F1 and the Rain

[philis]

So its raining at Silverstone, again, and here we are, again, watching water evaporate, waiting in vein to see some F1 action.
I cant seem to get my head around why cars refuse to practice in the rain, when you think of the measures and costs the teams go to sometimes for a single point, striving to ring every last bit of performance out of the car in dry conditions, why would they then refuse track time in the wet. (just look at how desperate Merc are for track time) When you add up how many wet races they have in the season then there must be some value in trying to improve wet weather performance. Surely there is a decent chance of a wet race on Sunday so why not get out there and learn something?
Im sure they will all talk about risk vs reward, but surly the risk of racing in the rain having no practice in those conditions is infinity more risky than practicing in the same conditions and setting the car up ready for it.
If it were up to me i would force teams to do a minimum amount of laps per session purely out of consideration for the fans.

[Grenoble]

Wet race setup is normally quite straightforward - speeds are much lower, so aero is much less of an issue to find setup.

The cars are much less sensitive.

Crank up the wing and it's down to the driver and free air, plus being on track at the right time in quali, Basically, there isn't much to learn.

[London424]

Grenoble said:

Wet race setup is normally quite straightforward - speeds are much lower, so aero is much less of an issue to find setup.

The cars are much less sensitive.

Crank up the wing and it's down to the driver and free air, plus being on track at the right time in quali, Basically, there isn't much to learn.

They also have much smaller numbers of wet/intermediate tyres so can't afford to waste them in FP1.

[RobGT81]

It will rain on Sunday and lots of drivers will complain about not having much wet running, we put a dry setup on etc..

[oyster]

philis said:

So its raining at Silverstone, again, and here we are, again, watching water evaporate, waiting in vein to see some F1 action.
I cant seem to get my head around why cars refuse to practice in the rain, when you think of the measures and costs the teams go to sometimes for a single point, striving to ring every last bit of performance out of the car in dry conditions, why would they then refuse track time in the wet. (just look at how desperate Merc are for track time) When you add up how many wet races they have in the season then there must be some value in trying to improve wet weather performance. Surely there is a decent chance of a wet race on Sunday so why not get out there and learn something?
Im sure they will all talk about risk vs reward, but surly the risk of racing in the rain having no practice in those conditions is infinity more risky than practicing in the same conditions and setting the car up ready for it.
If it were up to me i would force teams to do a minimum amount of laps per session purely out of consideration for the fans.

Forecast for qually and the race is for completely dry, so why would they waste resources and risk damage in a wet/damp practice session?

[WeyAyeMan]

There's also an increased risk of smashing the car up, which would put a damper <arf arf arf> on their weekend before it's really started.

On balance, high risk vs low reward means no running in the wet.

[Grenoble]

I always thought it a shame we couldn't have a mini-race in identical cars on the Friday of GP weekend.

Something like this:

http://www.motorsportretro.com/2009/11/senna-stuns...

Allow a different model at each race - anything manufacturers want to push. 2 races of say, 8 laps, random grid.

[thiscocks]

Given the unpredictability of this counties weather it certainly wouldnt hurt to go out and dail in some sort of wet setting...

[philis]

oyster said:

philis said:

So its raining at Silverstone, again, and here we are, again, watching water evaporate, waiting in vein to see some F1 action.
I cant seem to get my head around why cars refuse to practice in the rain, when you think of the measures and costs the teams go to sometimes for a single point, striving to ring every last bit of performance out of the car in dry conditions, why would they then refuse track time in the wet. (just look at how desperate Merc are for track time) When you add up how many wet races they have in the season then there must be some value in trying to improve wet weather performance. Surely there is a decent chance of a wet race on Sunday so why not get out there and learn something?
Im sure they will all talk about risk vs reward, but surly the risk of racing in the rain having no practice in those conditions is infinity more risky than practicing in the same conditions and setting the car up ready for it.
If it were up to me i would force teams to do a minimum amount of laps per session purely out of consideration for the fans.

Forecast for qually and the race is for completely dry, so why would they waste resources and risk damage in a wet/damp practice session?

Prudence dear Oyster, prudence

[weyland yutani]

TV and sponsors allow them to go racing, both rely on viewers to make their investment worthwhile. An empty track is ridiculous, Bernie should be chasing them out of the garage with a turd on a stick.

[Grenoble]

weyland yutani said:

TV and sponsors allow them to go racing, both rely on viewers to make their investment worthwhile. An empty track is ridiculous, Bernie should be chasing them out of the garage with a turd on a stick.

And watch them tour round at 30% pace?

You can't force people to run at speed.

[anonymous-user]

weyland yutani said:

TV and sponsors allow them to go racing, both rely on viewers to make their investment worthwhile. An empty track is ridiculous, Bernie should be chasing them out of the garage with a turd on a stick.

Agreed but he would also need to provide enough tyres and engines. They won't run the cars unless there is something useful to learn.

And unlike posted earlier, there could be plenty to learn if there was the possibility of a wet weekend. Otherwise, as its the last time these cars will run at Silverstone, why bother?

[Gwagon111]

This is why I can't be arsed anymore. What a load of balls. People have paid through the nose to see approximately nothing. Way to go Bernie . This is the first time in very very many years, that I have said 'fk it'. I think this will be the first of many .

[Grenoble]

Gwagon111 said:

This is why I can't be arsed anymore. What a load of balls. People have paid through the nose to see approximately nothing. Way to go Bernie . This is the first time in very very many years, that I have said 'fk it'. I think this will be the first of many .

Doesn't this happen in most wet FP1s?

[oyster]

philis said:

oyster said:

philis said:

So its raining at Silverstone, again, and here we are, again, watching water evaporate, waiting in vein to see some F1 action.
I cant seem to get my head around why cars refuse to practice in the rain, when you think of the measures and costs the teams go to sometimes for a single point, striving to ring every last bit of performance out of the car in dry conditions, why would they then refuse track time in the wet. (just look at how desperate Merc are for track time) When you add up how many wet races they have in the season then there must be some value in trying to improve wet weather performance. Surely there is a decent chance of a wet race on Sunday so why not get out there and learn something?
Im sure they will all talk about risk vs reward, but surly the risk of racing in the rain having no practice in those conditions is infinity more risky than practicing in the same conditions and setting the car up ready for it.
If it were up to me i would force teams to do a minimum amount of laps per session purely out of consideration for the fans.

Forecast for qually and the race is for completely dry, so why would they waste resources and risk damage in a wet/damp practice session?

Prudence dear Oyster, prudence

Taking risks with machinery isn't prudence.

I think you're referring to being prepared for anything - that isn't prudence.

To add, it isn't good for the fans. But then this is how Formula 1 practice sessions have always been.

[IanMorewood]

Run 20 cars in a wet practice and your going to give at least 3 teams significant repair work to do overnight. The chances of getting caught in someone elses accident also go up a lot.

[BaronVonVaderham]

If they bin it in practice their whole weekend could be compromised, hence safer not to run, even though they are missing out on valuable track time.

McNish and Allen came up with the suggestion that there should be 1 WC point for the fastest time in each session. That would get the cars out.

[oyster]

Gwagon111 said:

This is why I can't be arsed anymore. What a load of balls. People have paid through the nose to see approximately nothing. Way to go Bernie . This is the first time in very very many years, that I have said 'fk it'. I think this will be the first of many .

It's the British Grand Prix. Do fans expect wall to wall sunshine?

Of course if Bernie were to move this race to somewhere drier, like say Qatar, presumably you'd give him stcik for that too?

And as to paying through the nose - isn't Friday the cheapest day?

[Grenoble]

ash73 said:

Just get rid of the Parc Ferme rule, it was introduced in 2003 to cut costs because teams were building qualifying specials; but it's no longer needed because engines and gearboxes have to last several races and there's no refueling.

That isn't the only reason Parc Ferme exists. It's also to quarantine cars to prevent any other modifications - not just gearbox and engines.

[joema]

In response to the OP.

If they introduced some sort of quali system like moto gp whereby the practice times contributed to who got through it might mix things up a bit...