Good old Bernie......

Anything goes in here.....
User avatar
tut
Barefoot Ninja
Posts: 22975
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2005 5:53 pm
Location: Tut End, Glen of Newmill

Good old Bernie......

Post by tut » Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:56 am


User avatar
Shug
Posts: 13835
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:28 pm
Location: Deepest, Darkest Ayrshire

Re: Good old Bernie......

Post by Shug » Wed Jul 09, 2014 11:05 am

Not sure what Bernie has to do with it, but it's a farce... Legal since 2008, but they've now changed their mind?

I've heard it compared to Wrestling, in terms of fixing the sport, and this is the best example yet...
2010 Honda VFR1200F
1990 Honda VFR400 NC30
2000 Honda VTR1000 SP1
2000 Kawasaki ZX-7R

User avatar
flyingscot68
Posts: 1877
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 2:31 pm
Location: East Kilbride
Contact:

Re: Good old Bernie......

Post by flyingscot68 » Wed Jul 09, 2014 11:22 am

This is why I lost interest in F1 a few years back.
It's not racing, it's politics combined with advertising and revenue raising for the owners.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User avatar
graeme
Posts: 3528
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2005 11:29 am
Location: Kintore

Re: Good old Bernie......

Post by graeme » Wed Jul 09, 2014 11:58 am

Total farce. By all means ban them for 2016, giving teams plenty of notice, but this absolutely smacks of "Viewers are getting bored, so how can we cripple the Merc?"
211
958

User avatar
robin
Jedi Master
Posts: 10546
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:39 pm

Re: Good old Bernie......

Post by robin » Wed Jul 09, 2014 2:01 pm

Does anyone understand why it is the interlinking that makes these systems fall foul of an aerodynamic regulation? I understand the cars are not allowed movable aero parts and in the past they've gone to some lengths to "cheat" by having parts that flex under load to try and work around this. I don't understand why interlinking the front and rear suddenly causes some movable aero part that isn't there as part of the suspension design already (e.g. the wishbones and steering arms have apparently aerodynamic profiles).

Given the fact that the wheels influence the aero it would seem any car might fall foul of that regulation!!

Cheers,
Robin
I is in your loomz nibblin ur wirez
#bemoretut

woody
Posts: 5637
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 4:03 pm
Location: Southside Triangle

Re: Good old Bernie......

Post by woody » Wed Jul 09, 2014 2:06 pm

robin wrote:Does anyone understand why it is the interlinking that makes these systems fall foul of an aerodynamic regulation? I understand the cars are not allowed movable aero parts and in the past they've gone to some lengths to "cheat" by having parts that flex under load to try and work around this. I don't understand why interlinking the front and rear suddenly causes some movable aero part that isn't there as part of the suspension design already (e.g. the wishbones and steering arms have apparently aerodynamic profiles).

Given the fact that the wheels influence the aero it would seem any car might fall foul of that regulation!!

Cheers,
Robin
Wishbones have set profiles to negate any gain there. Not sure if they're interpreting it as the system stabilises the car and is therefore affecting the aero?

User avatar
Shug
Posts: 13835
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:28 pm
Location: Deepest, Darkest Ayrshire

Re: Good old Bernie......

Post by Shug » Wed Jul 09, 2014 2:12 pm

Yup - extrapolating the rule to have the whole car platform as a controlled aerodynamic component. Of course, de-linking suspension, the car is still a movable aero device, but they can't control it so closely. I think the systems are designed to affect rake changes dependent on braking and acceleration.

But yeah, basically they are stretching the rules as they see fit to impose a penalty on the best performing car. FFS just go Touring cars and give them success ballast if we want to be this farcical about it...
2010 Honda VFR1200F
1990 Honda VFR400 NC30
2000 Honda VTR1000 SP1
2000 Kawasaki ZX-7R

User avatar
tut
Barefoot Ninja
Posts: 22975
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2005 5:53 pm
Location: Tut End, Glen of Newmill

Re: Good old Bernie......

Post by tut » Wed Jul 09, 2014 3:02 pm

Same bunch of wankers designed the Dildo.

tut

User avatar
tut
Barefoot Ninja
Posts: 22975
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2005 5:53 pm
Location: Tut End, Glen of Newmill

Re: Good old Bernie......

Post by tut » Wed Jul 09, 2014 4:33 pm

whoops, that should read Dodo......

tut

User avatar
flyingscot68
Posts: 1877
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 2:31 pm
Location: East Kilbride
Contact:

Re: Good old Bernie......

Post by flyingscot68 » Wed Jul 09, 2014 4:36 pm

Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User avatar
robin
Jedi Master
Posts: 10546
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:39 pm

Re: Good old Bernie......

Post by robin » Wed Jul 09, 2014 5:24 pm

Surely god designed the Dodo on day 6.95?
I is in your loomz nibblin ur wirez
#bemoretut

User avatar
Kelvin
Posts: 656
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2006 12:28 am

Re: Good old Bernie......

Post by Kelvin » Wed Jul 09, 2014 5:33 pm

I doubt Bernie has much of a say in it.

Couldn't this just make things far worse and increase the gap between MB and everyone else?

F1 has become a ridiculous sport although it's hard to see what they should do.

User avatar
Dominic
Posts: 14448
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2005 10:14 am
Location: Milton Of Campsie
Contact:

Re: Good old Bernie......

Post by Dominic » Wed Jul 09, 2014 5:57 pm

Kelvin wrote:I doubt Bernie has much of a say in it.

Couldn't this just make things far worse and increase the gap between MB and everyone else?

F1 has become a ridiculous sport although it's hard to see what they should do.
My thoughts too- The Red Bulls are reported to have good handling in the corners, while MB have a mega engine (and no doubt a good chassis too). So, to get rid of the handling benefits, would surely penalise the likes of Red Bull more than MB :scratch

I wish they could leave things alone, and accept that every so often, one team, for a while, will have a big advantage. Kudos to MB for letting their drivers compete between themselves, and giving us a battle at the top of the champsionship.
http://www.dsaccountancy.com

1999 Lotus Elise Sport 135'99

User avatar
tut
Barefoot Ninja
Posts: 22975
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2005 5:53 pm
Location: Tut End, Glen of Newmill

Re: Good old Bernie......

Post by tut » Wed Jul 09, 2014 6:02 pm

Vettel, World Champion for the past four years with a completely dominant car, now can barely get on the podium with a second rate one. Likewise Alonso.

Goes to show that the car is the star.

tut

User avatar
Kelvin
Posts: 656
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2006 12:28 am

Re: Good old Bernie......

Post by Kelvin » Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:09 pm

tut wrote:Vettel, World Champion for the past four years with a completely dominant car, now can barely get on the podium with a second rate one. Likewise Alonso.

Goes to show that the car is the star.

tut
Pretty much always been the case , certainly in the modern era. There's not much between the top ten drivers so stick one of them in a dominant and reliable car and the likelihood is they'll win the WDC. The real story for Vettel is that his rookie partner is handing him his arse.

Post Reply