this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2023
24 points (100.0% liked)

Formula 1

9068 readers
57 users here now

Welcome to Formula1 @ Lemmy.world Lemmy's largest community for Formula 1 and related racing series


Rules


  1. Be respectful to everyone; drivers, lemmings, redditors etc
  2. No gambling, crypto or NFTs
  3. Spoilers are allowed
  4. Non English articles should include a translation in the comments by deepl.com or similar
  5. Paywalled articles should include at least a brief summary in the comments, the wording of the article should not be altered
  6. Social media posts should be posted as screenshots with a link for those who want to view it
  7. Memes are allowed on Monday only as we all do like a laugh or 2, but donโ€™t want to become formuladank.

Up next


F1 Calendar

2024 Calendar

Location Date
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 21-23 Nov
๐Ÿ‡ถ๐Ÿ‡ฆ Qatar 29 Nov-01 Dec
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ช Abu Dhabi 06-08 Dec

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] SatouKazuma@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This honestly sounds a bit ridiculous. A team found a new aero design? Cool!

[โ€“] jimbolauski@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The FIA does not want active aero, this is another rule in a long line of rules to prevent that. IMO now that there are cost caps in place they should get rid of most of these types of rules put in place to control spending.

[โ€“] tankplanker@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Its not just spending but intentionally limiting performance due to safety. Current cars and fully active aero would be seconds per lap quicker than the current cars and the current circuits are not designed for that, plus you would be significantly escalating g force putting extra strain on the driver. F1 every few years adjusts regulations to not only shake things up or appear to be greener but to slow down the cars.

[โ€“] TrekHuis@feddit.nl 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Indeed itโ€™s mostly for safety, active aero is difficult to keep in check as demonstrated by this static rule bending years. F1 is a part of technology advancements but just as space it should be done in a safely manner.

Not that I donโ€™t like the idea of a mind blown fast F1 car, all for it. And I think everyone had goosebumps when seeing an Williams from the 90โ€™s moving it suspension in the garage. But weโ€™ve also seen to what all of that let.

[โ€“] tankplanker@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

For its time the engineering behind that Williams active suspension is insane, its controlled by something that would probably be under powered for a modern washing machine compared to what they would use today. Didn't they have to program it in assembly to make it fit into the storage they had available? I'mlimitedbythetechnologyofmytime.gif

[โ€“] SatouKazuma@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm saying it's stupid. If the FIA supposedly are trying to lead the way in technologies that will eventually make their way to consumer automobiles, they should be celebrating advancements in aero. But maybe I'm biased as an aerospace engineer by background.

[โ€“] bhmnscmm@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

It's because the FIA don't actually care about F1 developing technology for road-cars. If they cared there wouldn't be huge engine and ERS restrictions, a tire monopoly, and limits on aero innovations (as you pointed out). They use the road-car excuse to either slow the cars down or for commercial/financial gain.