Formula One ( F1 )

Silverstone has a history of ripping these Pirelli tyres up, as far as I recall it was originally to do with the kerbs (obviously combined with the high-speed nature of the corners). I believe they did some work to reduce this, but I'm guessing it's still the primary reason.

Edit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9R1wEevHfwU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OA_HYwFDlLs

On a lighter note, that Renault race suit design seriously makes it look like the drivers have pissed themselves:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N34TEXhWTxk

It feels (i.e. I can't remember) ages since we had non-damage related punctures in F1. Is that just down to the high-load on the tyres at Silverstone or just because there's been so little racing the tyres haven't had as much running so teams are not 100% sure how they work?

Silverstone is massively hard on the tyres. There are a lot of high speed, high loading corners and it destroys the tyres, particularly the front left. I was going to mention ^^ that Ferrari blow out from a few years ago.

I'm surprised that COTA doesn't throw up similar issues given the recreations of the Maggots/Becketts/Chapel and Istanbul's turn 8. I'm guessing it's still largely a difference in the kerbs.

Hulkenburg is apparently talking to "some teams" about a race seat for 2021. Given the grid at the moment you'd have to assume the only real options are Haas or Williams. I get the feeling Grosjean is on the way out of Haas if someone with some money comes along and Latifi is miles away from Russell so maybe his money isn't worth it if he can't be at least in touch with Russell rather than the 0.5-1 second a lap gap). Obviously he's not had much running this year in his defence.

Would happily see Grosjean go at this point. Been hanging around not doing much other than complaining for a good few seasons.

https://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433/12044254/racing-point-fined-and-lose-15-points-after-renault-protest-upheld

Well this was no surprise.

They had a good crack but they've sort of won too. They get to keep using the parts for the rest of the year. They've dropped behind Renault in the table but you'd not put money on that being the case for the rest of the year. The drivers kept their points too which is good for PR (but obviously not for F1 money).

Be interesting to see how much it paid off at the end of the year. Sounds like it's potentially a bit of a bargain.

All-German line-up for Aston Martin next year? Hulk definitely deserves a seat at this point.

Williams having a bit of a Keystone Cops moment:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZwd-ffkAzE

When I was hoping for less of a roller-coaster season being a Vettel fan last year, this isn't exactly what I had in mind.

I know the modern F1 engines are amazing bits of kit, but listening to the LMP1/2 cars snarling and crackling on the over-run and then wailing their way down the straights in the Spa 6 Hours quali session does make me feel rather nostalgic for the older, simpler and noisier days.

Personally I've always thought it'd be great to have a parallel set of races in much more simple cars (Formula Ford, karts, cigar tube-style F1 cars) as the racing is dull as hell for the most part due to the desire to be peak motorsport tech.

I don't think it's the tech. I love the tech. It's the fact that aerodynamics and downforce matters more than anything else. Fixed capacity bucket of fuel, no electric drive, no wings, flat floor, go. That would be some good racing. Provided the bucket was big enough.

I'd put aero on the tech side of things personally.

Honestly I think most criticisms of F1 could be solved by having a parallel spec series. Trying to regulate what constitutes a 'wing' and regulate aero would be an absolute nightmare IMO. I've been watching a fair bit of F2/F3 this season and it probably doesn't come as a surprise that the racing is much more enjoyable to watch.

Trying to regulate what constitutes a 'wing' and regulate aero would be an absolute nightmare IMO.

We managed it in RGB, so I doubt it would be that hard in F1. A wing is bodywork detached from the main structure of the car where air passes both under and over the bodywork in question. Job done. No wings.

P.S. Don't like spec series. Motorsport should have scope for technological improvement.

Norris and Sainz trying to ask each questions while driving was brilliant. Norris look terrified hahaha

So would it be fine if the main body panels have downforce producing elements? Would be interested to have a look at the regs you're talking about, I imagine there's a lot of reliance on the "spirit of the rules"

Agreed, but if I had to choose between the peak of wheel-to-wheel racing, or the peak of motorsport tech, I'd much rather watch the former

Maybe you could allow some freedom over how the downforce is generated, but set limits on the amount per axle.

I wonder what would happen if you allowed fully active aero? Maybe the issue is that the rules are too restrictive and if you allowed for e.g. dynamic DRS that varies according to lateral g etc you’d get the driving style from wingless formulae, but 7g in the bends.

There are a lot of other downforce-generating devices on an F1 car. The front and rear wings make up less than 45% of the car’s downforce these days, maybe less than 40% in some cases. The front wing is mostly used to set up the air for the rest of the car and the rear wing is a very inefficient way of making downforce compared to the floor and diffuser. Personally, I think the big flat floors ought to be banned.

I’ve seen the cars over in the race bays without their wings or floors and they look mental like that. They should do at least one race each year with no aero. Just the main bodywork, 1000hp and gumball tyres!

Rossi's near death experience from the Austrian Moto GP - if there's one thing that would make him consider retiring, this is probably it…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yi0l44GOYLk