Q: Infringements. I’m not just thinking of Formula 1, these could also be applied to any road track hosting any racing series.
The first solution was mentioned by a few people, including Stuart “Chainbear F1” Taylor in this video. In a run-off area that is prone to track limits infringement, put a two or three-meter-wide grass (or gravel) strip at the corner exit, directly behind the outside white line, where you’d usually put the curb (although you could have both: first the curb, then the grass strip). The rest of the run-off area can be made of whatever the track and the sanctioning authorities require, but for a fast corner where a high-speed crash is a possibility, grippy asphalt would be the best choice. The grass strip would act as a deterrent, so if you go too wide, you’re immediately punished. But if you lose control over the car, you’re only going to ride over the grass for a fraction of a second, before the asphalt slows you down.
The second solution was proposed by former F1 driver Marc Surer, in a Q&A with Formel1.de.
Instead of a grass/gravel strip, Surer suggested using wide curbs with a curved, convex upper surface. Not as steep or harsh as a sausage curb, but with just enough curvature so when a car drives on it, it automatically sits on it, touching the top of it with its underfloor. The idea is to have the car not just lose a bit of grip; but also to wear out the underfloor or plank, which may cause a post-race penalty (a disqualification in F1, a points withdrawal in IndyCar, etc.) if a driver goes over it (and therefore beyond the track limits) too often. Also, for tracks hosting both Moto GP and F1, Surer suggested making these curbs removable, bolted on to the track surface, just like those used on street courses.
As a mere racing fan, both proposals make sense to me on paper; my personal favorite being the grass strip. But I’m aware that these are purely theoretical, at least for now, and I’m neither a track designer nor an FIA employee, so I don’t know if these would actually work in the real world. Also, since every corner is different from the next one, some tweaking will definitely be needed in every individual situation. What do you think? And do you know of anyone who could share some thoughts about these?
Xavier
CM: The first solution is one that has regularly been brought up but isn’t realistic, because of the risk of causing a bigger accident through cars digging in and then hitting where that strip ends, or more importantly, something similar happening with bikes when they run over them. One of the reasons these solutions hit trouble is because they don’t work for other series, and require permanent installation.
And that’s why the curbs idea from Marc Surer does seem to make more sense, especially if they can be safely install temporarily. The only pushback I can see here is from teams complaining that it would damage their cars too much and be very expensive. Austria’s harsh exit curbs were criticized for that reason.
The FIA is actively looking at the way it polices track limits, so I’ll see if we can get an update on that process in the coming weeks over the off-season.
Q: If Leclerc’s strategy of allowing Perez past to try and build a 5s gap over Russell had worked, would Mercedes have protested on the basis of race manipulation? Would they have had a case?
Ryan in the victorious state of Michigan
CM: Nope, I’m pretty sure there would have been no protest, and no grounds for it either, even if Leclerc had slowed to hold up Russell. Remember Lewis Hamilton backing up Nico Rosberg years ago here, trying to get a few cars between himself and his teammate in order to win the 2016 title? It’s still a racing tactic, as long as nothing you do is erratic or deemed dangerous.
There’s nothing in the rules that says you can’t let another driver go past. And Toto Wolff actually commented that it says a lot about Leclerc’s character that he didn’t try and back up Russell himself, and just left it to see if Perez could get 5s clear through his own pace.
THE FINAL WORD
From Robin Miller’s Mailbag, November 24, 2015
Q: I see a lot or requests or suggestions from IndyCar fans to reduce the downforce and increase the horsepower. Didn’t CART do this in the last few years of the 1000hp engine war? If memory serves me right, the rules package kept reducing the size of the wings and at one point, they were running super-speedway wings at the short tracks and drastically reducing the underwing tunnel exits at Michigan and Fontana. During those races, the passing become non-existent. I’m not a mechanical engineer, but perhaps someone (Mike Hull?) has the downforce data from both eras and could weigh in on this? I would hate to see the close racing that we have go away, just to watch a parade on the short ovals.
Matt Fraver, Columbus, OH
ROBIN MILLER: Mike Hull was kind enough to respond:
“First, in total agreement that the close racing is full of entertainment. The skill set to race close is also dependent upon the trust that drivers have for each other. The cornering speeds of the cars can be altered by IndyCar tweaking of the aero package, as we have seen, to effectively change the race balance. If they get it right (and normally do), it’s still really good two-abreast racing. If over-downforced in combination with tires that maintain grip for an entire run, you will see what happened at Fontana.
“In 1999 when we ran the speedway wings at short ovals even with the big tunnels, we were at exactly half of the downforce level we have available now. The mid-corner speeds were significantly reduced but the lower drag of the wings meant the speeds at the end of the straights were higher – going over 200mph into T1 at Phoenix in testing – (in testing, we are at 185mph with the current car) – with only a small amount of downforce to try and handle the corner.
“The CART races in this low-downforce spec at times became processional as with the additional loss of downforce by being greatly affect by the wake of the car in front. There was not enough grip to make a pass even with almost twice the HP that we have now. The only way this low downforce level of racing would work is if the level of grip was so low that tire degradation became significant (like we have now at Texas) with the result that the difference between new and old tires creates the overtaking opportunities.”