F1 2022 Season

They all bounce, that's the key point of a regulation change, Red Bull perhaps the least but as demonstrated last weekend they run higher than most already anyway so any change likely won't hamper them too much.

If Mercedes want a ride height change its probably to keep them at the front of the midfield, if its enforced on all teams they stand to lose less basically. If Mercedes have to run higher self enforced and those around them don't bother then they will obviously drop back.
 
pauldyson1uk said:
You make fair points. But the teams suffering will not accept being hindered, but something has to be done.
Click to expand...
That's racing though, if you turn up with a shit box, you should be forced to change to a safer configuration, whereas RB has a safe configuration already, it is pretty pathetic that the only way that the mercs can UNLOCK THE POTENTIAL is to try and hamper the teams that have it under control.
 
Gary Anderson makes an interesting point.

https://the-race.com/formula-1/gary-anderson-how-f1-can-regulate-away-bouncing/

"...The area in front of the rear tyre can be raised to whatever is required. Some teams, such as Red Bull and Ferrari, already have tunnels through this section that dramatically reduce the on/off switch effect that a flat floor section would have when it gets close to the ground.

But Mercedes doesn’t. The reason is simple, it will cost you some aerodynamic load – but do so in the interests of giving the driver a package that allows them to use their talent to the maximum. Sometimes, you need to make a compromise.

The solution to this problem is in how teams want to exploit the performance of their cars. I suspect Mercedes is going down a blind alley with the direction it is trying to go in as far as set-up is concerned..."
 
christy87 said:
That's racing though, if you turn up with a shit box, you should be forced to change to a safer configuration, whereas RB has a safe configuration already, it is pretty pathetic that the only way that the mercs can UNLOCK THE POTENTIAL is to try and hamper the teams that have it under control.
Click to expand...
Its not a myopic issue for Mercedes alone but affects the entire grid to some degree.

https://the-race.com/formula-1/rattled-ricciardo-backs-up-validity-of-russells-fia-lobbying/
 
Missed Apex talked about instead of changing rise height, enforcing a max G limit in a certain direction. If you go over the limit then do something about it (rise height etc). Seems fairer if it can be measured.
 
dinostar77 said:
Its not a myopic issue for Mercedes alone but affects the entire grid to some degree.

https://the-race.com/formula-1/rattled-ricciardo-backs-up-validity-of-russells-fia-lobbying/
Click to expand...
So make a rule that you are only allowed a certain level of porpoising, which will still allow growth in performance through testing new parts and being allowed to lower the car and gain performance, don't feck teams that have solved it and I'd love to see something feck them up to give Ferrari time to get back into it, but only by doing it the right way.
 
Mercedes need to just build a better car with less porpoising. RB have managed it. If Mercedes can't do that without losing performance, so be it. Build a better car next year.

Merc fecked up this year, people have to accept that and move on. If they want their star driver to step out the car like an old crooked man after every race for a few extra tenths, that's their choice.
 
Last edited:
pauldyson1uk said:
Toto has said they can turn the bouncing one and off, so maybe a simple alteration is all that's needed ?
One thing I do know is this is going to rumble on all season and bring some heated discussions between teams and 2 individuals in particular.
Click to expand...
At the end of the day, I think it's just posturing by Mercedes to get the budget cap lifted.
 
I doubt there have been any studies on the long term impact of these repetitive impacts it's likely going to be debilitating to drivers if they allow it to go on much longer. The problem with these injuries is they won't manifest for a decade or so.

I agree with the idea of a G force monitor. If the value hits X reading Y times the car has to retire. The teams will have to decide how aggressive they want to be with set up.
 
senorgregster said:
I doubt there have been any studies on the long term impact of these repetitive impacts it's likely going to be debilitating to drivers if they allow it to go on much longer. The problem with these injuries is they won't manifest for a decade or so.
Click to expand...

It's more a concussion discussion longer term. Either way, Mercedes have to make a move here and not wait for the FIA.
 
As usual people are acting like it is only Mercedes who are asking for changes. Adding active suspension benefits everybody and harms nobody. I really don't see why people are opposed to is outside of fanboyism.
 
BristolRuss said:
As usual people are acting like it is only Mercedes who are asking for changes. Adding active suspension benefits everybody and harms nobody. I really don't see why people are opposed to is outside of fanboyism.
Click to expand...

But the talk about active suspension or not isn't really relevant because that would be something discussed for next season.

This season the only way to reduce porpoising is either for teams to take responsibility or for the FIA to force bouncy teams to take responsibility.
 
BristolRuss said:
As usual people are acting like it is only Mercedes who are asking for changes. Adding active suspension benefits everybody and harms nobody. I really don't see why people are opposed to is outside of fanboyism.
Click to expand...

Cost cap is the main reason & length of time to produce it. It'll take a good 1-2 years by which time we'll probably have passive solutions developed by engineers. Not fanboyism.
 
28tqg3szsf591.jpg
 
The funny thing is that the people who have been crying for regulation changes to feck up mercedes after this past half decade of dominance are now acting as if it's a suprise that the regulation changes fecked up the mercs :lol:.

Not sure if they're just children or really that ignorant.
 
Abizzz said:
The funny thing is that the people who have been crying for regulation changes to feck up mercedes after this past half decade of dominance are now acting as if it's a suprise that the regulation changes fecked up the mercs :lol:.

Not sure if they're just children or really that ignorant.
Click to expand...
It was to level the field again not feck up Mercedes. Unless you believe the wind tunnel time limit was the cause. The proposing cannot be detected in the tunnel, that's why every car was bouncing in the first test. Merc fecked themselves up by designing a terrible car.
 
senorgregster said:
I doubt there have been any studies on the long term impact of these repetitive impacts it's likely going to be debilitating to drivers if they allow it to go on much longer. The problem with these injuries is they won't manifest for a decade or so.

I agree with the idea of a G force monitor. If the value hits X reading Y times the car has to retire. The teams will have to decide how aggressive they want to be with set up.
Click to expand...
There is a accelerator meter in the drivers helmet and earpiece so the FIA know the g forces the drivers are experiencing. Down the main straight at baku hamilton was at 6 g. Im amazed he didnt crash.

Rita at Alton Towers is 4.5g rollacoaster and the highest g force rollacoster in the uk. So thats some amount of force at 200mph in a bouncing car.
 
Abizzz said:
The funny thing is that the people who have been crying for regulation changes to feck up mercedes after this past half decade of dominance are now acting as if it's a suprise that the regulation changes fecked up the mercs :lol:.

Not sure if they're just children or really that ignorant.
Click to expand...
You seem to be missing the point that on sunday EVERY driver on the grid voted for porposing to be fixed apart from Alonso. Including the RB pair. Make of that what you will.
 
The Firestarter said:
It was to level the field again not feck up Mercedes. Unless you believe the wind tunnel time limit was the cause. The proposing cannot be detected in the tunnel, that's why every car was bouncing in the first test. Merc fecked themselves up by designing a terrible car.
Click to expand...
Sure reintroducing ground effect after 4 decades and then limiting certain teams a lot more than others in the windtunnel had no consequences whatsoever. They might not have mastered the purposing in the wind tunnel but it's a result of aerodynamics and as such the teams would have surely understood more about it with more time.
dinostar77 said:
You seem to be missing the point that on sunday EVERY driver on the grid voted for porposing to be fixed apart from Alonso. Including the RB pair. Make of that what you will.
Click to expand...
There's teams affected worse than others, but none of the top teams are experiencing it as badly as the mercs, I think we can all be honest about that.


To be clear, I don't think it was done because they are mercedes. It was done because they were dominant. It's happened throughout the entire history of F1, no one is allowed to be dominant for too long (with the possible exception of cosworth DFV's but even they won in a lot of different cars).
 
F-Red said:
It's more a concussion discussion longer term. Either way, Mercedes have to make a move here and not wait for the FIA.
Click to expand...
I suspect both long term brain and spinal cord injuries similar to what American football players are going through could happen if they don't put a stop to it. And unlike concussions it will take a long time to manifest so it would be too late.
 
Abizzz said:
The funny thing is that the people who have been crying for regulation changes to feck up mercedes after this past half decade of dominance are now acting as if it's a suprise that the regulation changes fecked up the mercs :lol:.

Not sure if they're just children or really that ignorant.
Click to expand...
Not sure you are being serious, did you miss the part about all the drivers apart from Alonso saying the same ?
 
pauldyson1uk said:
Not sure you are being serious, did you miss the part about all the drivers apart from Alonso saying the same ?
Click to expand...
I'm not saying Mercedes where the only ones handicapped. I think if every team had unlimited wind tunnel time and testing time we wouldn't see any of it anywhere. The resources allowed were inversely proportionate to the past success. I don't see how this is controversial to be honest.

I also don't buy that it couldn't have been detected in a wind tunnel. It's an aerodynamic effect, maybe it wasn't as bad and hence people didn't think it mattered that much, but it couldn't have been invisible if they actually got the ground effect to work in the wind tunnel.
 
Abizzz said:
I'm not saying Mercedes where the only ones handicapped. I think if every team had unlimited wind tunnel time and testing time we wouldn't see any of it anywhere. The resources allowed were inversely proportionate to the past success. I don't see how this is controversial to be honest.

I also don't buy that it couldn't have been detected in a wind tunnel. It's an aerodynamic effect, maybe it wasn't as bad and hence people didn't think it mattered that much, but it couldn't have been invisible if they actually got the ground effect to work in the wind tunnel.
Click to expand...
I have been doing some reading and found this, they need a new type of windtunnel to detect and eliminate porpoising. Wind tunnels have been intentionally limited by the FIA to cut costs. - Teams can only run a 60% scale mock-up.
Lack of wind tunnel time has been a major problem.

F1's biggest problem in 2022: what is porpoising? - Motor Sport Magazine ( I know we all know what is is, not trying to teach anybody how to suck eggs, the link give some info about wind tunnel time)
 
Abizzz said:
The funny thing is that the people who have been crying for regulation changes to feck up mercedes after this past half decade of dominance are now acting as if it's a suprise that the regulation changes fecked up the mercs :lol:.

Not sure if they're just children or really that ignorant.
Click to expand...

Speaking of ignorant, exactly how did the 2022 changes specifically target Mercedes?

The E10 fuel change affected all engines. The shift to ground effect scrapped all current aero philosophies.

And as others said wind tunnel time is not the reason their car is a shitbox.
 
Last edited:
hobbers said:
Speaking of ignorant, exactly how did the 2022 changes specifically target Mercedes?

The E10 fuel change affected all engines. The shift to ground effect scrapped all current aero philosophies.

And as others said wind tunnel time is not the reason their car is a shitbox.
Click to expand...
It did not target Mecedes.
I am comeing to the conclusion that Mecedes did in fact cock up their design to a point.
 
Last edited:
Ocon: Support is growing for FIA intervention to stop bouncing

But support for change is growing, says Ocon, who intends to back any sensible solutions to eradicate the problem.

"Yeah, that's a fair comment," he told media, including RacingNews365.com, when asked if more and more drivers are seeking FIA intervention.

"None of us want to sound like divas or that we are complaining that the cars are too hard to drive, but we need to realise that it's not healthy going into the future.

"It's not the porpoising necessarily, I think it's the stiffness of the cars which is a big hit on the long straight. We can't prepare our bodies for that."

https://racingnews365.com/ocon-support-is-growing-for-fia-intervention-to-stop-bouncing
 
klsv said:
Ocon: Support is growing for FIA intervention to stop bouncing

But support for change is growing, says Ocon, who intends to back any sensible solutions to eradicate the problem.

"Yeah, that's a fair comment," he told media, including RacingNews365.com, when asked if more and more drivers are seeking FIA intervention.

"None of us want to sound like divas or that we are complaining that the cars are too hard to drive, but we need to realise that it's not healthy going into the future.

"It's not the porpoising necessarily, I think it's the stiffness of the cars which is a big hit on the long straight. We can't prepare our bodies for that."

https://racingnews365.com/ocon-support-is-growing-for-fia-intervention-to-stop-bouncing
Click to expand...
This bit got me.

Ocon disagrees with Horner's claim
Red Bull boss Christian Horner believes teams have been persuading their drivers to complain about the porpoising effect of their cars to encourage changes to the regulations.

It comes with Mercedes driver Russell having been amongst the most vocal in demanding a rule change. When asked if he agreed with the view taken by the likes of Horner, Ocon said: "George finished on the podium today, so it doesn't seem too bad.

"I think it is something that the FIA are going to look at, probably for in the future, and it's something that we will support."

The Alpine driver added: "It's up to the FIA and then the policeman really to call what you can do or not in the future."

So Horner believes that other teams are making their driver lets say exaggerate the truth, I would say he thinks they are lying about it.
The "Russell having been amongst the most vocal in demanding a rule change." he is director of the Grand Prix Drivers' Association, is that not his job ?
 
pauldyson1uk said:
This bit got me.

Ocon disagrees with Horner's claim
Red Bull boss Christian Horner believes teams have been persuading their drivers to complain about the porpoising effect of their cars to encourage changes to the regulations.

It comes with Mercedes driver Russell having been amongst the most vocal in demanding a rule change. When asked if he agreed with the view taken by the likes of Horner, Ocon said: "George finished on the podium today, so it doesn't seem too bad.

"I think it is something that the FIA are going to look at, probably for in the future, and it's something that we will support."

The Alpine driver added: "It's up to the FIA and then the policeman really to call what you can do or not in the future."

So Horner believes that other teams are making their driver lets say exaggerate the truth, I would say he thinks they are lying about it.
The "Russell having been amongst the most vocal in demanding a rule change." he is director of the Grand Prix Drivers' Association, is that not his job ?
Click to expand...
Maybe it's a question of perspective? Horner might mean that Mercedes's drivers are arguing for a regulations change to deal with the porpoising (which might erase some of RB's current advantage, depending on the change), while Horner would probably rather see FIA demand that teams protect their drivers better within the current regulations (which might increase RB's current advantage, at least over the worst affected teams.)
 
Lando doesn't really care too much:

Lando Norris joked when asked how was the ride in his McLaren that “it’s beautiful, I’m loving it at the minute”, before adding to F1 TV: “I’m not complaining. Yeah, we have some porpoising, some bouncing, but it’s what you have to deal with.

“It’s the trade of trying to gain performance and we can quite easily go lower, gain performance but have more porpoising, but we just think where we are at is the correct amount.

“So I’m sure Mercedes could have a much different floor and raise the ride height and it would be much nicer for them, but they obviously just don’t want to lose performance.

“So I don’t think it’s anything to complain about. It’s just people need to find ways of fixing it themselves.”
Click to expand...
 
Cheimoon said:
Maybe it's a question of perspective? Horner might mean that Mercedes's drivers are arguing for a regulations change to deal with the porpoising (which might erase some of RB's current advantage, depending on the change), while Horner would probably rather see FIA demand that teams protect their drivers better within the current regulations (which might increase RB's current advantage, at least over the worst affected teams.)
Click to expand...

Yeh there's clearly two very different arguments going on simultaneously.

Some drivers want teams to be policed, some teams and their drivers want beneficial sweeping rule changes that mitigate their shitboxes.

What Ocon wants would probably mean Mercedes forced to run softer suspension and higher ride heights and end up losing their spot as the third fastest team.
 
Last edited:
hobbers said:
Speaking of ignorant, exactly how did the 2022 changes specifically target Mercedes?

The E10 fuel change affected all engines. The shift to ground effect scrapped all current aero philosophies.

And as others said wind tunnel time is not the reason their car is a shitbox.
Click to expand...
1. Mercedes had mastered the now old suspension setup (side dampers, side springs, heave springs, heave dampers, roll springs, rolldampers, inerters, hydraulic links with damper settings, gas springs). The newer simplfied setup for 2022 only has heave spring, torsion bars, rockers and dampers. This has badly affected Mercedes and a car that produces downforce by the bucketload.

2. The rule changes for the 2021 season meant that everyone lost 25% of rear end downforce. The non raked cars were affected more than the raked cars. Mercedes already had limitations in wind tunnel time and CFD as reigning constructors champions. They had to spend alot of that crucial time getting the downforce back and only in the silverstone update pacakge last year did they manage to get in par with RedBull (track dependant).

3. Engine homologation. The E10 fuel change had the unintentional sideeffect of reducing the power output of their engine. The homologisation ruling put into help RedBull from getting into a powertrain development arms race they couldnt win. Also stopped Mercedes from further developing the powertrain.

Anyway its par for the course for F1. Rules were changed to stop Schmacher Ferrari dream team domination. Rules were changed to stop RB domination with Seb Vetttel. Rules have been changed to stop Mercedes from dominating. Rules will be changed again in the future to stop team x from dominating.
 
The rules were the same for everyone. I'd be inclined to tell teams to raise their ride height to help the drivers and live with their failed designs. It's a team sport, the best engineering excellence should be rewarded like always. If that means Merc and others at the back of the grid then so be it.
 
Maroon Lucifer said:
what did this mean?
Click to expand...

"In the latter stages Hamilton said on the radio that his seat had gone cold, despite the race taking place in warm conditions with track temperatures in excess of 45C. Vowles said the cold sensation Hamilton experienced was in fact a consequence of the violent bouncing he suffered. "I spent a few minutes with Lewis earlier to actually ask him what happened. Nothing really had changed in the car, it just looks like after the amount of pummelling his back had taken from the bouncing, he fundamentally had a numbness that set in and it looks like the cold was a response to that. "So there wasn't anything cold in the car. It's just a response to the amount of endurance and pain he'd been through in the race."

So that's what was meant by "my seat's gone cold".
 
His seats gone cold and I believe he was wondering why he got out of bed at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.