@@tropickman i get your point but its not common knowledge. I do understand f1 and the tech side, but alot of fans don't. Hence why there is so much complaining about f1 when people dont even understand it. But i know what you mean dude.
The last part about the three car train was an eye opener, although it does make those moments when someone overtakes 2 cars at once seem less impressive now :)
go to motorsport.com, if you sign up for prime you get much more of this stuff. I've been critical for years of sky's broadcasting. They as the sole provider of f1, should have an in dept tech talk. Not the ramblings of ted and his notebook, which while occasionally humorous - mostly awkward.
Willem Toet did a full day of guest lecturing on aerodynamics at my university a few years ago. He’s very good, engaging and interesting, with a wealth of experience in F1. Great guest for the video also!
You got that FIA? You got that Technical Bureau of the FIA?? Now start thinking on how to minimize loss of grip so the car behind can follow its opponent!
Actually I found this to be quite simplistic and dull. The rear wing may send air skyward (you can see this during any wet race), but what about the low pressure area that is left by that air? We've all seen "double DRS" situations too. And in terms of the dirty effect in corners, I'd hoped to see a more detailed demonstration with the graphics, to show precisely how that turbulent air and low pressure hits those key surfaces differently from still air for the leading car. Why not discuss how the problem can be reduced too?
very cool Peter thank you. FIrst of all. I clicked the Like Button. I am a subscriber. so I do like your channel. You do listen to the subscribers. So I hope my comments are taken on board. What frustrated me, was a lot of what the man was saying. Wasnt demonstrated, so when he spoke about the 2nd car in a 3rd car train. Opening up DRS, would suck the rear wing wake down from the lead car. That wasnt explained so I have no idea why or how that happens. He also mentioned the air when cornering and how the wake is affected there, and that you would want to be "inboard" but I dont understand why. Again that wasn't shown. very cool segment though In regards to F1. I think the DRS is used with the wrong parameters. I think if the gap to the car infront of you is MORE THAN A SECOND. you should get DRS. once you get to the 1 second DRS is deactivated and you have to then pass with talent, speed and a good car. This would also help the slower cars. they could run a higher engine mode as they would be on DRS a lot more. and close the field up a bit more also something needs to be done about Midfield teams. They do just enough to get points and to get a return on their investment. Williams are using 1 less engine each season. therefore have NO INTEREST in winning. I know Peter wont like that comment but it is true. how do you expect to compete with 1 less engine. and lower power modes. I think the one way to stop that would be to impose a percentage rule. so constructors points. you cant finish the constructors championship 5 points at the end of 4 stages in the year. so every 5 races you have to be within 5 points at those stages of the team ahead of you. if not you get a fine that dips you under your break even point. this would encourage teams to actually develop. because as I said. Williams and force india and Sauber do just enough to make points to get the money and break even or + 10% which keeps most shareholders happy.
I say get rid of DRS and allow the cars to use as much fuel flow as they want but with a limited fuel amount so 100 litres but a huge fuel flow to get past a car for a boost but then that car will need to run lean to finish the race so could be passed latter in the race by the ones conserving fuel. In my mind this works or does it mean the lead car gets an advantage by being able to conserve fuel?
either seriously minimize wings, make them really basic, standardized even or put some sort of drs like device on the front wing to increase downforce while following
3:09s Why on Earth are we still talking about this twenty four years later in 2017? It's exactly why Hakkinen lost it behind Alesi in Estoril 1993. It has always been like this. Please tell us something new already.
probably why it's so hard on the ovals for them to run faster up to and through the power out of those turns for them. though they do seems to handle it better than F1 cars can.
probably my most favourite video uploaded on geeky f1 stuff by Peter. more geeky things and video demos please.
It was nice that he didn't keep interrupting him in this video, I guess maybe he's learning from comments! Much better :)
We need more videos from this great man! Looks like he can talk about aerodynamic all day long!
These animations are amazing. And the change with the interviewer not interrupting every 5 seconds is a welcoming bonus
Fascinating!!
What a great video!
Actually; they explained nothing that is not general knowledge. Why not talk about how to reduce this?
@@tropickman i get your point but its not common knowledge. I do understand f1 and the tech side, but alot of fans don't. Hence why there is so much complaining about f1 when people dont even understand it. But i know what you mean dude.
Thanx for letting the man talk and not interrupting him every few seconds 👍
Absolutely fascinating. Exposing the truly invisible side of F1. Thank you!
The last part about the three car train was an eye opener, although it does make those moments when someone overtakes 2 cars at once seem less impressive now :)
hang on.. was there more to this? it seems as though it ended before this guy was done sharing the most interesting part of F1 racing.
go to motorsport.com, if you sign up for prime you get much more of this stuff. I've been critical for years of sky's broadcasting. They as the sole provider of f1, should have an in dept tech talk. Not the ramblings of ted and his notebook, which while occasionally humorous - mostly awkward.
Glad I found this excellent video on RUclips, watching it on motorsport.com or autosport.com is impossible due to the lag.
You can see those 3rd car overtakes at Baku, with both K-Mag and Ricardio
Amazing, another great video!
Excellent! Willem Toet is a gem.
Willem Toet did a full day of guest lecturing on aerodynamics at my university a few years ago. He’s very good, engaging and interesting, with a wealth of experience in F1. Great guest for the video also!
So much better with Willem's input!
hope to see the full discussion
Awesome stuff guys, a knowledgeable fan is better for the sport in general. Hats off to Mr. Windsor
Awesome! Thanks for sharing. I love F1 as much for the technicalities as for the racing!
This is great insight!!
Pete what a brilliant upload, cheers
Video should be named "Drafting explained by a Formula 1 wizard"
Great video
Could listen to that guy for hours.
Good show. Very interesting . I learned a few things there .
This is so fucking interesting. I love these kind of videos
this is the best thing ever, thank you !
amazing content! great job guys!
Wow, great video!
Fantastic video. Thanks
Super great and interesanting video!!
That "Generic F1 car", is clearly a Mercedes
Peter mentioned 'Generically liveried' in the first instance, not 'Generic F1 Car'.
You're right I missed the world Liveried.
He does however say "Your basic"
Ben Rhodes thank you
You got that FIA? You got that Technical Bureau of the FIA?? Now start thinking on how to minimize loss of grip so the car behind can follow its opponent!
Less complex less sensitive wings like those on car before 2009 ..... So that car can follow closely
Actually I found this to be quite simplistic and dull.
The rear wing may send air skyward (you can see this during any wet race), but what about the low pressure area that is left by that air?
We've all seen "double DRS" situations too.
And in terms of the dirty effect in corners, I'd hoped to see a more detailed demonstration with the graphics, to show precisely how that turbulent air and low pressure hits those key surfaces differently from still air for the leading car.
Why not discuss how the problem can be reduced too?
more of willem please
lovely explained
great insight!
very cool Peter thank you. FIrst of all. I clicked the Like Button. I am a subscriber. so I do like your channel. You do listen to the subscribers. So I hope my comments are taken on board.
What frustrated me, was a lot of what the man was saying. Wasnt demonstrated, so when he spoke about the 2nd car in a 3rd car train. Opening up DRS, would suck the rear wing wake down from the lead car. That wasnt explained so I have no idea why or how that happens.
He also mentioned the air when cornering and how the wake is affected there, and that you would want to be "inboard" but I dont understand why. Again that wasn't shown.
very cool segment though
In regards to F1. I think the DRS is used with the wrong parameters. I think if the gap to the car infront of you is MORE THAN A SECOND. you should get DRS. once you get to the 1 second DRS is deactivated and you have to then pass with talent, speed and a good car. This would also help the slower cars. they could run a higher engine mode as they would be on DRS a lot more. and close the field up a bit more
also something needs to be done about Midfield teams. They do just enough to get points and to get a return on their investment. Williams are using 1 less engine each season. therefore have NO INTEREST in winning. I know Peter wont like that comment but it is true. how do you expect to compete with 1 less engine. and lower power modes. I think the one way to stop that would be to impose a percentage rule. so constructors points. you cant finish the constructors championship 5 points at the end of 4 stages in the year. so every 5 races you have to be within 5 points at those stages of the team ahead of you. if not you get a fine that dips you under your break even point. this would encourage teams to actually develop. because as I said. Williams and force india and Sauber do just enough to make points to get the money and break even or + 10% which keeps most shareholders happy.
I say get rid of DRS and allow the cars to use as much fuel flow as they want but with a limited fuel amount so 100 litres but a huge fuel flow to get past a car for a boost but then that car will need to run lean to finish the race so could be passed latter in the race by the ones conserving fuel. In my mind this works or does it mean the lead car gets an advantage by being able to conserve fuel?
Amazing!!!
Amazing
either seriously minimize wings, make them really basic, standardized even or put some sort of drs like device on the front wing to increase downforce while following
Very interesting, although I had to pause the vid and find out what DRS is :) (Drag Reduction System - alters rear wing)
I thought the title was in German until I actually read it😅
I wish F1 practice sessions would have coloured smoke on track so we could see this in action. Probably not safe though
Soooo what should they do to make them look good, but be able to follow closer, is the question I'ld like an answer to
Takes these guys forever to get to the point!
BRILL
5:16 oh... biology class
cool
this is one of the biggest problems in f1 currently
I loves me some Science!
F1 aerodynamics as told by air wizard xd
👏👏👏
Jesus at 1:04
Hmmm. Interesting
3:09s Why on Earth are we still talking about this twenty four years later in 2017? It's exactly why Hakkinen lost it behind Alesi in Estoril 1993. It has always been like this. Please tell us something new already.
I don't like the unstructured style to delivering this information. The images in the animations didn't align with what he was actually talking about
Just think of the expense of the computer graphics they did provide. That was all original stuff, not done before.
but that's a Mercedes anyway.
To bad the physics dictate close race to the dream state.
Isn’t this just drafting, in American terms?
Yes, commonly known as drafting.
probably why it's so hard on the ovals for them to run faster up to and through the power out of those turns for them. though they do seems to handle it better than F1 cars can.
Duncan Cunningham
They (NASCAR stockcars I presume) handle the wake better because they're less dependent on aerodynamic grip.
Or slip streaming in most other English speaking corners of the world.
This feels really loosely put together, like the proffessor rambles on about stuff but doesnt really give a coherent explanation.