Sad news.

Jobs had his faults, but he made very great and positive influences in the computer industry, and will be missed.

Quote from Electrik Kar :

I think people love Apple because it fashionised tech geekery. It's just a computer for fs.

That's partly true. But there are others who appreciate the shift in the bigger picture. Transforming computers from corporate mainframes into consumer desktops, and later into portable devices, was driven largely by the efforts of Jobs and Apple - both from a business perspective and technologically.

Any punts?

I reckon:
1. Vettel
2. Alonso
3. Button

Quote from Kazu2799 :

anyone know why heidfeld's car "exploded"?

Some sort of water storage/containment near the engine. Not sure. I've heard references to a water "bottle", but it's probably not an accurate description.

Very hot fire + water + enclosed space = high pressure = explosion

Quote from Mustafur :

Oh, I thought abc brought in ads recently.

I wouldn't really know though because there shows are aimed at pensioners.

Doesn't SBS have a format where it has something along the likes of 10 to 20mins of straight adverts then none at all during the show. IMO it's a good format none the less and would work brilliantly during a live broadcast.

I don't really watch the ABC either. I do watch the SBS quite a bit (news and current affairs mainly), and they have 90-second ad breaks, up to 5 minutes per hour. They were losing too many audiences between shows with the old format (lengthy adverts between shows) so they changed.

F1 really needs to utilise the Internet more. Now that FOM owns the video feeds, they could broadcast the events via online streaming. I suppose it's more profitable for TV companies to pay them license fees though.

Quote from Mustafur :

Im surprised BBC doesn't just add adverts i mean its common sence and it can relax the costs.

Even if they added adverts during the pre race shows or 1 advert at a time during the race im sure it would be enough to make up the costs for the series.

ABC, Australias public broadcaster has adverts to cover the costs rather then making everyone in the country pay some ludicrious fee.

ABC? ABC only advertises its programmes, retail products, or sponsored events/shows/etc. It's not quite the same as commercial advertising on other free-to-air channels. It's funded entirely by the Commonwealth government.

SBS does advertising though.

I wonder if the new broadcasting agreement will change anything for Australian coverage.

Good work, Hyper. I think you're right!

Quote from scania :

If they make it to a real think, a quick relase wire is not a hard technic

I don't think the problem is releasing the canopy. It's the problem of driver extraction if the car is upside-down. How would the driver move the canopy out of the way after release, especially if the weight of the car is resting on the canopy?

Anyone tried the bonus question? I don't think any of the choices are correct!

Which statement is correct?

The Nürburgring has 18 corners and its nickname is "The Green Hell". (18 corners?!)
The length of the circuit is 5.1 km and in 1978 a Dutch sportsman became world champion at the old Nürburgring. (There has never been a Dutch F1 champion, unless the question is talking about another world championship.)
The official opening was in 1927 and in the 1950s Juan Manuel Fangio managed to win five times in a row. (Could be correct if it's talking about Fangio's five world titles, rather than five wins at the Nurburgring.)
Fernando Alonso is the last European driver to win at the Nürburgring and in the same year he became World Champion. (Latter is wrong.)

Last edited by samjh, Wed 20 Jul 2011, 09:08.

If LMP cars can have closed cockpits, there are no technical reasons (including heat) why F1 cars cannot.

Quote from BlueFlame :

Vettel is clearly on the backfoot, he's got jack shit on Webber. Webber the man to beat this weekend, he's been the quickest whenever he's set a lap.

That's a bit of an exaggeration (Webber being quickest all the time). But between Webber and Vettel, advantage Webber I think. Hard to tell for sure though, because the conditions were very erratic.

Quote from Storm_Cloud :

There might be something in that. Webber is able to blow his own diffuser better than Vettel. After Webber schooled the German at Monaco and Spain in successive races, Renault developed an off throttle system that removed the Aussie's advantage.

You're making it sound like Renault developed the EBD specifically to give Vettel an advantage, when that's really not the case. In 2010, the two drivers were neck and neck until Spain. Then Webber had the edge from Spain and Monaco to Spa (remembering that Vettel had chassis damange in Spain and Monaco), then Vettel basically steamrolled over everyone else from Italy onward. So the blown diffuser theory doesn't wash when compared with their race performance over the season.

Last edited by samjh, Sun 10 Jul 2011, 07:19.

Quote from DevilDare :

Horner and Newey look damn pissed off.

Nothing to do with reliability... Lotus-Renault are not complaining, its just RBR looking to keep their advantage over the others. Suck it up, and prove you are just as quick without these "dirty" tricks.

Why is it "dirty"?

McLaren, on the other hand, get to effectively override the new rules. Hot-blowing is supposed to be banned now, but Mercedes teams -- ie. McLaren, since it is the only team other than Ferrari to utilise hot-blowing -- get to inject fuel into half of its cylinders, supposedly for reliability reasons.

Quote from TexasLTU :

So, Renault and Mercedes are given an exception on banned diffusors?

Yes and no.

They've been given some concessions on reliability grounds.

Mercedes is allowed to fire half of its cylinders (ie. 4 of its 8 cylinders) while drivers brake. This is effectively hot-blowing but at 50% of the potential maximum. Hot-blowing has been banned for all others.

Renault is allowed to open its throttle up to 50% while drivers brake. However, Renault engines cannot hot-blow. So Renault teams - including RBR - basically get to do what they've always done: cold blowing under braking.

Last edited by samjh, Fri 8 Jul 2011, 22:06.

It's odd, considering that some of the tracks are under threat from nearby residents because of sound levels...

Darn.

So LMP2 cars could potentially have more powerful engines than LMP1?!!!! How strange!

And I see that the ACO continues to ignore the disparity between diesel and petrol...

Quote from ACCAkut :

well they cant do that, its either 3.7 N/A or 2.0 Turbo (or is that only for LMP1?)

I think you're confusing LMP1 with LMP2.

LMP1 is maximum 6L NA, 4L for turbo/super-charged petrol, 5.5L for turbo diesel. No cyl limit.

LMP2 is maximum 3.4L NA with max 8 cyl, 2L for turbo petrol with max 6 cyl, and 4.4L for turbo diesel. All engines have to be production-based.

Quote from ACCAkut :

as i understand it Audi stays, using its diesel, and Porsche runs petrol. I wonder if they go n/a or turbo, imagine 2.0 flat-6 (can't be flat-4, thats Subaru territory :razz

I vote for the 997 GT2 RS engine: 3.6L H6 twin-turbo, pumping out 612 horses.

Exactly, Mustafur.

I would like to mention that one of the most exciting battles in F1 history was not for 1st, but 2nd place: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kl2tIFxSEGA

Quote from Mustafur :

I doubt they change the maps during the race, its qualifying where they had the high engine map settings, in the race it would be unsuitable for the engine and fuel loads they put in the car.

I doubt it also.

A more likely work-around is to have a 3D engine map which only applies the "extreme" map when the fuel level is very low (eg. only enough fuel for two flying laps), and less demanding maps for higher fuel loads.

I think the basic rule they should follow is:
* If the track has two long straights (ie. the pit straight and a back straight), two DRS zones with one detection point for each.
* If the track has only one long straight, one DRS zone and detection point.

Well, they stirred up a hornet's nest when they DOS'ed the CIA website.

Although I don't agree with their method, I'm quite shocked at how they managed to break some of their targets. The Citibank site was compromised by an SQL injection (inserting part of an SQL query into a web form or address to extract sensitive data from a database or bypass login), which is a basic attack vector that every self-respecting website or database developer should secure. The way they're just DOS'ing (Denial of Service - basically just flooding a server with too many requests) everything is also disturbing, because it's not too hard to configure a web server against simpler DOS attacks.

Last edited by samjh, Wed 22 Jun 2011, 11:10.

I like the old Playstation livery for Pescarolo-Judd:

Quote from Squelch :

The definition of "the red zone" isn't quite clear to me, but it is mentioned a lot in that article.

Does Caubet mean they have allocated the funding and are fully committed to 2013 (in the red financially) which if postponed until 2015 will break them? Or does he mean the internal board have been told that 2013 is the date, only to hear there will be a postponement and they are red faced now?

Might be a French thing? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Zone_%28World_War_I%29
Perhaps it refers to a status of limbo.

More likely I think it's just a point of no return. If the FIA doesn't implement the new engine rules for 2013, the board of Renault will probably cancel their F1 program entirely.

My feelings are neutral on the engine. But looking at the budget of Audi's Le Mans program, I think Renault might find LMS or ALMS to be better value for money.

A Renault LMP1 with a twin-scroll 2L engine would be an interesting addition to the mix. Or maybe they could go the diesel route...

How much did it cost to go?

One of the problems with F1 races is the cost of the tickets, rather than proximity.

Not exactly racing, but...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvDNNj2ZdX8