Screw you guys. No more super awesome ideas of mine for you lot.

Quote from ATC Quicksilver :

I already came up with the best solution ever, hydrogen powered cars. The only emission from a hydrogen powered car is water, scale it up to F1 levels of power and as the race goes on the cars will make the track wet, no need for sprinklers!

this sound BRILLIANT~!

except no one knows how much water will get dumped out... lol

I could just go to every race and wash my car at the circuit the day before the race, everytime I do that it ****ing rains the next day.

decrease wing area by 30%. Increase tyre width by 15%. remove double diffuser. Remove wooden plank (allowing ground effect). Remove sidepod bargeboards.
Allow front and rear wing angle change from cockpit.

Presto. aero efficiency dropped, mecanical grip increased, non-turbulent air generating aero forces created (ground effect).
Plus, drivers could put wings at lower angle to aid overtaking.

The remaining aero components would have to be simple too, like you could say there could be three or more cross sections taken equally spaced from one end of the wing to the other and two of them have to be identical or something daft along those lines.

Actually thats excessive regulation which is bad.

Wider cars and larger tyres would be nice.

Quote from ATC Quicksilver :

I already came up with the best solution ever, hydrogen powered cars. The only emission from a hydrogen powered car is water, scale it up to F1 levels of power and as the race goes on the cars will make the track wet, no need for sprinklers!

You'll also need fuel cells made from unobtainium, or else there will be Hindenburg-like explosions in every major crash.

hydrogen is actually pretty safe to be involved with in a fire, far safer than petrol as it effectively creates a fast rising flash fire, a lot of those killed on the hindenberg were as a result of either falling / jumping from too high or from being crushed. most serious serious burns came from the fuel / structure etc that had caught fire, of the 97 people on board only 37 were killed (+1 ground crew member) some actually escaped without any injuries or burns at all and a dog on board escaped serious injury.

I don't see how the Hindenburg disaster has any relevance to 21st century automotive fuel cells really. Gasoline fuel cells failed a lot once upon a time, but we learned from that and made quite safe ones without any unobtanium. Just because you don't know how something could be done doesn't mean it's complicated, expensive or difficult.

I was really just following the spirit of the discussion, which was in jest, and not serious.

Unless if I misinterpreted ATC's intentions. I'm guessing he wasn't serious. Or was he?

Quote from ultrataco :

Hamilton got only a warning because that rule is about blocking an overtake move (I think). Hamilton wasn't blocking. He was actually getting out of the way so Petrov couldn't take advantage of the slipstream. He moved first and Petrov followed.

Risky and questionable, but not against the rules, so no penalty.

Agree 100% , I think the problem maybe that we and the stewereds see so very little of this "nose to ass.. follow me if you can" type racing , that when presenteded with it ...we throw our hands up and say "drive thru ..stop and go "

But it seems easy to define ..

Petrov moves 1st then hammy =Block

Hammy moves 1st then Petrov =Trying to break tow


It aint rocket science baby


Edit* As not to show bias ...You have to admire Petrovs skills to follow Hammy , he pretty much had him covered allways

thats a nice explanation, don't know why the hell i never thought of it to explain in work to the guys that read tabloids. they should write it into the rules, if the driver following is reacting to the car in front then it's ok to move repeatedly , if the car in front is reacting to the car behind then only one move per straight. (obviously in a lapping situation the car that appears to bein front is actually behind in the race)

Slightly off-topic, but what the hell:

http://www.facebook.com/group. ... 13124725380827&v=info

lol traxX

Good one ^^

Think of it this way.

If you want to slipstream, stay behind the guy infront.

If you want to pass, obviously go around the guy infront.

So anyone tell me, was Petrov behind Lewis and following OR was he trying to pass him on the straight.

If Petrov was trying to get through on the straight, do you really think he is going to follow a driver weaving back and forth? Had Petrov stayed straight after the 1st or 2nd weave he would have been side to side and had the next turn.

He tried to slipstream, Lewis tried to break that, not block off Petrov. Some people make these drivers seem retarded. They both knew what was going on.

I really do not see how the red part could be the one in the F1 logo. I have always seen the white as the one. I think its an awesome logo as well!

Quote from traxxion :

Slightly off-topic, but what the hell:

http://www.facebook.com/group. ... 13124725380827&v=info

I used to think that too.

Regardless I think Petrov has potential, but hes made a few mistakes in the first races but in fairness he is a Rookie.

Quote from traxxion :

Slightly off-topic, but what the hell:

http://www.facebook.com/group. ... 13124725380827&v=info

Quote from traxxion :

Slightly off-topic, but what the hell:

http://www.facebook.com/group. ... 13124725380827&v=info

I've known it for ages I like this logo just for this.

lol...

You got me on this.

Question is: what the **** is the ugly red for then ?

Quote from GianniC :

Question is: what the **** is the ugly red for then ?

To remind us that the FIA can do whatever they want.

I think the red is supposed to represent speed.. (because of the idea of motion in it and the red colour is also often associated with speed; a red ferrari looks faster then as blue one or something)

Meh.

Quote from GianniC :

Question is: what the **** is the ugly red for then ?

Imagine the logo without it. The 1 is not so visible.

I can't believe people noticed this just now It's an awesome logo..