Posts 
Atom AKA the FIA's Selective Updating
AKA the FIA's Selective Updating
Date: October 27 2007
[ 
Mood: Slap ]
Mood: Slap ][ 
Currently: Reading The Krytos Trap by Michael A. Stackpole ]
Currently: Reading The Krytos Trap by Michael A. Stackpole ]After three days of waiting, details of the technical updates (or some of them) the FIA promised for 2009-spec Formula 1 are beginning to emerge. Allegedly. It is said that the changes for 2009 are:
40cm wider and shorter wings. This would help aero control at the front, since the air the front wings pass through to the rest of the car will be less disturbed by subsequent aero. As a pro-aero rule, this is not necessarily a good thing. What is needed is a better balancing between aero grip (which is relatively transient, and apt to reduce at the least disturbance) and mechanical grip (relatively permanent and thus more useful for overtakers).
The "spoons" in the middle of the front wings will be considerably less pronounced, when this is taken in combination with the ride height rules.
The middle part of the car will become standard. Now this was a rule mooted to be coming in for 2011. Perhaps it was predictable that the FIA would be impatient to impose such a problematic rule. Come on, this is Formula 1, not a vintage racing series...
There will be adjustable front wing flaps. They may be adjusted twice a lap, by six degrees or less each time. This is the sort of rule that makes me wonder how many hours of daydreaming must have gone into such a daft regulation. Quite apart from the amount of alteration being really quite small (I'm sure the flaps could be adjusted a lot more if that was a desirable trait), there is the small matter of what the point of allowing this sort of behaviour would be.
And the FIA intends to enforce the restrictions how?!?
The rear wing will now be shorter and taller. This is meant to have the opposite effect of the front wing and clean up the airflow for the oncoming car a little. This rule isn't too bad. Unfortunately it is more than counterbalanced by the other rumoured rules.
I say rumoured... ...because the FIA still hasn't updated its own regulations. The 2008 regulations were last updated (at the time of writing) on March 28th 2007. The 2009 regulations were last updated even earlier, on December 22nd 2007. I said yesterday that the FIA needed to improve its internet presence, but this is ridiculous! With three days between the decision and now (and still no update), I am beginning to suspect that the rule updates are being withheld from the public is deliberate.
While I am not familiar with f1.automoto365.com, I suspect that the fact that it does not have much of a reputation (good or bad) among Formula 1 addicts is important here. Either it's made up these rules (in which case they are scarily plausible - but then so was Luc Domenjoz's "quote" about Hamilton's gearbox) or the FIA has deliberately tipped them off and not other sources (in which case the FIA is playing a very dangerous game).
The internet, contrary to popular belief, does have a successful, if informal, authority system. This is the "if I've heard of the source, preferably off-line as well as on-line, it's valid" for the more casual internet users, and "if it's a site known for having an accurate view on the subject, it's good but not necessarily valid" for more experienced internet users. By picking only sites that have low authority ratings in both criteria, the FIA will be suspected of dodgy behaviour. Especially as it's not told its own site about the changes yet...
Apologies to f1.automoto.com's admins. While I am sure their site is respectable (I can't get it to load on my computer, admittedly), but a site has to be reasonably well-known among a niche crowd to do well on the "accurate-view" score. Until then it's neutral - a source that can be interesting, but not believed over and above better-rated sources until it's proved itself. Sites climb up and down the informal authority ratings as individual users see how well the site's viewpoints correspond with that user's perception of reality.
The perception now is that the FIA are, at best, hiding something. The FIA and f1.automoto.com update contradict each other, so at least one of them is wrong. On the face of it, we'd go for the latter. The trouble is that the FIA itself said that it was changing the rules three days ago, yet it hasn't changed them on its own site. So the FIA's on-line authority has gone down. In fact, given the FIA's off-line specialism (politicking) we cannot rule out the possibility that it has simply taken its politicking into the digital realm for the benefit of... ...well, who?
The moral of the story? Be honest on the internet - it really does help your credibility, whether it's in F1 or any other field.
40cm wider and shorter wings. This would help aero control at the front, since the air the front wings pass through to the rest of the car will be less disturbed by subsequent aero. As a pro-aero rule, this is not necessarily a good thing. What is needed is a better balancing between aero grip (which is relatively transient, and apt to reduce at the least disturbance) and mechanical grip (relatively permanent and thus more useful for overtakers).
The "spoons" in the middle of the front wings will be considerably less pronounced, when this is taken in combination with the ride height rules.
The middle part of the car will become standard. Now this was a rule mooted to be coming in for 2011. Perhaps it was predictable that the FIA would be impatient to impose such a problematic rule. Come on, this is Formula 1, not a vintage racing series...
There will be adjustable front wing flaps. They may be adjusted twice a lap, by six degrees or less each time. This is the sort of rule that makes me wonder how many hours of daydreaming must have gone into such a daft regulation. Quite apart from the amount of alteration being really quite small (I'm sure the flaps could be adjusted a lot more if that was a desirable trait), there is the small matter of what the point of allowing this sort of behaviour would be.
And the FIA intends to enforce the restrictions how?!?
The rear wing will now be shorter and taller. This is meant to have the opposite effect of the front wing and clean up the airflow for the oncoming car a little. This rule isn't too bad. Unfortunately it is more than counterbalanced by the other rumoured rules.
I say rumoured... ...because the FIA still hasn't updated its own regulations. The 2008 regulations were last updated (at the time of writing) on March 28th 2007. The 2009 regulations were last updated even earlier, on December 22nd 2007. I said yesterday that the FIA needed to improve its internet presence, but this is ridiculous! With three days between the decision and now (and still no update), I am beginning to suspect that the rule updates are being withheld from the public is deliberate.
While I am not familiar with f1.automoto365.com, I suspect that the fact that it does not have much of a reputation (good or bad) among Formula 1 addicts is important here. Either it's made up these rules (in which case they are scarily plausible - but then so was Luc Domenjoz's "quote" about Hamilton's gearbox) or the FIA has deliberately tipped them off and not other sources (in which case the FIA is playing a very dangerous game).
The internet, contrary to popular belief, does have a successful, if informal, authority system. This is the "if I've heard of the source, preferably off-line as well as on-line, it's valid" for the more casual internet users, and "if it's a site known for having an accurate view on the subject, it's good but not necessarily valid" for more experienced internet users. By picking only sites that have low authority ratings in both criteria, the FIA will be suspected of dodgy behaviour. Especially as it's not told its own site about the changes yet...
Apologies to f1.automoto.com's admins. While I am sure their site is respectable (I can't get it to load on my computer, admittedly), but a site has to be reasonably well-known among a niche crowd to do well on the "accurate-view" score. Until then it's neutral - a source that can be interesting, but not believed over and above better-rated sources until it's proved itself. Sites climb up and down the informal authority ratings as individual users see how well the site's viewpoints correspond with that user's perception of reality.
The perception now is that the FIA are, at best, hiding something. The FIA and f1.automoto.com update contradict each other, so at least one of them is wrong. On the face of it, we'd go for the latter. The trouble is that the FIA itself said that it was changing the rules three days ago, yet it hasn't changed them on its own site. So the FIA's on-line authority has gone down. In fact, given the FIA's off-line specialism (politicking) we cannot rule out the possibility that it has simply taken its politicking into the digital realm for the benefit of... ...well, who?
The moral of the story? Be honest on the internet - it really does help your credibility, whether it's in F1 or any other field.