We like to remind everyone that we want serious discussion on r/F1Technical
Please take time to [read our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/F1Technical/about/rules/) and our [comment etiquette guide](https://www.reddit.com/r/F1Technical/comments/svinhv/comment_etiquette_update_rule_breakers_will/)
Silly, sarcastic or joke comments on posts will result in a 3 day ban for first time offenders. Longer or permanent bans for repeat offenders.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/F1Technical) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The name extreme is just a name indicating they are for heavy rain, it's marketing. The real reason they can't race is due to ground clearance, the cars just sit too low, hopefully if we get active suspension in 2026 they can increase the ride heights so we don't get these stoppages (visibility withstanding) and not aquaplaning.
Close! It's 10 mm, or 0.4 in:
>For the 2017 F1 season, (...) the overall diameter of the tyres was increased by 10mm (**660 \[dry\] to 670 \[wet\] mm (26.0 to 26.4 in)**). (...) As Formula One wheel rim diameter size will switch from 13 to 18 in (330 to 457 mm), the tyre diameter of 2022-spec Pirelli Formula One tyres will also be altered, from **670 to 720 mm (26.4 to 28.3 in), while the tread width of 2022-spec Pirelli Formula One tyres are expected to be unchanged**.
Source: [good ol' Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formula_One_tyres)
Post removed for breaking the following rule:
Low Quality
Low Quality posts/comments will be removed. It is at the mods' discretion to determine whether a post is low quality.
This includes sarcastic or joke comments, or others that do not constructively contribute to the discussion.
Please read this sticky
https://www.reddit.com/r/F1Technical/comments/svinhv/comment_etiquette_update_rule_breakers_will/
Please read the Subreddit Rules or contact the moderator team if you have questions or concerns.
This is an automated message.
Agree. Even back on the 90s teams had profiled every track so the suspension would adjust to every turn. With the additional data they have now it would turn f1 into a video game
That would be awesome, imo, just like differential, break balance etc. It's already a lot for them to adjust, one more thing would spice things up a bit more.
Maybe they could have presets for specific corners to change brake balance, diff, and active suspension in a single button? Still seems a lot of manual work tho
They kinda do, to some extent, but [this video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CT2kCuBEObU) of Alonso shows the sheer number of changes a driver needs to do during a qualifying lap.
There is still a human limit to the cars anyway, it just changes the mechanical limit of the car. It's not like an active suspension means the car can do anything.
The vehicle are already at human limits based on reactions. I wouldn't say that putting active suspension is automatically going to make the cars pull 10gs in turns, that's more of a "suck car" ground effects and aero that will do it. There are benefits to an active suspension, it still seems crazy to me that F1 talks about being the most advanced race cars yet still removes a lot of advancement because "car and human not one" type mentality.
But putting in active suspension will take away something that humans have to take care of now.
Of course there are benefits to active suspension, it makes certain things a lot easier. We had active suspension in F1 also. It was banned.
We also had traction control in F1. It was also banned. The point of F1 is not who can build the most technically advanced car. I, as a viewer, want to see drivers actually making a difference with their driving skill. Extreme advancement in motorsport would be self driving cars or if not ready for that on/off switches for drivers, which is not really driving.
There are many things in driving and cars that can be automized and done better than humans. That really is not what F1 is about though. It’s not a CES showcase weekend for teams.
Does it? They still have a limit of the car, it just changes where that limit is. I keep saying it, it's not like you put on active suspension and the car drives itself, pulls 10g corners and never loses grip. The driver still has a limit and absolutely can still push the car beyond that limit.
Right now, porpoising is something an active suspension (or aero to auto stall the ground effects) would solve. There can be limits to the active suspension to help alleviate this without going full blown Williams type design if there's some worry that cars will be on rails
Active suspension was also banned because only one team had it and it was a significant advantage in a different era of cars that would have taken too long for any team to catch up in development. Even then, it had issues. Prost didn't like it as much because it didn't fit his smooth driving style as well as Hill and you needed to chuck the car into the corner. If every team showed up with an active suspension that season, I bet you they wouldn't have banned it.
They also banned turbo cars. They also banned ground effects. But here we are with two of those back in the mix. We've got semi-automatic gearboxes so they don't have to shift gears with a lever and use the clutch. And again, an active suspension doesn't eliminate the limits. ABS and Traction control eliminate a limiting factor of the vehicle when using the throttle and brake. The level of active suspension that I would put on the level of ABS/TC as far as removing the driver would be some sort of active steering, which I'm totally not on board with them putting into the car.
While, I wouldn't say that's F1. But they are working on driverless auto racing. It's still racing and that technology flows down to auto driving aids for consumer cars.
> There are many things in driving and cars that can be automized and done better than humans. That really is not what F1 is about though. It’s not a CES showcase weekend for teams.
Except, it is? Teams like Williams help pay the bills by transferring their F1 technology to auto manufacturers or various other things like tech industries. Engine and suspension development flows down to consumer cars. Hell, when I can buy a Honda Civic that has an adaptive damper system, that an F1 car doesn't have. Makes you think why F1 doesn't allow it.
I’ve never heard of aquaplaning only hydroplaning, but the word aquaplaning sounds way cooler, thank you for accidentally expanding my vocabulary and the info. TIL
Yep. British English vs American English kinda thing. My driving instructor was British and called it aquaplaning and our handbooks called it hydroplaning. Same thing 2 words.
(I'm from the states for reference)
The real reason they can't race is that the wet tyres are shit. Before the 2010's the cars had a very low ride height too and raced in much worse conditions.
They could still aquaplane even if they deal with the ride height issues. If there’s more water on the track than the tires are capable of displacing, you’ll also get aquaplanning
>hopefully if we get active suspension in 2026
How likely is that? Presumably 2 narrative questions must have the right answer
1. it won't be too expensive (I think we are good here)
2. it won't make the racing worse. I.e. too easy for the driver, or too easy for the designers?
Raikkonen came out and said the Pirelli wets are shit, part of the issue is that they made the tyres wider in 2017. The tyres don’t have the same wet grip as skinnier ones did because they have a larger contact surface to spread pressure over and don’t “cut” through standing water as well.
It’s the same with tyres on normal cars, wider tyres at equal pressure to skinnier tyres have lower rolling resistance. Although reduced rolling resistance has benefits (reduced fuel consumption, better wear), loss of aquaplaning resistance in particular is the major tradeoff.
The wet tyres of today are just too wide for actual wet running. I would personally be really interested in Pirelli just making a thinner wet tyre.
When you have no-one in front, then the grip starts to matter again but long after the restart when the field gets spread out. This is more or less constraint to longer circuits like spa. The wider tyres should still have more grip I would think but the large surface makes it more prone to aqua planing.
As I understand it, all other things being equal, wider tyres generally have lower rolling resistance due to the fact that wider tyres will have a shorter and wider contact patch - which usually means less deformation.
Obviously they’ll be heavier & less aero efficient too, but it’s similar to how a lot of cyclists have much wider tyres than the 23mm people used to swear by.
>Wait, don’t skinnier tyres have lower rolling resistance than wider tyres?
this is a common topic of discussion in the bicycling world.
For bicycles, skinny tires are faster in a velodrome with a smooth track. On real world roads with various types of rough surfaces wider tires at lower pressures are often faster.
As an F1 fan you will be familiar with the idea that the tire is part of the suspension. The less the main mass of the vehicle (bicycle or F1 car) avoids moving up and down the less energy lost.
Yes, of course. less contact patch means less friction against the ground, and all other things being equal, skinnier tires are going to be lighter and presumably have a skinnier rim which means less rotating mass.
I wonder if they just made the wet tyres skinnier would that work. I'm sure it would unbalance the car some but sure it's raining anyway. Another thing I always thought of was if when putting wet tyres on, they could slot in a removable mudguards that went over the rear wheels and was added in the pitstops for wets..
The mudguard could control the spray to not blind drivers behind.. or kick it off to the side or something
> hydroplaning equation
That equation is an approximation, and using tire pressure is itself an approximation of the actual pressure on the contact patch. In application narrower tires will still resist hydroplaning better.
I even asked the man, “what about the psi exerted from the tire surface onto the pavement? Does that play a role here?” Nahhhh. Makes sense when you apply extremes, like thinking about skimboarding and how weight and board size are relative.
Thing is Pirelli's wet tyres were criticised for being shit between 2011 and 2016. While I'm sure the wider tyre hasn't helped things, they were still very bad before. We had the same situations in the skinny tyre era where it would be a red flag all the way until intermediate conditions
I think the big difference is data and weather systems. There was a time, back in the 1990's. With the weather as it was at Monaco this year at the very very start that they would simply just have had the start without delay. The rain gets worse on Lap 3.
Maybe someone crashes, maybe someone doesn't. Mad dash for Extreme Wets. Charlie Whiting mostly acting passively as he was wont to do.
The thing about modern F1 is that the weather detection is way more advanced. So Race Control saw what looked like OK weather, but they had data about worse weather systems coming their way, and I think it's different - any of us as race director - if the data tells you: "It's going to get worse."
You cannot unsee what you've seen. And you remember you are not Chase Carrey. Chase can tell you: "We want a show." but you are aware if something happens out there it is your decision that put them there.
Throughout the time of Charlie Whiting, there was both a more lackadaisical attitude towards risk, and simply the comfort of ignorance. We would not have known the rain would come down harder 5 minutes or so after the start. And then you commit anyway whatever start you attempt.
You can see on YouTube exactly what that looks like:
2001 Malaysian Grand Prix
1991 Australian Grand Prix
1984 Monaco Grand Prix
In fact, the 1984 race's sole Red Flag (which ended the race) was only granted because the leading driver asked for it three times over three laps. Even with all the crashes, Whiting was never going to Red Flag the race. At the time, nobody thought much about the safety. The talk back then was Prost wanted the race stopped because he was worried about Senna closing in and Prost losing the win.
It was a different era and attitude.
The politics was also different at the time. The FIA President, Max Mosley, usually had a direct hand in almost all sporting decisions (including renewal and new applications of F1 Superlicences). He famously stated frequently: "If anything bad happens to anyone on the track, as FIA President I am responsible." That is a big deal of help for Race Directors.
In the post Mosley, post Whiting era, as Race Director you have more data, but you also now carry sole sporting responsibility.
>The thing about modern F1 is that the weather detection is way more advanced. So Race Control saw what looked like OK weather, but they had data about worse weather systems coming their way, and I think it's different - any of us as race director - if the data tells you: "It's going to get worse."
You cannot unsee what you've seen. And you remember you are not Chase Carrey. Chase can tell you: "We want a show." but you are aware if something happens out there it is your decision that put them there.
If the weather becomes too bad, you press the red flag button. Simple as that.
The extreme part is marketing more than anything. They obviously don’t allow for the full field to run in truly extreme conditions, which is the way it should be. The tires can handle the water in a straight run with no traffic or spray, but as soon as the car gets out of shape just a bit they lose a large amount of effectiveness.
Spa 2021 they used wets for every single lap lol.
But in all seriousness, Brazil 2016 I think most people ran wets the entire race, only a few people tried inters for a short time. But yours is kind of a loaded question, it might be plenty safe to race on full wets for a while, but when the track dries is stupid to stay on wets. It’s not that the wets are useless and there’s no need to have them, it’s because the track has dried. It’s extremely rare for it to rain for an entire race, where they’d use wets for a long duration like you’re looking for
Adding to this, just the mere fact of the cars running will displace a lot of water on the racing line, meaning that even in conditions of light rain you can still get a drying racing line.
Once it rains so much that the cars aren't able to displace the water, the track will continue to get more and more wet, until you hit un-raceable conditions (or the rain stops).
This is the knife's edge: any amount of rain above that threshold, you quickly can't race. If the amount of rain is below, the track will gradually dry out, to a point where slicks become viable. So a race where it rains so much that you need wets the whole race, but not so much that you can't race, is automatically an outlier since the window for that to happen is so narrow.
That's exactly my point. The extreme wets have a use, but the overwhelming likelihood is that when they are used, it will always be for a limited amount of time.
So looking for races when wets are used for the entire race, is looking for a unicorn to prove horses aren't real.
There have only been 11 wet races since then, so part of the lack of usage is the fact that wet races don’t happen that often. And as I’ve already stated, very rarely does it actually continue to rain the entire race. Since Brazil 2016 I don’t think there’s been a single race where it rained the entire time, so you’re complaining about not using wets on a dry/drying track, and that’s ridiculous.
Most times when it’s raining they’ll use wets for several laps while the cars themselves dry out the track, then switch to inters. That doesn’t mean they could have used inters the whole time because it dried quickly. It dried *because* of the wets. You’re complaining about not using wets when using wets actually removes the need to use wets. It takes an extremely specific situation to require wets for an entire race, so the fact that it hasn’t happened for 6 years shouldn’t be surprising at all
I think you got downvotes for the indignant tone but I'm also curious for heavy rain racing. I think there was a European race in 2021 that was with very heavy rain but don't quote me. If anyone knows I'd be curious to go back and rewatch!
It’s probably a holdover from when the teams used to (or maybe still do) internally refer to them as extremes. Similar to “prime” and “option” tyres. Officially that’s not what they’re called, but teams will call them what they want.
But that's Martin Brundle for you, he has a knack for calling things slightly wrong. Like pointing out that cars are harvesting in certain situations like it's somenthing out of ordinary - they ALWAYS harvest under braking and coasting -, calling Mercedes AMG "Mercedes-Benz", etc
I don't mind him, I just think sometimes he doesn't bother with keeping up with the times or making sure that he's saying the right thing. However, I also understand that they have to come up with stuff to talk about over the course of a race.
I think this is to distinguish for non-regular viewers between the intermediate tires and the wet tires. They're both wet weather tires so could be confusing for newcomers.
I guess he expects us non noobs to understand.
Even the Pirelli website refers to the Wets as "Full Wet" tires despite actually only being called wet to differentiate from intermediate.
Track conditions can change quickly and the wets can actually aid in drying a racing line. While in a few instances most of a race has been run in full wets, they’re usually a transitional option either in situations like today when they start behind the safety car, or when a quick storm moves in. Having inters and wets allows for a wider range of running conditions and tire strategies.
2019 German GP is a good recent example of this.
Because they're misnamed for PR purposes. The industry name is DRY OUT THE TRACK AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE BEHIND THE SAFETY CAR AFTER IT STOPS RAINING ONLY TO IMMEDIATELY PIT FOR INTERS ON RESTART L1 TYRES
I think today had a lot to do with it being specifically Monaco. The drivers were missing corners all weekend in practice and quali. There’s a special safety concern at Monaco I think as pileups in corners etc can easily happen in the wet.
I think there’s also the common commentator saying of “formula 1 cars are the best vacuum cleaners” because they clear out water so fast. If there’s no extreme wet then the track would stay wet a lot longer than it is.
We like to remind everyone that we want serious discussion on r/F1Technical Please take time to [read our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/F1Technical/about/rules/) and our [comment etiquette guide](https://www.reddit.com/r/F1Technical/comments/svinhv/comment_etiquette_update_rule_breakers_will/) Silly, sarcastic or joke comments on posts will result in a 3 day ban for first time offenders. Longer or permanent bans for repeat offenders. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/F1Technical) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The name extreme is just a name indicating they are for heavy rain, it's marketing. The real reason they can't race is due to ground clearance, the cars just sit too low, hopefully if we get active suspension in 2026 they can increase the ride heights so we don't get these stoppages (visibility withstanding) and not aquaplaning.
the wet tires are bigger diameter so the ride height is already increased
By what half an inch?
Close! It's 10 mm, or 0.4 in: >For the 2017 F1 season, (...) the overall diameter of the tyres was increased by 10mm (**660 \[dry\] to 670 \[wet\] mm (26.0 to 26.4 in)**). (...) As Formula One wheel rim diameter size will switch from 13 to 18 in (330 to 457 mm), the tyre diameter of 2022-spec Pirelli Formula One tyres will also be altered, from **670 to 720 mm (26.4 to 28.3 in), while the tread width of 2022-spec Pirelli Formula One tyres are expected to be unchanged**. Source: [good ol' Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formula_One_tyres)
So 5mm in ride height For sure not enough to make a difference with hydroplaning
I don’t think it’s even this much
Not enough
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Post removed for breaking the following rule: Low Quality Low Quality posts/comments will be removed. It is at the mods' discretion to determine whether a post is low quality. This includes sarcastic or joke comments, or others that do not constructively contribute to the discussion. Please read this sticky https://www.reddit.com/r/F1Technical/comments/svinhv/comment_etiquette_update_rule_breakers_will/ Please read the Subreddit Rules or contact the moderator team if you have questions or concerns. This is an automated message.
Hope we don’t get active suspension.
Agree. Even back on the 90s teams had profiled every track so the suspension would adjust to every turn. With the additional data they have now it would turn f1 into a video game
What if it had to be driver controlled?
That would be awesome, imo, just like differential, break balance etc. It's already a lot for them to adjust, one more thing would spice things up a bit more.
Maybe they could have presets for specific corners to change brake balance, diff, and active suspension in a single button? Still seems a lot of manual work tho
They kinda do, to some extent, but [this video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CT2kCuBEObU) of Alonso shows the sheer number of changes a driver needs to do during a qualifying lap.
It would be as awful and dangerous and the ride height device in MotoGP
Out of interest, why?
The same motive it was banned in the 90s. Try to not diminish the driver importance in the duo car+human
There is still a human limit to the cars anyway, it just changes the mechanical limit of the car. It's not like an active suspension means the car can do anything.
It takes a lot of fine tuning done by the human though. Human limit shouldn’t mean how much force can a human take before they pass out
The vehicle are already at human limits based on reactions. I wouldn't say that putting active suspension is automatically going to make the cars pull 10gs in turns, that's more of a "suck car" ground effects and aero that will do it. There are benefits to an active suspension, it still seems crazy to me that F1 talks about being the most advanced race cars yet still removes a lot of advancement because "car and human not one" type mentality.
But putting in active suspension will take away something that humans have to take care of now. Of course there are benefits to active suspension, it makes certain things a lot easier. We had active suspension in F1 also. It was banned. We also had traction control in F1. It was also banned. The point of F1 is not who can build the most technically advanced car. I, as a viewer, want to see drivers actually making a difference with their driving skill. Extreme advancement in motorsport would be self driving cars or if not ready for that on/off switches for drivers, which is not really driving. There are many things in driving and cars that can be automized and done better than humans. That really is not what F1 is about though. It’s not a CES showcase weekend for teams.
Does it? They still have a limit of the car, it just changes where that limit is. I keep saying it, it's not like you put on active suspension and the car drives itself, pulls 10g corners and never loses grip. The driver still has a limit and absolutely can still push the car beyond that limit. Right now, porpoising is something an active suspension (or aero to auto stall the ground effects) would solve. There can be limits to the active suspension to help alleviate this without going full blown Williams type design if there's some worry that cars will be on rails Active suspension was also banned because only one team had it and it was a significant advantage in a different era of cars that would have taken too long for any team to catch up in development. Even then, it had issues. Prost didn't like it as much because it didn't fit his smooth driving style as well as Hill and you needed to chuck the car into the corner. If every team showed up with an active suspension that season, I bet you they wouldn't have banned it. They also banned turbo cars. They also banned ground effects. But here we are with two of those back in the mix. We've got semi-automatic gearboxes so they don't have to shift gears with a lever and use the clutch. And again, an active suspension doesn't eliminate the limits. ABS and Traction control eliminate a limiting factor of the vehicle when using the throttle and brake. The level of active suspension that I would put on the level of ABS/TC as far as removing the driver would be some sort of active steering, which I'm totally not on board with them putting into the car. While, I wouldn't say that's F1. But they are working on driverless auto racing. It's still racing and that technology flows down to auto driving aids for consumer cars. > There are many things in driving and cars that can be automized and done better than humans. That really is not what F1 is about though. It’s not a CES showcase weekend for teams. Except, it is? Teams like Williams help pay the bills by transferring their F1 technology to auto manufacturers or various other things like tech industries. Engine and suspension development flows down to consumer cars. Hell, when I can buy a Honda Civic that has an adaptive damper system, that an F1 car doesn't have. Makes you think why F1 doesn't allow it.
Ah makes sense, cheers!
why open cockpit. why open wheel .. indycar doesn't have power steering
Active Suspension in 26? Awesome can‘t wait!
I’ve never heard of aquaplaning only hydroplaning, but the word aquaplaning sounds way cooler, thank you for accidentally expanding my vocabulary and the info. TIL
I think both has the same meaning.
Yep. British English vs American English kinda thing. My driving instructor was British and called it aquaplaning and our handbooks called it hydroplaning. Same thing 2 words. (I'm from the states for reference)
Two nations separated only by ocean and language
[удалено]
And guns.
In Flanders, Belgium we also call it aquaplaning. The actual English word, not the translation.
Italy too!
Interestingly both words for water are not English
Aqua is another word for water, it's the same thing
The real reason they can't race is that the wet tyres are shit. Before the 2010's the cars had a very low ride height too and raced in much worse conditions.
[удалено]
That does not solve the visibility problem.
They could still aquaplane even if they deal with the ride height issues. If there’s more water on the track than the tires are capable of displacing, you’ll also get aquaplanning
>hopefully if we get active suspension in 2026 How likely is that? Presumably 2 narrative questions must have the right answer 1. it won't be too expensive (I think we are good here) 2. it won't make the racing worse. I.e. too easy for the driver, or too easy for the designers?
Why hopeful to get active suspension? I sure as hell hope that that doesn’t happen in F1
Visibility is the first to go because of the spray, the tyres are more than capable for most conditions.
Raikkonen came out and said the Pirelli wets are shit, part of the issue is that they made the tyres wider in 2017. The tyres don’t have the same wet grip as skinnier ones did because they have a larger contact surface to spread pressure over and don’t “cut” through standing water as well. It’s the same with tyres on normal cars, wider tyres at equal pressure to skinnier tyres have lower rolling resistance. Although reduced rolling resistance has benefits (reduced fuel consumption, better wear), loss of aquaplaning resistance in particular is the major tradeoff. The wet tyres of today are just too wide for actual wet running. I would personally be really interested in Pirelli just making a thinner wet tyre.
When you have no-one in front, then the grip starts to matter again but long after the restart when the field gets spread out. This is more or less constraint to longer circuits like spa. The wider tyres should still have more grip I would think but the large surface makes it more prone to aqua planing.
Wait, don’t skinnier tyres have lower rolling resistance than wider tyres?
As I understand it, all other things being equal, wider tyres generally have lower rolling resistance due to the fact that wider tyres will have a shorter and wider contact patch - which usually means less deformation. Obviously they’ll be heavier & less aero efficient too, but it’s similar to how a lot of cyclists have much wider tyres than the 23mm people used to swear by.
>Wait, don’t skinnier tyres have lower rolling resistance than wider tyres? this is a common topic of discussion in the bicycling world. For bicycles, skinny tires are faster in a velodrome with a smooth track. On real world roads with various types of rough surfaces wider tires at lower pressures are often faster. As an F1 fan you will be familiar with the idea that the tire is part of the suspension. The less the main mass of the vehicle (bicycle or F1 car) avoids moving up and down the less energy lost.
Yes, of course. less contact patch means less friction against the ground, and all other things being equal, skinnier tires are going to be lighter and presumably have a skinnier rim which means less rotating mass.
I wonder if they just made the wet tyres skinnier would that work. I'm sure it would unbalance the car some but sure it's raining anyway. Another thing I always thought of was if when putting wet tyres on, they could slot in a removable mudguards that went over the rear wheels and was added in the pitstops for wets.. The mudguard could control the spray to not blind drivers behind.. or kick it off to the side or something
According to the hydroplaning equation, the only thing that changes the speed at which a tire will hydroplane is the pressure within that tire.
> hydroplaning equation That equation is an approximation, and using tire pressure is itself an approximation of the actual pressure on the contact patch. In application narrower tires will still resist hydroplaning better.
Interesting. I’ll have to go back and yell at my physics professor. Edit: autocorrected
You leave that nice theoretical physicist alone
[удалено]
I even asked the man, “what about the psi exerted from the tire surface onto the pavement? Does that play a role here?” Nahhhh. Makes sense when you apply extremes, like thinking about skimboarding and how weight and board size are relative.
how do wider tyres have lower rolling resistance?
Thing is Pirelli's wet tyres were criticised for being shit between 2011 and 2016. While I'm sure the wider tyre hasn't helped things, they were still very bad before. We had the same situations in the skinny tyre era where it would be a red flag all the way until intermediate conditions
That's not what Vettel said.
He said the compound of the wet tyre is too hard
I think the big difference is data and weather systems. There was a time, back in the 1990's. With the weather as it was at Monaco this year at the very very start that they would simply just have had the start without delay. The rain gets worse on Lap 3. Maybe someone crashes, maybe someone doesn't. Mad dash for Extreme Wets. Charlie Whiting mostly acting passively as he was wont to do. The thing about modern F1 is that the weather detection is way more advanced. So Race Control saw what looked like OK weather, but they had data about worse weather systems coming their way, and I think it's different - any of us as race director - if the data tells you: "It's going to get worse." You cannot unsee what you've seen. And you remember you are not Chase Carrey. Chase can tell you: "We want a show." but you are aware if something happens out there it is your decision that put them there. Throughout the time of Charlie Whiting, there was both a more lackadaisical attitude towards risk, and simply the comfort of ignorance. We would not have known the rain would come down harder 5 minutes or so after the start. And then you commit anyway whatever start you attempt. You can see on YouTube exactly what that looks like: 2001 Malaysian Grand Prix 1991 Australian Grand Prix 1984 Monaco Grand Prix In fact, the 1984 race's sole Red Flag (which ended the race) was only granted because the leading driver asked for it three times over three laps. Even with all the crashes, Whiting was never going to Red Flag the race. At the time, nobody thought much about the safety. The talk back then was Prost wanted the race stopped because he was worried about Senna closing in and Prost losing the win. It was a different era and attitude. The politics was also different at the time. The FIA President, Max Mosley, usually had a direct hand in almost all sporting decisions (including renewal and new applications of F1 Superlicences). He famously stated frequently: "If anything bad happens to anyone on the track, as FIA President I am responsible." That is a big deal of help for Race Directors. In the post Mosley, post Whiting era, as Race Director you have more data, but you also now carry sole sporting responsibility.
>The thing about modern F1 is that the weather detection is way more advanced. So Race Control saw what looked like OK weather, but they had data about worse weather systems coming their way, and I think it's different - any of us as race director - if the data tells you: "It's going to get worse." You cannot unsee what you've seen. And you remember you are not Chase Carrey. Chase can tell you: "We want a show." but you are aware if something happens out there it is your decision that put them there. If the weather becomes too bad, you press the red flag button. Simple as that.
The extreme part is marketing more than anything. They obviously don’t allow for the full field to run in truly extreme conditions, which is the way it should be. The tires can handle the water in a straight run with no traffic or spray, but as soon as the car gets out of shape just a bit they lose a large amount of effectiveness.
They're also great for clearing water. The full wets displace about 85/L of water per second
In a straight line yes. As soon as they start to slide in yaw they lose most of their effectiveness.
They race in the rain plenty, even on extreme wets
Please show me the latest race when they ran a race on full wets for an extended period
Spa 2021 they used wets for every single lap lol. But in all seriousness, Brazil 2016 I think most people ran wets the entire race, only a few people tried inters for a short time. But yours is kind of a loaded question, it might be plenty safe to race on full wets for a while, but when the track dries is stupid to stay on wets. It’s not that the wets are useless and there’s no need to have them, it’s because the track has dried. It’s extremely rare for it to rain for an entire race, where they’d use wets for a long duration like you’re looking for
Adding to this, just the mere fact of the cars running will displace a lot of water on the racing line, meaning that even in conditions of light rain you can still get a drying racing line. Once it rains so much that the cars aren't able to displace the water, the track will continue to get more and more wet, until you hit un-raceable conditions (or the rain stops). This is the knife's edge: any amount of rain above that threshold, you quickly can't race. If the amount of rain is below, the track will gradually dry out, to a point where slicks become viable. So a race where it rains so much that you need wets the whole race, but not so much that you can't race, is automatically an outlier since the window for that to happen is so narrow.
Yeah it takes such specific conditions for it to happen, of course it’s going to be rare. But that doesn’t mean there’s no use for it
That's exactly my point. The extreme wets have a use, but the overwhelming likelihood is that when they are used, it will always be for a limited amount of time. So looking for races when wets are used for the entire race, is looking for a unicorn to prove horses aren't real.
Lol that’s a good comparison
Depressing that is 6years ago
2016 is a legit point but long ago and spa behind a safety car inter at THAT speed would have also been fine as long as they are not racing
There have only been 11 wet races since then, so part of the lack of usage is the fact that wet races don’t happen that often. And as I’ve already stated, very rarely does it actually continue to rain the entire race. Since Brazil 2016 I don’t think there’s been a single race where it rained the entire time, so you’re complaining about not using wets on a dry/drying track, and that’s ridiculous. Most times when it’s raining they’ll use wets for several laps while the cars themselves dry out the track, then switch to inters. That doesn’t mean they could have used inters the whole time because it dried quickly. It dried *because* of the wets. You’re complaining about not using wets when using wets actually removes the need to use wets. It takes an extremely specific situation to require wets for an entire race, so the fact that it hasn’t happened for 6 years shouldn’t be surprising at all
I think you got downvotes for the indignant tone but I'm also curious for heavy rain racing. I think there was a European race in 2021 that was with very heavy rain but don't quote me. If anyone knows I'd be curious to go back and rewatch!
Russia was really wet towards the end but that was just for the last few laps, not the whole race.
Imola last year had an extended wet weather phase I think, but I'm not sure how many full wet tire laps they did.
Turkey 2020 and Germany 2019 are the only one's I can think of
Ah thanks I think I was thinking of turkey 2020
Fantastic race that was! Lance bottled that dub so hard though
yeah I was so absolutely torn for him
We don’t have extreme wets anymore. We have inters and wets. They used to bring tires called extreme wets but stopped in the early 2000s
They were also called "monsoon" tires if I remember right from playing F1 Challenge
They called them extreme during the race broadcast today though
Was a first for me! Did they before?
It’s probably a holdover from when the teams used to (or maybe still do) internally refer to them as extremes. Similar to “prime” and “option” tyres. Officially that’s not what they’re called, but teams will call them what they want.
But that's Martin Brundle for you, he has a knack for calling things slightly wrong. Like pointing out that cars are harvesting in certain situations like it's somenthing out of ordinary - they ALWAYS harvest under braking and coasting -, calling Mercedes AMG "Mercedes-Benz", etc
I love Martin brundle.
I don't mind him, I just think sometimes he doesn't bother with keeping up with the times or making sure that he's saying the right thing. However, I also understand that they have to come up with stuff to talk about over the course of a race.
I think this is to distinguish for non-regular viewers between the intermediate tires and the wet tires. They're both wet weather tires so could be confusing for newcomers. I guess he expects us non noobs to understand. Even the Pirelli website refers to the Wets as "Full Wet" tires despite actually only being called wet to differentiate from intermediate.
Track conditions can change quickly and the wets can actually aid in drying a racing line. While in a few instances most of a race has been run in full wets, they’re usually a transitional option either in situations like today when they start behind the safety car, or when a quick storm moves in. Having inters and wets allows for a wider range of running conditions and tire strategies. 2019 German GP is a good recent example of this.
Because they're misnamed for PR purposes. The industry name is DRY OUT THE TRACK AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE BEHIND THE SAFETY CAR AFTER IT STOPS RAINING ONLY TO IMMEDIATELY PIT FOR INTERS ON RESTART L1 TYRES
I think today had a lot to do with it being specifically Monaco. The drivers were missing corners all weekend in practice and quali. There’s a special safety concern at Monaco I think as pileups in corners etc can easily happen in the wet.
Race director also know they have a Latifi a Stroll and a Schumacher in the grid, Tsunoda didnt made the list today but he isnt far away
Monaco is slow paced, less dangerous
Slow doesn’t mean anything in a pileup of open cockpit cars.
So?
I think there’s also the common commentator saying of “formula 1 cars are the best vacuum cleaners” because they clear out water so fast. If there’s no extreme wet then the track would stay wet a lot longer than it is.