Should Mercs Super DRS be allowed?

Of course it should be legal. It's refreshing to see some new innovation with a concept that was thought to be "put out to pasture" by the FIA. Red Bull/Lotus can ***** and moan but realistically they should hit the drawing board and come up with their own. If the Red Bull flexi-wing saga told us anything (and it pushed the rules further than this, IMO) it's that a device can weather protests all season and emerge legal as can be.

With the Benz F-duct already declared legal multiple times, I can't see much to be gained here through protesting. Especially with the venerable Ross Brawn at its defense.

 

This!

Silly argument I think. As others have stated, nothing about the secondary system to feed air to the front wing moves other than the air running through it. While it may require something to move for it to activate, it is well understood the piece that moves is separate, is intended to move and is well within the rules.

I'd be okay with that. Ross Brawn might not be though.

>8^)
ER

 

Yeap.

It should be allowed. And DRS zones should be everywhere on the circuit. That way, there's no 'dead meat' situation. The car that was overtaken can fight back and try to overtake and regain position...

 

Perhaps his overtake on Alonso in Monaco went unpunished in your eyes...

 

I agree, there should be no limitations on the DRS's use it should be 100% at the drivers discretion anytime/anywhere.

 

But then it would completely lose it's purpose - It's meant to be an overtaking aid as requested by the fans....... Make it's use "free" and it may as well be banned.

Cheers,
Ian

 

Not really:

All they need to do is keep the current rules (of a passing car within a second) and extend the DRS Zone to the entire track.

 

Yet wouldn't its use anywhere, anytime lead to more overtaking maneuvers? Imho I think it would.

 

That's a slightly different argument - You're saying that if the *trailing* car is within a second, he can then use it anywhere he wants? ie, the leader remains a "sitting duck" whenever the chaser is within a second and it still can't be used by the leader?

While that would probably increase the amount of overtaking I suspect it would become the dreaded "back & forth" that many have used as an argument against it - They want to make overtaking *possible*, not too easy.

Cheers,
Ian

 

I would like to see it used by any driver at anytime anywhere on the track, leader/car in-front aswell, atleast it would be interesting even if it did not produce the results hoped for.

 

Fair enough.

But, I don't see how it would be "interesting" as it's effectiveness would be eliminated and we're back at square one - No overtaking. If you allow the "leader" to use it too it may as well be eliminated IMO.

Cheers,
Ian

 

And if Ferrari invented it and was winning with it the poll would be 100-0 in favor of keeping it.

 

We cannot forget that some chassis/engine/aero packages are better than others so this should also be taken into account. It would be interesting if F1 atleast tried it on the track that the DRS has the most effect/advantage on.

 

Indeed - And the "purists" will argue that's enough - May the best car win etc. The problem is that unless I'm 2-4 seconds quicker than you I'm not getting past, and as we know, the majority of the grid is within a single second. So we'd be back to the "boring processions" that (most) fans don't like.

I *could* be tempted to go with you're free to use it if you're within a second of the car in front anywhere, but the fear there is, again, the danger of going back and forth every time the trailer deploys the thing. TBH, I think they've got it about right as we haven't seen that happen often.

Cheers,
Ian

 

It was just a thought.

 

It´s within the rules, but not within the spirit of the rules. The eternal debate.

Peter Sauber said that Ross Brawn has broken a gentleman´s agreement with this, so I vote NO. Can´t blame Ross anyway, probably he´s got some Mercedes shareholders asking for his balls.

 

Indeed. However, and FWIW, I fall firmly in the "there's no spirit in the rules" in pro sports - If it isn't written down, it doesn't exist IMO. And even then there's the never ending question (as in this case) of "interpretation" - Lotus protested it under article 3.15 as a driver activated device.

Source? I'm not arguing but definitely haven't seen anything to that effect. I believed Ross approached Charlie about it *way* back in the off-season so would doubt he had any gentlemans agreement with anyone. OTOH, I guess Peter may have asked about something along the same lines and Ross threw him off the trail - But they all do that all the time. If he was going to ask anyone, it should have been Charlie of course.

Cheers,
Ian

 

Gentleman's agreement fix:

Ross can settle this with dueling pistols drawn at 20 paces apart from one another. Ross is a little cross-eyed so I wouldn't put money on him making the shot, but I bet he would wear a kevlar vest

 

+1

 

Actually, all joking aside, I believe there are any number of gentlemens agreements made between the teams that "we" never hear about. One that we did was, of course, the voluntary non-use of KERS in '10 (?) - The regulations allowed it, but they all agreed that none of 'em would run it.

Cheers,
Ian

 

In theory, I agree. And in theory, lawyers are not necessary.

But we all know that these F1 rules are so complex and sometimes (I suspect that deliberately) ambiguous that everything is debateable.

Remember the rear wing that Ferrari tried at Barcelona in 2011: it was legal by the book, but Charlie banned it (rightly, IMO) because he said that it was against the spirit of the rule. Why NO then and YES now? Only Bernie knows it.

It´s just an Internet rumour. Just one example:

http://totalf1.com/full_story/view/412655/Peter_Sauber_says_there_are_still_gentlemen_in_F1/

Of course, take it with a grain of salt.

 

Glad it is ok, Lotus crying Foul because they know sooner than later that MBZ is going to start doing better (especially with Tire situation resolved). Good for Brawn, Haug, and the Guys at MBZ.

 

I can't believe some people don't get it. You're right...there would be absolutely no point in having it if they could all use it any time and anywhere. Even after all this time, the point is still missed?? amazing.

 

It is not about "missing the point" its simply about having a different opinion. I do not work in F1 and I doubt anyone else here does who is offering their opinion as "fact" so on that neither opinion is right or wrong.

 

You don't think that it's a fact that if DRS could be used at will, that the very reason it was invented in the first place would be negated? That's not opinion at all.