aye, i think anything an F1 team create should be allowed and kept no matter what, these people are the smartest mechanics the world will know. banning their innovations is just stupid. F1 needs cars with hidden secrets to keep it more .... unbalanced.
@@preacherz01 I agree, but that's only in the case that the inclusion of the innovation doesn't result in "extended periods of one handed driving", or otherwise doesn't give them a very significant edge.
@@irish_mcrae1892 its because they competitors are too lazy to think of ways to make a f duck that doesnt involve the use of one hand and its people like that who got it bannedf
@@dimitriyakovic1522 - Have you ever listened to a snowmobile competition? Well, that's CVT racing, there's only FORWARDS and BACKWARDS. The 4 most famous vehicles with CVT are electric cars (and some hybrids like the Prius), Polaris UTVs, direct-drive karts and mopeds.
My favorite F-1 car of all time, and now a banned platform, was the Tyrell P-34. I believe that with proper support from s tire manufacturer the P-34 could have had multiple handling advantages as well as an aero advantage.
The one handed driving to activate it is insane. it would have been better to have a foot switch like old school high beams...and the fact that no one thought of that kind of boggles my mind.
Would have really appreciated a much more elementary explanation of what's happening with the f duct instead of just throwing out words like "pipery" and "fluidic switch" with no explanation and a few drawings with nice green arrows.
Think of the system as a whole as the switch. By putting his hand on the hole in the cockpit the driver activates pressure differences and changes how or where the air ( fluid ) is diverted , hence a switch.
You know when you stick your hand over the end of the hose on a vacuum cleaner and the motor spins faster? You can use that kinda thing to switch which pipe the air flows through. And if you throw some air at a wing in the right way, it messes the whole thing up and stops moving air, less downforce = less drag.
Air goes whoosh whoosh. When driver want air to go whoosh over the airplain wing, driver block air window to make whoosh go over airplan wing. FFS it's a fucking duct, dude. What's to understand?
one small critique.. Next time you mention multiple races in rapid succession from years past, could you maybe add "Fourth Round at X, or Round 10 at Y" for those of us that don't remember the order of every single race in seasons past?
Lotus also tried a solution like this, a fluid switch that stalled the rear wing at a certain speed and unstalled it below a set speed (in 2013 british gp I think) but it was never raced
Great video, i remember the f-duct. It was an interesting bit of engineering at the time. The FIA had no choice but to ban this idea and regulate it through the use of DRS. The sport changed drastically with these innovations, and added to the excitement of the F1 experiance for viewers.
FIA: Formula 1 is meant to be the ultimate expression in technology that makes the car faster in straights and corners and lighter. Also FIA: aaa speed scawy
this is what I love about F1, the constant pushing of the rules/workarounds to gain an advantage. The things they come up with are amazing, like these ducts, Renaults damper in 2006, Ferrari's 2019 engine, yes they get banned but that just allows a new trick to be created next.
Great video, thank you. I remember it being a thing at the time but never really understood how it worked. As for my favorite band F1 car, it has to be the Brabham BT46. Gordon Murray's fan car.
There is this really really neat aircraft museum in Dayton Ohio, USA, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. The way they have the museum setup, you start off at the very beginning of flight and work your way to the current area. You notice small changes in airframe design. For example moving flight control cables from the outside into a protected tube, or putting aerodynamic covers over wheels, or a plate over the spokes of a rim. It seems obvious looking back, but every advancement in design makes aviation that much safer and more efficient. The point is, unless new ideas and technologies are tested, advancement is impossible.
It honestly pisses me off how much shit in racing gets banned, it seems no matter what category they just ban fucking everything that would make it more exciting and or more competitive
I always thought it was a beautiful solution, using airflow in an innovative way like that. But the need to take your hand off the wheel in the Ferrari design was never a good idea.
Using the driver to manipulate a static fluid switch stems from a ban on movable aerodynamic surfaces (which would include air valves used for aerodynamic purposes). DRS is the same thing, but using a moving aerodynamic surface.
I want to see an F1 car with ground effect, four wheel drive, a massive engine that's super charged and turbo charged, with KERS and a F Duct. I think we'd beat a few lap records
Functionally yes, but the DRS is much better at it. Significantly cheaper, and arguably safer. The problem that led to the F-duct is F1 has a blanket rule than bans 'moveable aerodynamic devices' ie flaps in the wing. However at the time the driver was not considered as part of this rule, which is why a fluidic switch covered by the drivers leg/hand was legal. The F-duct is actually the reason they introduced DRS in the first place.
Interesting video! Could you guys provide a reference on the more technical side of the F-duct? Maybe with a little more technical detail? I’m curious to know what you mean by stalling decreasing drag
The first F-1 race I attended (I was eight years old) was in 1960 at Riverside Raceway in California (Stirling Moss won if anyone is interested). The cars had shifted to rear engine layout which at the time was the height of technical achievement. Oh how things have changed! Computers win races now, not the driver’s!
There is no traction control, abs, or active suspension there hasn't been for over a decade unless you mean the computers that control the fuel injection?
Jack Danny I suppose my comment is more of a melancholy lament. In the late sixties and seventies it seemed like there were a greater percentage of teams that could be competitive without needing the financial resources of a Boeing or Microsoft (a decent example was Rob Walkers efforts). One arena is engines. Although some companies always used their own power plants many others did quite well running the Cosworth DFV (this also helped level the playing field a bit). A company didn’t need access to wind tunnels and prohibitively expensive “main frame” computers to win races. Maybe I am being naive but I feel like there was a time when the driver made the difference (as in Stirling Moss-awesome driver largely competing in sub par British vehicles, but still winning races). Now it seems to me that you can take a good (not necessarily great) driver, put him in a dominant vehicle and the race is decided before it starts. The dominant vehicles now (and in fairness this isn’t a recent phenomena) are produced by companies with virtually unlimited developmental resources (super sophisticated computer designs), basically things that some companies don’t have and ultimately are forced to leave F1 because of this. So, my observation about “computers winning races” was more of a generic comment. I could be way off base here but to illustrate my point, I would suggest you could put several different drivers in the current Mercedes and they would win races in that car. However I doubt if the opposite is true. Could a Hamilton or Schumacher win a lot of races in mediocre vehicles today? I think not. And in my opinion “computers” play a huge part in this. Maybe all this is inevitable, but at least for me it seems like a big part of the drivers contribution has been reduced significantly. Just sayin’........
That would be the thing that Adrian Newey designed for the Gran Turismo game- closed cockpit, active-everything, fan car. Does a bazillion kph and doesn't just drive o the ceiling; but chews the ceiling up and spits it out the rear, whilst opening spacetime rifts simultaneously...!!
I'm imagining the fun and games that would have ensued, if someone had combined the Lotus double chassis car with the Brabham fan car, and slipped the resulting combination under the radar enough to deploy it in anger in an actual race. That would have lit the fireworks ...
I seriously hope that the FIA and F1 will move towards making sure the teams don't cross the cost caps while leaving them as much wiggle room as possible as far as technical regs are concerned. I would truly love to see how the engineers tackle such a scenario and all the possible solutions
DRS literally does the same thing, and is definitely safer, and cheaper. Drivers literally had to take their hands off the wheel down the straight. With DRS, they push a button. The F-Duct is now completely useless
Anything that makes the car faster, and is within the regulations, is always a win imo. Could be a fucking donkey for extra downforce for all it matters, as long as it works.
I remember playing Spy hunter on my C-64... Maybe someday they will invent something that destroys the competition behind... small oil spill button, airflow destroyer (backwards) and so on :-)
Who can forget the BT46 fan car ?! That's my all time favourite. Also I won't forget the beautiful Force India nostril nose front wing of 2015 and their dragon wing shark fins in 2017❤
I thought it was called the F-duct because of the 2 ducts coming together into 1 like a F. Kinda funny it has the less complicated meaning of the Vodafone F.
sad that there are so many bans; if it weren't for them, f1 would be much more advanced and cooler. teams would need to adapt or die out. Also it's insane that some small vents seem to be so significant for f1! You'd think only a computer driver could make something so fine tuned work
They should not be banning anything. They only should have restrictor plates on the engine (I think like nascar if I remember correctly) and weight of the car. Mandatory minimum weight. If the maximum speed is 300 miles per hour, and (a) car go above that, all cars get smaller restrictor plates. This way the awesome driver is high lighted and also the ingenuity of the crew. That's it
I think the teams should be allowed to make modifications to their cars as much and as creatively as they want, as long as they publish their findings to the other teams and said mods don’t put the driver in any more danger then they already are. Example: the f duct would not be allowed because the driver has to activate it with one hand while driving with the other, but if the duct was activated by a button and stayed closed until pressed again, then it would be okay.
Personally I actually agree with this ban. Using a body part to physically cover an air duct is distracting at best and reduces control authority as well. The fact that DRS essentially serves the same purpose while being formally regulated supports the notion that FIA indeed banned the F-duct out of safety concerns. I think we can all agree that pushing a button clearly has higher safety margins than covering an air vent.
I thought it was a D duct, or crotch duct, somewhat like those old under sterring wheel AC vents. Where did those go? I was born after the last one of those cars carrying those ducts were released. We need to bring those back
Wonders why viewer numbers and ticket sales keep going down. Not allowing the races to get crazier and tracks nastier. I want some loops and shit dammit bring on the future of racing already
can FIA for once decide what's a passive and what's an active system? if a system is passive if it's triggered by another system that's controlled by a driver? but the system itself isn't controlled by the driver?
question: they could have simply opened and closed the f duct with an additional pedal, similar to the backwheel breakpedal.. Noone would have noticed it and it would have been even safer, since the breaks and f-duct are basically never used at the same time.. on top, no other team wouldve noticed it (most likely) as it would have been invisible aswell.. so why tf did everyone, except from mercedes, choose the most unsave, most obvious and most difficult to operate system?
Because there was a ban on movable aerodynamic surfaces, and a valve controlling airflow to change the aerodynamics counts as a movable aerodynamic surface. The loophole is that the driver is not a surface.
F1 2022 : F1 car body with drivers foot engine only ( aka flinstone car). no shoes, only human power, Car body made from cardbox. There, nothing can be banned anymore
sorry, i dont think i quite understand how it worked? so overall it added more downforce to the cars while the driver covered the hole in their cockpit? so while it wasnt being covered, the air flow would be split to reduce the amount of added downforce?
Can they make a Formula X, basically group B for Formula 1🤷🏽♂️where they use more open and longer tracks and all the innovations made for every team in all the seasons are green lit. I’d support that 100000%
I would find formula one MUCH MUCH more interesting if they loosened aero rules enough for major innovation. Perhaps for the balance teams would need to make certain innovations opensource at the start of the season? Not sure but if F1 is for cutting fuel consumption they should allow for more radical aero innovation
F Duct doesn't need to come back to formula 1. The reason why formula one allows the one year to develop a product is so that formula one canpush itself to The cutting edge of technology and do it not only safely but cheaply. They allowed DRS simply because it was a safer/cheeper version of the F Duct
I would love to see a type of racing where the only limitations put on the manufacturers is safety. Image the Mario kart type shit they’d come up with then?
Just give Everyone stock base Corollas, 87-octane gas, and only a helmet/radio system allowed. No lightening of car. We'll see who the better drivers are.
