@Aristotelis As you say this is a problem that will never go away. Even with no Parc ferme, the drivers will want to run as low as possible and raked for a more forward CoP. They will always take the risk because their confidence tells them they can handle it.
@Aristotelis I'll add though that one of the reasons I watched F1 in life is to see the best drivers handle difficult cars - so I have no issue with this balance shift situation given by changable conditions.
@Aristotelis A lot of this could be helped by removing the parc ferme rule if conditions change between qual and the race. It won't help RBR or Ferrari catch McLaren, but it would make their cars a bit more drivable in the wet.
March 16th 2005, twenty years ago we published issue 4 of Autosimsport magazine. Controversy as ever as we cover Redline's GTP mod. @MartiniAlex@domduhan
Interesting piece on AI in Simracing by Phil Iwaniuk in @pcgamer Issue 402 (UK). Alas, it doesn't take a huge amount of fact checking to be aware that @realDriver61's father isn't Nigel Mansell.
@Aristotelis If there isn't enough elec. power to push against the drag then they have to work on these drag reduction rules. The design of the chassis rules has been dictated by the PU rules. Racing? Entertainment? Not sure where that fits in.
@Aristotelis The aero regs have come this way as a result of the PU specs being energy starved versus current regs. With a 350Kw drop when clipping, the modern aero would see cars downshifting on straights. As it stands we might see the ICE being used mid corner for recharge.
@Aristotelis@davidperel The problem is that overtaking with DRS is not overtaking. The rest of it is fine, remove DRS, and remove constant radio comms - Done.