Renault GP test female driver De Villota

[My993C2]

Don't they need to prove themselves in GP2 first before they get an F1 ride? The Indy cars while still fast are not in the same league and presently I would say Simona de Silvestro is the best female open wheeler (Danica Patrick is too small for the G-Forces of an F1 car) but she is still in Indy and I don't think Simona is good enough yet for F1. Trust me I am all for giving women an equal shot in motorsports, but if what they say is true about the G-Forces of an F1 car (no reason to think it is not true), then we are still not there in terms of finding the right girl with the right stuff.

All that happened with Ms De Villota was that she comes from a well off well connected family who gave her a "thrill of a life time" ride in the Renault. I am sure the people from Renault were not that serious.

 

[Yann Laprevotte]

Don't they need to prove themselves in GP2 first before they get an F1 ride?

Makes sence, although there's no "need". As long as they of course meet the superlicense requirements. IIRC(although I might just be talking BS) an overall top 5 in IndyCar is good enough to get the superlicense, therefore at least Danica should be eligible for it.

In fact... Let's face the truth, if a woman ever makes it to F1, it most likely won't be for sheer talent. Just look at the current situation in F1. Most teams can't afford paying for two good drivers. A good 1/3 of the field is composed of paying drivers. And in the end, we end up with people like D'Ambrosio, Chandhock or Kartikeyan(well, not anymore for Narain), who never proved anything special in their career, despite being around for years. Of course, a good part of those paying drivers are actually very talented - Perez, or Sutil, whose seat has been secured by Medion's money AFAIK.

A woman in F1 would mean some HUGE attention from the medias. Look at Danica in the US, it's getting absolutely ridiculous. The girl has "only" won once and got some Indy top 5, and she gets half the air time any time someone mention IndyCar on TV, and she's probably the only IndyCar driver known by the average American. Just imagine this type of hype in Europe. Many companies would be extremely happy to put a few millions on the table to get their names associated with it.

 

[William Levesque]

And as far as I know, most Indy Car races are more demanding than F1 races...

No power-steering on these cars by the way... At the Indy 500 (Danica's best track) each corner makes more than 3G's and there are 4 of them in a single lap of what, 40 seconds ? At 225mph average... So, in about 40 seconds you get 12G's, without power-steering, near 200 times in a *~3 hours race...

I guess she is fit enough

I'm not saying she is a sure bet though, don't get me wrong... I don't think she is even interested in F1 anyway...

 

[TheHemps]

Cliche, I'm affraid.

See, there are 3 women in IndyCar this year. All 3 are doing fine. They're not causing more incidents than the average, in fact, I don't think they've been found guilty of causing an avoidable incident this season, while we've seen dozens of them so far. They're coping great with the physical constraints, although the races are slightly longer - and I don't think the F1s can provide so many more Gs than the F1.

It kinda bothers me how many people automatically think that all women are dangerous and incompetent if put at the wheel. Just because of prejuges, and a few crazy ones(Milka Duno...). Yet absolute jokes like Viso, Valerio or Bianchi(although the latter has some huge sheer pace, can't deny that) can take out 1 car or more at almost every single event they take part in, and receive little(if any) public bashing in the end. I wonder how the public would react if those 3 were women.

I'm not a follower of Indycar so I didn't know about the physical demands or any other factors, but it seems that, if you are correct then a female driver would have no problem, or minimal problems with the physical nature of F1. At the end of the day, a driver is a driver and male drivers can be/are just as reckless on occasion as some of the examples of women in the vids on this thread.

I think what my little mini-rant was getting at is that I just don't think a fair assessment can be made because of the politics of the nation that 8 of the 12 teams are based in. De Villota may be a great driver (I don't think so, many might disagree) but I think she knows as does everyone else that she's effectively been given a free track day in an F1 car because her dad has connections and money.

What happens when a serious driver has a real shot on merit and doesn't make the grade? How many will then go on to use the British legal system to sue the hell out of a team because they didn't get their own way? It's just the culture we live in and I just don't see McLaren or Red Bull or any of the British teams stepping into what could be a massive legal minefield, because believe me there are women out there that will take organisations for everything they've got if they don't get their own way.

F1 has enough politics, I just don't think any team will want to expand those politics. It's a shame we live in this kind of world where all of these things are issues but the fact is they are.

 

[My993C2]

And as far as I know, most Indy Car races are more demanding than F1 races.

There is no doubt that the Indy car is a demanding car to drive (of course what do I know I have not driven an F1 car or an Indy car. The closest I have driven was a Formula Renault and that does not pull the same Gs as these higher classed cars). But braking and cornering in an F1 car is in the 4 and 5 G realm. Trust me I am NOT a Danica hater. But she is not very good in road races in the Indy series despite her Karting and road racing background. I would love to see a female in F1, but only if they possess the appropriate skills. I watched the NASCAR Nationwide race yesterday from Montreal (I hardly ever watch NASCAR) and it was evident that Maryeve Dufault was outclassed in that field and not ready for the Nationwide series while Danica Patrick did have the skill to stay on the lead lap (of course all those damn full course yellows helped).

 

[William Levesque]

I'm not saying she is good enough for F1, she is not as comfortable on Road Course than on Ovals... (Hence why she made the move to Nascar, less Road Course)

She had a great race in Montreal though, until she had trouble with her brakes... Maryeve was just plain rubbish though... Her "3 point" turn was just plain retarded... And she was aiming for a Top 20 before the race, guess she had what was coming to her... Sad...

What I was saying is that she has the physical fitness to drive an F1, after all Tony Stewart did in the Swap and had no problems, despite the fact that he is not what you can call "fit" (Not that there is any problems with that)

But right now, I don't think there's a good candidate... Maybe someday though...

 

[James Chant]

And as far as I know, most Indy Car races are more demanding than F1 races...

No power-steering on these cars by the way... At the Indy 500 (Danica's best track) each corner makes more than 3G's and there are 4 of them in a single lap of what, 40 seconds ? At 225mph average... So, in about 40 seconds you get 12G's, without power-steering, near 200 times in a *~3 hours race...

I guess she is fit enough

I'm not saying she is a sure bet though, don't get me wrong... I don't think she is even interested in F1 anyway...

#

sure. Turn left, turn left, turn left, turn left... hard stuff that

 

[William Levesque]

There you go, I knew someone ignorant would post something like that...

Maybe at Daytona or Talladega, I agree... (Which they don't do in IRL)

But not at Indy I'm afraid... A perfect lap would be done without lifting off for all 4 corners, but a single mishap and you're in the wall at 200mph... In the race they usually have to lift... If you go off the racing line, you're pretty much done...

So stop thinking ovals are easy, they are not ! (Well, except for flat-out barely turning ones...)

 

[TheHemps]

There you go, I knew someone ignorant would post something like that...

Maybe at Daytona or Talladega, I agree... (Which they don't do in IRL)

But not at Indy I'm afraid... A perfect lap would be done without lifting off for all 4 corners, but a single mishap and you're in the wall at 200mph... In the race they usually have to lift... If you go off the racing line, you're pretty much done...

So stop thinking ovals are easy, they are not ! (Well, except for flat-out barely turning ones...)

I can imagine it takes some skill and going round those bends at 200mph must be challenging to a point. But let's not turn i into something its not. It is left,left,left. How bad the crash could be doesn't make the driving any harder. Staying on a racing line is the basics I'm afraid.

 

[William Levesque]

And that is the tough part... A single tiny slide off the racing line can most of the time end your day...

Then add the pressure of other drivers on track going the same 200mph + as you and trying to get by, sometime just before the corner so you are forced to go in the dirty line, 2 wide... (I'm talking about Indy by the way, other ovals in IRL are not that interesting, I usually like short tracks in Nascar though)

And by the way, I'm a road racing guy

 

[Juen-Jen Wang]

Are you guys seriously bringing up the "they are just turning left so it must be easy/physically undemanding" again? Honestly do you guys realize how stupid you sound by saying that ovals aren't physically demanding? Seriously... some of you who laugh at "rednecks" can sound more uneducated than the rednecks you are laughing at.

Yes... the CART guys were fainting due to the G-Forces on an oval. Makes you oval bashers sound real smart now doesn't it?

Anyways, @William and @ My993C2: Unfortunately My993C2 is right. An F1 is more physically challenging to drive than an IndyCar (in it's current spec) even if the IndyCar doesn't have power steering. This is mainly because the current IndyCar chassis is still mostly an oval chassis so there's a lack of downforce compared to the F1. Therefore, while I believe the IndyCar is harder to drive (based on my iRacing experience), the F1 corners much quicker and faster thus generating more G-Forces. This will probably change with the 2012 IndyCar however as the road going version of the ICONIC car has more downforce than the Dallara spec and it has a turbo that can push the car's HP to over 700. So as IndyCar continues to evolve it will start to become more legitimate as far as road races are concerned.

However, if you measure the G-Forces drivers experience on the ovals it's actually higher and much more consistent than an F1 race. So an IndyCar's physical challenges actually comes from the oval because on a road course you don't experience longitudinal Gs (with exceptions such as Eau Rouge but most longitudinal Gs you experience on road is very negligible) while on ovals because of the banked turns and the centrifugal nature you have to deal with longitudinal and lateral Gs and that adds up to around 9-10 Gs consistently each lap.

As I said, it astounds me that some of the most intelligent motorsport fans from Europe can degenerate into a bunch of idiots more uneducated than hillbillies when they are talking about ovals... seriously guys have some self respect

I can imagine it takes some skill and going round those bends at 200mph must be challenging to a point. But let's not turn i into something its not. It is left,left,left. How bad the crash could be doesn't make the driving any harder. Staying on a racing line is the basics I'm afraid.

Download CARTFactor slap on the Hanford device and go on indy and try to do a perfect lap "staying on the racing line" without understeering or snap oversteering into the wall... Go on i dare you. Let me know how that goes. When you are going THAT fast at a consistent pace on an oval staying on the racing line becomes a very huge challenge. I've learned that through iRacing oval racing and CARTFactor. Everything on an oval is exaggerated including the aero push which makes "staying on the racing line" not as "basic" as you would think. Seriously, get in CARTFactor and try to beat the best lap at Indianapolis. I bet you can't even figure out how to go around that track flatout

 

[William Levesque]

Interesting (And scary) video

 

[Juen-Jen Wang]

Interesting (And scary) video

Yeah that's why IndyCars are currently capped so they dont go above 225 mph. Even tho the new ICONIC chassis and engine has the cars going slightly over that into the dangerous 228 mph mark again (but that's all theoretical anyway we have yet to see if the new chassis will be faster). This is also a reason why ChampCar stopped going to ovals because they didn't want the compromise the speed on road courses.

It really infuriates me how people's IQ drops down to negative numbers when they are talking about ovals... If you guys pride yourself at "being more intelligent" then be more intelligent and atleast understand what you're bashing instead of jumping to conclusions. I have no problems with people who think oval is boring (even tho a good 2 months of oval racing in iRacing can fix that...) But when people think that driving on an oval is about as physically challenging and easy as driving in circles in your local parking lot then I'm sorry but you are just a plain uneducated retard. Have you tried racing (heck even hotlapping) in CARTFactor? Ever done a few months of oval racing in iRacing? If not then kindly dont post ignorant crap in threads about ovals. You're only making yourself look more uneducated than the rednecks you laugh at

 

[TheHemps]

Yeah that's why IndyCars are currently capped so they dont go above 225 mph. Even tho the new ICONIC chassis and engine has the cars going slightly over that into the dangerous 228 mph mark again (but that's all theoretical anyway we have yet to see if the new chassis will be faster). This is also a reason why ChampCar stopped going to ovals because they didn't want the compromise the speed on road courses.

It really infuriates me how people's IQ drops down to negative numbers when they are talking about ovals... If you guys pride yourself at "being more intelligent" then be more intelligent and atleast understand what you're bashing instead of jumping to conclusions. I have no problems with people who think oval is boring (even tho a good 2 months of oval racing in iRacing can fix that...) But when people think that driving on an oval is about as physically challenging and easy as driving in circles in your local parking lot then I'm sorry but you are just a plain uneducated retard. Have you tried racing (heck even hotlapping) in CARTFactor? Ever done a few months of oval racing in iRacing? If not then kindly dont post ignorant crap in threads about ovals. You're only making yourself look more uneducated than the rednecks you laugh at

I don't know if I should quote you or quote myself just to help you out a bit. I said it is challenging but let's not turn it into something it's not. It is not comparable to F1. The discussion was is Indy a suitable gauge on a persons skill when it comes to deciding whether or not a person could drive in F1. You just turned it into another is it easy/hard argument. You also compared real life to a computer game, then called other people retards. Magic

 

[Juen-Jen Wang]

I don't know if I should quote you or quote myself just to help you out a bit. I said it is challenging but let's not turn it into something it's not. It is not comparable to F1. The discussion was is Indy a suitable gauge on a persons skill when it comes to deciding whether or not a person could drive in F1. You just turned it into another is it easy/hard argument. You also compared real life to a computer game, then called other people retards. Magic

So you're saying that a sim that's completely based on real data isn't comparable to real life? iRacing is laser scanned using real telemetry from oval teams with real life racers using that to practice so that isn't a good gauge to test whether oval racing takes actual skill?

 

[TheHemps]

At the end of the day, Red Bull Racing paid £1.5 million for their simulator, about $3m. rFactor costs £30. I can imagine that should answer a lot of questions for you. Of course this being the internet, I await your vile mouthed, ill thought out response. P.S, I'm not usually this nasty, just to people with poor manners.

 

[Juen-Jen Wang]

At the end of the day, Red Bull Racing paid £1.5 million for their simulator, about $3m. rFactor costs £30. I can imagine that should answer a lot of questions for you. Of course this being the internet, I await your vile mouthed, ill thought out response. P.S, I'm not usually this nasty, just to people with poor manners.

I never said rFactor (well... CARTFactor in particular) and iRacing were perfect (although iR being a lot closer to real life than many rFactor mods) representations of real life as both rF and iR are missing a lot of key variables that are paramount to real life. Both rF and iR are a much more simplified version to real life. That said, ovals in CARTFactor and iRacing are very difficult already. It took me about 5 hours of straight practicing to be able to learn CARTFactor at indy (using a proper set from an oval alien) and not spin out or crash when it usually takes me about 2 hours to maintain a stable line on a road course (yeah i know i'm not that good but still). So are you saying that elements that are missing in a simplified version would make it more difficult than real life?

Also, I apologize for snapping. I just cant stand people who look down on IndyCar purely because it runs on ovals and they are using an oval chassis on road courses (something of course that ICONIC is suppose to fix). I also can't stand people who believes that ovals are as easy as they look on tv without them actually trying it in CARTFactor or iRacing. I've argued with people day and night about the merits of oval racing and frankly I'm getting a bit tired of the overly judgmental attitude people have on ovals (granted NASCAR fans are no angels themselves... but still)

 

[William Levesque]

arrot:

 

[TheHemps]

Thankyou for you aplology Juen-Jen. I understand it's annoying when people don't understand where your coming from. I don't imagine oval racing is easy. In fact, there were discussions about having an oval race in F1, Bernie was all for it. However, it's a different sport. It sounds to me as if an Indy car driver is constantly fighting to keep the car on the track, against a number of different factors. I watched the vid you posted and William's right, thats scary stuff. But F1 is a different scenario, with different factors. For instance, an airline pilot can't necessarily fly a fighter jet, but a fighter jet pilot can fly a Liner. Same with F1 and Indy. In my opinion, I believe an F1 driver could make the transition to Indy without much trouble, but I don't think it would be as easy the other way round. Of course that's the wonder of nice and sensible discussion, you can disagree and point out why you think I'm wrong. So what do you think? Is Indy a good gauge on a drivers skills if they are being considered for F1?

 

[Juen-Jen Wang]

I believe an F1 driver could make the transition to Indy without much trouble, but I don't think it would be as easy the other way round. Of course that's the wonder of nice and sensible discussion, you can disagree and point out why you think I'm wrong. So what do you think? Is Indy a good gauge on a drivers skills if they are being considered for F1?

I've calmed down a bit and re-read your post and I see your argument now. I'm sorry for misunderstanding it. I feel a bit embarrassed now. But yes I actually agree that Indy isn't a very good gauge but nonetheless I'm am happy FIA recognizes it by giving its top 6 drivers the ability to apply for a super license.

The biggest problem is really the cars. The current spec is still (despite what people say) leaning towards being an oval chassis. So that actually makes the IndyCars feel very different to an F1 where as GP2 is much much close to F1. So I would agree that Indy isn't really a proper stepping stone to F1. In regards to ovals, only Nigel Mansell didn't have problems adapting but he was racing in CART (Which, despite common belief is very different to Indy). If you look at the F1 drivers going over to Indy (the 1996 started league not CART) F1 rejects actually do not have a very good track record. Robert Doornbos, Enrique Bernoldi, Franck Montagny and recently Takuma Sato (despite being very quick he's having problems lasting the race as usual especially on ovals where he tends to push too hard and understeer into a wall) haven't really been that outright stunning transitioning over. So while I do agree IndyCar drivers have more of a mountain to climb going into F1 than vise versa. I dont think the other way around would be easy. Of course, IndyCar has yet to have a very talented F1 driver cross over and we dont know if the 2012 ICONIC would make IndyCar more or even less like F1 (i'm going to assume less). So it's really all down to speculation.

What would be interesting is if Lewis Hamilton of Sebastian Vettel takes the Las Vegas 5 million dollar bait and try to go over just for one race.

I still would like to see some young IndyCar driver have a crack at F1 tho. After all Timo Glock did race in ChampCar before GP2 and F1 I know Ryan Briscoe and Marco Andretti has tested for F1 teams but I dont know if they were impressive or not. (Maybe someone can answer that?)