Sweet baby geezus! The Ducati has 3 sets of wings now?

Macattack said:

IMO if they went back to cooking tires you'd never hear a peep about wings and aerodynamics from anyone I don't want them doing the crazy special batch tire flown in the night before thing I'm just pointing this out that its tires as much as aero

Click to expand...

I’m inclined to agree - the entire bike works as a system. Tires are generally considered the single most impactful performance determinant for race vehicles (cars and bikes). Aero is another. My assertion was that when aero becomes the predominant development path, racing suffers (I didn’t assert that aero development was the only factor negatively impacting the quality of racing). We saw this in F1, and we seem to be seeing it now in MotoGP. Others with far more expertise than me are asserting the same.

You disagreed. So I linked articles of Marc Marquez, Jack Miller, and Mat Oxley discussing the issue. You then asserted that the racing is better than previous years. I’m inclined to agree that in some ways, it is. The sprints have been pretty exciting, but the races have generally been intense action for a few laps followed by a processional snooze fest with few passes for significant position. Processional meaning “in line” without passing - not necessarily implying they can’t be closely in line. I linked the articles with data to support this. Two of the best races in the modern era (Phillips Island 2015 and Assen 2018) occurred during the time when you say the racing was less entertaining.

You can insist the racing is more entertaining with aero, and that’s fine, but it’s contrary to available data and expert opinion saying the opposite. Does that mean I’m advocating for a return to less aero and reintroducing special tires? No, two things (or more) can be true at the same time - aero should not be the predominant development path AND certain riders should not get special tires AND on the fly ride height devices should be prohibited AND…

Or not - like what you like

But there’s objective evidence that aero is leading to boring racing.

*Edited for clarification

Macattack said:

2007 the bikes are too fast = reduction to 800cc's - bike are unrideable~ electronics development crashfest= bikes are as fast as they were at 1000cc . ---> move to 1000cc bikes are too fast again -fuel limits, control tires= bikes are slower-----> areo development= bikes are fast again honda is not winning enough ----------> tire limits , fuel limits and bla bla bla bla bla

Click to expand...

Yep - it tends to pendulum back and forth between various interests and interventions. Looks like we’re going back to smaller displacement motors soon.

Just went to FB and first post in my feed is from Speed Physics:

“MotoGP Grand Prix of Qatar Free Practice One. KTM looks to be testing some aero updates and one that stands out is that RB19 rear wing

They also seem to be running multiple slats within the radiator intake area for some time now where earlier this season it was just the radiator.”

Suspension, electronics, tires, brakes, chassis?? Nah.

Aero baby! Aero on tap. You want some aero with your aero?

Why aren't they going after the adjustable ride height stuff? I like this technology I think it is going to make my street bike better someday , but it's gotta be shaving a second a lap off of laptimes , cooking tires , and causing crashes for the non point and squirt bikes. its unfair.

Macattack said:

Why aren't they going after the adjustable ride height stuff? I like this technology I think it is going to make my street bike better someday , but it's gotta be shaving a second a lap off of laptimes , cooking tires , and causing crashes for the non point and squirt bikes. its unfair.

Click to expand...

To my understanding they are planning to ban or significantly restrict the use of ride height devices in the next year or so.

I was reading that those lower loop wings on the Ducati MotoGP bike create a down wash affect that both increases the effectiveness of the wing above it, AND smooths the air off the back of the bike making it harder to draft. So if you have Ducati’s out front (and usually you do) that would also make it harder to pass.

No one is asking the question, "where is this going to end up?" IMHO the bikes are too fast

Yeah, a racing series generally gets slower as time progresses.

bp_SFV4 said:

Yeah, a racing series generally gets slower as time progresses.

Click to expand...

It might be a necessary intervention. 10 or 20 years ago, the NHRA reduced the length of track for the Top Fuel classes from a 1/4 mile to 1000 ft to reduce trap speeds.

If you listen to the Spies interview, you’ll hear him discuss the same issue.

That was done for safety reasons after a few tragic events. I don’t think there’s a nexus to what’s going on in MotoGP in that context.

Paul G said:

Click to expand...

Ben Spies is a nob

Steven31371 said:

smooths the air off the back of the bike making it harder to draft.

Click to expand...

This isn’t a thing. Smooth air like what they’re doing in F1 with more emphasis on diffusers rather than wings make it easier to draft.

I’d wager these extra wings are to mitigate vortices generated by the wheel so that there’s cleaner air for the other wings on the main fairing or ground effect.

bp_SFV4 said:

That was done for safety reasons after a few tragic events. I don’t think there’s a nexus to what’s going on in MotoGP in that context.

Click to expand...

Yep. Exactly what Spies was talking about.

They could change MotoGP in a big way by eliminating the sole source vendor thing with tires. IMO, that should be a team decision.

bp_SFV4 said:

They could change MotoGP in a big way by eliminating the sole source vendor thing with tires. IMO, that should be a team decision.

Click to expand...

You need all the teams to be on board with this

I don’t need anything. I’m just making conversation.

bp_SFV4 said:

They could change MotoGP in a big way by eliminating the sole source vendor thing with tires. IMO, that should be a team decision.

Click to expand...

I’m inclined to agree.

The risk with a tire war though, is that because tires are the most important single determinant of performance (as much as several seconds per lap), and bike and rider performance is relatively close across the grid (entire grid within a second or so on the spec tire), IF there is significant disparity in tire performance between manufacturers (Michelin vs Bridgestone for example), the riders on the better tire are essentially guaranteed to win, and those on the worse tire don’t have a chance.

craig bush said:

I’m inclined to agree.

The risk with a tire war though, is that because tires are the most important single determinant of performance (as much as several seconds per lap), and bike and rider performance is relatively close across the grid (entire grid within a second or so on the spec tire), IF there is significant disparity in tire performance between manufacturers (Michelin vs Bridgestone for example), the riders on the better tire are essentially guaranteed to win, and those on the worse tire don’t have a chance.

Click to expand...

I’m fine with single tire supplier, but I don’t like that tire manufacturer dictating with an iron fist HOW teams use their tires, i.e. regulating tire pressures to the point of measuring them mid-race with required sensors on the bikes etc.

We need a tire war. That is the very thing that will drive manufacturer development into the most important performance item to a motorcycle rider. You'll never likely have fork mounted wings or a ride height device, but you will benefit from a better tire compound.