Technical Regulations for 2009-2015

[ESPImperium]

I thought of a idea the other day there. Allong the lines of the engine rule, and how the gearbox rule should be.

Limit eash driver to 50 sets of dry tyres per season, whitch would mean that each driver would have to change their tyres 2.5 times each race if the season was to be a completely dry season. Id also bring it in that they would have access to two sets of wet and extra wets every race.

A single compound, from either 2 or three tyre manufacturer for Slick, Wet and Extra Wet tyre.

It would reduce tyre freight by arround 60% and make the sport more green, and also more road relevant in that respect.

Take it like this, if a regular driver did 750km per race weekend, each dry tyre would do 300km on each tyre before a tyre change. But id ideally want to make them last arround 325km and then they seriously fall off the edge of the cliff for grip.

Id also like to make it that tyres couldnt be changed during parc ferme, unless it was wet or a "change of climactic conditions". Ideally id forget tyre warmers as well, and make each tyre useage to be concurrent, meaning that they had to compete 300km on the set before being allowed to change the set.

Could this idea be one that would really spice up the action???

[WhiteBlue]

These (current) rules give excessive prominence to aerodynamics and make overtaking too hard. Unless there are difficult weather conditions, then the car in front stays there throughout the race and this is mostly due to the aerodynamics.

=D> =D> =D>

Todt should revisit Mosley's proposal to limit DF to 1.25 metric tons. It is obviously necessary. It would be best if aerodynamics would be massively cut in terms of budget. Teams should not be able to spend more than 10% of R&D on aero. If necessary aero can be homologated, but I would prefer fixed downforce.

[pgj]

These (current) rules give excessive prominence to aerodynamics and make overtaking too hard. Unless there are difficult weather conditions, then the car in front stays there throughout the race and this is mostly due to the aerodynamics.

=D> =D> =D>

Todt should revisit Mosley's proposal to limit DF to 1.25 metric tons. It is obviously necessary. It would be best if aerodynamics would be massively cut in terms of budget. Teams should not be able to spend more than 10% of R&D on aero. If necessary aero can be homologated, but I would prefer fixed downforce.

I agree. Limiting cash-spends is a difficult area. It would have to be a voluntary limit and there are teams out there that would never agree to it. I would like to see something along the lines of a standard single element front and rear wing.

[machin]

I would like to see something along the lines of a standard single element front and rear wing.

I think this is the only sensible way to limit aero costs.. However I would change it slightly to:-

• Standard Single element rear wing.
  Standard Front wing with "neutral" main plane and 2 (one per side) driver adjustable flaps.
  Standard Floor and diffuser.

Leave the remaining parts of the car as per the current (2009-2010) rules for some individuality.

The second advantage of this approach is that the standard wings could be designed such that they are not so heavily optimised for free-air running and are therefore less affected by running in the wake of another car. The teams themselves (quite rightly) would never end up with an unoptimised front wing on their own, so it has to be forced upon them.

[pgj]

I would like to see something along the lines of a standard single element front and rear wing.

I think this is the only sensible way to limit aero costs.. However I would change it slightly to:-

• Standard Single element rear wing.
  Standard Front wing with "neutral" main plane and 2 (one per side) driver adjustable flaps.
  Standard Floor and diffuser.

Leave the remaining parts of the car as per the current (2009-2010) rules for some individuality.

The second advantage of this approach is that the standard wings could be designed such that they are not so heavily optimised for free-air running and are therefore less affected by running in the wake of another car. The teams themselves (quite rightly) would never end up with an unoptimised front wing on their own, so it has to be forced upon them.

I could live with that. We may also get some greater variation back into car design instead them all being a variation on a standard theme.

[strad]

Get rid of the diffusers

[xpensive]

Get rid of the diffusers

That's the only workable regulation, flat bottom as long as there is car to measure, simple enoough to police?

[lebesset]

how about smaller cars , shorter and narrower

easier than widening all the tracks

is there really any need for 600Kg cars to be 5.5 metres long ? would be easy with 4 cyl turbo's

am afraid overtaking was nearly as difficult BEFORE diffusers , they are only part of the problem

[strad]

Yes but in diffuser discussions people seem to always overlook the fact, that while looking for downforce, the designers purposely look to screw up the airflow as much as possible for the following car. Do you really think they don't take advantage of something they have all seen makes it difficult to be passed?

[xpensive]

how about smaller cars , shorter and narrower

easier than widening all the tracks

is there really any need for 600Kg cars to be 5.5 metres long ? would be easy with 4 cyl turbo's

am afraid overtaking was nearly as difficult BEFORE diffusers , they are only part of the problem

In the 70s, with 2000 mm wide cars and no run-off areas, they were starting three abreast, how did they manage that you might wonder?

[WhiteBlue]

It looks like the 18 inch wheels are coming in 2013 with Michelin low rolling resistance tyres according to news from AMuS. Perhaps that is the right time to widen the tracks back to 2000 mm. As Jean Todt said the aerodynamic will have to be cut back and that implies that mechanical grip will be raised to keep performance. Wide tracks could be a good measure to achieve that.

[xpensive]

It looks like the 18 inch wheels are coming in 2013 with Michelin low rolling resistance tyres according to news from AMuS. Perhaps that is the right time to widen the tracks back to 2000 mm. As Jean Todt said the aerodynamic will have to be cut back and that implies that mechanical grip will be raised to keep performance. Wide tracks could be a good measure to achieve that.

I'm with the FIA and Michelin all the way on that one, as long as they regulate that hideous front wing somehow! Gawd how I hate it!

[WhiteBlue]

http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 49763.html

Regarding KERS and aero AMuS reports that the teams are in a stale mate. Mercedes is opposed to go to a standardized KERS from Magneti Marelli and say it makes no sense unless KERS is integrated with the engine and gives decent fuel saving.

In the aero discussion Ferrari, Mercedes, McLaren and Williams are pushing for deeper aero cuts. Smaller front wings, simple end plates, ban of all aero parts except for wings and including the aero devices under the nose are all being proposed. Adrian Newey and Red Bull are opposed to the cut because they obviously have an advantage when the rules stay as close to their current successful design.

This seems to be the classical situation where an aerodynamicist stops sensible rules due to particular team aero interests. I wonder how that situation will be resolved. I still think that the FiA should introduce safety regulation to mandate that the total front wings must be visible from the driver position. Much of the aero around the nose would go away if they cannot get the high noses they run now.

[pgj]

I support WhiteBlue. I would like to see a greatly reduced single element front and rear wing with a maximum surface area.

I am never quite certain, would an aero change of this nature have to come from FOTA through the CA or could a change be imposed by the FIA?

[WhiteBlue]

German AMuS Report

AMuS said KERS would definitely return and there could be a delay before KERS would deploy after the driver command to spoil counter attacks. The main area of change in 2011 will be aerodynamics.

The DDD will be eliminated as discussed previously and the single diffusor height will be restricted to 125 mm putting more emphasis back on the rear wing.

The bodywork ahead of the sidepods, and the flow aids under the chassis, are to disappear. I take it that this means the splitters and floor extension under the tub could be about to go as the last turning vanes that were used to support the out bord mirrors.

The front wing endplates will be restricted in shape, the front wings will be smaller, while the front wing adjustors could be abolished. As the front wing center is standardized and DF neutral it could mean a serious cut in front DF.

Adjustable flaps could be applied to the rear wings to gain higher top speeds on the straights.

Pirelli seems to be moving ahead with the tyre supply as their initial offer was much better in price and tyre cost seems to be lower long term with them.