I think you have my argument in one WB. Reduce aero by up to 80% on 2008 and current levels (Both roughly the same). Make the designers try to make their cars more slippery thru the air, with increased mechanichal grip, where id like to allow things like mass dampers, Torque Transfer Rods and dare I say it allow active suspension again. Making the aero less important and actually getting the cars back to having a more greener outlook with roughly the same levels of grip, although this may be diluted by as much as 30-40% in real terms. Green technologies like KERS and HERS should be allowed, but with no push to pass button, these systems are deployed to make the car consume less fuel from the gas pedal ant nothing else.WhiteBlue wrote:WhiteBlue wrote:+1ESPImperium wrote:One other area that needs changed is fuel, make the sport greener by limiting fuel to 100KG for every car.. Thus making energy recovery systems needed, as well as making designers make their cars more slipery as the downforce will eat up the fuel. I think all theese measures would encourage more overtaking and making designers think green with the current engine regs.Let's try to recapture the discussion at the point where it got derailed. The concept that ESPImperium proposed would be changing the average speed indeed. That is undeniable. Average power setting would have to come down because the high doenforce and drag would not be sustainable. Top power would be the same but enjoyable for less time. Primarily cornering speeds would be reduced, which isn't a bad thing. Fans of massive G-forces would be disappointed, but fans of the corner challenges of the seventies, eighties and mid nineties would triumph.WhiteBlue wrote:Not very credible considering that historic GP cars reached 300+ km/h with half the horse power we have now. Absolute performance would go down but speed not really. With 700 bhp you can still run some moderate downforce and drag but not five time the minimum weight of the car. But what is wrong with twice the weight of the car?xpensive wrote:Your suggestion means limiting fuel-load to 135 liters, which is at least 30% less than today's. The only way of doing that is to radically reduce air-resistance, but even if you take off the wings completely, the Cv of an open-wheeler is still rather dramatic. But as air-resistance goes with the square of the speed, why you probably can achieve it with a substantial slowing down of the cars. Will the fans accept that? Active aerodynamics would be a step on the way however.
Someone mooted the idea on the engine rules thread once where there is a locked 5KG fuel tank that a driver that is marginal on fuel can use but once its used they must drive like they are a lap down, I like this idea, but without the lap down. What should happen then is that the engine should be then switched to its leanest mode to make the finish. For this id make it that each engine should only have a maximum of 5 fuel modes, 5 being the leanest and 1 being the most power the engine can produce from its fuel.
Id take away a lot of what the driver can control on his steering wheel, id like to see only a couple of rotary controls, and a few buttons. Possibly go down the road of standardising the steering wheels, and with this the telemetry, but this would be a long term goal. If a team want to change a setting they can do so at a pit stop by connecting the umbilical and performing a data transfer.
One other goal id do with the rules is make it that a team that has been in the sport more than 2 years (including name changes EG; Honda > Brawn > Mercedes) to only be allowed one major aero revision per year and another 3 minor ones. This would make Monza and Monaco spec aero solutions to be a thing of the past. I feel that getting the smaller teams up to speed is needed, to this id make a new team have to follow a minimum of 18 month lead time to get their car on the grid.
Id make it that gearboxes should follow engines with a maximum of 5 per season per driver. And the Gearbox and engine rule would be changed to be concurrent changes (Ferarri at Bahrain would have to have ditched their 1st engines after Bahrain Quali on both cars, and not be used again this season) I feel this would make engine engineers think more, and also make the team worry more.
Its all about cutting costs, creating overtaking and improving the show what I have suggested. I don’t have the figures or brain power that others may have, but im trying to think about what would improve F1, make driver skill and bravery shine thru, but also show that the fastest and most aggressive driver doesn’t always win as well. Im also trying to improve the green credentials of the sport as well.
