Saving F1 - the new approach?

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

@ beelsebob
I wouldn't have thought so.
6 seconds on KERS provides around 6tenths at present. Having more power would probably make that 1 to 1.5 seconds quicker(roughly) and it is mainly used in acceleration zones, so the demand on the driver is minimal other than in utilising the control.

Easy to implement, easy to develop and it would add another dimension to strategy.
When to use it, at which stage of the race etc.
Would some hoard it till the end? Would others try use it to overcome a poor grid position? You could get some brilliant racing, and the best thing is, it's the drivers choice and he is in full control.

[beelsebob]

@ beelsebob
I wouldn't have thought so.
6 seconds on KERS provides around 6tenths at present. Having more power would probably make that 1 to 1.5 seconds quicker(roughly) and it is mainly used in acceleration zones, so the demand on the driver is minimal other than in utilising the control.

Easy to implement, easy to develop and it would add another dimension to strategy.
When to use it, at which stage of the race etc.
Would some hoard it till the end? Would others try use it to overcome a poor grid position? You could get some brilliant racing, and the best thing is, it's the drivers choice and he is in full control.

I was referring to the originally proposed changes – allowing the teams to build any shape of car they like as long as it fits a certain bounding box would immediately reintroduce all kinds of crazy aero devices. Allowing any engine as long as it meets a certain efficiency rating would instantly increase the power output, as we'd start seeing things like the current engines, but with turbos, and more optimal cylinder sizes, and more cunning methods of getting the fuel ignited well. I would be willing to bet that if we moved to "you can have any shape as long as it fits in this box", we'd instantly see lap times drop by 10 seconds or more.

[krisfx]

When you give a set of bounding boxes for the cars, the teams will approach it differently, but once one design starts winning, the other teams follow suit, resulting in clones anyway.

The rules where you find loopholes make engineering more creative, however I agree we need a solution which allows engineering within the sport to be more radical.

[sm68]

A couple of things I would like to try:

1. No pit-car radio whilst the race is on. I am fine with it during practice, but once the race is underway the driver should be on his own. This will change the dynamics of the races quite a bit. No calling in for pit stops, no warning drivers to save fuel etc.

2. Ban the high nose so that there is not so much turbulence coming out of the diffusers - this would make it easier for cars to get up close to each other and get past each other without the artifice of the DRS. The cars would be less grippy which should liven things up a bit as well

[FrukostScones]

Bring Back the manufacturers
nothing more to add here.

I stopped reading there.
nothing to add here.

Formula 1 is not about cars. So F1 needs no car manufaturers (Big manufacturers come and go and leave burnt soil in the process).
All F1 needs is Ferrari (not a car maufacturer imho) and a bunch of players who try to beat them.

[Just_a_fan]

Many tracks are struggling to find the cash to stay in F1 win some looking to alternate. For example:

Ecclestone said that if a deal with Melbourne cannot be negotiated for beyond 2015, the series would be more likely to exit Australia than to shift to another state. "The race itself, from our point of view, is probably the least viable of all the races we have," he said.

Let's make one thing clear about this aspect of the F1: it's not an F1 issue. The problem is caused by the huge amounts that Bernie asks the circuits to pay in order to host the races. This is because he's trying to help his employer cover the huge costs they took on to buy the commercial rights to F1. This is purely a commercial problem for Bernie and his mob of blood suckers. There is nothing that anyone can write in to F1's rules that will chnage this problem.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

What is Ferrari if not a car manufacturer? A seller of beer mats and scarfs?

F1 is about cars. Manufacturers have a link because they build road cars. The days of garagistas are over, you only need look at McLaren for evidence of that.

[Cam]

Bring Back the manufacturers
nothing more to add here.

I stopped reading there.
nothing to add here.

Formula 1 is not about cars. So F1 needs no car manufaturers (Big manufacturers come and go and leave burnt soil in the process).
All F1 needs is Ferrari (not a car manufacturer imho) and a bunch of players who try to beat them.

I'm sorry you feel that way. This thread is open to suggestions on how to change F1 and implement options that can ensure the viability of F1 into the future. Not only have you not offered any solutions yourself, you have undertaken to pick apart a previous post only. Negativity and being un-helpful is not required here. It simply wastes space and reduces the chance of finding real solutions. Please have an opinion, however please respect the other people who, unlike you, go out on a limb to offer an idea. They shouldn't be ridiculed or denigrated for that.

I would disagree with your statement and back it up with evidence that not only is F1 about cars and that it's actively trying to entice manufacturers back into the sport - however I doubt anyone could convince you.

Should you decide to offer up some constructive ideas, I'll be happy to discuss those further with you.

[Cam]

A couple of things I would like to try:

1. No pit-car radio whilst the race is on. I am fine with it during practice, but once the race is underway the driver should be on his own. This will change the dynamics of the races quite a bit. No calling in for pit stops, no warning drivers to save fuel etc.

Absolutely agree, top idea. This would indeed put the result almost entirely in the hands of the driver. Being crowned WC after that would certainly be worthy. Simple to implement. Costs nothing. Increases the show. Awesome stuff.

This is what happens when constructive ideas are put forward - magic.

[Cam]

I was referring to the originally proposed changes – allowing the teams to build any shape of car they like as long as it fits a certain bounding box would immediately reintroduce all kinds of crazy aero devices.

Yes, it's possible that would occur and some kind of restraints may be required, however the concept of seeing crazy aero does appeal to me. It would allow the engineers to experiment more. How it could be implimented is a good question.

Allowing any engine as long as it meets a certain efficiency rating would instantly increase the power output, as we'd start seeing things like the current engines, but with turbos, and more optimal cylinder sizes, and more cunning methods of getting the fuel ignited well. I would be willing to bet that if we moved to "you can have any shape as long as it fits in this box", we'd instantly see lap times drop by 10 seconds or more.

Perhaps, and that's okay I think. Someone else had an idea to give only certain KJ per race, so maybe a combination of these would liven it up? If F1 had a 'hybrid engine only' policy, we would already all be driving electric or hydrogen cars. F1's ability to push innovation in to the domestic market is huge - if allowed to happen. So rather than seeing the possibility of a car driving off into the distance, I see the possibility of me, and you, having a better car as a result. To be a leader, you must lead. F1 can do this and it will increase the show and sell more cars on Monday - I think.

So you would prefer to keep to a one engine model, like they do now? Teams are already claiming the costs are skyrocketing - how would you suggest reducing this cost area?

[Cam]

Many tracks are struggling to find the cash to stay in F1 win some looking to alternate. For example:

Ecclestone said that if a deal with Melbourne cannot be negotiated for beyond 2015, the series would be more likely to exit Australia than to shift to another state. "The race itself, from our point of view, is probably the least viable of all the races we have," he said.

Let's make one thing clear about this aspect of the F1: it's not an F1 issue. The problem is caused by the huge amounts that Bernie asks the circuits to pay in order to host the races. This is because he's trying to help his employer cover the huge costs they took on to buy the commercial rights to F1. This is purely a commercial problem for Bernie and his mob of blood suckers. There is nothing that anyone can write in to F1's rules that will chnage this problem.

Agreed the one or two are ruining it. f the asking costs weren't so high that would solve a lot of problems. Asking people to cough up $285 for a crap ticket, isn't really opening it up for the masses to come and enjoy. Would you rather a smaller percentage of a whole lot - or a large percentage of a bit?

People can do something, just see the Arab Spring for inspiration. F1, like governments, only survive thanks to you and me. Without you, me and the rest of us, it dies. So our actions count in a huge way. F1 is very unfair for the teams, the tracks and the fans. It's very fair to MrE. The tracks, the teams and the fans can do whatever they want, they just have to have the courage to start it and once a way starts, it's hard to stop. Imagine if the fans boycotted a race? Changes would be swift. So, rather than waiting for any possible backlash from teams dropping out or going bankrupt, or tracks pulling out or fans turning off, try another tact. The time of excess is for a minority is over. And relying on weird tyres won't last forever.

[SeijaKessen]

One thing I do have to add...

Stop allowing Herman Tilke to have a monopoly on new track design.

Take golf courses as an example...no course architect has a monopoly on potential new courses to be designed with PGA play in mind.

I am sick of his --- tracks, and could care less if he is being told to do it that way.

His tracks are devoid of any soul, and are never going to be considered classic whether it is 50 years or 100 years from now.

Yes he can whine about being under time constraints, but really, it's not that difficult to come up with inspired track design.

Oh hey look it's another long straight into a left or right corner.

lol

I mean really, this is what passes for track design now?

[Cam]

Stop allowing Herman Tilke to have a monopoly on new track design.

Another great point. As the cars have evolved, the tracks haven't. This is definitely one area that could hep F1.

What are some key features that could be added to a new track?

My thoughts are 2 different routes. One would suit speed, the other handling. A team would have to decide which approach to take and that would certainly increase the show.

Any more thoughts?

[bhall]

When you say two different routes, do you mean two different racing lines or two wholly different routes? Either last year or the year before, Ecclestone actually proposed allowing drivers to cut a certain number of corners per race to overtake cars ahead.

[SeijaKessen]

Stop allowing Herman Tilke to have a monopoly on new track design.

Another great point. As the cars have evolved, the tracks haven't. This is definitely one area that could hep F1.

What are some key features that could be added to a new track?

My thoughts are 2 different routes. One would suit speed, the other handling. A team would have to decide which approach to take and that would certainly increase the show.

Any more thoughts?

I am of the belief F1 needs a few high speed tracks in the rotation; the old Hockenheimring (some have said they have been looking to restore the forest section, not sure if that is true?) Imola from 1981 to 1994, Osterreichring. And yes, I say Imola being a fan of Senna...I still do not agree with the removal of the Tamburello Corner.

The one thing I have noticed in common with all great tracks out there in the world --whether they are used for F1 or not-- is that they have a great sense of flow to them. They don't have to be high speed to have a great flow to them...they have to be designed by people with a concept of what works.

I'd like to see some flat-out corners involved again...the kind where you just put the pedal to the floor.

Leave the angular track design to street circuits where there is no other option in various areas.

One thing I do think that is important with all track design is to have elevation changes...they do not need to be extreme in design, or do they need to mirror Spa, but the entire track should not be completely flat.