Technical Regulations for 2009-2015

[turbof1]

Wow, both having a much harder problem to solve, and being 6 seconds a lap faster... that's pretty --- impressive!

5 to 10 times? Then 6 seconds is laughable. Imagine what the f1 teams could achieve with that same amount, but less restrictive rules.

Even if this is the time they'd lose based on the current state of aero, we can then assume that they'll gain 1.5-2 seconds a lap just from getting better at designing cars from year to year. That leaves us at a 1 second time loss. Which is in the bounds of the normal lap time variation of F1. Give it a year after that and they'll be a second a lap faster than current cars, plus, the engines will have developed (which they're ofc not doing just now), and we can expect them to be significantly faster than this year already. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if they were already tightening up the regulations some more come 2015

They aren't allowed to develop the engine anymore after January, and quite possibly any engine development after next season, will be given to the manufacturers that have the weaker engine, just to catch up. It'll be another engine freeze, at best maybe a very strictly controlled engine development programme. Aero-wise teams are already on their top. 2009 atleast brought in some oppertunities with a bigger front wing. The coming batch of aero reg changes are all restrictions. I see them finding 1 second at the most. After that, teams will be spending tenths of millions to find not seconds, not tenths of a second, but merely hundreds of a second over a complete year.

[beelsebob]

Wow, both having a much harder problem to solve, and being 6 seconds a lap faster... that's pretty --- impressive!

5 to 10 times? Then 6 seconds is laughable. Imagine what the f1 teams could achieve with that same amount, but less restrictive rules.

Yes – they could probably be significantly faster... But then we'd have a pile of dead drivers. So it's much more reasonable to tighten up the rules, be equally impressed by the engineering feat of being significantly faster, despite much tighter restrictions, and not have the dead drivers

Even if this is the time they'd lose based on the current state of aero, we can then assume that they'll gain 1.5-2 seconds a lap just from getting better at designing cars from year to year. That leaves us at a 1 second time loss. Which is in the bounds of the normal lap time variation of F1. Give it a year after that and they'll be a second a lap faster than current cars, plus, the engines will have developed (which they're ofc not doing just now), and we can expect them to be significantly faster than this year already. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if they were already tightening up the regulations some more come 2015

They aren't allowed to develop the engine anymore after January, and quite possibly any engine development after next season, will be given to the manufacturers that have the weaker engine, just to catch up.

Right, which is how Honda are going to enter the race in 2015 – by not developing their engine at all. Wait... no.

There's no homologation rules been outlined yet at all for these engines.

[turbof1]

Yes – they could probably be significantly faster... But then we'd have a pile of dead drivers. So it's much more reasonable to tighten up the rules, be equally impressed by the engineering feat of being significantly faster, despite much tighter restrictions, and not have the dead drivers

There are more then enough ways to make a car faster without so much increasing the risk on the pilot's life. I agree that the safety of the driver should have priority, but the whole intent changed into just keeping the car's performance level. Instead of just doing that, why not try to keep making cars ever more safer and allow for every increase of safety for the driver an increase in speed.

I am impressed that they keep finding improvements year after year; it's just that the last few years we've seen development struggling. By now we can safely call this a semi-spec series; there really isn't much the team can develop anymore. I find it then very wasteful to spend such a huge amounts on things we can't ever see on road cars. Without a big share of the restrictions we would have seen much more applications of f1 tech into the real life.

Right, which is how Honda are going to enter the race in 2015 – by not developing their engine at all. Wait... no.

There's no homologation rules been outlined yet at all for these engines.

I don't know how the Honda situation turns out; it would fair to assume manufacturers are free to develop as long as they still aren't entered in F1. How else would Cosworth developed its engine and got it in F1 back in 2010? And yes engines are atleast frozen over the 2014 season. After that it is still open, for now.

[beelsebob]

Yes – they could probably be significantly faster... But then we'd have a pile of dead drivers. So it's much more reasonable to tighten up the rules, be equally impressed by the engineering feat of being significantly faster, despite much tighter restrictions, and not have the dead drivers

There are more then enough ways to make a car faster without so much increasing the risk on the pilot's life. I agree that the safety of the driver should have priority, but the whole intent changed into just keeping the car's performance level. Instead of just doing that, why not try to keep making cars ever more safer and allow for every increase of safety for the driver an increase in speed.

Because we've not even mastered making the cars safe at their current speed yet, let alone even faster.

[beelsebob]

I don't know how the Honda situation turns out; it would fair to assume manufacturers are free to develop as long as they still aren't entered in F1. How else would Cosworth developed its engine and got it in F1 back in 2010? And yes engines are atleast frozen over the 2014 season. After that it is still open, for now.

Where have you seen this rule? The engine homologation rules are in the sporting regulations. The 2014 sporting regs have not been published (even in draft) yet.

[turbof1]

Yes – they could probably be significantly faster... But then we'd have a pile of dead drivers. So it's much more reasonable to tighten up the rules, be equally impressed by the engineering feat of being significantly faster, despite much tighter restrictions, and not have the dead drivers

There are more then enough ways to make a car faster without so much increasing the risk on the pilot's life. I agree that the safety of the driver should have priority, but the whole intent changed into just keeping the car's performance level. Instead of just doing that, why not try to keep making cars ever more safer and allow for every increase of safety for the driver an increase in speed.

Because we've not even mastered making the cars safe at their current speed yet, let alone even faster.

In that case: neither has any car manufacturer been able to make a road car 100% risk free. Mastering it would mean taking the weakest element out of the car: the driver. We could do that, or accept what we have done until now: that there will always be some risk involved with racing.

Where have you seen this rule? The engine homologation rules are in the sporting regulations. The 2014 sporting regs have not been published (even in draft) yet.

http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2013/01/a ... e-in-2014/

Getting it right will be vital to competitiveness next year; the manufactures have agreed to homologate the engines on March 1st 2014, so they have until then to develop them.

Apperently I was wrong on some things, sorry about that. Still, the engines will be homologated.

[beelsebob]

There are more then enough ways to make a car faster without so much increasing the risk on the pilot's life. I agree that the safety of the driver should have priority, but the whole intent changed into just keeping the car's performance level. Instead of just doing that, why not try to keep making cars ever more safer and allow for every increase of safety for the driver an increase in speed.

Because we've not even mastered making the cars safe at their current speed yet, let alone even faster.

In that case: neither has any car manufacturer been able to make a road car 100% risk free. Mastering it would mean taking the weakest element out of the car: the driver. We could do that, or accept what we have done until now: that there will always be some risk involved with racing.

Sure... Which is exactly what we do, but that doesn't mean that we try to increase that risk, rather than reduce it, when we're already at the limits of human ability to deal with the forces, temperatures and concentration levels involved.

[turbof1]

Hence why I said to make the cars themselves more safer in case of a crash, instead of just blindlesly making the cars slower.

[wesley123]

What I still dont understand is why they still have such a weight limit. I can imagine there being a weight limit to not favor lighter drivers, but why not lower the limit to like 500kg? It would make the cars faster, the research in materials to make the car lighter could prove useful in road cars. Also there is less mass involved in a crash(safer). Also it would be more fuel efficient. I have no doubt cars are close to 500kg(without ballast) anyways, so why not lower this limit, instead of making it even higher?

[turbof1]

I would couple that with a variable minimum weight for the drivers based on criteria like height, body density, etc.

[beelsebob]

Hence why I said to make the cars themselves more safer in case of a crash, instead of just blindlesly making the cars slower.

1) They're not making them slower, they're making them the same speed.
2) They're making them progressively safer, that doesn't change the fact that making them faster will make them less safe.

[turbof1]

this will end in a perpetual circle . I'm backing out of it; it isn't part of the topic.

[Arterius]

What I still dont understand is why they still have such a weight limit. I can imagine there being a weight limit to not favor lighter drivers, but why not lower the limit to like 500kg? It would make the cars faster, the research in materials to make the car lighter could prove useful in road cars. Also there is less mass involved in a crash(safer). Also it would be more fuel efficient. I have no doubt cars are close to 500kg(without ballast) anyways, so why not lower this limit, instead of making it even higher?

I agree with your point completely. It would open up another avenue for development on the mechanical side of the car.
500kg might be a bit extreme, but why not go back to the 605kg minimum weight which we had a few years ago. Give the engineers and team another challenge besides aero.

[beelsebob]

What I still dont understand is why they still have such a weight limit. I can imagine there being a weight limit to not favor lighter drivers, but why not lower the limit to like 500kg? It would make the cars faster, the research in materials to make the car lighter could prove useful in road cars. Also there is less mass involved in a crash(safer). Also it would be more fuel efficient. I have no doubt cars are close to 500kg(without ballast) anyways, so why not lower this limit, instead of making it even higher?

Simple – without a weight limit, people will try to design for the lightest possible car, and we'll get a Lotus (60s, not current) philosophy of making the cars lighter until they're dangerous.

[Arterius]

What I still dont understand is why they still have such a weight limit. I can imagine there being a weight limit to not favor lighter drivers, but why not lower the limit to like 500kg? It would make the cars faster, the research in materials to make the car lighter could prove useful in road cars. Also there is less mass involved in a crash(safer). Also it would be more fuel efficient. I have no doubt cars are close to 500kg(without ballast) anyways, so why not lower this limit, instead of making it even higher?

Simple – without a weight limit, people will try to design for the lightest possible car, and we'll get a Lotus (60s, not current) philosophy of making the cars lighter until they're dangerous.

Making the cars lighter does not mean reducing the safety regulations of the tub or the crash structures. Those are the most important part in driver safety in an accident.