Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
The system itself isn't bad or arbitrary, but the rules around it are. if you remove the restriction on when you are allowed to use it and put restrictions on the number of uses instead, you create a strategic instrument which doesn't give an unfair advantage to any driver.
This system is a contrived overtaking aid. Either you allow fully active aero (completely integrated into the cars normal function) or you dont allow it at all.
Anything in between with rules restricting when it can be uses is just gimmicky BS
strad wrote:after a certain point top speed doesn't really matter...it's how quick..not how fast
Speed thrills, no doubt about it, but you must have the track to support it. You need 1000 Hp and a long straight with plenty of slipstreaming, followed by a wide entry hairpin, that's the recipe for overtaking right there.
but for the majority of viewers speed has little meaning, when I sit in front of the tv I can't really tell if they are
doing 250 or 350 km/h , it is just a number
When you see the cars irl, you can definately tell.
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"
Ditch DRS. Have tyres that can take the loads yet degrade enough for there to be a genuine strategy choice between one or two stops. Widen rear tyres and take off the rear wing in an attempt to redress the balance mech grip versus aero. Get rid of team to car radio.
EDIT: Oh, and I'd have topless 'Gridboys' added alongside the gridgirls so my wife doesn't moan about it being a misogynist sport that's stuck in the seventies. It really would make the viewing experience so much more pleasurable for me...
I would first of all limit the scope of aerodynamic work teams can do. How would you do it? Quite simple, just apply the same principle the teams impose on engine development work. Allow one basic aerodynamic design per season and a limited list of upgrades that can be done over one year, like a low and high downforce package and that would be it.
As compensation rules on engines and Energy recovery would be freed up considerably. AWKERS would be allowed and pretty much everything that is allowed in LMP1. So free choice of engine config every year. Less fuel flow for progessivly bigger energy recovery systems. The whole works.
I would go for a tunnel floor, smaller wings, 18 inch wheels and movable and adaptive aerodynamics. In aerodynamics everything that makes the car more aerodynamic efficient would allowed. I would keep power unit homologation but no freeze. Small changes with limited number like the aerodynamic allowance from a closed list can be made during the season. Big changes can be made for the following year.
I would generally allow a team to make changes every third race. That means you have six changes per season. Two aerodynamic, two energy recovery and two engine changes. If that is not enough and you have money left allow three changes per season from a very restricted list.
The purpose is limiting what teams can do in volume and resources and still provide development in all fields during the season. This would make F1 technically more interesting and limit the development cost at the same time. Mid field teams would have a better chance of catching up.
Commercially I would give all teams a base budget that they can exist from. The rest can be distributed by points earned. Ferrari are not to receive any extra money. They have already enough. I would also prohibit any corporation that is involved in tobacco or other drug business to sponsor a team or F1 as a whole.
I would also allow more than one tyre supplier but testing would be restricted to one additional hour on Friday for tyres only. Every tyre supplier must be prepared to supply all teams if called for.
I would change the F1commission to give the manufacturers more say to balance the vote of the constructors and attract more manufacturers. Currently F1 is totally unattractive to manufacturers because the constructors get it all their way.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best ..............................organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)
But then, in all fairness, we would require that the 'Grid girls' also be topless, no?
You see that would just land me in more grief, I'd be quite happy to let her have a treat if it means that I can enjoy the first few laps without her in my ear telling me that I shouldn't be watching it.
Oh, that's another thing actually. I would stop the interminable replays that we get off the start every single grand prix. They do it at the exact moment the DRS becomes active and we miss crucial bits of action that are going on in the early laps. It's a hangover from the days when the start was the only exciting part of the race and needs to be done away with.
PhillipM wrote:"Here is 50 litres of fuel, you must finish the race on it, you cannot use any alternative pre-stored energy, use whatever engine you like"
Then I'd knock 10% off it every year.
that's 6km/l for a 300km grandprix, doubt a normal family car could do that when you drive it hard
Tim.Wright wrote:This system is a contrived overtaking aid. Either you allow fully active aero (completely integrated into the cars normal function) or you dont allow it at all.
Anything in between with rules restricting when it can be uses is just gimmicky BS
The idea came from the f-duct, which I am sure you no problems with. Again, the system itself isn't "contrived", the problem lies with that only the person behind can use it, so the ruling around it. That my friend isn't BS, but short sigtness from you. referring to allow full active aero is extrapolating.
xpensive wrote:
Speed thrills, no doubt about it, but you must have the track to support it. You need 1000 Hp and a long straight with plenty of slipstreaming, followed by a wide entry hairpin, that's the recipe for overtaking right there.
but for the majority of viewers speed has little meaning, when I sit in front of the tv I can't really tell if they are
doing 250 or 350 km/h , it is just a number
When you see the cars irl, you can definately tell.
The shoddy TV production does a lot to take away any sense of speed the cars carry since the rely pretty much on tracking shots, or other stupidity that involves beauty shots.
In the late 90s/early 00s, when the cars came out of Radillon onto the Kemmel Straight, they used to have a camera setup at the top of the grand stands. You always got a great sense for how fast the cars were passing by. They no longer use that shot instead opting for a head on shot of the Kemmel Straight which kills all ability to have any sort of stationary reference point.
"I don't want to make friends with anybody. I don't give a sh*t for fame. I just want to win." -Nelson Piquet
WhiteBlue wrote:I would first of all limit the scope of aerodynamic work teams can do. How would you do it? Quite simple, just apply the same principle the teams impose on engine development work. Allow one basic aerodynamic design per season and a limited list of upgrades that can be done over one year, like a low and high downforce package and that would be it.
As compensation rules on engines and Energy recovery would be freed up considerably. AWKERS would be allowed and pretty much everything that is allowed in LMP1. So free choice of engine config every year. Less fuel flow for progessivly bigger energy recovery systems. The whole works.
I would go for a tunnel floor, smaller wings, 18 inch wheels and movable and adaptive aerodynamics. In aerodynamics everything that makes the car more aerodynamic efficient would allowed. I would keep power unit homologation but no freeze. Small changes with limited number like the aerodynamic allowance from a closed list can be made during the season. Big changes can be made for the following year.
I would generally allow a team to make changes every third race. That means you have six changes per season. Two aerodynamic, two energy recovery and two engine changes. If that is not enough and you have money left allow three changes per season from a very restricted list.
The purpose is limiting what teams can do in volume and resources and still provide development in all fields during the season. This would make F1 technically more interesting and limit the development cost at the same time. Mid field teams would have a better chance of catching up.
Commercially I would give all teams a base budget that they can exist from. The rest can be distributed by points earned. Ferrari are not to receive any extra money. They have already enough. I would also prohibit any corporation that is involved in tobacco or other drug business to sponsor a team or F1 as a whole.
I would also allow more than one tyre supplier but testing would be restricted to one additional hour on Friday for tyres only. Every tyre supplier must be prepared to supply all teams if called for.
I would change the F1commission to give the manufacturers more say to balance the vote of the constructors and attract more manufacturers. Currently F1 is totally unattractive to manufacturers because the constructors get it all their way.
I have an easier way to restrict aero, ban front wings and go back to ground effects.
And why would you prohibit any corporation involved with tobacco or other drug business to sponsor?
"I don't want to make friends with anybody. I don't give a sh*t for fame. I just want to win." -Nelson Piquet
xpensive wrote:
Speed thrills, no doubt about it, but you must have the track to support it. You need 1000 Hp and a long straight with plenty of slipstreaming, followed by a wide entry hairpin, that's the recipe for overtaking right there.
but for the majority of viewers speed has little meaning, when I sit in front of the tv I can't really tell if they are
doing 250 or 350 km/h , it is just a number
When you see the cars irl, you can definately tell.
sure, but 600M watch a grandprix on tv, a few 100k at most watch it live and quite a few of them probably not where they can see cars at top speed
