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.
You could always badge engineer, x.
Nissan AMG anyone...?
Or perhaps Monster AMG, the perfect foil to Red Bull.
I do like the sound of a Torro Rosso Infiniti powered by Renault paid by Red bull, though. The marketing guru's have infinite possibilities with that beauty.
To 60% of the viewing public, this would appear a totally unique team whilst still playing Bernie's game.
Bernie could offer the select few teams the possibility of a more manipulatable competition, but on his terms. Everyone's a winner (except the customer of course)
I imagine the idealised model for Bernie would be Ferrari, RB, McLaren, Merc as the big teams, with Williams as a fig leaf garagista. Then a couple of customer teams for billionaires wanting to make a splash, and a couple of development teams similar to RB-TR.
The customer and development teams would be allowed to badge engineer a car from the big teams. So their engineering budget would be a fraction of the current budgets and they could use that money to pay the entry fees to Bernie - unlike the current back markers who can barely afford the fees because of the cost of building a car.
richard_leeds wrote:I imagine the idealised model for Bernie would be Ferrari, RB, McLaren, Merc as the big teams, with Williams as a fig leaf garagista. Then a couple of customer teams for billionaires wanting to make a splash, and a couple of development teams similar to RB-TR.
...
Has MrE ever said something to that fact, or is it just sheer speculation?
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"
Moxie wrote:
THIS SHOW IS A RACE!!! IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE A COMPETITION!!! To keep the performers in this particular show, they must be paid enough to actually compete at some reasonable level. There must be some level of unpredictability and suspense regarding which team will win. Without competition F1 has become an expensive and boring waste of time.
This is part of the problem though, and the exact reason the big manufactures don't want anything to do with F1 right now. In order for big corporations to invest large sums of money, they are going to want it to benefit them in some way, usually through free advertising and name recognition. To get that, they either need to be winning or always at the front of the field. In other words they need stability, mainly regulation stability. Coincidentally, the small teams need stability as well, as that's what keeps costs low.
Bernie however doesn't want stability, he wants drama to bring in the low brow fans, who don't care about racing.
Really it's pretty simple, F1 has a choice to make either embrace the corporations and technology, or embrace the low brow fans. Walking the line between the two is not working.
Moxie wrote:
THIS SHOW IS A RACE!!! IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE A COMPETITION!!! To keep the performers in this particular show, they must be paid enough to actually compete at some reasonable level. There must be some level of unpredictability and suspense regarding which team will win. Without competition F1 has become an expensive and boring waste of time.
This is part of the problem though, and the exact reason the big manufactures don't want anything to do with F1 right now. In order for big corporations to invest large sums of money, they are going to want it to benefit them in some way, usually through free advertising and name recognition. To get that, they either need to be winning or always at the front of the field. In other words they need stability, mainly regulation stability. Coincidentally, the small teams need stability as well, as that's what keeps costs low.
Bernie however doesn't want stability, he wants drama to bring in the low brow fans, who don't care about racing.
Really it's pretty simple, F1 has a choice to make either embrace the corporations and technology, or embrace the low brow fans. Walking the line between the two is not working.
You are not the first to draw this conclusion. Bernie has been compared to Vince McMahon of WWE fame on more than one occasion in this forum. I agree that it does appear that Bernie is turning F1 into something like WWE "sports entertainment" rather than a true sporting competition.
It would not surprise me one bit if F1 were to begin conducting pre-race interviews in front of the crowd, in which the drivers are encouraged to give lengthy monologues about how they will deliver a smack down on the competition.
Moxie wrote:
It would not surprise me one bit if F1 were to begin conducting pre-race interviews in front of the crowd, in which the drivers are encouraged to give lengthy monologues about how they will deliver a smack down on the competition.
Personally, i think F1 cost control is out of control, and the regulations are out of control.
Engine manufacturers want to unfreeze the engine freeze, id allow them to do this, however only if the limit the cost to the customer teams to €12m to €15m a season. There are two teams out there paying €21m for a power train this year. As for Gearbox supply, id limit this to €5m a season. If Caterham could see a €10m reduction on costs on engine/gearbox side this would be a massive boost for them. However id allow the teams to use 8 gears from a nominated 12 for their gear boxes. However once those ratios are in the gearbox they can't be taken out for the 5 races, id also allow one final drive change per gearbox as well. As for how you use the gearboxes, they don't have to be consecutive, they can be concurrent like engines. This will give the teams better scope to tune their gearboxes for what they want.
F1 needs small teams, it needs a mid pack and a established sharp end. It needs 10, 11 or 12 teams.
Overall it needs to look at a standardised inboard active suspension for a cost of no more than €10m a season. Let the teams develop their A Arms and uprights, but inboard, its all the same, only the suspension geometry is different for each car. With this, have a assisted power steering to assist, but not turn the wheel 45 degrees and the wheels turn more than that, make the steering of the car more physical.
As for Aero, id give the aero guys a good bit back. Id however have Singapore as a "Aerodynamic Cut Off' for the year, meaning that you can only go till then to introduce new parts on the aero side, mechanical side can change, but not Aero. Id also limit teams to introduce new front wings/rear wings/floors/diffusers to 4 or 5 a year. However id give the teams this in response:
45 tunnel days
45 days full power CFD - 15 days CFD can be traded for 3 days testing or 15 days more in the wind tunnel. This can be done in 5 days for an extra days testing or 10 more in the tunnel. CFD limited to 3 teraflops for rest of the year otherwise.
21 days Track Testing (Pre Season - 12, In Season - 9, Post Season Young Drivers - 3)
As by year, i mean per car, so you could have used 30 days tunnel testing for a 2015 car in 2014, and trading CFD for more tunnel testing may be needed. However, this may also make the step for some teams to make an extra second up mid season more defined. So greater variation and more randomness in some results.
As for staff, F1 should be limited to have 600 per chassis team and 450 per engine manufacturer. Id also limit costs to a maximum of €250m per chassis team and €125m per engine manufacturer per year. However, chassis teams need to be able to show they have a budget of €80m to see them through the season as well, but to do this id allow the smaller teams to run cars with two liveries for 8 races a season.
If F1 got all this right, it would have cost savings and also make F1 a spectacle in efficiency as well. When business in the real world is trying to maximise efficiency, F1 seems to be taking on efficient technology and not promoting it and also being massively inefficient in the way they run their business. Where i work we are trying to do more with less man hours. F1 should follow, and id like to limit the teams to take 40 guys to the track per weekend, but they can only work for a maximum of 8 hours in the garage per day, and 12 hours in the paddock. However, the teams must also abide by a maximum of 2,400 paddock hours per race as well, I'm calculating this as 40 guys for 12 hours a day over 5 days. Meaning the engineers can get their rest, but if need be, teams can run a small night shift crew if they need to as well. Banning of mission controls during a live session, but allowing teams to have their engineers at their base decide more is one other cost saving meaning there would be less computing gear and guys in the back of the garage as well. At the end of each session the car has a download performed and this is shot back via high speed internet to their base. That is true efficiency and a true way of showcasing technology that F1 can pioneer.
