Grid and Race position biased KERS

[ringo]

So 160 more horsepower is a restriction?
There is no power advantage in NASCAR, from what i know so far, since i don't watch it.

How is this artificial? What is considered "natural" in F1?
There are a few artificial things in the sporting code, such as preventing any sudden movements to defend a position, and also back markers having to concede position to leading cars. Disallowing brake testing and other creative means to compete.
Most of the regulations in F1 impart some artificial behaviors on track in the name of fair play and even in performance.


The purest form of racing is to get from point A to point B by any means by staying within the circuit and the with the same basic tools and your god give talent. That only exists in track and field. Formula 1 is full of little agreements, manners and rules, many of which are distantly similar to the PD KERS proposal.

Imagine watching a race with the PD KERS on all cars, but without having the knowledge of it's existence. Would you not be entertained by what is taking place on track? Remove any ideology, tradition and preconceptions and take it as you eyes see it.

Remember this is not a penalty for any one car, it's just an inciter.
All it does is make the fighting ring smaller which brings the fighters closer.

Isn't increased competition what we want to see... at a reasonable cost?

[lolzi]

Of course 160 more horsepower isn't a restriction, but the guy in doesn't get that, does he?
I would like to know which rules are "distantly similar" to your proposal.
If I "remove any ideology, tradition and preconceptions", why would I find cars going you a track entertaining at all? And how am I supposed to know if I would be entertained when I haven't seen it on track - for all we know it might make the racing worse.
And no, if I wanted competition at the cost you're proposing, I wouldn't watch F1.

[ringo]

I am bringing back this topic, now that we are 5 years into the future and we have much more Electric Horsepower.
The sport needs to be fixed even more and there have been threads talking about putting drivers in different cars and whatnot. Making the cars more difficult to drive etc.

I have suggested that we simply give the poorer cars an unfair performance advantage on track to make up for their lack of development and funding.

So i bring this idea forward to you all again in light of how electric power is even more integrated into the engine's management and function. Let's think about making the ERS capacity inversely proportional to grid position throughout the whole race.

Position and electric horspower:

Last place has a maximum of 200 electric horspower.

each place above that has 5 less horspower electrically.

So we have this incremental power reduction as the race position improves. in a 20 car race, the man in P1 will have 95 electric horsepower only.

If we have attrition and the race goes down to say 14 cars, the man in P14 will still have 200 electric hp available to him.

In qualifying all cars will have 200hp. The grid bias system will come into effect after the first 3 laps along with DRS.

I think this is a very simple system to implement and it works with any set of aero or tyre regs. It will definitely keep racing close. If a car was 5 seconds a lap slower, imagine how many seconds a lap 200hp gives you?

[ringo]

Thanks for the explaination Ringo.

I did understand it, just was not sure if you would adjust it dynamic during the course of the race.

To sum it up in short, it comes to Power = Engine+KERS+((position-1)*KERS/23), which asummes a base KERS power, which lets say is 60kW. the the guy on pole has engine+60kW KERS and the guy who runs last has engine+120kw.

I do see some technical challenges to achieve this value, but as you say you could use a factor of let´s say 0.5, which gives the last guy only 90kW (or 30kW extra).
I´m sure that from an entertainment point of view, it´s a very neat idea.

I understand that people will argue from a "fairness" point of view.
To which conclusion you come, will depend on your POV in this respect, and which view and outlook you have to life and fairness in general.
I don´t want to judge here, It´s like a dynamic handicap.
It´s known to all, and it´s the same for all.
So, I don´t think it´s "unfair" as such.

If it is the right/good thing to do, is a different matter.

I thing it is "fairer" then the current moveable rear wing rule, where the guy in front can do nothing, unless he blocks on the straight, or drives the other guy of the track.

If the KERS technology develops a little bit more, I could see this happen in some years time.
I don´t think, all things considered (entertainment factor included), that it is a "bad" idea.

It would be easiest to implement with a spec KERS, but that´s not necessary, it could work with any KERS (needs to be powerful enough), so people could keep their advantage from having a lighter KERS etc.

But it would require a FIA KERS control/SECU, that´s the not a big problem IMHO.
It sounds a little bit "Playstation like" first time out, but as more as I think about it, as more I see merrit in the idea.

It´s less "unfair" then other things like "success ballast" or "reversed grid" IMHO.
If technical doable (maybe in 2-3 years time), I would not be surprised to see the idea tested/used in real life.

The future is here! all the what ifs in this post are now reality and the sport's poor condition as a form of entertainment can no longer be ignored for the sake of the purists. Given the advancement in ERS what are your takes on the concept?

[notsofast]

It certainly is an interesting idea. Maybe I'm not understanding it fully. With a scheme like this, wouldn't it be to Mercedes' advantage to simply sit out Q3 and start from positions 9 and 10 on the grid? Wouldn't the extra horsepower allow them to pass everyone else and dominate the races even more than now? As long as there's no incentive for anyone to qualify low on purpose, then this concept has merit.

[ringo]

The graduated power is only enabled after lap 3. There is no advantage in sandbagging in Q3.
All cars start with 200 hp ERS until lap 3 is completed.
After which, the biasing will commence.

Well lets say mercedes did sit out Q3 for P9 and P10 for a power advantage; knowing they will be in the pack by lap 3....

That power advantage is reduce by an increment as the car moves up in race position for the following lap.


example:

P10 Hamilton ERS power - 150hp
P9 Perez ERS power - 145hp
P8 Rosberg ERS power - 140hp

lets say some how on lap 4 hamilton overtakes both drivers and is in P8 by lap 5..

this is what things now look like:

P10Perez ERS power - 150hp
P9 Rosberg ERS power - 145hp
P8 Hamilton ERS power - 140hp

So you see, it's very dynamic and your power advantage is strictly determined by the position you start the new lap in.
If you gain a place during the lap, you can expect to have 5 less horsepower once you start the next lap.

This arrangement keeps the race on edge, and leaves no chance to relax and save fuel and "cruise home". A team knows that everyone behind the leader is aware they have more power and will not ease up. They will be gunning for P1.

The man in P20 has a 100hp advantage as he is going around and he is going to try and use that power and overtake as much people as he can over that lap. If he overtakes 6 drivers all the better for him.. he now has to brace himself for being chased around the circuit with 30 hp less than he had the previous lap.

I like to think of it as a Formula 1 "Hell in a ERS Cell" cage match. No obvious gimmicks for the fans at the track at all. A power advantage is not something that you can see, and it doesn't handicap the cars performance like ballast weight. It doesn't punish starting at the front either. If a driver wants to be in P1, he just has to brace himself for the pressure from behind.

The rule applies even to pitstops.

If your pit box is behind the start finish line, once you change tyres and cross over after losing places you are still entitled to the power increase for your position on the new lap.

It's a very simple system. Race control will regulate the batteries on each car to cap the power output. MGUH to MGUK power, once below 100hp will not be regulated.

[ackzsel]

This whole idea reminds me of rubber band AI from video games. I didn't like it there because it didn't reward pushing hard. Just be there at the last possible moment.

Dialing back ERS will cook some rear brakes as well. I don't like the idea of a driver losing a well deserved first position in the end just because his brakes gave up after circulating 1st for too long.

[FJBH10]

This would be an excellent idea as long as you make sure it cannot be manipulated: A car could deliberately qualify 3rd or 4th to get the KERS benefit even though they are capable of pole and so on.

[ringo]

I'm bumping this topic.
There is some credance to use KERS to promote closer racing and overtakes with the 2026 regulations.
It can be a success depending on how the FIA want the electrical energy to be used.
Will there be a bias between leader and follower?
If both leader and follower have the same freedom with the same peak energy how can an overtaker be at an advantage to overtake?

It's crazy how I made this topic in 2010 and F1 still has overtaking issues.
But it's coming full circle now.. FIA finaly see that the electrical power is the key to improving the racing.

[ringo]

If the cars are not fast enough then the teams need to work harder. Stop farting about with trying to change the bottom line - the people that work hardest and smartest will be fastest.

You are pulling the rug out from under them and making it into a benefit society.

Fast forward to 2024. Windtunnel and cfd bias.

[CMSMJ1]

If the cars are not fast enough then the teams need to work harder. Stop farting about with trying to change the bottom line - the people that work hardest and smartest will be fastest.

You are pulling the rug out from under them and making it into a benefit society.

Fast forward to 2024. Windtunnel and cfd bias.

That is a proper zombie resurrection

KERS eh? Life seemed simple then.. and where are we now?

I think my feelings are broadly the same on this (and on the F1/other racing series)
A development concession for the teams that are not performing - rather than penalising the best, allow the others to have an opportunity to develop and improve. I think MotoGP has the right idea

In a wider waffle on it..
Give them a race distance to achieve and a sustainable fuel allowance/number of tyres
A minimum level of safety - crash tests/tethers etc - all that good stuff
Small footprint on plan view - to restrict overall levels of floor based downforce
We can also, hopefully, rely on a cost cap that is already in place.
Expand practice sessions to force cars to run with 3rd drivers - the cars need to run more and be seen more

Step back - let the teams freely develop whatever they want - if this is electrified and develops an excellent recovery system and if this is the game changer - let's see it.

The teams that work harder and faster will still win..

[PapayaFan481]

...

Give them a race distance to achieve and a sustainable fuel allowance/number of tyres
A minimum level of safety - crash tests/tethers etc - all that good stuff
Small footprint on plan view - to restrict overall levels of floor based downforce
We can also, hopefully, rely on a cost cap that is already in place.
Expand practice sessions to force cars to run with 3rd drivers - the cars need to run more and be seen more

Step back - let the teams freely develop whatever they want - if this is electrified and develops an excellent recovery system and if this is the game changer - let's see it.

The teams that work harder and faster will still win..

I agree. They have a system in place to limit costs, so open things up now.

[ringo]

Woth the politics at play, some teams will want to avoid unknowingly given other teams and avantage if things are too open.

But now that 3rd drivers are mentioned. I think the sprint races should only be contested by third drivers. Let them do their their qualifying and their sprint race. Then the championship drivers can do the practice sessions and the grandprix.

As for the performance balances. A lot has happened since 2010 KERS and little has changed in terms of overtaking and excitement. Things have probably got worse since the cars got wider to look more aggressive. I much prefered the 1800mm wide cars.

With the new electrification rules I would like to hear more from Tombazis on the push to pas feature and what prevents its availability to all cars from cancelling out the intent to have it as a speed advantage to promote overtaking.