Perfect racing - Designing the perfect racing series

[Conceptual]

F1Technical:
Here's a start for thinking out the perfect racing series. If you have a specific idea, a proposition to make it into the rules, organisation, marking or whatever for our new virtual series, start a new thread here and prepend your topic title with "[Perfect racing]".

Conceptual:
Has anyone proposed designing the rules and specifications of a new series? I'm sure that there are a million people out there thinking of what they think would make good racing, but is it possible to get some people here to co-develop a "series" by pooling all of their talents and experience?

I read the article about the new Superleague, and to be honest, if something like that can become a reality, a well thought out and presented series that could realistically overtake F1 as the pinnacle of motorsport might actually attract some attention. Or, we can just have a good time talking about it and playing around with ideas. It's not like an amateur league could do much worse than the powers that be in F1 have in the past 10 years...

Anyways, here are a few of my ideas. Most are about framework and philosophy, and if it goes far enough, we can compile the info and look at tracks and the other goodies...

Overall: Two cars per team, 24 total, chassis construction must be done in house for each team, must be single seater and open-wheel. Very similar to the premise of F1 so far, but that is where I would propose to end the similarities.

Mission: To attract auto companies to push their R&D through on-track competition. To attract a global audience with an exciting race series that has 12 disimilar cars built by different manufacturers. To propell development of positive real-world relevant road technology of drivetrain only. To showcase the talent of the manufacturer first, and driver second. And to attain complete synergy of regulations and management.

I would throw out the name as "HyperKart World Series" but obviously if it became a group project, every part of it would be voted on by the contributors before becoming "official"

A few things that I would like to see in the series:

1. Safety regulations built around 2007 F1 crash regs.
2. Slick tires, preferrably 3 suppliers.
3. Build what you like "energy reclaimant drivetrain" with fuel limitations for race (no refueling).
4. AWD. I would like to see "triggers" on the steering wheel that would independantly control the amount of power applied to the individual front wheels.
5. Aero-neutral regulations. Teams can design what they want as long as the "wake" of the car returns very close to "clean" air. Downforce would be self limiting due to constraints placed upon putting the air-stream back together behind the car.
6. Power to weight ratio close to 1989 F1 regs with no driver-aids. Give the cars more power than the chassis can handle, and allow the operating engineer (driver) to do his job.
7. WCC and WDC
8. Top 3 teams in the WCC standings must submit the complete documentation on their cars to the other 9 teams at the end of each season, thus combining long term R&D budgets, cutting costs, and a faster path of technology to consumer automobiles, while retaining multi-team competitiveness year over year without the need for spec parts.

Obviously I am just throwing some stuff out there, but I would thoroughly enjoy not only discussing this project, but actually setting things down that may eventually be presented as a new series. If anything, we may just end up with a video game or R-factor mod!!

I love F1, but I would be infatuated with a new series that is truly about breakthrough technology while still preserving the spectacle of the show. Who knows, there may be a few hundred million people that agree with me on that!

If anyone wants to participate, please let it be known here, and maybe we can get a new forum header to discuss this project on F1technical.net!

Or if I'm crazy, you can let me know that here as well!

Chris

[Conceptual]

Wow, over 50 views on this topic with no replies...

Did I do or say something that I shouldnt have?

Chris

[waynes]

im still drawing up my rules and sporting regs

although i will say

first rule of new F1, is not to post rules and regs about new F1, max might take them on

[West]

First rule of Formula One: do not talk about Formula One.

I would really like to see the crappier teams be given a bigger budget (somehow); then maybe their talent will shine. Not exactly a rule but it might give the India and Aguri fans a reason to live.

[Conceptual]

im still drawing up my rules and sporting regs

although i will say

first rule of new F1, is not to post rules and regs about new F1, max might take them on

I guess that I am more interested in the benefit of mankind that these kinds of regs would develop more than the money it would generate for me.

But then again, I could really use Bernie/Max level paychecks...

[Carlos]

Formula Libre engine regulations, any displacement, any intake system; at or above atmospheric, any number of cylinders, rotors, revolving paddles,fans or static plates, electric, hybrid or ICE ... but a specified type and amount of fuel, for a specified distance, restricting both hydrocarbons and nitric oxide emissions to suit real world requirements of restricting greenhouse gases, including any kind of catalytic converter.

[donskar]

This SHOULD be a very popular topic.

I have no specifics, just (I hope) a catalyst for more discussion: in many ways the era of the Ford DFV (3 liter V8) was a great period in F1. Any way to recapture some scintillas of that time?

Whatever they were, the conditions active at that time produced enormous variety, with 30+ cars showing up to battle through pre-qualifying, and then qualifying. Yes, many of the teams were no-hopers, but not always. For example, those were the days when Minardi sometime made the top 5 in qualifying and even in the final results.

I can't get over the feeling that huge fields are good for F1. more cars, colors, characters. Where is today's James Hunt or even Eddie Irvine?

Today, there are no VISIBLE technology changes from year to year. We have instead aero changes so small that we argue over closeup photos of barge boards. (we love that stuff, but it is invisible to most fans.) Think of the major techno changes (ie., noticeable and/or graspable by the average fan) of the past generation: carbon fiber tubs (Barnard), semi-auto and auto transmissions (Barnard), wings (was it Chapman or Forgheiri?) When is the last time an F1 car was described as revolutionary rather then evolutionary. Was it Tony Southgate who said he lost interest in F1 because modifying a bracket qualified as a major revision? Unfair, but there's a message in his exaggeration.

Engines: it was not long ago when V8s, V10s, and V12s competed. Imagine, there was a time when naturally aspirated engines competed with turbos. Now, the idea is probably horrifying to the codgers who run the sport.

Is it even remotely possible that SOMEthing could be done to make it easier to enter -- not necessarily win, just get into the field?

That's my two cents (probably worth about one pence today.)

[Conceptual]

If there is enough interest, I say that we need to get an outline of the F1 regs, and just discuss article by article what should be written.

Who wants in on this? And I mean to completely work it end to end... Regs, tracks, marketing, all of it.

It may be a discussion that lasts several months at least! March is still a goodly ways off!

Im in, how do we set it up?

Chris

[mahesh248]

Are you serious about this ? or is this going to remain a concept , This is more to do with Managment and logistics , I am a conceptual engineer . So my study will be way different than this. , would love to discuss more on this .

[Carlos]

Yes- a project of 100's of hours, posting each minute F1/F!A section, inputing suggestions into a data base, consensus on each section, by the originator Chris, is it a flirtation - smiling and brief, a conversation - a few minutes, a project with a committed manager? Just tell us Which?

Our Car development project - 100's of entries - has so far come to nothing - can the Forum endure such a demoralizing recurrence?

Are you proposing a Sh g or a Marriage?

[checkered]

Yes- a project of 100's of hours, posting each minute F1/F!A section, inputing suggestions into a data base, consensus on each section, by the originator Chris, is it a flirtation - smiling and brief, a conversation - a few minutes, a project with a committed manager? Just tell us Which?

Our Car development project - 100's of entries - has so far come to nothing - can the Forum endure such a demoralizing recurrence?

Are you proposing a Sh g or a Marriage?

It is heartwarming to

see such commitment for and affection to this forum that the air of lethargy gripping the "car development project" pains you so, Carlos. The sentiment is echoed, as is your attempt to frame your questions so that the fresh enthusiasm that regularly grips our forum can recognise but not necessarily be constrained or spent (should our perception be found lacking, as we by definition should know it is) by past and ongoing empirical experiences we share. A very deftly formulated caveat you offer and the hope within is a thing of beauty.

Worry not, though, as it's merely a sleight of mind that one thread only - even discussing "life, the universe, and everything" in terms of what F1T is - could encompass our environment in a manner comparable to playing with the most elemental forces of nature. The Manhattan Project this is not, for a single World we do not share but are invited to peer into as many realities as there are members. Do we truly know what we can and will learn? No, it's the very definition of things learnt that we didn't and yet we're here, ready for more. On such vast fields a Conceptual (welcome to the forum) approach is as valid as any other. For all the joys of internet it is still a medium so lacking in capacity that it cannot accommodate a fraction of a single consciousness, a force that with the best of intentions can and will find equal value and purpose in effort as in the lack thereof.

Conceptual, your stated emphasis on the ramifications of F1 extending way beyond the sport itself and understanding that is somewhat reminiscent of mine. This has led me to think not about what the rules should be but what, and how, rules are. I suspect that many of whom have had a largely active part in making what F1 is can recognise this also. Being left at the mercies of more unidimensional constructions such as the rules alone, with a more or less willing conviction that they're the be all and end all of the sport (in abiding by, enforcing and breaking them), can be a painful experience. The ever diminishing leeway in the technical constraints of F1 and the recent "spy" episodes attest to this.

I can imagine a great many open wheel formulae that would be very satisfying and exciting to me. The challenge of F1 is that it reflects on those figments of my imagination by the power of many concepts come true, and challenges them. In that sense you're holding a mirror to another here, creating an infinite that to me is more an illusion than a reality. Taking the F1 view of things, I'd rather attempt to ensure that the reflective surface of the existing sport remains relatively unblemished, doesn't distort too much and stays intact. It is wonderful that we can so easily employ our imaginations and be motivated by them. Don't lose the idealism either, it can come in handy yet.

[Conceptual]

Yes- a project of 100's of hours, posting each minute F1/F!A section, inputing suggestions into a data base, consensus on each section, by the originator Chris, is it a flirtation - smiling and brief, a conversation - a few minutes, a project with a committed manager? Just tell us Which?

Our Car development project - 100's of entries - has so far come to nothing - can the Forum endure such a demoralizing recurrence?

Are you proposing a Sh g or a Marriage?

It is heartwarming to

see such commitment for and affection to this forum that the air of lethargy gripping the "car development project" pains you so, Carlos. The sentiment is echoed, as is your attempt to frame your questions so that the fresh enthusiasm that regularly grips our forum can recognise but not necessarily be constrained or spent (should our perception be found lacking, as we by definition should know it is) by past and ongoing empirical experiences we share. A very deftly formulated caveat you offer and the hope within is a thing of beauty.

Worry not, though, as it's merely a sleight of mind that one thread only - even discussing "life, the universe, and everything" in terms of what F1T is - could encompass our environment in a manner comparable to playing with the most elemental forces of nature. The Manhattan Project this is not, for a single World we do not share but are invited to peer into as many realities as there are members. Do we truly know what we can and will learn? No, it's the very definition of things learnt that we didn't and yet we're here, ready for more. On such vast fields a Conceptual (welcome to the forum) approach is as valid as any other. For all the joys of internet it is still a medium so lacking in capacity that it cannot accommodate a fraction of a single consciousness, a force that with the best of intentions can and will find equal value and purpose in effort as in the lack thereof.

Conceptual, your stated emphasis on the ramifications of F1 extending way beyond the sport itself and understanding that is somewhat reminiscent of mine. This has led me to think not about what the rules should be but what, and how, rules are. I suspect that many of whom have had a largely active part in making what F1 is can recognise this also. Being left at the mercies of more unidimensional constructions such as the rules alone, with a more or less willing conviction that they're the be all and end all of the sport (in abiding by, enforcing and breaking them), can be a painful experience. The ever diminishing leeway in the technical constraints of F1 and the recent "spy" episodes attest to this.

I can imagine a great many open wheel formulae that would be very satisfying and exciting to me. The challenge of F1 is that it reflects on those figments of my imagination by the power of many concepts come true, and challenges them. In that sense you're holding a mirror to another here, creating an infinite that to me is more an illusion than a reality. Taking the F1 view of things, I'd rather attempt to ensure that the reflective surface of the existing sport remains relatively unblemished, doesn't distort too much and stays intact. It is wonderful that we can so easily employ our imaginations and be motivated by them. Don't lose the idealism either, it can come in handy yet.

So, you're in Checkered???

If F1T would set a new "Other Series" board up, I would be more than willing to do the leg work to get it rolling. I may have some engineering schooling, but I have ALOT of business schooling. Project management and all that, you understand.

Maybe I'm just disillusioned by the apparent state of what F1 has become.

If there is anything that I hate in this world, it is wasted potential.

I just feel that F1 is a very wasteful sport, and it is not limited to just money, but huge amounts of potential are wasted constantly, and to be honest, it really takes the shine off my desire to continue to watch.

I want something that takes what we have and applies it to move forward. If that is not possible in this forum tho, I will shut up about it!

Chris

[flynfrog]

my rules would read:
1: Car must fit into a 2meter by 3 meter box
2: must have no body covering the front and rear edge of the tires as seen from above
3: Car must be safe (insert crash regs here)
4: There is no limit to the number of cars a team can bring but all must qualify. Only the top three can score points.
5: there are no limit to the number of teams
There are 25 Grid positions available.
qualifying will be a flying lap format driver gets two flying laps qualy order will be chosen at random.
6: Points scale will be 20-10-5-3-2-1.


Not rules but stuff I would like to see.

Tracks can be run on anything form ovals to road courses to street courses
Ticket prices half what they are now. General admission seating at all tracks.

[modbaraban]

1: Car must fit into a 2meter by 3 meter box
2: must have no body covering the front and rear edge of the tires as seen from above

F1 =

[checkered]

So, you're in Checkered???

I'm afraid that

was as far as I'm willing to go. I'm stating this conditionally, of course. What I wrote above, was close enough to what I possibly could've contributed. Things do evolve but beyond this point there's little I can do until an opportunity presents itself again. Also, be aware that even at this time there are people who are invested in what you are suggesting, in very real terms. There are also viable open source car projects. Don't rush it, take your time to establish some groundwork. Rules are often trivial compared to the underlying necessities.

If F1T would set a new "Other Series" board up, I would be more than willing to do the leg work to get it rolling.

We do have an "Other racing series" section here. We also have an "Off topic section". F1T hasn't perhaps been as disciplined in employing the division of the different discussion areas as would be optimal, but there's still a very good reason those areas exist.

If there is anything that I hate in this world, it is wasted potential. I just feel that F1 is a very wasteful sport, and it is not limited to just money, but huge amounts of potential are wasted constantly, and to be honest, it really takes the shine off my desire to continue to watch. I want something that takes what we have and applies it to move forward.

Potential is a hard thing to waste. I wouldn't bet on your sentiment being widely shared in the design offices, engineering- and finance departments of F1 teams. Disappointment is a rearward facing emotion and of little use in a competitive environment. We should be thankful if we can truly perceive and recognise opportunities in order to make true advances. Look around F1T and you may find at least some of your concerns being or having been discussed in quite some detail, most likely in a more specific framework.

If you can draw a new synthesis or provide a new perspective from all this, all the better.