Technical Regulations for 2009-2015

[Metar]

So basically, in that first season when everyone experiments, if you chose a wrong path, you're screwed for the rest of the season unless you give up one of just two mid-season developments?

[Scotracer]

What a waste.

All of those hours and millions of dollars invested into competitive F1 Technology now has a return on investment of ZERO.

I think that the 2008/9 A1GP car is more cutting edge than that render.

Maybe it is time to find a new hobby... After this extraordinary season however.

I wonder what the blowback is going to be like when 100 million fans go from this seasons cars, and the thrilling racing that it has delivered, to slower, archaic aero machines that will have a high attrition rate due to the new technologies that will be inroduced.

Maybe this is what Max meant when he talked of reviving F2?

Because those cars are not the cutting edge, top level machinery that F1 was synonomous for.

Frozen engine from 2006, aero from 2002, and primitive KERS all add up to OLD NEWS. Regardless of how close the racing is.

Chris

What have I been complaining about since I joined this forum?

F1 hasn't been the pinnacle of technology for many years. All it is right now is "The best you can do with old technology". And, it will remain that way whilst Max is in office. But, you can't put all the blame on the FIA as it is the engineers pushing any and all technologies to beyond a safe level that have caused this. Maybe we should have free regulations with a budget cap. That would allow freedom...to a level.

[Conceptual]

So basically, in that first season when everyone experiments, if you chose a wrong path, you're screwed for the rest of the season unless you give up one of just two mid-season developments?

Absolutely!

Or even if your design is .5s down on the fastest team, you cannot hope to catch up because of the ultra-limited aero changes, and the frozen engine.

So, like you said. If you show up at the first race, and finish outside the top 8, you may as well as start on next years car and start testing, and divert all of that money that you save from NOT RACING for the rest of the season into its development.

And then you can show up at the first race of the following year, and if you are .5s down again, start all over again.

Why would they make regulations that remove the ability of the teams to overcome time deficits? That is just going to lead to alot of teams not showing up....

Chris

[timbo]

So basically, in that first season when everyone experiments, if you chose a wrong path, you're screwed for the rest of the season unless you give up one of just two mid-season developments?

After I read this I looked thriugh 2009 regulations and his rule seem to be scrapped. Good news!

[Ogami musashi]

Conceptual i think you're over-reacting.

You don't even know how will the designs look and be constituted of, and already you're predicting things.

The rule timo speaks of has been dropped.

And by the you're looking at one year regulations (that you know will be revamped again in 2011) to speak about F1 future?

AFAIK aerodynamics are still allowed in F1 for 2009..there's only ONE part of 50Cm standard!

And many of flips up you consider being technological are actually non relevant at all.

In aerospace we design planes without fancy things and thus the planes look standard, but their aerodynamics are not.


Wait a bit..we'll see, and i think that if F1 really has no more technological advance then another championship will see the light, because manufacturers are in F1 just for that.



AS for slower: look at the testing times...slicks and 2009 levels of downforce are faster than the 2008 cars!

[Conceptual]

Conceptual i think you're over-reacting.

You don't even know how will the designs look and be constituted of, and already you're predicting things.

The rule timo speaks of has been dropped.

And by the you're looking at one year regulations (that you know will be revamped again in 2011) to speak about F1 future?

AFAIK aerodynamics are still allowed in F1 for 2009..there's only ONE part of 50Cm standard!

And many of flips up you consider being technological are actually non relevant at all.

In aerospace we design planes without fancy things and thus the planes look standard, but their aerodynamics are not.


Wait a bit..we'll see, and i think that if F1 really has no more technological advance then another championship will see the light, because manufacturers are in F1 just for that.



AS for slower: look at the testing times...slicks and 2009 levels of downforce are faster than the 2008 cars!

Didn't I read some where that Boeing was consulting with one of the teams, because of the aero tech and understanding that has been uncovered in the last 5 years or so in F1?

If the 2 developments/season rule has been dropped, then most of what I said doesn't apply.

I was much more disappointed by the apparentness of how the 2 upgrades rule and the engine freeze would lead to LESS competitiveness in F1.

If that rule has been removed, then I do agree that there will be advances that can make up time, and tighten the field.

I was much more disgusted that after an ultra-close 2007 season, and a pretty-close 2008 season, that we would end up with another 2004 season repeat.

But that is moot if said rule has been dropped.

Chris

[Metar]

Very good news that this rule didn't make it. Still doesn't make the 2009-car renders any sweeter. That thing looks like someone viewed a 10-year old F1 car through a fisheye lens.

F1 reached a stage where it's no longer just the dimensions that matter, not just the engine aspiration-method ('80s), configuration ('90s) or state of tune ('00s), or the safety of the car is regulated - we've reached a stage where every single bit cannot exist unless it is explicitly allowed. And the problem is, none are allowed. No chimneys, no flipups, no winglets, no bargeboards, no bridgewings, no noseholes, no V12s, no V10, no Turbochargers. We now have wing-dimensions even more regulated than ever before, we have a ban on anything that isn't the actual smooth body, and we even have regulations stating the shape of that body, stating exactly how wide a sidepod has to be! Ogami, even with aerodynamic development allowed, teams are still incredibly restricted - the shape and number of planes on the wings is set in stone anyway...

Costs won't be any different - the top teams will still spend just as much, just like they're developing the engines just as hard nowadays. Only the magnitude of the gains will be smaller. Much like today's engine-gains are not much above 10hp, and tyre-gains have stopped, we'll see teams updating their cars radically to gain 0.3 tenths, whereas today that would be achieved by a wisely-placed new winglet, or a new wing.

Overtaking, who will care? I've watched Formula Masters at Monza - they were boring. Dull. Mind-numbingly dull. They sounded slow, they looked slow, and I fear they might be what the FIA wants. Sure, they had six overtakes for the lead in a single lap - but at what price?! These single-seaters are severely underpowered spec-cars - as a result, the drag forced the leaders to become very slow. So on every straight, five cars passed you - and how fun is that? It isn't. Drag-induced overtaking is dull - just having a car stay behind you for a series of corners, then emerge from your wake on the first straight and you're left defenseless. Overtaking in F1 may be rare at the moment, but when it happens, it's spectacular. It's two drivers battling to be first into the corner, to be the one on the right line, and the first one out. We need more of that, not some rubbish slipstreaming. In NASCAR terms, we'd need short-tracks and not superspeedways - overtaking, out-braking, taking a wiser line: passing, not drafting past.

This is Formula Spec, Formula Regs, Formula Max. Whatever it is, it isn't what I started watching just 9 months ago with the Canadian GP.

[Scotracer]

Guys, F1 technologies have been banned throughout the decades and F1 cars have gone through a number of revolutions and this is just the next step. Sure, F1 is becoming a Spec series by stealth but F1 cars are still the fastest racing cars on earth, despite all the technological limitations which is quite something.

Banned F1 technologies:

-Ground Effect underbodies
-Active Suspension
-Turbo-superchargers/Superchargers
-Engine development for performance
-Traction Control
-Electronic Engine Braking Control
-Launch Control
-Ramp Wings
-Vortex Generators
-Chimneys
-Automatic Transmission
-V12, V10, V16, 4cyl, V6 engines
-CVT
-Variable Valve Timing
-ABS

I can't think of anything else that was banned.

Future Prospects:

-Homologated Engines
-Heavily limited aero advancement
-Limited KERS
-Budget Cap
-Possible downsizing of ICE (for 2011)

Yay!

The car I drive every day is more advanced than F1 cars of next year

[Ogami musashi]

Very good news that this rule didn't make it. Still doesn't make the 2009-car renders any sweeter. That thing looks like someone viewed a 10-year old F1 car through a fisheye lens.

That is some renders! they do not intend to show the real actual models but explicitly give you an hint on the visual changes.

The wings and over shape won't be strictly like that, it just there to show that the wings dimensions are changed and appendices are banned.

Actually if you watch the little CFD model picture you can see there're differences with the sketches.

F1 reached a stage where it's no longer just the dimensions that matter, not just the engine aspiration-method ('80s), configuration ('90s) or state of tune ('00s), or the safety of the car is regulated - we've reached a stage where every single bit cannot exist unless it is explicitly allowed. And the problem is, none are allowed. No chimneys, no flipups, no winglets, no bargeboards, no bridgewings, no noseholes, no V12s, no V10, no Turbochargers.

That's no true. Rules specify maximum areas for some bits. They do not explicitly fobidden anything.

Nowhere in the technical rules you can see something like (as far as bodywork in concerned) "... are not allowed" (okay except moveable aerodynamics.).

That was excatly the same before, simply the rules become more and more restrictive yes.

We now have wing-dimensions even more regulated than ever before, we have a ban on anything that isn't the actual smooth body, and we even have regulations stating the shape of that body

, stating exactly how wide a sidepod has to be!

No, nothing states how wide the sidepod has to be, it states a minimum radius for the sidepods that's all.
The max/min dimensions are there since years. That's how work rules for an open constructor championship, you have to set maximum figures to ensure some goals.

Ogami, even with aerodynamic development allowed, teams are still incredibly restricted - the shape and number of planes on the wings is set in stone anyway...

That's true this is even more restrictive and i don't think that's a good long term solution, but in fact this is not a long term solution.
Secondly, the shape of planes is absolutely not set in stone, while the number of elements is limited since long time.
That doesn't mean that you can't be as effective.

Overtaking, who will care? I've watched Formula Masters at Monza - they were boring. Dull. Mind-numbingly dull. They sounded slow, they looked slow, and I fear they might be what the FIA wants. Sure, they had six overtakes for the lead in a single lap - but at what price?! These single-seaters are severely underpowered spec-cars - as a result, the drag forced the leaders to become very slow. So on every straight, five cars passed you - and how fun is that? It isn't. Drag-induced overtaking is dull - just having a car stay behind you for a series of corners, then emerge from your wake on the first straight and you're left defenseless. Overtaking in F1 may be rare at the moment, but when it happens, it's spectacular. It's two drivers battling to be first into the corner, to be the one on the right line, and the first one out. We need more of that, not some rubbish slipstreaming. In NASCAR terms, we'd need short-tracks and not superspeedways - overtaking, out-braking, taking a wiser line: passing, not drafting past.

I think you misunderstood the 2009 regs, those regs actually DECREASE the drag.

They tend to let some slipstream but any slipstream means loss of downforce so that's definitely not the aim of the OWG.

At least for 2009.

The new sidepods will have a minimum radius to prevent them creating too much turbulence and wings and diffuser will work the same way.

All is done to help overtaking occuring in corners.

[Ogami musashi]

Future Prospects:


-Heavily limited aero advancement

????? where did you see that?

-Limited KERS

Same thing, the KERS will be LESS limited with the years..

-Possible downsizing of ICE (for 2011)

Downsizing doesn't mean technology restriction at all...Actually this is a current trend in technology for any car!

[Scotracer]

Future Prospects:


-Heavily limited aero advancement

????? where did you see that?

-Limited KERS

Same thing, the KERS will be LESS limited with the years..

-Possible downsizing of ICE (for 2011)

Downsizing doesn't mean technology restriction at all...Actually this is a current trend in technology for any car!

Well look at it this way, look what has been restricted for next year:

-Maximum of 2 elements for front wing
-Homologated centre section
-No ramp wings
-No Chimneys
-No Antlers
-No Vortex Generators
-Heavily simiplified Front-wing endplates

Those to me cry restrictions, restrictions, restrictions. Where exactly are teams going to make up time?

[timbo]

I have question on aero adjustments (two per lap).
From the rules I see that they are supposed to help drives who are in the slipstream, but are they allowed when one car doesn't follow another? For example driver may adjust front wing for different sections on the track. OK, this is obvious, I guess, better question would be - why stress overtacking help in the rules? I'd bet wing adjustments would be used for that less than 10% of the time. Adjusting for different sections seem to me much more beneficiary.

[Ogami musashi]

If i tell you that next year you can venturis under the sidepods and then tell you diffuser is banned, do you think is limit aero development ?

No.

Many bans are simply counter balanced by less restrictions in other areas.

The front wing width and height is an example.

[Conceptual]

Are the tuned mass dampers still banned for next year? Or have the new inertia dampers actually replaced the need for them?

Chris

[Metar]

One of my favourite things after a GP is checking out various websites (such as this one) for the newest developments of that race. That will pretty much be gone, because what exactly will you add? Slightly vary the curvature of your sidepod?

Frankly, some of the banned things are, at least in today's safer world, pretty safe to re-introduce. So yes, traction-control and engine-braking improve the spectacle, but how exactly is an active suspension less safe than a KERS system?

F1 reached another stage - one which I'm sure every fan welcomes - and that is that for 14 years, not a single driver died, despite some drivers hurling at 200km/h and upwards into walls and barriers. In this condition, when a 300km/h crash that included several flips (Kubica's) results in a minor problem with the leg, and a 200km/h backwards crash into the wall (Timo's) results in nothing, I'm sure F1 can afford a part slightly more prone to failing, like flexible aero - hell, I've hurt myself more than Timo did last weekend when I fell on my shoulder! I've got two split bones and one broken, and he has what exactly? I can't drive at all for a week or so as a result, and he was back in the seat a few days later.