Divergent Governance: A Solution to the Overtaking Problem

[Pingguest]

Dear Richard James,

Recently I printed out and read your document. It's intelligently written and the theory looks sound to me.

Your theory is to connect a parameter to another, creating a (linear or non-linear) relationship between those two. If many of those relationships are created, there wouldn't an absolute, single solution. Teams would then choose a niche in which they will specialize themselves and hence designing a car wouldn't be a matter of development only, but a matter of strategy too. However, you say that a full implementation of a parametric regulatory framework and divergence governance in Formula 1 is impossible. I agree. Although a parametric framework could be combined with allowing in-season development, divergent governance practically requires an elimination of in-season development. As such divergent governance would be against the spirit of Formula 1.

As an alternative you propose not to control certain parameters (e.g. engine power and grip) by connecting those to others, but by measuring the efficiency or cost effectiveness of those parameters. Therefore you propose to limit the available amount of fuel and number of tyres per event. However, regarding the aerodynamics you suggest an absolute downforce limit. To me this looks very much against the principles of divergent governance. In fact, you explicitly reject parametric limits elsewhere in your document. It should be noted that downforce is inversely related to fuel economy. Creating downforce causes drag and requires a powerful engine, resulting, ceteris paribus, in higher fuel consumption. If fuel consumption is then sufficiently limited, teams have no option but to reduce downforce.

But if an absolute downforce limit is considered to be within the spirit of divergent governance or to be a justified exception, it could be wondered if a fuel consumption limit is really necessary. If downforce is limited, mid-race refuelling banned, the tyre allowance reduced to one set per race and driver aids prohibited, a fuel consumption limit may well be unnecessary. Teams would then have to choose between a more powerful engine that requires more fuel, more weight, harder and/or wider tyres and cautious driving and a less powerful engine that requires less fuel, less weight, allows softer and/or smaller tyres and is more drivable. Wouldn't that be more in line with the principles of divergent governance?

With kind regards,

Pingguest

[SiLo]

Hi, just opened the pdf and scrolled down to the F1 section, will read more later but I noticed a diagram and it caught my eye.

On page 46, the fuel capacity against weight looks to be non linear, almost like an exponential, but surely this should be linear for 1 litre of fuel ways the same as the next, no matter how expanded or compressed it is. It's mass will always be the same and gravity does not change (static) so surely it should be a straight line?

Please explain why it isnt, or if im correct, I am very eager to hear back

[WhiteBlue]

SiLo, read the Pdf to know why.

My view of the proposed system:

It is much too complicated and the rule makers will not bother with the huge simulation work load that would be necessary to keep it going. The fans will be having difficulties to understand the rules and will feel like there are different rules for different teams. They will argue that the relationship between parameters is not made for equivalence but tweaked in favor of a certain opposing team.

The section about the necessity to limit downforce is very good and should be read by everybody.

[Pingguest]

SiLo, read the Pdf to know why.

I read the entire document and think that SiLo has a fair point.
It say's:
"The limiting of fuel could be as simple as a relationshiip with a car's fuel capacity (see figure 10), which would promote engine efficiency, or total amount of fuel used in a season which would promote further business efficiency with practises such as testing sessions."

There's no mentioning about connecting fuel consumption to another parameter.