Technical Regulations for 2009-2015

[machin]

I can see

Where are you "seeing" these???

Some good suggestions though. Although I can't believe that any team/manufacturer would agree to a 1.7 v6 atmo engine... if they're going to change the rules, they'll want to go to something they can market (small capacity, direct injection turbos)... cutting two cylinders off the current engine isn't a two minute job.

[WhiteBlue]

Id say the downforce reduction will be somewhere between 30% and 55% in real terms as the ideal.

What is your reckoning behind those figures?

Do you have any information what the downforce split is between wings and floor?

Obviously the wing formula will not change, except for the adjustable bits. All the change in DF will come from the diffusor cuts. One can imagine that some of the power that went into the DDDs and the lesser 50 mm diffusor height will be used in additional wing settings next year.

[hollus]

No DDD and lowering the diffusor height seem to me like an attempt to break the coupling between the diffusor and the bridge wing. The smaller/simple diffuser will shed some downforce on its own, but breaking the coupling could be very significant, as the wings will stall at lower angles. That's probably the reasoning behind reducing the diffusor height. Not only make it smaller, but move it further away from the wings and have a more horizontal air flow coming out of it.

[godlameroso]

Making the cars more efficient is only going to help the sport, but I'm of the firm belief that slowing down the cars is not. Now I'm not saying that cars should have 50kg w16 6 liter turbos in a 500kg shell, rather let's be reasonable. Keep the cars lapping at around the same time, just make it so cars can follow better. Movable aero as well as improved kers would probably help in this department.

If the kers acted as a hybrid for most of the time, supplementing the smaller displacement turbo engine then power levels should be the same as they are now, or better yet improve fuel economy. Yet you could also use that same kers to boost output, but the kicker is that now you have less engine power until the kers charges again.

[WhiteBlue]

When I listen to Norbert Haug's statement I conclude that the FOTA working group is discussing a down sized, direct petrol injection engine with fewer cylinders than eight, turbo loaded with about 600 bhp. That power figure would include or not include unlimited KERS. We cannot know how it is meant. My impression is that the ICE would have 600 bhp stand alone without the secondary electric power from KERS.

To reach fuel efficiency targets the new engine formula would most likely work with a total fuel load limit which would be set individually per race track. The fuel allowance would be set low enough to avoid the levels of aero forces that we have this year. The agreed 2011 aero is also a good starting point for 2013 unless we get more information in the next two years. I believe that the initial 2011 aero level is the maximum F1 should have in the future. Fuel allowance should become more restricted for every efficiency gain that teams make. This would keep performance on a constant level which is desirable. Level performance avoids increasing safety measures which are costly for track owners and constructors.

[aral]

When I listen to Norbert Haug's statement I conclude that the FOTA working group is discussing a down sized, direct petrol injection engine with fewer cylinders than eight, turbo loaded with about 600 bhp. That power figure would include or not include unlimited KERS. We cannot know how it is meant. My impression is that the ICE would have 600 bhp stand alone without the secondary electric power from KERS.

To reach fuel efficiency targets the new engine formula would most likely work with a total fuel load limit which would be set individually per race track. The fuel allowance would be set low enough to avoid the levels of aero forces that we have this year. The agreed 2011 aero is also a good starting point for 2013 unless we get more information in the next two years. I believe that the initial 2011 aero level is the maximum F1 should have in the future. Fuel allowance should become more restricted for every efficiency gain that teams make. This would keep performance on a constant level which is desirable. Level performance avoids increasing safety measures which are costly for track owners and constructors.

Bernie has been talking about a standardised engine size, throughout all the main series, and in WRC. 1600cc is the size mentioned, but as the optimum cylinder cc is considered to be 300cc, I would imagine that 15oocc, 5 cylinder engines would be more likely. However, I would like to see an engine size mentioned, but leaving the layout, cylinder number etc open. That could lead to a flat 10 screamer, down to a 3 cylinder thumper. But the engineering possibilities would be interesting.

[Just_a_fan]

http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/ ... 10935.html

Tyre supplier, active aero, 107% qualifying limit etc. all in newly agreed regs.

[machin]

Somone at the FIA must read the F1Techncial forum; my "virtual slipstreaming" suggestion has been taken up:-

The driver may only activate the adjustable bodywork in the race when he has been notified via the control electronics that it is enabled. It will only be enabled if the driver is less than one second behind another

full article here:- http://www.planetf1.com/news/3213/62249 ... 011-Season

[myurr]

Somone at the FIA must read the F1Techncial forum; my "virtual slipstreaming" suggestion has been taken up:-

The driver may only activate the adjustable bodywork in the race when he has been notified via the control electronics that it is enabled. It will only be enabled if the driver is less than one second behind another

full article here:- http://www.planetf1.com/news/3213/62249 ... 011-Season

Unfortunately I view that as a ridiculous dumbing down of the sport. Artificially boosting or limiting one car in a fight against another makes a mockery of the sport, moving it closer to mario kart whereby a driver behind gets a speed boost to overtake the driver in front.

Consider two equal cars with two equal drivers fighting all the way to the end of the race - admittedly an unlikely scenario, but it is possible to get close. The driver entering the last lap behind the other driver is at an advantage simply because they'll be the last driver to get the speed boost. Effectively this regulation is aimed at removing the art of defensive driving.

Instead of gimmicks like this all the sport has ever needed was cars that were more difficult to drive, such as those in Canada where the marginal tyres made life difficult or wet races. The more difficult the cars are to drive the more mistakes and variations in pace there will be, and the more the drivers themselves are able to influence their relative pace.

[ISLAMATRON]

It must be said over and again

Passing/overtaking is not the problem, the problem is the lack of SIDE BY SIDE racing.

but the teams thought something needed to be done so this was their answer... of course everybody on these boards will be blaming the FIA for the rule changes after another Bahrain snoozer

[WhiteBlue]

It must be said over and again

Passing/overtaking is not the problem, the problem is the lack of SIDE BY SIDE racing.

but the teams thought something needed to be done so this was their answer... of course everybody on these boards will be blaming the FIA for the rule changes after another Bahrain snoozer

+1

there may be a few souls who understand that FOTA is now making all the rule proposals which usually get ratified by the WMSC

[andrew]

Rule changes for next year:

http://www.crash.net/f1/news/160891/1/f ... uncil.html

I'm not sold on KERS but lets see what happens and they have not reviewed the ridiculous (and dangerous) testing ban.

[andrew]

Somone at the FIA must read the F1Techncial forum; my "virtual slipstreaming" suggestion has been taken up:-

The driver may only activate the adjustable bodywork in the race when he has been notified via the control electronics that it is enabled. It will only be enabled if the driver is less than one second behind another

full article here:- http://www.planetf1.com/news/3213/62249 ... 011-Season

Unfortunately I view that as a ridiculous dumbing down of the sport. Artificially boosting or limiting one car in a fight against another makes a mockery of the sport, moving it closer to mario kart whereby a driver behind gets a speed boost to overtake the driver in front.

Consider two equal cars with two equal drivers fighting all the way to the end of the race - admittedly an unlikely scenario, but it is possible to get close. The driver entering the last lap behind the other driver is at an advantage simply because they'll be the last driver to get the speed boost. Effectively this regulation is aimed at removing the art of defensive driving.

Instead of gimmicks like this all the sport has ever needed was cars that were more difficult to drive, such as those in Canada where the marginal tyres made life difficult or wet races. The more difficult the cars are to drive the more mistakes and variations in pace there will be, and the more the drivers themselves are able to influence their relative pace.

+1

Artificial passing will not solve the on-track problems, except those that sit all day on theior playboxes and x-stations.

Making the cars harder to drive will increase the specticle of the sport.

[machin]

In "the good old days" F1 cars had low downfore and high drag. Cars of equal performance would battle all race long... passing and re-passing due to the slip stream effect. The skills you needed to stay ahead were good defensive driving and the ability to create a gap between you and the guy behind... to "break the tow"...

So in my opinion the "virtual slipstreaming" will improve the on-track battles, increase the driver's requirement for good defensive driving and promote trying to create a gap... not just truddle along knowing the guy behind is going to be hindered by the dirty air.... OK, so they still won't be able to follow closely in the corners, but this has got to be step in the right direction....

[autogyro]

You wont think that when some driver tries to pass another on the inside of a fast curve and the reduced DF on the rear upsets the aero balance and slides the rear end into the car being passed.