planetf1.com

It is currently Wed Jun 19, 2019 11:45 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue May 28, 2019 12:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:17 pm
Posts: 282
I think the stewards may be on to something.

Let them race in the pit lane.

Pretty radical idea


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 28, 2019 3:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 8:07 am
Posts: 1153
Not radical, but to be fair I don't think it's actually broken. Only 3 things I would prioritise:

1) Increase Free-To-Air coverage
2) Drop circuits with little or no overtaking opportunities
3) Build more instances of designated track re-joining points - i.e only one method back on to the circuit if a car leaves the track and it will cost them at least 10 seconds. I don't know why this isn't more common. We don't want cars beached in sand for one mistake but the abuse of track-limits is ridiculous and drivers naturally take advantage of it.

_________________
"I'd rather lose a race going fast enough to win it, than win one going slow enough to lose it".
-Stirling Moss


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 28, 2019 3:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2003 11:31 am
Posts: 1772
1) Reduced telemetry. No information for things like tire temps, temps, corner speeds, etc. Car should be driven by the driver, not the engineers sitting in Woking or Stuttgart.
1.5) No live track to factory telemetry. A maximum of 3 "computer" guys allowed at the circuit.
2) No radio communication except for safety reasons, but also reduced options on the steering wheel. NO DRIVER COACHING.
3) Maximum size of non-engine team - 150. No idea how it can be policed.
4) Engine manufacturers must make all modes available to all customers, and a new engine can only be introduced if ALL the teams have access to it.
5) Engine design should be open to all customers, and they should have all the specs at the same time as the factory team.
5.5) Ban simulators.
6) Reduce downforce drastically, and make front wings even simpler than now. If it makes F1 slower than F2, I don't care.
7) Monaco should run with the same car as Spain, but no wings and engine de-tuned. Reduce the race to 37 laps.
8) DRS that is only activated while you're in the slip-stream of the car ahead. This is such an obvious one.
9) Something to reduce the effect of tires, but I don't have a solution to that.
10) Make cars MUCH smaller.
11) Bottom 5 teams get extra testing time, paid for by the FiA.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 28, 2019 7:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 6891
Location: Michigan, USA
ReservoirDog wrote:
6) Reduce downforce drastically, and make front wings even simpler than now. If it makes F1 slower than F2, I don't care.

You may not, but a lot of people would. This idea would make F1 into an almost literal joke.

_________________
PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 15 podiums): 3rd in 2016
TOP THREE CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): Champions in 2015 & 2018 | 2nd in 2017
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 USA & P-F1 Champion | #2 in the world in 2017


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 28, 2019 7:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 11:51 am
Posts: 4673
I don't think that this is radical, but can't they have two lanes in the box, where the outer one is obliged to be used unless is occupied? Then, we would see no unsafe release anymore and bingo-bangs in the box.

_________________
The end is near


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 28, 2019 8:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:39 pm
Posts: 313
Siao7 wrote:
Exediron wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Exediron wrote:
TedStriker wrote:
Manual gearboxes with conventional 3 pedal control. That would sort the men from the boys.

It really wouldn't. The Sky team talked about this during the past GP weekend, and Anthony Davidson was dead on when he said that it's just another skill every driver will learn. There's nothing inherently difficult about driving a stick shift -- any of the current F1 drivers could do it just fine.

The idea is not if they could do it or not. The argument is that drivers made mistakes back in the day of the sticks; and these were drivers that were used to them. These mistakes can spice up the race. Although it is a step backwards after 25 or so years to go back to the sticks, more of a leap backwards if you want.

My point is that it won't 'sort the men from the boys'. It might well introduce some more randomness, but that's about all.

As funny as TedStriker made it sound (I agree with you!), I guess some would grasp it better or faster than the others. Senna for example was praised for driving with one hand on the wheel through difficult sections while shifting with the other, where other drivers didn't try that. I can see what TedStriker meant, unless he meant something completely different and I'm way off the mark here. But yeah, drivers would adapt, there's no question about it.

Also, a bit of randomness would be good I think, driver mistakes like that are pretty much eliminated in this era and they did add to the skill of the driver. But I wouldn't want to go backwards, else we may as well be racing auto unions with bicycle tyres...


It wasn't so much to add randomness. At the moment, wheelspin aside you just plant the throttle and hold on on a straight and it's all about the right foot in bends. I'm not saying there would be much change in straight line competitiveness but surely thousands of extra driver inputs per race, each one having to be perfectly chosen and timed or their competitor gains an advantage would have the potential to mix things up a bit? There would soon be established 'standard' gears and changing points for tracks however it would be the driver that can adapt those in a close racing/wet situation that would come out on top.

Having said all of that, it's not gonna happen with hybrid power units unless they have WAY mare pedals and steering wheel controls to control all of that manually too!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 29, 2019 4:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2014 2:10 am
Posts: 111
Agree with making the cars smaller in general.

Remove engine modes, spec mug-h.

Restrictions on area of the car a team can develop, the higher up the standings the less parts of the car you can develop after itnial testing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 29, 2019 9:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7335
Lt. Drebin wrote:
I don't think that this is radical, but can't they have two lanes in the box, where the outer one is obliged to be used unless is occupied? Then, we would see no unsafe release anymore and bingo-bangs in the box.

In tracks like Monaco, how would they implement this?

Also, how would it work? Who will be using the inside lane? And would you have cars cutting from the outside lane to their respective boxes and cars from their boxes cutting to the outside lane?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 29, 2019 9:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 15025
Siao7 wrote:
Lt. Drebin wrote:
I don't think that this is radical, but can't they have two lanes in the box, where the outer one is obliged to be used unless is occupied? Then, we would see no unsafe release anymore and bingo-bangs in the box.

In tracks like Monaco, how would they implement this?

Also, how would it work? Who will be using the inside lane? And would you have cars cutting from the outside lane to their respective boxes and cars from their boxes cutting to the outside lane?


To be fair we do have this already at most tracks. The Monaco pit lane just isn't wide enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 29, 2019 11:51 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 11:51 am
Posts: 4673
Siao7 wrote:
Lt. Drebin wrote:
I don't think that this is radical, but can't they have two lanes in the box, where the outer one is obliged to be used unless is occupied? Then, we would see no unsafe release anymore and bingo-bangs in the box.

In tracks like Monaco, how would they implement this?

Also, how would it work? Who will be using the inside lane? And would you have cars cutting from the outside lane to their respective boxes and cars from their boxes cutting to the outside lane?

Read again my post, it's all explained.
Two lanes.
The driver is always obliged to go for an outer lane.
The inner lane can be taken by the driver who goes out next to him, ahead or behind.

_________________
The end is near


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 29, 2019 11:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 11:51 am
Posts: 4673
mikeyg123 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Lt. Drebin wrote:
I don't think that this is radical, but can't they have two lanes in the box, where the outer one is obliged to be used unless is occupied? Then, we would see no unsafe release anymore and bingo-bangs in the box.

In tracks like Monaco, how would they implement this?

Also, how would it work? Who will be using the inside lane? And would you have cars cutting from the outside lane to their respective boxes and cars from their boxes cutting to the outside lane?


To be fair we do have this already at most tracks. The Monaco pit lane just isn't wide enough.

Maybe I missed it, but what I see is that there is always just about enough place for two cars, but no two lanes and rule to use far outer side.

_________________
The end is near


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 29, 2019 12:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 15025
Lt. Drebin wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Lt. Drebin wrote:
I don't think that this is radical, but can't they have two lanes in the box, where the outer one is obliged to be used unless is occupied? Then, we would see no unsafe release anymore and bingo-bangs in the box.

In tracks like Monaco, how would they implement this?

Also, how would it work? Who will be using the inside lane? And would you have cars cutting from the outside lane to their respective boxes and cars from their boxes cutting to the outside lane?


To be fair we do have this already at most tracks. The Monaco pit lane just isn't wide enough.

Maybe I missed it, but what I see is that there is always just about enough place for two cars, but no two lanes and rule to use far outer side.


Those no rule defining it but a driver never gets penalised for an unsafe release if there is enough space for them to go side by side.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 29, 2019 4:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 8:07 am
Posts: 1153
DOLOMITE wrote:
...

3) Build more instances of designated track re-joining points - i.e only one method back on to the circuit if a car leaves the track and it will cost them at least 10 seconds. I don't know why this isn't more common. We don't want cars beached in sand for one mistake but the abuse of track-limits is ridiculous and drivers naturally take advantage of it.



Bit like MotoGP's Long Lap idea

_________________
"I'd rather lose a race going fast enough to win it, than win one going slow enough to lose it".
-Stirling Moss


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 31, 2019 12:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 25158
https://www.racefans.net/2019/05/29/the-storm-brewing-amid-f1s-2021-rules-wrangle/

Couple of interesting points raised in this article. Buried in it was the fact that the gearbox tender has been cancelled and it looks highly likely that the other standardization tenders will also be withdrawn. According to the article it seems pressure from the teams has forced the FIA to cave.

Reading the rest of the article I'd be frankly surprised if 2021 brings much change at all tbh. It looks like the teams are the ones in control


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 31, 2019 6:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:14 am
Posts: 816
Location: Stratford
Zoue wrote:
https://www.racefans.net/2019/05/29/the-storm-brewing-amid-f1s-2021-rules-wrangle/

Couple of interesting points raised in this article. Buried in it was the fact that the gearbox tender has been cancelled and it looks highly likely that the other standardization tenders will also be withdrawn. According to the article it seems pressure from the teams has forced the FIA to cave.

Reading the rest of the article I'd be frankly surprised if 2021 brings much change at all tbh. It looks like the teams are the ones in control


I might be being very ignorant here, but why do the teams not want to change? A big rule change might be a chance for a team in the midfield (especially Renault with a big budget) to get themselves to the front.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 31, 2019 6:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 25158
JN23 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
https://www.racefans.net/2019/05/29/the-storm-brewing-amid-f1s-2021-rules-wrangle/

Couple of interesting points raised in this article. Buried in it was the fact that the gearbox tender has been cancelled and it looks highly likely that the other standardization tenders will also be withdrawn. According to the article it seems pressure from the teams has forced the FIA to cave.

Reading the rest of the article I'd be frankly surprised if 2021 brings much change at all tbh. It looks like the teams are the ones in control


I might be being very ignorant here, but why do the teams not want to change? A big rule change might be a chance for a team in the midfield (especially Renault with a big budget) to get themselves to the front.
I think some of the smaller ones probably do but the big ones have all the power. Doubtless engine supply plays some part in how they vote, too.

The current rules favour the manufacturers and they are not likely to abandon that position without a fight


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 31, 2019 7:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:17 pm
Posts: 282
Zoue wrote:
JN23 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
https://www.racefans.net/2019/05/29/the-storm-brewing-amid-f1s-2021-rules-wrangle/

Couple of interesting points raised in this article. Buried in it was the fact that the gearbox tender has been cancelled and it looks highly likely that the other standardization tenders will also be withdrawn. According to the article it seems pressure from the teams has forced the FIA to cave.

Reading the rest of the article I'd be frankly surprised if 2021 brings much change at all tbh. It looks like the teams are the ones in control


I might be being very ignorant here, but why do the teams not want to change? A big rule change might be a chance for a team in the midfield (especially Renault with a big budget) to get themselves to the front.
I think some of the smaller ones probably do but the big ones have all the power. Doubtless engine supply plays some part in how they vote, too.

The current rules favour the manufacturers and they are not likely to abandon that position without a fight

Inmates running the asylum.

Pure nonsense.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 01, 2019 12:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 5199
JN23 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
https://www.racefans.net/2019/05/29/the-storm-brewing-amid-f1s-2021-rules-wrangle/

Couple of interesting points raised in this article. Buried in it was the fact that the gearbox tender has been cancelled and it looks highly likely that the other standardization tenders will also be withdrawn. According to the article it seems pressure from the teams has forced the FIA to cave.

Reading the rest of the article I'd be frankly surprised if 2021 brings much change at all tbh. It looks like the teams are the ones in control


I might be being very ignorant here, but why do the teams not want to change? A big rule change might be a chance for a team in the midfield (especially Renault with a big budget) to get themselves to the front.


Wrong teams that do want change. Between Mercedes and Ferrari they can control 6 of the 10 teams votes whether the likes of RP or Haas would actually want change or not. On some things a simple majority is enough so they've got them by the short and curlies.

McLaren,STR and RB might still fancy wholesale changes but I'm not that convinced Renault or Honda do. A different engine means more expense, more chance at embarrassment and even just sizeable changes to the current one might be off putting now they're getting in spitting distance of the leading engines so beyond a budget cap I don't think Renault and Honda mind keeping the status quo on a lot of things if they, especially Renault, can actually get that budget cap through. That'll be their big line in the sand imo and they'll let a lot of other things go.

Change can be expensive and its looking like we're getting convergence naturally on the engine side at least so we'll probably be better off keeping them for a while now that any potential new entries have been successfully scared away which was the only really good reason for an engine switch imo.

But it's clear the turkeys are still going to be fully in charge of the Christmas dinner arrangements even post 2020 so who knows what we'll end up with.

Also read elsewhere Mercedes will walk in 2025, their new boss is trying to save $5bn and is a leader in the electric side of things so they'll focus on FE instead but may still remain an engine supplier in F1. If any truth then I fully expect a longer gradual budget cap proposed so they can still outspend for a few more years before it fully comes in around 2025 and they sell off the team to someone else who likes the idea of a budget cap like a VW or someone.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 01, 2019 4:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 10:02 am
Posts: 1753
Location: Far side of Koozebane
Lotus49 wrote:
JN23 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
https://www.racefans.net/2019/05/29/the-storm-brewing-amid-f1s-2021-rules-wrangle/

Couple of interesting points raised in this article. Buried in it was the fact that the gearbox tender has been cancelled and it looks highly likely that the other standardization tenders will also be withdrawn. According to the article it seems pressure from the teams has forced the FIA to cave.

Reading the rest of the article I'd be frankly surprised if 2021 brings much change at all tbh. It looks like the teams are the ones in control


I might be being very ignorant here, but why do the teams not want to change? A big rule change might be a chance for a team in the midfield (especially Renault with a big budget) to get themselves to the front.


Wrong teams that do want change. Between Mercedes and Ferrari they can control 6 of the 10 teams votes whether the likes of RP or Haas would actually want change or not. On some things a simple majority is enough so they've got them by the short and curlies.

McLaren,STR and RB might still fancy wholesale changes but I'm not that convinced Renault or Honda do. A different engine means more expense, more chance at embarrassment and even just sizeable changes to the current one might be off putting now they're getting in spitting distance of the leading engines so beyond a budget cap I don't think Renault and Honda mind keeping the status quo on a lot of things if they, especially Renault, can actually get that budget cap through. That'll be their big line in the sand imo and they'll let a lot of other things go.

Change can be expensive and its looking like we're getting convergence naturally on the engine side at least so we'll probably be better off keeping them for a while now that any potential new entries have been successfully scared away which was the only really good reason for an engine switch imo.

But it's clear the turkeys are still going to be fully in charge of the Christmas dinner arrangements even post 2020 so who knows what we'll end up with.

Also read elsewhere Mercedes will walk in 2025, their new boss is trying to save $5bn and is a leader in the electric side of things so they'll focus on FE instead but may still remain an engine supplier in F1. If any truth then I fully expect a longer gradual budget cap proposed so they can still outspend for a few more years before it fully comes in around 2025 and they sell off the team to someone else who likes the idea of a budget cap like a VW or someone.


I feel Liberty & the FIA need to fix is the political situation in the sport before it can even start to look at fixing the sporting & technological side of it. That to me could well be the biggest, & perhaps bloodiest battle they'll face.

You have to remember that unlike teams such as Williams, McLaren, Haas & Racing Point, Mercedes, Renault, Red Bull & by extension Alfa & Toro Rosso & also I guess to a lesser extent Ferrari, do not see F1 as a sport & don't compete for the sake of competing. Both Merc & RB are on record as saying F1 is a "marketing exercise". They participate to advertise their brands.

Why would they want to vote for a rule that'll dilute their influence & chip away at their competitive edge? "Win on Sunday. sell on Monday" is still the catch cry of the manufacturer teams and it's the reason they go racing.

The irony of course is that these teams that wield all the power, that hold all the cards. These teams that call the shots, will be the ones that'll walk as soon as the sport no longer suits their marketing objectives leaving the true racing teams to pick up the pieces.

The equations simple to me. If Liberty try to wrest control back from the big players in an attempt to level the playing field, the big players could walk. If Liberty maintain the status quo, the sport risks becoming irrelevant.

Not only did Eccleston err by giving so much power to the teams, but he also gave it to the wrong teams. He gave power to the teams who, ultimately, don't need the sport nor care for the sport past on how it can improve it's market share.

Eccleston's a true genius. He made tens of millions selling control of the sport to participants who really have no skin in ensuring the long term viability of the sport. He then made tens of millions more reducing the sports exposure by locking it behind a paywall. Then, once complete, he sells the commercial rights to Liberty for billions. Its amazing. He sells Liberty a sport they effectively have little power in governing.

_________________
Races since last non RB, Merc, Ferrari winner (After Canada- 19) - 125 & counting.( Last win, Lotus, 17/3/13)

Non RB, Merc, Ferrari podiums won in Hybrid era - 321 trophies available, 23 won

2017 WCC CPTTC - Jalopy Racing (Herb & Me)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 07, 2019 7:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 9:08 pm
Posts: 1640
Lewis Hamilton and Lance Stroll echoing some of the points raised on this thread.
https://www.planetf1.com/f1-races/canad ... onference/

Normally aspirated engines, manual gearboxes, less driver aids, Management to equalise the teams to maintain competitiveness (as is done in the NFL for example).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 07, 2019 8:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2003 11:31 am
Posts: 1772
The biggest point for me is that instead of racing it's an endurance exercive. They can have any engine, gearbox, but it'll be en exercise to extend their life.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 08, 2019 12:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6327
Remove all modernity from F1. Naturally aspirated engines, manual gearboxes, maybe even no power steering, no traction control or ABS, no ERS. Simultaneously, get more investment in Formula E. Bigger budgets to push those electric motors and include all of the assists and fancy technology. Costs in F1 will go down dramatically and these ancient technologies will not allow for a large field spread as so many firms have already mastered them. The racing will become more exciting.

Most importantly; by having these two series so different (one glorifying the past and one looking to the future) you can come up with a clever arrangement. There should be some circuits that Formula 1 and Formula E both race on. As soon as Formula E cars start beating the F1 cars' times; you scrap the dinosaur formula and convert Formula E into the new F1 the following season because they will have proven that the technology has matured to the point of functional superiority.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 08, 2019 12:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:17 pm
Posts: 282
sandman1347 wrote:
Remove all modernity from F1. Naturally aspirated engines, manual gearboxes, maybe even no power steering, no traction control or ABS, no ERS. Simultaneously, get more investment in Formula E. Bigger budgets to push those electric motors and include all of the assists and fancy technology. Costs in F1 will go down dramatically and these ancient technologies will not allow for a large field spread as so many firms have already mastered them. The racing will become more exciting.

Most importantly; by having these two series so different (one glorifying the past and one looking to the future) you can come up with a clever arrangement. There should be some circuits that Formula 1 and Formula E both race on. As soon as Formula E cars start beating the F1 cars' times; you scrap the dinosaur formula and convert Formula E into the new F1 the following season because they will have proven that the technology has matured to the point of functional superiority.
with no power steering and no ABS, and all the other modern options in a Formula 1 car, any formula e car beating lap times would be a artificial construct


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 08, 2019 1:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6327
Altair wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Remove all modernity from F1. Naturally aspirated engines, manual gearboxes, maybe even no power steering, no traction control or ABS, no ERS. Simultaneously, get more investment in Formula E. Bigger budgets to push those electric motors and include all of the assists and fancy technology. Costs in F1 will go down dramatically and these ancient technologies will not allow for a large field spread as so many firms have already mastered them. The racing will become more exciting.

Most importantly; by having these two series so different (one glorifying the past and one looking to the future) you can come up with a clever arrangement. There should be some circuits that Formula 1 and Formula E both race on. As soon as Formula E cars start beating the F1 cars' times; you scrap the dinosaur formula and convert Formula E into the new F1 the following season because they will have proven that the technology has matured to the point of functional superiority.
with no power steering and no ABS, and all the other modern options in a Formula 1 car, any formula e car beating lap times would be a artificial construct

Keep the power steering if you want. Modern F1 regs have already banned ABS and TC. The point is that the modern cars are a hybrid of electric power unit technology and old school combustion engines. Formula E is all electric. Instead of having one formula with the best of both worlds; separate the two worlds and allow the superior performer to carry the title "Formula 1".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 08, 2019 7:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 8:48 pm
Posts: 3129
Location: UK
sandman1347 wrote:
Altair wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Remove all modernity from F1. Naturally aspirated engines, manual gearboxes, maybe even no power steering, no traction control or ABS, no ERS. Simultaneously, get more investment in Formula E. Bigger budgets to push those electric motors and include all of the assists and fancy technology. Costs in F1 will go down dramatically and these ancient technologies will not allow for a large field spread as so many firms have already mastered them. The racing will become more exciting.

Most importantly; by having these two series so different (one glorifying the past and one looking to the future) you can come up with a clever arrangement. There should be some circuits that Formula 1 and Formula E both race on. As soon as Formula E cars start beating the F1 cars' times; you scrap the dinosaur formula and convert Formula E into the new F1 the following season because they will have proven that the technology has matured to the point of functional superiority.
with no power steering and no ABS, and all the other modern options in a Formula 1 car, any formula e car beating lap times would be a artificial construct

Keep the power steering if you want. Modern F1 regs have already banned ABS and TC. The point is that the modern cars are a hybrid of electric power unit technology and old school combustion engines. Formula E is all electric. Instead of having one formula with the best of both worlds; separate the two worlds and allow the superior performer to carry the title "Formula 1".

The problem here though is the same one that has driven the over-regulation of Formula 1: that racing car technology has far surpassed the limit of human endurance. The only thing restricting how much faster F1 cars can go is the ability of the driver to cope with the G forces, not the limitation of the technology. It's for this reason that the fanciful claims I see of tearing up the rulebook and giving the engineers free reign are not feasible in reality.

Eventually FE will reach the same performance ceiling that F1 is currently at. How then do you decide the "winner"? I guess you could go by which one gets more viewers, in which case my money would be on FE. Once you have a couple of generations of people growing up in a world that no longer relies on the combustion engine, the idea of using them for racing will not have wide appeal. These people will look upon these F1 cars in the same way we look at an old steam locomotive.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 08, 2019 8:16 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 9:08 pm
Posts: 1640
Are batteries good for the environment?
Is Formula E going to run for 2 hours on the original batteries?

I agree that the capability is there to make cars that are too fast for the current circuits and generate too high G forces for the driver to cope with.

Formula 1 became a success because it came from another era. Privateers could enter and win - in 1964 Jo Siffert bought himself a Brabham BRM and was almost a one man team. He beat Jim Clark in his Lotus Climax (who won the 1963 and 1965 World Championships in the same car) at the non-Championship Mediterranean Grand Prix and repeated the feat the following year.
http://www.onthedash.com/docs/Siffert.shtml

That is the sort of thing that made F1 great.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 08, 2019 7:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 3791
There's just so much grip. Watching quali in Canada today, it was incredible how little steering input is needed, especially when they're accelerating out of corners. Yes Botas spun, but that was about it really.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Follow me @asphalt_world


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 08, 2019 11:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2004 8:26 pm
Posts: 27
Fixing F1 is as simple as going back to naturally aspirated engines, manual gearboxes, refueling, simplified or eliminated front wings, 600 kg minimum weight including driver but not fuel, remove all limits on engine and drivetrain component use. They'll always spend the money they can get. Let them spend it on race weekends putting on a good show instead of on R&D developing engines that are only run at full power in qualifying. Putting on a good show is the key to funding junior teams in a way that doesn't include billionaires' sons and boytoys making a joke of the series that's supposed to represent the best drivers. Failing these ideas, do whatever it takes to replace a RedBull driver with Daniel Riccardo.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 09, 2019 8:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:17 pm
Posts: 282
Altair wrote:
I think the stewards may be on to something.

Let them race in the pit lane.

Pretty radical idea

I change my opinion.

Get rid of the stewarts.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 10, 2019 11:32 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 5:52 am
Posts: 2721
Altair wrote:
Altair wrote:
I think the stewards may be on to something.

Let them race in the pit lane.

Pretty radical idea

I change my opinion.

Get rid of the stewarts.

Image
Source: https://www.classicdriver.com/en/article/classic-life/sir-jackie-stewart-i-was-first-person-spray-champagne-formula-one

Really..?

_________________
Where I'm going, I don't need roads


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 10, 2019 11:40 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:17 pm
Posts: 282
tootsie323 wrote:
Altair wrote:
Altair wrote:
I think the stewards may be on to something.

Let them race in the pit lane.

Pretty radical idea

I change my opinion.

Get rid of the stewarts.

Image
Source: https://www.classicdriver.com/en/article/classic-life/sir-jackie-stewart-i-was-first-person-spray-champagne-formula-one

Really..?
not radical enough for you?

There was a good tweet by Jimmie Johnson, "I'm glad we don't have stewarts in NASCAR"

He's not wrong.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 10, 2019 12:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2017 1:19 pm
Posts: 455
Altair wrote:
tootsie323 wrote:
Altair wrote:
Altair wrote:
I think the stewards may be on to something.

Let them race in the pit lane.

Pretty radical idea

I change my opinion.

Get rid of the stewarts.

Image
Source: https://www.classicdriver.com/en/article/classic-life/sir-jackie-stewart-i-was-first-person-spray-champagne-formula-one

Really..?
not radical enough for you?

There was a good tweet by Jimmie Johnson, "I'm glad we don't have stewarts in NASCAR"

He's not wrong.


I imagine that you are probably joking but the idea of gettind rid of stewards is obviously nonsense.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 10, 2019 12:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:17 pm
Posts: 282
BMWSauber84 wrote:
Altair wrote:
tootsie323 wrote:
Altair wrote:
Altair wrote:
I think the stewards may be on to something.

Let them race in the pit lane.

Pretty radical idea

I change my opinion.

Get rid of the stewarts.

Image
Source: https://www.classicdriver.com/en/article/classic-life/sir-jackie-stewart-i-was-first-person-spray-champagne-formula-one

Really..?
not radical enough for you?

There was a good tweet by Jimmie Johnson, "I'm glad we don't have stewarts in NASCAR"

He's not wrong.


I imagine that you are probably joking but the idea of gettind rid of stewards is obviously nonsense.

So are half the things suggested in this thread, or have you not decided to read the title of it?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 10, 2019 12:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2017 1:19 pm
Posts: 455
If it was just a joke then fair enough. Obviously getting rid of stewards wpuld be tone deaf and dangerously stupid. I should have known you were smarter than that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 10, 2019 7:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2003 8:25 pm
Posts: 446
In the interests of being green - do away with the ICE and install wind turbines! Speeds and noise might decrease a bit.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 10, 2019 8:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:17 pm
Posts: 282
Can the mods close this thread?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 10, 2019 8:19 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 11:10 am
Posts: 552
Altair wrote:
Can the mods close this thread?

I realise that you are the OP, however given that this is an active topic with lots of contributors, I will give the forum 24 hours notice and if no one objects I will then close the thread. However, given that someone is likely to just start the same thread again, it seems a little bit pointless just to close it.

If someone replies to this thread with an on topic contribution to the thread, that will be considered an objection to it being closed and the thread will remain unlocked.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 10:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 9:08 pm
Posts: 1640
I think it is a worthwhile thread. There are many things wrong with the current F1. I consider fiddling around and not tackling the real core problems is what the FIA and the owners have been doing, and so actually trying to fix F1 requires what could be considered radical ideas - yet those could actualy be sensible ideas that would result in a better F1.

eg. Stewards.
It is fairly obvious that if you hire different non-professional stewards for each Grand Prix, you are not going to get consistent interpretation of the rules.
There is also the question of interference in the stewards decisions by the owners or the FIA to try to keep the World Championship contest alive for as long into each year as they can.

What they need is an FIA that writes and interprets the rules, and has the same professional stewards employed by the FIA at each race.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 10:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 15025
babararacucudada wrote:
I think it is a worthwhile thread. There are many things wrong with the current F1. I consider fiddling around and not tackling the real core problems is what the FIA and the owners have been doing, and so actually trying to fix F1 requires what could be considered radical ideas - yet those could actualy be sensible ideas that would result in a better F1.

eg. Stewards.
It is fairly obvious that if you hire different non-professional stewards for each Grand Prix, you are not going to get consistent interpretation of the rules.
There is also the question of interference in the stewards decisions by the owners or the FIA to try to keep the World Championship contest alive for as long into each year as they can.

What they need is an FIA that writes and interprets the rules, and has the same professional stewards employed by the FIA at each race.


Would having professional stewards who solely relied on F1 for their income be a lot more susceptible to FIA influence than the current set up? I.E do what we say or you may be out of a job rather than do what we say or we won't ask you again next year.

It would give the FIA a lot more leverage for manipulation.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 11:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Posts: 1054
Location: UK
mikeyg123 wrote:
babararacucudada wrote:
I think it is a worthwhile thread. There are many things wrong with the current F1. I consider fiddling around and not tackling the real core problems is what the FIA and the owners have been doing, and so actually trying to fix F1 requires what could be considered radical ideas - yet those could actualy be sensible ideas that would result in a better F1.

eg. Stewards.
It is fairly obvious that if you hire different non-professional stewards for each Grand Prix, you are not going to get consistent interpretation of the rules.
There is also the question of interference in the stewards decisions by the owners or the FIA to try to keep the World Championship contest alive for as long into each year as they can.

What they need is an FIA that writes and interprets the rules, and has the same professional stewards employed by the FIA at each race.


Would having professional stewards who solely relied on F1 for their income be a lot more susceptible to FIA influence than the current set up? I.E do what we say or you may be out of a job rather than do what we say or we won't ask you again next year.

It would give the FIA a lot more leverage for manipulation.


I'm an advocate of professional stewards because it would provide consistency, the fact that they would be professional should mean they have the integrity to resist interference. However, it is very much a point to be considered.
Would the complement of 3 be better served if there were one or perhaps even two guest stewards as 'invigilators' with a resident core to add the consistency?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Covalent, P-F1 Mod, SteveW, tootsie323 and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group