How do we fix F1?
Discussion
We've all had a good whinge about formula one from time to time I had one very recently here:
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Maybe its time we all got a little more proactive and talked about how we can actually fix f1. So Imagine your bernie or max what would you do to make f1 great again??
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Maybe its time we all got a little more proactive and talked about how we can actually fix f1. So Imagine your bernie or max what would you do to make f1 great again??
IMHO you can’t ‘fix’ it. And it is great.
Motor Racing is a cyclical business in anycase, as fresh blood sorts out the latest regulations and team sciences works toward one ideal solution, and disappears up it’s own arse every periodically. Turning the clock back makes it no challenge for the super-engineers who need to go where creative development opportunity lye.
But you can develop it. Which actually is what they are doing.
I agree with Peter Windsor; these are the fastest devices on the planet, providing a combination of entertainment and technological ground breaking, and attracting the most talented engineers/ racers of all and the most sophisticated media following.
I think finally that until you get up close (a difficult thing I grant) to a working Formula One Grand Prix car and see, feel and hear what goes on to extract the performance it does, on the grounds of remote TV observation MotoGP (for one) may come across better.
Again IMHO, it’s very difficult to better the show, particularly this year, that Max and Bernie provide. The folk that know seem to be chipping away at aerodynamics (internally/weight distribution) and going greener.
What should we be suggesting? You pay Kimi et all $20M pa each and everyone race them in the second division Renault cars or A1 GP cars; they seem to slide around plenty.
Motor Racing is a cyclical business in anycase, as fresh blood sorts out the latest regulations and team sciences works toward one ideal solution, and disappears up it’s own arse every periodically. Turning the clock back makes it no challenge for the super-engineers who need to go where creative development opportunity lye.
But you can develop it. Which actually is what they are doing.
I agree with Peter Windsor; these are the fastest devices on the planet, providing a combination of entertainment and technological ground breaking, and attracting the most talented engineers/ racers of all and the most sophisticated media following.
I think finally that until you get up close (a difficult thing I grant) to a working Formula One Grand Prix car and see, feel and hear what goes on to extract the performance it does, on the grounds of remote TV observation MotoGP (for one) may come across better.
Again IMHO, it’s very difficult to better the show, particularly this year, that Max and Bernie provide. The folk that know seem to be chipping away at aerodynamics (internally/weight distribution) and going greener.
What should we be suggesting? You pay Kimi et all $20M pa each and everyone race them in the second division Renault cars or A1 GP cars; they seem to slide around plenty.
4 cylinders, ultra light weight, low budget to get more participation, eco friendly, relevant.
Couldn't we just watch racing Caterhams? They can cover the Ring in under 7 minutes if I'm correct...
Seriously, F1 needs to change the cars so that there is no pitting for fuel, no pitting for tires. The pits are only there to fix the car. There must be more on track passing that shows driver skill--tactical skills enter into the equation as it relates to managing tires. Most fans don't get jazzed watching tire changes and 5.8 seconds of fuel being added. The best F1 races are the ones that rain--the driver skill becomes everything.
The next thing F1 could do is eliminate tracks where the "racing" is processional. After the first lap, too many races become processional.
Then, make sure there are more cars on the track.
Couldn't we just watch racing Caterhams? They can cover the Ring in under 7 minutes if I'm correct...
Seriously, F1 needs to change the cars so that there is no pitting for fuel, no pitting for tires. The pits are only there to fix the car. There must be more on track passing that shows driver skill--tactical skills enter into the equation as it relates to managing tires. Most fans don't get jazzed watching tire changes and 5.8 seconds of fuel being added. The best F1 races are the ones that rain--the driver skill becomes everything.
The next thing F1 could do is eliminate tracks where the "racing" is processional. After the first lap, too many races become processional.
Then, make sure there are more cars on the track.
Yup.....
Dump refuelling.
Return to slick's...but not wider cars.
Have a ruddy sensible simple qualifing format.
Get shot of huge expenditure....by limiting the shear amount of kit and personal that the teams take including all those stupid hospitality suites, number of wagons, telemetry equipment and such other rubbish.
Ban pit-to-car radio's.
Ban telemetry, ban all electronic driver aids.
Limit the effect of the aero's package.
There...that feels better....
Dump refuelling.
Return to slick's...but not wider cars.
Have a ruddy sensible simple qualifing format.
Get shot of huge expenditure....by limiting the shear amount of kit and personal that the teams take including all those stupid hospitality suites, number of wagons, telemetry equipment and such other rubbish.
Ban pit-to-car radio's.
Ban telemetry, ban all electronic driver aids.
Limit the effect of the aero's package.
There...that feels better....
aeropilot said:
Yup.....
Dump refuelling.
Return to slick's...but not wider cars.
Have a ruddy sensible simple qualifing format.
Get shot of huge expenditure....by limiting the shear amount of kit and personal that the teams take including all those stupid hospitality suites, number of wagons, telemetry equipment and such other rubbish.
Ban pit-to-car radio's.
Ban telemetry, ban all electronic driver aids.
Limit the effect of the aero's package.
There...that feels better....
My two pen'north, for what its worth.Dump refuelling.
Return to slick's...but not wider cars.
Have a ruddy sensible simple qualifing format.
Get shot of huge expenditure....by limiting the shear amount of kit and personal that the teams take including all those stupid hospitality suites, number of wagons, telemetry equipment and such other rubbish.
Ban pit-to-car radio's.
Ban telemetry, ban all electronic driver aids.
Limit the effect of the aero's package.
There...that feels better....
Award points for all positions. Award points for qualifying. That way you encourage the back markers to keep racing throughout the race (every place counts), and you encourage some extreme tactical decisions (run very light for quali to get a point, say).
If you want to be more extreme, reverse the grid. Then watch the tactical process at work - is it better to qualify faster or slower?
I have no problem with pitting - at the end of the day, drivers on strategies that keep them running lighter but stopping more often will have to race hard to try to make up places. If you remove pitting and keep qualifying then how will there be any overtaking? The fastest guy starts first and drives off. What I have a problem with is compulsory pitting - why not let teams run a no-stop strategy if they think it will help?
All of that is conditional, however, upon making it possible to overtake. By far the best solution IMHO is to abandon or severely curtail the wings, but allow the bodywork to be much freer. Encourage the teams to make more of the "car as wing", but remove the opportunity for deliberately creating a turbulent wake. Personally I'd love to see ground effect back, but there are major safety problems with that (car leaves track, loses all downforce, doesn't slow down much more before the accident).
Oh and bring back unlimited testing. This is a very short-sighted policy - basically no back-marker or new-entrant team can test their way to improvement; they all have to rely upon the accuracy of their wind tunnels and computer models, which inevitably take years to build up and can't be "fixed" quickly.
aeropilot said:
Yup.....
Dump refuelling.
Return to slick's...but not wider cars.
Have a ruddy sensible simple qualifing format.
Get shot of huge expenditure....by limiting the shear amount of kit and personal that the teams take including all those stupid hospitality suites, number of wagons, telemetry equipment and such other rubbish.
Ban pit-to-car radio's.
Ban telemetry, ban all electronic driver aids.
Limit the effect of the aero's package.
There...that feels better....
remember the good old days of turbo engines and no refueling?Dump refuelling.
Return to slick's...but not wider cars.
Have a ruddy sensible simple qualifing format.
Get shot of huge expenditure....by limiting the shear amount of kit and personal that the teams take including all those stupid hospitality suites, number of wagons, telemetry equipment and such other rubbish.
Ban pit-to-car radio's.
Ban telemetry, ban all electronic driver aids.
Limit the effect of the aero's package.
There...that feels better....
When you were sat on the edge of you seat praying that your fav driver, who had wound the boost up, did not run out of gas?
Ahhh those were the days when racers won races not pit crews and strategies.
Moseley has had the chances in the past but squandered them.
Why did they go for 2.4 engines to slow the cars down? All this did was make the cars more aero efficient which has a detrimental effect on overtaking as the cars performance is more reliant on the aero package. They should have banned pneumatic valve actuation instead. This would have capped engine speeds to 13k ish and significantly reduced power (and costs) without having any benefit to the overall packaging.
Use a single element rear wing!
No aero appendages!
Used a narrower "Plank".
Get rid of Mosely!
Why did they go for 2.4 engines to slow the cars down? All this did was make the cars more aero efficient which has a detrimental effect on overtaking as the cars performance is more reliant on the aero package. They should have banned pneumatic valve actuation instead. This would have capped engine speeds to 13k ish and significantly reduced power (and costs) without having any benefit to the overall packaging.
Use a single element rear wing!
No aero appendages!
Used a narrower "Plank".
Get rid of Mosely!
I have problem with Aero bits or driver aids.
The sport is supposed to push the boundaries of technology so mechanical, technical developments are fine as long as they make the cars go faster.
Do away with refueling and perhaps car to pit communications.
A race should not be won on a pit stop strategy unless it is the driver gambling on looking after his tyres and trying not to stop or pushing hard enough to gain enough lead to be able to stop and still maintain track position.
Every car should start with enough fuel to finish the race.
This would also encourage teams to make more fuel efficient cars in order to keep weight down.
The sport is supposed to push the boundaries of technology so mechanical, technical developments are fine as long as they make the cars go faster.
Do away with refueling and perhaps car to pit communications.
A race should not be won on a pit stop strategy unless it is the driver gambling on looking after his tyres and trying not to stop or pushing hard enough to gain enough lead to be able to stop and still maintain track position.
Every car should start with enough fuel to finish the race.
This would also encourage teams to make more fuel efficient cars in order to keep weight down.
Firstly, I have to say that so far, F1 this season is a vast improvement on recent seasons so there is a sense that it is at last going in the right direction.
The problem here is that F1 has evolved from what it was 20 or 30 years ago to such a point that – from a marketing perspective – it has changed its target market entirely. Today, it seeks to attract new, casual observers, particularly those in emerging economies, as this is where the manufacturers see the biggest growth. It is this group that is more likely to be swayed by on track success in their buying decision as to what their next road car should be. Motorsport fans have the wherewithal to make their own judgements.
F1 also recognises that motorsport fans understand that they have choice. That is to say that if we want to see some “proper” racing, for the price of a couple of beers, we can toodle off to Brands, Snet, Cadwell or wherever, munch on a greasy burger, watch a 750mc meet and witness more excitement in a single race than F1 can deliver in a whole season. They can’t compete with that so why bother?
You may, possibly correctly, point out that if a true fan finds F1 tedious then the casual observer would find it doubly so. The figures though, don’t hold up to scrutiny. F1 is hugely popular and interest in it is growing.
For real racing with proper, powerful edgy cars whose performance is directly correlated to the skill of the driver, one has to look no further than A1GP. A very worthy, excellent formula that offers much of what many contributors to this topic might see as a utopian example of what F1 should be. Yet despite this, it remains eons away from ever toppling F1 in popularity stakes and likely never will.
Whether this is right or wrong is for another topic. Evolution is a natural thing and stifling it is simply devolution and leads to cries of “convolution”. Personally, I think the “peaks and troughs” comment made earlier is very valid. Best to find fascination in it while we can (and rest easy in the knowledge of the 750mc meet coming up!!).
The problem here is that F1 has evolved from what it was 20 or 30 years ago to such a point that – from a marketing perspective – it has changed its target market entirely. Today, it seeks to attract new, casual observers, particularly those in emerging economies, as this is where the manufacturers see the biggest growth. It is this group that is more likely to be swayed by on track success in their buying decision as to what their next road car should be. Motorsport fans have the wherewithal to make their own judgements.
F1 also recognises that motorsport fans understand that they have choice. That is to say that if we want to see some “proper” racing, for the price of a couple of beers, we can toodle off to Brands, Snet, Cadwell or wherever, munch on a greasy burger, watch a 750mc meet and witness more excitement in a single race than F1 can deliver in a whole season. They can’t compete with that so why bother?
You may, possibly correctly, point out that if a true fan finds F1 tedious then the casual observer would find it doubly so. The figures though, don’t hold up to scrutiny. F1 is hugely popular and interest in it is growing.
For real racing with proper, powerful edgy cars whose performance is directly correlated to the skill of the driver, one has to look no further than A1GP. A very worthy, excellent formula that offers much of what many contributors to this topic might see as a utopian example of what F1 should be. Yet despite this, it remains eons away from ever toppling F1 in popularity stakes and likely never will.
Whether this is right or wrong is for another topic. Evolution is a natural thing and stifling it is simply devolution and leads to cries of “convolution”. Personally, I think the “peaks and troughs” comment made earlier is very valid. Best to find fascination in it while we can (and rest easy in the knowledge of the 750mc meet coming up!!).
This is what we want
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7uuahQQugY&mod...
davidy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7uuahQQugY&mod...
davidy
Edited by DavidY on Thursday 16th August 19:12
DavidY said:
NOW THAT WAS F
ing GOOD!! 
I had actually forgotten just how good F1 used to be
Thanks for reminding me!!Now I am even more pissed off with todays drivvel.
After theve qualified get some one (possibly the pole man) to pick a number out of a hat (a number for every place on the grid) and who ever qualified in the place picked starts at the front and the cars who qualified infront of the selected person get put behind every one else.
Should shake it up a bit.
Should shake it up a bit.
no refueling, slicks, no tyre changes etc all the good things that have been suggested above.
But then with The Hypno-Toads little twist....
Engines are totally unlimited. You can have whatever you want; 5 litre V8s, rotarys, X36s, turbo 4s, supercharged flat 10s, petrol burning gas turbines, anything but you only have a certain amount of petrol, lets say 150 litres.....
The fuel is from one supplier regulated by the FIA so no Brabham style BASF V2 rocket fuels.
If the cars start getting too quick, we cut it to 140 litres. If they get to quick again, we cut it to 130 litres and so on.
Now this should please everyone. Different techinical solutions to the same problem which could feed back to road cars, the cars would begin to look and sound different and we please the green idiots because the faster they get the less petrol the FIA gives them.
But then with The Hypno-Toads little twist....
Engines are totally unlimited. You can have whatever you want; 5 litre V8s, rotarys, X36s, turbo 4s, supercharged flat 10s, petrol burning gas turbines, anything but you only have a certain amount of petrol, lets say 150 litres.....
The fuel is from one supplier regulated by the FIA so no Brabham style BASF V2 rocket fuels.
If the cars start getting too quick, we cut it to 140 litres. If they get to quick again, we cut it to 130 litres and so on.
Now this should please everyone. Different techinical solutions to the same problem which could feed back to road cars, the cars would begin to look and sound different and we please the green idiots because the faster they get the less petrol the FIA gives them.
After watching that old video, it's clear that today's formula 1 cars need to be much less aerodynamically dependant to allow that kind of close racing. More mechanical grip e.g. full slicks etc. Also, watching those old cars clash together like that; you couldn't do that in today's cars for fear of suspension damage etc. Not saying that contact is good, but when it's in the spirit of racing.
There should be less emphasis on ground breaking technology and a more back to basics approach. F1 today seems to be more a show of what man and technology can achieve with multi-million pound budgets and less on the true spirit of racing.
There are also no real personalities among the drivers nowadays. They're all as dull as ditchwater! Having said that, the rivalry between the McLaren drivers at the moment is making it interesting.
There should be less emphasis on ground breaking technology and a more back to basics approach. F1 today seems to be more a show of what man and technology can achieve with multi-million pound budgets and less on the true spirit of racing.
There are also no real personalities among the drivers nowadays. They're all as dull as ditchwater! Having said that, the rivalry between the McLaren drivers at the moment is making it interesting.
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff