My idea to fix the F1 paradox
Discussion
No jokes about WWE wrestlers and women having whipped cream/bikini fights this time sorry!
I think that F1 has an intrinsic paradox going on...
They say that F1 is about having the best technology, and yet they have lots of races to establish a World Driver Champion.
I think that the end of Traction Control will allow driver's to better demonstrate their driving skills, racing will get better and more varied as their will be the skilled, the brave and the lucky getting the chance to out accelerate other cars.
If a car is too technologically advanced (which they're not but run with me here...) then we may as well let all the drivers do a lap on Gran Tourismo and the one with the best lap time is the Champ.
Wouldn't it be ace to have 2 championships, whether it's still 1 race or split into 2?
F1 Drivers: Limited wing, no TC, manaual cluth/gearbox
F1 Tech: Nearly anything goes, mass dampers, turbos, flexi floors, 6 wheels etc
Your thoughts and saucy photos of celebrities please?
I think that F1 has an intrinsic paradox going on...
They say that F1 is about having the best technology, and yet they have lots of races to establish a World Driver Champion.
I think that the end of Traction Control will allow driver's to better demonstrate their driving skills, racing will get better and more varied as their will be the skilled, the brave and the lucky getting the chance to out accelerate other cars.
If a car is too technologically advanced (which they're not but run with me here...) then we may as well let all the drivers do a lap on Gran Tourismo and the one with the best lap time is the Champ.
Wouldn't it be ace to have 2 championships, whether it's still 1 race or split into 2?
F1 Drivers: Limited wing, no TC, manaual cluth/gearbox
F1 Tech: Nearly anything goes, mass dampers, turbos, flexi floors, 6 wheels etc
Your thoughts and saucy photos of celebrities please?
I would love to see how fast they can actually make these things go round a track without the limitation of the human wanting to live.
Would be very interesting to see all the fantastic techniques all previously banned put into action. Like big remote controlled cars. But then the exciting part of it is removed, and we'd be cheering on nuts and bolts.
Would be very interesting to see all the fantastic techniques all previously banned put into action. Like big remote controlled cars. But then the exciting part of it is removed, and we'd be cheering on nuts and bolts.
There are lots of one make formula that allow the drivers talents to shine through , why do people always think technology is bad?
F1 isnt just about drivers, its also about different approaches to engineering concepts , its about strategy and a platform for manufacturers to showcase their talents.
If we keep trying to go backwards with the technology and dumb it down all the time, we will end up with wooden spoke wheels and a lever on the steering wheel to adjust the ignition timing.
F1 isnt just about drivers, its also about different approaches to engineering concepts , its about strategy and a platform for manufacturers to showcase their talents.
If we keep trying to go backwards with the technology and dumb it down all the time, we will end up with wooden spoke wheels and a lever on the steering wheel to adjust the ignition timing.
I'd like the regulations less restrictive, and give designers a bit more leaway when it comes to coming up with inovative concepts. At the moment the cars are all too similar. I'd like to see lower CC turbo cars, as well as NA's, I'd love to see a freak of nature Tyrell, with 6 wheels, and all those funky designs get a chance to have a pop!
To play devils advocate, why not make the formula anything goes bar the following.
To prevent radio control or cyborg pilotage: The driver must be wholly within the vehicle and may not be modified i.e. no physical mods to allow greater resistance to G.
To prevent excessive injury to drivers: The driver must be wholly contained within a survival cell capable of deceleration of Xg without serious injury to a crash test dummy of type Y.
To prevent injury to spectators: The car must remain in one piece when hitting a solid concrete block at the cars highest geared speed.
To protect track workers, for use under caution flags: All cars will be fitted with a remote controlled speed limiter that may be activated by the Race Director.
To prevent wacky races style dodginess: No part of the car is permitted that functions solely to damage or interfere with others.
To cope with the increased speeds and resultant safety issues all run offs will covered with the stuff they put on post-it notes but stronger.
Ok maybe not the last one. But, my point is, what is actually wrong with a real Formula Libre? Do what you like, go as quick as you like if you can find someone to pilot it and you don't damage the punters. It would require a huge amount of research into increased safety and G resistance systems but does that matter?
To prevent radio control or cyborg pilotage: The driver must be wholly within the vehicle and may not be modified i.e. no physical mods to allow greater resistance to G.
To prevent excessive injury to drivers: The driver must be wholly contained within a survival cell capable of deceleration of Xg without serious injury to a crash test dummy of type Y.
To prevent injury to spectators: The car must remain in one piece when hitting a solid concrete block at the cars highest geared speed.
To protect track workers, for use under caution flags: All cars will be fitted with a remote controlled speed limiter that may be activated by the Race Director.
To prevent wacky races style dodginess: No part of the car is permitted that functions solely to damage or interfere with others.
To cope with the increased speeds and resultant safety issues all run offs will covered with the stuff they put on post-it notes but stronger.
Ok maybe not the last one. But, my point is, what is actually wrong with a real Formula Libre? Do what you like, go as quick as you like if you can find someone to pilot it and you don't damage the punters. It would require a huge amount of research into increased safety and G resistance systems but does that matter?
Sounds like reincarnating "Group B" for F1 to me. And we all know where that led in rallying. Fire and death.
Would you derestrict the size of the engines? Allow turbos - the power of the cars would immediately double and more. You wouldn't see any overtaking because the drivers would be too busy just trying to stay on the track, and alive.
Not sure it's a great idea to be honest. Let's see what difference removing TC makes next year and reappraise then?!
Would you derestrict the size of the engines? Allow turbos - the power of the cars would immediately double and more. You wouldn't see any overtaking because the drivers would be too busy just trying to stay on the track, and alive.
Not sure it's a great idea to be honest. Let's see what difference removing TC makes next year and reappraise then?!
edited to add - grid girls in whipped cream / bikini fights though - I think you might be onto something there...
Edited by Stuismyname on Thursday 11th October 11:02
I would like to see a more free formula, to allow engineering innovation. There are some of the best engineers around working in F1 and it would be good to see what they are capable of. All the little tricks like mass dampers, bendy floors, flexible wings should all be allowed. They should free up the engine regulations to allow different engine styles but limit the fuel available for a race to make some kind of power restriction.
rustybin said:
To prevent excessive injury to drivers: The driver must be wholly contained within a survival cell capable of deceleration of Xg without serious injury to a crash test dummy of type Y.
To prevent injury to spectators: The car must remain in one piece when hitting a solid concrete block at the cars highest geared speed.
I take it you're not an engineer then To prevent injury to spectators: The car must remain in one piece when hitting a solid concrete block at the cars highest geared speed.
Giovanardi's opinion on F1(and he was one of Ferrari's test drivers in 00 / 01)
Q - JSUK:
Would you like to have more international drivers in the BTCC? Do you feel it would be good for the series if Chevrolet or BMW ran a factory effort?
FG:
Of course; to make the category interesting to people outside it would be good to have more international drivers. The people that like racing like to see the good championships like the BTCC is. They want to watch good fighting not like Formula One which makes you fall asleep!
More fight with more brands would make more cars faster so I would be glad to see that too.
Q - JSUK:
Would you like to have more international drivers in the BTCC? Do you feel it would be good for the series if Chevrolet or BMW ran a factory effort?
FG:
Of course; to make the category interesting to people outside it would be good to have more international drivers. The people that like racing like to see the good championships like the BTCC is. They want to watch good fighting not like Formula One which makes you fall asleep!
More fight with more brands would make more cars faster so I would be glad to see that too.
zac510 said:
rustybin said:
To prevent excessive injury to drivers: The driver must be wholly contained within a survival cell capable of deceleration of Xg without serious injury to a crash test dummy of type Y.
To prevent injury to spectators: The car must remain in one piece when hitting a solid concrete block at the cars highest geared speed.
I take it you're not an engineer then To prevent injury to spectators: The car must remain in one piece when hitting a solid concrete block at the cars highest geared speed.
I always thought that they dropped the ball the year thinner front tyres were demanded, pre grooves.
This just seemed to cut drag, and make the cars quicker, they reduced downforce that year also. Im not 100% but think that was 94.
I think they've got the down force part of the equation that is F1 all wrong.
Imagine if we allowed more downforce, with a minimum limit at a set velocity.
Wouldn't that allow more over taking ?
This just seemed to cut drag, and make the cars quicker, they reduced downforce that year also. Im not 100% but think that was 94.
I think they've got the down force part of the equation that is F1 all wrong.
Imagine if we allowed more downforce, with a minimum limit at a set velocity.
Wouldn't that allow more over taking ?
Here's my formula....
a). No refuelling allowed
b). Tyres that will actually go the race distance
c). Award as many points for pole position as for winning the race - same pattern - 1st down to 8th or whatever - and line the race grid up in reverse with the fastest qualifier at the back
Chris
a). No refuelling allowed
b). Tyres that will actually go the race distance
c). Award as many points for pole position as for winning the race - same pattern - 1st down to 8th or whatever - and line the race grid up in reverse with the fastest qualifier at the back
Chris
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff