Formula One - The next five year regulations

[Vimy101]

Vimy my man,

Active Suspension, ABS, TC were banned at the end of 1993. Senna died because his steering column - which was modified the week-end of the race - snapped while taking a turn at Tamburello, sending him in a cement wall. An element of the suspension pierced his visor and hit him in the eye/eyebrow piercing his skull. Whether you believe it or not, Michael Schumacher (a whole 'nother sea of worms) had nothing to do with it and his death was freak. Tragic...but freak. It wasn't the crash that killed him, but something piercing the helmet and the skull.

 

I am an advocate for technology in the car. We simply cannot go back to the times Bosco reminds us about. Maybe that is the difference between us youngsters and the older, wiser guns. Still...if we are to ban such "electronic driver aids" why ban other things that could have made it into street cars. just think of what ideas came out of F1 in the last 10 years of banned electronics:

 

- Front & Rear Mechanical Torque Transfer (BAR Honda, 2004)

- Movable aerodynamics (Ferrari, 1997)

- Brake Steering = 2nd/selective brake pedal (McLaren, 1998)

- Mass Damper System (Renault, 2005)

 

And back to electronics...who can forget both Coulthard and Schumacher benefitting from 2 way telemetry ? 2001 Monaco GP (Coulthard) and 2002 Brazilian GP (Schumacher) when their respective teams solved the car issues from behind the pit wall ?

 

Formula One should be about innovation, about development, about cutting edge technology. it ain't like that no more. I agree - costs were spiraling out of control. What makes you think F1 teams will actually stop spending money if there is a ban on electronics or technology ? They would just run more wind tunnel testing and optimize aerodynamics in quest of that elusive 0.1 of a second which could have been easily achieved by writing some code at a cost of a few hundread thousand dollars as opposed to a few tens of millions.

 

IMO if they just wanted to cut down on prices...they should have disallowed testing anywhere but the racetrack, say the Friday before the test: unlimited testing...and maybe 10 other days of testing thruout the year. I forgot where I read but it costs about 2000 dollars a lap to run an F1 car at the average circuit. Looks like McLaren wasted 150,000 $ just to let a former driver have a fun day. Talk about budgets and reducing costs...

 

It would have been incredibly stupid easy to put a rev limiter on the cars and keep the trusted V10 engines. Horsepower and speed reduction. Instead everyone had to redesign and repackage an engine...now with a different geometry, different angle, different weight different everything. THAT was a failure in terms of cost savings.

 

And I could speak on what I love and hate about F1 for the next week and not be finished.

 

There is no mention of that specific head injury in the Wikipedia article. The only mention of his head injury was that it was of a massive concussive nature. I will certainly defer to your knowledge of F1.

 

However, I did watch the race live and there were far more sparks coming from the skid bars of Senna's William's than any of the other cars. I repeat the incident again because I remember thinking at least 5 laps before Senna lost control that his car just didn't look right and it was getting worse with every lap.

[bosco]

^ f1, all valid points and believe me i love high tech but if high tech causes the races to continue to be a follow the leader ordeal then some of this high tech has got to go. you guys know way more than me about F1 but i do know one thing the parade needs to end. F1 is the zenith of motorsports please fix it. bosco

[FJuan]

Bosco you must be a huge Nascar Fan. What major technology has came from Nascar and being used on todays cars?

[fweasel]

There is no mention of that specific head injury in the Wikipedia article. The only mention of his head injury was that it was of a massive concussive nature. I will certainly defer to your knowledge of F1.

.

If Speed ever airs their Decades coverage of that race again, the modern commentray is very insightful and a must see for any racing fan. You get to watch the historic video feed with commentary that has the luxury of 20/20 hindsight. It was one of the worst (if not the worst) race weekends in Formula 1. Rookie Ratzenberger was also killed and Rubens Barichellow narrowly escaped death in a horrific off. Several spectators were also injurred in a crash on one of the first laps of the race.

 

The suspension component did indeed pierce Senna'a helmet and caused his death.

[fweasel]

Bosco you must be a huge Nascar Fan. What major technology has came from Nascar and being used on todays cars?

Beer Cuzies, improved RV roof structures, and countless amounts of data for UV exposure studies.

[bosco]

Bosco you must be a huge Nascar Fan. What major technology has came from Nascar and being used on todays cars?

 

carburetors seriously i'm not getting in a pissing match with you or anyone else on this but to answer your question yes i'm a NASCAR fan as well as most all other forms of car/bike racing including F1. now you want me to guess what you are? :icon_wink bosco

[fweasel]

now you want me to guess what you are? :icon_wink bosco

I'm too dumb for opera, too smart for NASCAR. (one of my favorite T-shirts spotted at the AMLS race in Ohio.)

[Scotty]

You know at this point in time LeMans cars are more advance than F1 cars. Almost every year, Audi will come out with something new that gets banned the following year.

[KartRacerBoy]

Mark Hughes, a columnist in AutoSport magazine, is fearful that Max Mosely, head of the FIA, is cosying up to the manufacturers, who declare they want an F1 formula that reflects the tech they put in road cars. Stability control, traction control, etc.

 

I'm hopeful that Max is just being his annoying self and throwing a bombshell into the conversation to stir things up and keep the manufacturers happy b4 he puts the kibosh on their plans. Figuring out his true beliefs is difficult, since he is like Bernie Ecclestone in that he always takes an extreme position b4 the bargaining actually begins.

 

As for passing, I know f1anatic disagrees, but lets go back to a single set of race tires and eliminate refueling. Get rid of the series of sprints between stops. Or at least one set of race tires. There was more passing in 2005 when drivers ran out of grip (from overusing tires early on) than in the 5 previous years combined. Granted, the situation might change if the one race set of tires rule lasted more than a single season and teams and drivers adapted (not to mention a single tire supplier), but it was a great spectacle.

 

And it isn't artificial competition. There was no refueling from 1983 onward and pitstops were only for tires. The racing was great (although perhaps becz aero development was still in its infancy then).

[fweasel]

You know at this point in time LeMans cars are more advance than F1 cars. Almost every year, Audi will come out with something new that gets banned the following year.

...and then trickle into their road cars. Turbo deisel v10 SUV FTW! (rumoured option anyways)

[KartRacerBoy]

It was one of the worst (if not the worst) race weekends in Formula 1. Rookie Ratzenberger was also killed and Rubens Barichellow narrowly escaped death in a horrific off. Several spectators were also injurred in a crash on one of the first laps of the race.

 

The suspension component did indeed pierce Senna'a helmet and caused his death.

 

Believe me, there were many F1 races that were far worse in terms of deaths than Imola 1994. Cars used to go into crowds, catch fire, and burn many to death. Read about racing in the 1960s and 1970s and drivers fell like flies. In 1973, an F1 driver died every third race.

 

The difference is that in 1994 it was on television for millions to see.

[fweasel]

Believe me, there were many F1 races that were far worse in terms of deaths than Imola 1994. Cars used to go into crowds, catch fire, and burn many to death. Read about racing in the 1960s and 1970s and drivers fell like flies. In 1973, an F1 driver died every third race.

 

The difference is that in 1994 it was on television for millions to see.

Agreed, I should have clarified it as the worst weekend in modern F1. As morose as it may be, some of my favorite photographs are of early motorsports crashes... back when it was safest if you were thrown from the car!

[KartRacerBoy]

BTW, fweasel, what is "sport sharp"? Is it curable with antibiotics? Does the wife know?

[fweasel]

BTW, fweasel, what is "sport sharp"? Is it curable with antibiotics? Does the wife know?

Sport # (# is the sybol the cools guys use instead of typing sharp) is a feature that all non 07 LGT/SpecB owners lack and will suffer decreased performance as a result. It seems the FIA banned variable ECU tuning for the 05/06 model years. While Subaru had it perfected and ready for use in our cars, a 12th hour decision pulled that gem from our cars... You see, more than just technology trickles down from race cars.

[KartRacerBoy]

Damn, my BS meter just pegged...

[hybridandy]

...

 

Most money doesn't win. Toyota is reported to be the highest spender in F1, how many races did they win this year? Ferrari is #2 in spending, and they only did okay.

 

...

 

Ferrari only did okay? They were 1 point back in the championship going into the last 2 races and only due to a blown engine (on it's second race weekend, I believe) in the next to last race, was the championship decided and Ferrari had to settle for 2nd and 3rd place.

 

I don't think going back to a single set of tires for the entire race is a good idea. It's basically going to force the drivers to drive conservatively for 90% of the race. You flatspot a tire early and your race is over (ask Kimi). I think 1 tire manufacture and everybody on the same compound will make the races better though. It would be interesting to see how a single fuel load would affect the races but I don't think it would make as much of an impact (everyone would have the same amount so they would still be equal). I personally like the idea of starting a race heavy or light as a strategic element.

 

Also, I don't think trying to restrict the technology will work either. These aren't mom and pop operations competing here, they've got dollars to spend and they won't spend them foolishly. Part of the appeal of F1 is the fact that the cars are the fastest and most technically advanced things on the planet. Maybe require full disclosure of a car after the season is over to even the playing field. You may have developed a super advanced piece of new technology that will allow you an advantage, but it will only last 1 year, then everybody has it. This may encourage new innovation that could filter down into everyone's respective product lines (I wonder how a mass damper system would work in my Spec B). Just an idea.

[KartRacerBoy]

hybridandy, perhaps you're right about fuel loads. When cars couldn't refuel in the 1980s and early 90s, it was b4 aero became more science than art. One reason they went to refueling was because cars were so critical on aero, they could never get close enough to pass, so even if a following car was 1+ sec/lap faster, it couldn't pass.

 

The solution to the passing problem is simple. Ban downforce. No wings or diffusers. But it won't happen because of the advertising space they'd lose and the cars might be slower than lower formula. Even if they are harder than hell to drive. I'd get rid of downforce and put big ass slicks back on with a wide track. Even with current horsepower, the cars would be monstrously fast in a straight line, braking distances would go way up, and if there was no traction control or stability control, they'd be a handful into and out of the corners. Skill would become much more prominent.

 

And teams could still use their windtunnels to minimize drag although this would probably be much easier than what they do now in those tunnels.

[f1anatic]

Ok kids. What the hell are you doing here !

WEASEL

Sport # (# is the sybol the cools guys use instead of typing sharp) is a feature that all non 07 LGT/SpecB owners lack and will suffer decreased performance as a result. It seems the FIA banned variable ECU tuning for the 05/06 model years. While Subaru had it perfected and ready for use in our cars, a 12th hour decision pulled that gem from our cars... You see, more than just technology trickles down from race cars.

 

 

Weasel you're a genius.

 

HYBRID

Part of the appeal of F1 is the fact that the cars are the fastest and most technically advanced things on the planet. Maybe require full disclosure of a car after the season is over to even the playing field. You may have developed a super advanced piece of new technology that will allow you an advantage, but it will only last 1 year, then everybody has it. This may encourage new innovation that could filter down into everyone's respective product lines (I wonder how a mass damper system would work in my Spec B). Just an idea.

 

Fabulous ideea. It has my support and it has been suggested in the pit lane before. Get it past Ron Dennis and a few other conceited losers and it might happen. In all seriousness it is a great ideea that would just push the teams to innovate. By the end of the racing season everyone has somehow copied each other anyways. i recall reading on the mass damper - GATE. Renault had it last year on the car and designed their car around it. Everyone else ran it in winter testing but two teams could not make it work: Honda and McLaren. Ferrari used it but theri car was designed without it...and when McLaren and Honda had the mass damper banned...it was Ferrari who benefitted.

 

KARTER

The solution to the passing problem is simple. Ban downforce. No wings or diffusers. But it won't happen because of the advertising space they'd lose and the cars might be slower than lower formula. Even if they are harder than hell to drive. I'd get rid of downforce and put big ass slicks back on with a wide track. Even with current horsepower, the cars would be monstrously fast in a straight line, braking distances would go way up, and if there was no traction control or stability control, they'd be a handful into and out of the corners. Skill would become much more prominent.

.

 

utter insanity, madness crap. Lol. You wanna get rid of aerodynamics ? Were/Are you an advocate for the wing of tomorrow as well (which thank God it was disallowed) ? I agree with putting less emphasis on aerodynamics. Clean up the car of winglets and horn exhausts and bargeboatrds and go back to the sexy coca-cola bottle shape, a 3 element wing and that's it.

 

Remember what they did in 1995 in order to slow the cars down ? They reduced the size of the rear wing, lowering it. Remember what they did in 2001 ? They lifted the front wing 10 cm. And again in 2003. And in 2005 they moved the rear wing forward and elongated it. What did this bullshit do ? NOTHING that they hoped for. They just need to clean up the aero and reduce the allowed surface area for wing elements. By the year 1999- and this comes straight off a poster on the wall - the number of rear wing elements on the car was 8-10 (8 visible in my poster, Schumacher, Monaco GP). No more than 4 elements on the rear wing...3 upper and one lower beam.

 

Did raising the front wing help ? To reduce downforce - mind you ? No...and now the cars are plain hideous and still no overtaking. And while regulating the braking performance on the car will definitely help...what needs to improve are the circuits. Chicanes and curves were modified in a knee jerk reflex after Senna's death - God Bless Him - which ruined the sport. How many times do you think the first corner at Monza was changed in the past 10 years ? I believe in 2002 they changed it 3 times around between the different races they had there.. Too many 1st corner accidents. Let us make it from a left hand turn to a right hand turn. Dang...mang...that solved the problem.

 

 

You think the cars would be hard to drive ? No shit...they wouldn't even drive...they would roll in the first wall. We got plenty of kids on this forum who can't keep an awd car with 1600 kg on the asphalt...how do you think you can control a rwd car with 800 hp and weighing a ton less than the Legacy ?

 

What I love is that some of us claim F1 is too easy to drive these days and too munch Nintendo in the car and so on. Look no further than Mika Hakkinen. 5 years later he stepped in a car which he said wasn't much different than the one he drove in 2001. And what...he was 3 seconds off the pace...a 2X World Champion with 1993-2001 with 9 years of racing ? If it was so damn easy...why was he so slow ? All he had to do is press some pedals and point in the right direction ?

 

Well you may wish to review this info here

http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2004/RobertNapolitano.shtml

and let us know if removing aerodynamics from the current F1 cars would not result in massive bleeding ?

and I quote

"The Grand Prix with the highest average speed in history was the 1971 Italian Grand Prix, won by Peter Gethin in a BRM at an average speed of 242.615 kph (150.754 mph) on the Monza circuit which at the time did not yet have any chicanes (interestingly, a recent computer simulation suggested that current Formula One cars would achieve an average speed of well over 300 kph - 190 mph - on the original circuit). In 1998, the fastest Grand Prix was the Italian, won by Michael Schumacher at an average of 237.591 kph (147.633 mph).

respectively

29. Are the cars currently used faster than the cars of the "turbo" era? If a 1.5-litre turbocharged car were produced today, as was the case up until 1988, it would be a great deal faster than the contemporary 3-litre cars. However, contemporary cars benefit from significant technological progress, allowing them to exceed the speeds of the 1988 turbocharged models, despite the fact that these were able to rely on over 1200 horse power in qualifying!

http://atlasf1.com/news/1999fiafaq.htm#Q29

[KartRacerBoy]

f1anatic,

 

Your reasons for minimizing downforce are my reasons for eliminating it. Yes, they raised the front wing. yes they lowered the rear wing. And the teams got the downforce back with time and money. So ELIMINATE the damn things. Make GRIP god. I know it won't happen for the reasons I stated above and more, but it's a wonderful fantasy.

 

At the very least, go back to big, dirty single element wings. Banana wings. No Gurney Flap (sorry Dan).

 

As to Mika, the tires have a hell of alot more grip than they did when he was racing. And he's not F1 fit. And he now drives DTM sedans. And he has kids and doesn't want to do anything stupid. That is why he is 3 sec slower. Have you ever pulled a sustained 3g's in a turn. It wears on you quick. 5gs in an F1car, fun, but not for long unless you're fit for it.

[KartRacerBoy]

As to average speeds, F1anatic, I'm perhaps on circuits like the old Hockenheim or prechicane Monza or Imola you might go faster w/o wings, but not on other modern circuits (even Spa). Granted, terminal straightaway speeds might go up substantially, but the time at that higher speed will be less because turn speeds (entry, midcorner, exit) will go WAY down. I say might because with no downforce, braking will have to start much sooner, so they might not get to a faster terminal velocity compared to a winged car. But faster acceleration will result due to less drag from no wings.

 

If I was the FIA, my real concern from my proposal would be on courses where terminal velocity is higher. When cars touch wheels, they could take off, but this will depend on how car designers modify current designs to minimize drag while retaining strength for crush zones. Even with massive downforce, IRL cars take off regularly when touching wheels. Perhaps this is due to the wide flat bottom to house the radiators, etc. If so and designers could retain some crushable structures w/o flat bottoms (by making the bottom of the radiator pods curve up from the central monocoque to the widest point of the pod) so air isn't so easily trapped underneath, my approach might work.

 

So there you are f1anatic. My proposal for new aero rules.

[Scotty]

Even if you take away the wings and diffusers, it just means the engineers will spend more time optimizing the shape of the car to produce the downforce. Unless you make all cars the sames the same shape, the engineers will tweak every tiny little thing.

 

The solution is still in the tires. A single spec, super hard/low traction tire will solve majority of the problems. With a low traction tire, cornering speed will drop significantly, acceleration will drop, braking zones will get longer. You can have all the power in the world, but it's worthless if you can't get the tires to hook up. Then you can let the engineers run wild.

 

As for F1 cars being easy to drive. Anyone can get within 95% of what the car can do. It's that last 5% that separates the men from the boys.

[bosco]

^ RE 92's. bosco

[KartRacerBoy]

Even if you take away the wings and diffusers, it just means the engineers will spend more time optimizing the shape of the car to produce the downforce. Unless you make all cars the sames the same shape, the engineers will tweak every tiny little thing.

 

The solution is still in the tires. A single spec, super hard/low traction tire will solve majority of the problems. With a low traction tire, cornering speed will drop significantly, acceleration will drop, braking zones will get longer. You can have all the power in the world, but it's worthless if you can't get the tires to hook up. Then you can let the engineers run wild.

 

As for F1 cars being easy to drive. Anyone can get within 95% of what the car can do. It's that last 5% that separates the men from the boys.

 

Tires may be a big element. In 2005 when a car could only use a single set of tires for a race, by the end of the event with varying fuel loads at the beginning of the race and two tire suppliers, different teams had different tire performance (and sometimes diff drivers on same team had diff level of grip left). I think you may be right if a set of tires has to last a race, but if a car can change tires 2 or 3 times in a race, the tire maker would have to make a VERY low grip tire for such a tire to be trash at the end of each stint.

 

Making a tire last 50+ laps is much harder than making them last 15 laps. Prost and Senna were masters at this. Schumacher may have been but he never got a chance to prove it in his era with refueling dominating pit strategy.

 

I stand by my premise.

[Scotty]

^ RE 92's. bosco

 

Bosco, you were too late, I already mentioned RE-92 on the first page of this discussion.

 

The key isn't to design a tire to last the entire race. Just go from bad to worse within a few laps. A set of RE-92 will probably only last a few laps under that kind of power. But no more fuel in the pits, just tire changes like the old days. I want to see 3 second pit stops again.

[bosco]

Bosco, you were too late, I already mentioned RE-92 on the first page of this discussion.

 

The key isn't to design a tire to last the entire race. Just go from bad to worse within a few laps. A set of RE-92 will probably only last a few laps under that kind of power. But no more fuel in the pits, just tire changes like the old days. I want to see 3 second pit stops again.

 

sorry. bosco