FIA (finally) agrees to review circuit designs to promote passing

I love Todt already

 

Yes! All these new tracks suck.

 

It's the cars, not the tracks. Overtaking happens plentiful in GP2/3.

'back to the roots' with F1 cars please (for overtaking sake).

Mechanical differentials, less downforce (simple diffusers, wide rear wings).

 

+1

and do something to reduce stopping power...maybe rear brakes only?

 

If what it takes is to dumb down F1 cars to the level of GP2 why have F1 in the first place?
Circuits have a lot to do with the problem and getting rid of chicanes would be a great place to start. Originally they were band-aid fixes for existing tracks. Now they're designed into new ones. Where is the sense in that?

 

If you get rid of much (to all) of the aerodynamics, the stopping power comes down all by itself. The front and rear wings should return to single plane designs or be eliminated al together.

 

You guys are all right if you look at how F1 is defined:

F1 is defined by 4 basic values:
- Safety
- Show
- Costs
- Technology

The formula of F1 is a compromise between these four constraints. When big accidents happen (think Barrichello/Ratzenberger/Senna/Wurz) then the safety component gets a huge priority. When the teams can't afford the game anymore, the cost cutting becomes priority. When the audience starts to turn off their TVs, then they tinker with the show component.

Currently we have somewhat of a control on costs, huge safety margins and a somewhat lame show.

If you want to improve the show, you need to alter the Formula: Reduce aeros, bring back steel suspensions and brakes etc. But that will negatively affect the technology element, because you're going back to the mid sixties. F1 then becomes a hardsell as the technology marvel the teams want it to be to have the most marketing effect.

You could alter the tracks: All the modern tracks were designed with safety in mind and the mid speed Tilke turns. It is not Tilke who has no imagination, it is the constraints given to him by a safety conscious FIA that demands the boring turns etc.

Bottom line is: The show can be improved, but it will negatively affect another constraint. Technology (cars) and safety (tracks) are likely to be altered.

Since the FIA assures through its regulations that F1 is the king of motorsports (at least for the races under its governance), changing the formula for F1 will have a trickle down effect on its other series. Otherwise a GP2 car could suddenly become faster than a F1 and that can't be. That of course affects costs dramatically if all lesser series have to be altered as well.

 

Yes and no. The cars have advanced, as they are suppose to. The tracks have advanced in a negative way. As said, the tracks need less chicanes and some areas need to be wider to promote passing. I know they are safer, but this is racing. Look at Spa, then look at some of these new tracks....

 

So, Tilke will have to come up with a new idea. I don't know...sounds pretty radical.

 

Well whats the point of having such advanced differentials that will give you so much grip that the cars are almost unable to spin? Whats the point of having such advanced aero that when a car comes up within 2 seconds of another, it's unable to pass simply because of unstable air? Sorry but I don't really like watching different colored trains following each other. I want to see the drivers having a real chance at overtaking again.

Schumacher VS Barrichello in Hungary 2010, RB was over 3s a lap faster than Schumacher and was since then unable to pass Herr Michael.

Yes the new tracks are boring, I'm not saying anything about that. Chicanes are unnecessary for the most part and the new tracks just lack imagination so Tilke puts a few squiggles in there so it'll look good. But in all fairness, it works for any other racing series, hence the problem lies with the cars, simple as that IMO.

 

Have we reached the point where the technology has become too sophisticated and the cars too capable? If so a rethink of what F1 is, and should be, is in order.
I think that the more we limit the scope of design the less attractive F1 becomes.

 

I think we have. Honestly, every now and then I watch a rerun of F1 in the 90's/early 2000's, and we just don't have that stuff anymore. Close racing etc.

Now during the races all we're doing is being theoretical, about who comes where and when he'll be close. Then still no passing (only when it's wet).

I wish the disturbed airflow was something that wouldn't have ever been discovered by the designers....

 

Can't put the Genie back in the box.

I've been reading Karl Ludvigsen's book on Chapman and Colin's idea for limiting F1 was a fuel flow restriction. So many cc.s per sec. All other parameters would be free. Get rid of some the more boring aspects of today's tracks and it might still be a good approach.

 

I have believed in the idea of fuel flow restriction for the last 25 years!!
I have mentioned it many times in discussions about regulations, engine sizes, number of cylinders, etc...

Fuel flow control is the ONLY way to regulate F1 equitably and to give maximum freedom to designers without seeing their output gets out of hand.

I never understood why the idea was never adopted by the FIA, advocated by the engineers, and claimed by the manufacturers.

To me, the present premises for the FIA to draw F1 regulations are completely flawed, and this is why there is instability in the sport: the technical rules are subject to interpretations and need to be tweaked several times a year!!!

A fuel flow formula would also attrack the best brains in the automotive industry and have direct results for car manufacturers in their quest for fuel efficiency.

I predict that the FIA will adopt it one day, too late and after most car manufacturers will have walked away in disgust.

 

We can only hope. J. Todt has shown signs of rationality long missing at the FIA so maybe there's hope.
A fuel flow (as opposed to a fuel consumption) standard would allow a return of the innovation that's been missing.
BTW I recommend the Ludvigsen/Chapman book highly.

 

You have to wonder how many passes will take place this year due to pit crew errors or just plain slow pit stops due to crowded pit lanes etc

 

I will have to buy that book.

At the moment, I can't finish Jochen Rindt's biography by David Tremayne; it's too long and fastidious.

In between, I had time to read "No Angel", and I am half way through "Bernie" by Susan Watkings. BTW, it's a bad idea to read 2 bio of the same guy one after the other!

I must say that on the whole, I am no fan of Colin Chapman.

 

Then you'll find this book fascinating.
K.L. is not one to put on the rose colored specs. I particularly like the comment about Chapman not going through with a proposed takeover by Deloren because the scrutiny would have led to jail time

 

OK, I may get flamed for this, but I would love to see no limits on the cars. Think of the engineering advancements and high levels of excitment if the teams could do whatever they wanted: 12 cylinders, 6 cylinder turbos, electric boosters, moving wings, refueling, run your own tires, AWD, unlimited budget... think of what wild stuff we'd see.

 

No limits nor parameters?
I wonder if they'd end up even using wheels?
The limiting factor would be driver endurance I imagine. Or is a driver needed under your scenario?

 

We all have to remember that for many years F1 has been won or lost on qualifying, strategy and pit stops. The cars are so advanced, that the only way to help would be tracks that promote passing more then they do now, and that still won't solve the issue. But, they can't make the cars less advanced or that goes against F1 all together. Hard to explain, but I'm sure you guys get my point.

 

Hummmm, you got me thinking there.

The nearest we ever had to that idea was the original CANAM, where the only rules were that the car had to have 2 seats and the wheels enclosed. There was hardly any other regulations initially (well, maybe the fuel, I am not sure).

CANAM cars were way faster than F1, and developed an astronomical power, mostly once the turbos were introduced (Porsche and then Chevy).
I think the series collapsed because of lack of contenders in the end; it had become so expensive that no one could really afford it.

But I am sure that if Bernie was adopting it, his TV rights could trickle down to the teams to make it viable.
But I cannot see "Formule Libre" last long without some impositions on the vehicles, if only to stop one type of car to run away with all the trophies, like the McLarens, and then the Porsches did.

I also don't know how long the existing circuits could safely accomodate the cars!!
But we can always dream... or look at old CANAM videos!!!

 

The concensus here in UK, is that Chapman was spared arrest and possibly jail because he died before the wheels went in motion.
He was deeply implicated on a massive fraud with De Lorean, as a subsequent enquiry revealed.
One could say that his passing was a 'timely' death, saving his family from certain disgrace.
The Lotus accountant, who was also part of the scam, wasn't so lucky and did some time inside.

But Chapman was a rogue anyway, who built his car company over a trail of unpaid bills to many subcontractors. He was a motivator and convinced many people to work for him without being paid ! Later on, he dismissed then, having exploited them shamefully for several years!
His business practices were also sharp, to say the least.
Now I can't wait to read the book !!

 

Sharp is a much used descriptor.