1) No aerodyanmic devices whatsoever. This has been my position for 5 years. The way this is enforced is the concept of the convex hull. Once the body bends in one direction it can never unbend in that direction. This eliminates 99% of all aero today--wings, spoilers, wingletts, barge boards, diffusers, venturies,... The only allowances would be for engine air intake, cooling air intakes, and brake ducting. 2) Multiple engine and transmission configurations allowed. Yes, indeed. But allow any engine anybody wants to try: pistons, turbines, wankles, turbo, super, electrical,.... The only limitation is a limitation on the total BTU content of the <liquid> fuel being carried. Even engine displacement is FREE--the goal is to develop engine technology that is powerful, light, reliable, and fuel efficient. 3) All tires manufactured in the winter before racing begins and are stockpilled in a garded warehouse. Any number of manufactures can participate. Teams can switch at any time--even durring a race. 4) Cars can be continuously developed/tossed/renewed--look, this is FORMULA ONE not IMSA, CART, IRL, <insert other crap series ike NASCAR>. 5) Elimination of rules regulating engine changes, gearbox changes, team orders, and tire changes. Refueling continues to be banned as a safety issue. The elimination of aerodynamics means that engine technology is free (but remains expensive), brake technology is free, suspension technology is free. This will double or tripple the acceleration distances out of turns, quadrupple brake distances into turns, decrease corner speeds by half, get rid of dirty air, and presto, there are opportunities for passing. In effect, all accelerations will come down to about 1.8-2.0 Gs max. There is no reason to restrict brake technology--the lack of aero makes current brake technology way to powerful for the resulting tire traction. There is no reason to restrict engine technology, the lack of aero make current engine technology way to much power for the resulting tire traction. Without aerodynamics, current F1 cars would spin their tires accelerating in a straight line all the way through 3rd or even 4th gear. There is no reason to resctict transmission technology. It would be very interesting to see a 4.0 litre V12 with 4 speeds compared to a 2.0 liter V8 with 7 speed transmission both producing the same maximum power. There is no reason to restrict suspension technologies, in fact, here is where one wants the greatest development. There is no reason to restrict tire technology--sooner or later pieces of that technology will arrive on road tires--and we all want this kind of grip.
If only we could. Not only weren't the good old days as good as we remember but what worked back then wouldn't work in today's world.
Turbos, blow... They are a cheap substitute for development and engineering talent. 3liters, naturally aspirated, no restriction other than fuel consumption, would produce real-world transferable developments quickly. (I could be talked into smaller displacement, as long as it could be demonstrated to not favor a particular configuration.) No virtual-fenders, strictly defined wing boxes, no diffusers, delineated brake ducting, min weight, no durability requirements, no materials restrictions other than toxicity, wider tires, same dia brakes (if not wheels), no driver adjustable anything, no dsg, no multiple gear changes, mechanical diffs only, no nanny-gizmoes of any kind. ...After this weekend I'd add no radios.
When (if) they go to turbo motors, they need to develop an overboost button similar to indy car of years past that allows drivers to reach higher boost for a period of time but risk blowing their motor if overused. Would be interesting to see... THE MAIN THING I WANT BACK IS ENGINE DEVELOPMENT! FROZEN ENGINES SUCK AND THE FANS HATE IT! ARE YOU LISTENING FIA?!
+1 The talk of "banning aero" is, IMO, nonsense - Anything moving, particularly at these speeds is pushing a *lot* of air around. These guys understand that and must develop aerodynamically efficient shapes. They're always gonna generate "dirty air" in their wake. Furthermore, without downforce they'd take off..... My 02c: - Unfreeze the frozen stuff - Let 'em at it! - Stick with the 2.4's, but get rid of the rev limit [I'd like the V10's back, but we're in cost cutting mode, remember ] - Test on the Monday after (most) races. - Everyone has "x" amount of fuel for the race [And x will be reduced by y% every year for n years - You gotta be efficient!] - KERS is free. - Team rules are fine. [It's always been a team sport] - You are free to use as many, of whatever compound, tires as are available - But, for now, there's only one tire supplier. [I enjoy tire wars, but again "not now".] It seems that some here don't understand that there's *never* been "enough" overtaking in F1! - It's a criticism that's been around since day 1. It's the way it is (and I don't care that they can do it GP2 - This is *not* a spec series!). Don't like it? Go watch the taxicabs turn left and leave us F1 fans to our misery. Incidentally, there was a pretty good story in R&T about the 24hrs at the 'Ring recently - Porsche ran a hybrid "911" with a flywheel KERS system developed by..... ..... ..... Williams! - Got great reviews from the drivers. I'd like to see KERS back next season, but not this half-assed "standard unit" nonsense - Let Williams (and whoever else) run flywheels, others can run batteries, yet others may implement something different. Cheers, Ian
But it is a spec engine series. BMW, Honda, Renault and Toyota all left as manufacturers because there was no marketing or technology pay-off for the hundreds of millions it cost to be Cosworth engine builders rather than legitimate manufacturers. Monty's involvement in this farce stands shoulder to shoulder with his ghetto-fabbing the road cars in its infamy and ignominy. Spot on, but I'll note that everything wrong with F1 since the V-10 only rule has its roots in NASCAR: Increase "the spectacle" at the expense of verity.
Thank you Ian. I was unable to respond in a manner that wouldn't have sounded demeaning to the Ban Aero movement
Here's my detailed opinion of F1 woes and solutions : http://www3.sympatico.ca/gmacgruer/I_Formula1.html
+1 The engineers now know WAY more than they knew then, and we'll have the same effect. Sooner than later, one engineer does something mega clever, the car will be so fast others might as well have a steamboat engine, and it'll be a one horse race again.
But wasn't that racing? There will always be clever new developments, with someone then being faster, until others catch up. That was the way I liked it; not trying to equalise all cars.
I'm a newb, this is my first season watching F1.....but it seems to me that simply adding weight to the top cars would help. They'd be slower at everything: turning, braking, accelerating. Then you could still let them develop whatever aero and brakes they wanted. 1) Take the top 9 cars from last week and increase their minimum weight in varying amounts. Then do it again, in addition, after qualifying. If you won last week and took the pole, you'd have the most possible weight added to your car. You could add the weight anywhere you wanted with any material, just so you met the new minimum. The goal would be to make the top 10 cars have similar lap times. Any strategy to try and game the system would be allowed, to try and make some team tactics to taking the championship. Obviously Ferrari would not like this so it'll never happen. 2) More safety car. Look for any and every opportunity to deploy it. Everything gets more exciting when this happens. I have no idea why they wouldn't want it out more. Obviously Ferrari would not like this so it'll never happen. 3) Let the teams do whatever 'orders' they want. If they want one car to drive slow and hold everyone up, or let the teammate pass, fine. Just like when a quarterback kneels to run out the clock rather than trying to score again. It 'fixes' the score, but we think nothing of it. Obviously Ferrari would like this so it'll surely happen.
Are you sure this is your first year? You are a very quick study BTW I don't like the idea of adding weight, weight is the enemy.
I've watched every qualifying and GP this year, and never a single clip prior to that. I'm fascinated. For Bahrain I woke up early to VPN with all my Ferrari gear on, flag in hand. I've really developed a negative view of Ferrari over this season. I figure it can't have always been this way, but they're a hard team to pull for. I realize results are probably all that counts for new car sales, but I personally have a much lower view of Ferrari than before this season. I still love my car, but honestly a little of the mystique is gone. I consciously think about not wanting to buy parts now to support their F1 effort....weird huh? I know, I know, they can do fine without my few dollars. I don't really care if they win or not, but I'd like them to have a little more class and integrity. They seem to do whatever they want, seems as if the FOM, FOTA, FOA, FIA, and WMSC should just be disbanded to let Ferrari make the rules. If their team mebers were slightly likeable that would help too. Christian Horner and Martin Whitmarsh are both really interesting, Domenicali is sickening to me. Most of the drivers are just clearly nice guys, or at least know how to come across that way. Alonso is fun to watch on track (as long as he doesn't talk), but seems like a real ****** whenever he talks in the interviews. Massa clearly just has no fire. I guess I've never seen him prior to this year, but he's got the personality of a turtle. Imagine what Webber would have done if Red Bull had told him to pull over and let Vettel past..... So entertaining though. As much as people complain about it, I think overall it's fascinating. I'm now an F1 fan for life, but rooting for Ferrari only lasted about 3 races. I guess I really don't have a team now, just like to watch. So, my question for the long time fans is: Has Ferrari always been like this?
I agree with the fuel rule, same amount of fuel regardless of the engine size or configuration.. ( 15 % ethanol? ) F1 has too many rules, if there were this many restraints on developements fourty years ago we would not have rear engines or sequential gear boxes..
You can't ban it, what the hell do you think would stop the cars from entering orbit at those speeds ? My old boss used to say " if its not part of the aerodynamics, then put a damn hole in it"
