How would *you* make F1 better?.......

I think that was loldonado.

 

Ian, see my post. Instead of Bernie taking all the cream, that cream should go back into the sport, tracks/facilities, companies involved, etc.

Bernie is self serving and not interested in the sport other than it continues to make a profit for himself. What we need is somebody that is focused on the sport not making himself rich.

I really think F1 should be a non-profit organisation.
Pete

 

I agree with your initial post, Sir Ian . There's enough runoff area to spin out the Costa Concordia these days. Buff up the barricades for safety but we need more dunes.

 

I think the run off area's are also way to large.. and the fans are so far from the action. My idea, ( not sure how it could work ...? ) is that instead of the legality plank, the cars carry a magnet on the bottom and then line the run off with attractive magnets to slow & stop cars from crashing... I think you could do it safely and reduce the run off areas. bring the crowds in closer... i think it would make the tracks much more interesting... and safer.

 

The end result of this technology is drivers would just go into corners with their throttle pinned ... if they did not make it so what, the magnets would save them.

(Fast_)Ian is right, there should be consequences for falling off. Sand traps are a good idea. Over reaction from Senna's death caused these enormous run off areas ...
Pete

 

Bring bak refuelling ...... Have 2 tire suppliers and give me burnie's job

 

Please no return of refuelling. I would like us to go further and remove the enforced tyre change pitstops.

Why?

Because pitstops are directly related to the lack of passing and destroy the flow of a race.

Think about it. If you cannot use a pitstop to engineer a pass, then you have to grow a pair and make the pass on the race track ... far too risky for many so they just wait for a pitstop. Some call it strategy, I call it soft.
Pete

 

not if the magnets stopped them for 30-60 seconds each major off.... there would be a huge penalty to "banzi" the corner... i think could lead to better smoother driving... but will not eliminate all accidents.

 

Fascinating idea!

Wildly expensive and totally impractical IMO, but a cool idea! Off the top of my head;

- What happens if there's more than one car involved - They'd be slowing down at alarmingly different rates etc.
- What happens if someone's upside down? Rather than attract the magnets would now repel and you'd levitate right into the barrier!
- There's just too many unforeseen scenarios. [The "OSINTOT" - "Oh ****, I never thought of that!"]

Seriously, as F1Flagger has noted, the existing system of flags/lights has served us remarkably well over the ages; Keep it simple.

Theoretically, the rules can already penalize an "off" with drive thru's and stop & goes. Sure, it becomes a judgement call but I believe Charlie has had about enough of 'em making up their own race track and is "on the case".....

Doesn't get the punters any closer though - In fact, thinking more on this, given how safe they are now maybe any new tracks could put the fans closer in a lot of scenarios?

Cheers,
Ian

 

Beg to differ on all points unless;

- Give me a good reason why refueling will make it "better"? As I've said, I can take it or leave it. FWIW, Autosport is reporting that Mclaren are aiming for sub 2 second stops next year - Sam seems confident they can do it too!........

- Same question about a tire war. Can be fun and certainly they push the envelope closer to the edge. But exactly how would it make the racing better?

- OK, you've got Bernie's job! - Please give us your manifesto for improvement!?

Cheers,
Ian

 

I hear you, but I don't think Bernie is taking all the cream. He has (rightly or wrongly) a huge debt to service and a fiduciary responsibility to maximize profits. The majority of which do already get returned to the teams.

I never thought I'd be defending the Pygmy! But here goes; I beg to differ that he's not interested in the sport - He's already got more money than God, I really don't think that's his motivation. He cares very deeply about it IMO.

Still pondering that one! The FIA is of course already a non-profit.....

Cheers,
Ian

 

How sweet!

See the Viz for replacement keyboard scenarios!

La plage?

Cheers,
Ian

 

I happen to think F1 is in a pretty decent place right now. What I would suggest is reassessing the tires, working towards a tire that will last an entire race and won't degrade and produce all that klag. I think that's the biggest detriment these days - so much close racing and competitiveness, but as a race progresses you're always left with a single racing line. I would also evaluate DRS to see if its use can be expanded/tweaked.

 

I agree that F1 is in a fairly good, competitive state currently. My suggestions...

1. Reduce/reconfigure asphalt runoff areas to restore the consequence of an "off."
2. Eliminate hard compound tire, make all other compounds 10% softer (but without the massive marbles).
3. More tires allotted in qualifying.
4. Make Friday an open testing day and allow a third car if necessary.

 

This is a good comment. Was that not the idea of the grooved tyres though?

Pete

 

A engine size limit, but no restrictions on cylinders. N/A

No kers

No DRS

Refueling

Allow on track testing prior and during the season, allowing smaller teams to use the big boys tracks

I loved the way the cars looked with the big aero packages such as the F2008


allow multiple tire manufactures to sign with a team or engine manufacture

 

I had to think real hard to making F1 more interesting for us spectators (not necessarily better for the sport) than this amazing 2012 season we just had, but I think the following would spice things up:
• Gravel/Dirt/Sand on run-offs so mistakes have consequences or conversely once you're off you need to let all traffic within 1s pass before re-entering the circuit
• At least 2 DRS zones at every circuit
• Increase the DRS window beyond 1s
• Do away with flags completely, and only employ them when there is a malfunctioning light on the circuit (if the lights are wrong at least it'll be consistently wrong for everyone and there won't be room for interpretation)
• More testing dammit!

 

Two drivers from the top 10 qualifiers are randomly selected to go to the back of the pack for each and every race. Two of the slowest 14 qualifiers are randomly selected and given their starting grid positions in the top 10 to replace the two moved back.

The two top ten randomly selected to go to the back of the grid get unlimited allowances for tire and 'legal' chassis/aero setup adjustments and are NOT required to pit for tires at all.

No 'single' top 10 qualifier can be sent to the back of the grid more than 4 times in a season.

 

Or to simplify this otherwise brilliant concept:

Reversed grid

Instead of qualifying the drivers start in reverse order of their WDC positions.

 

I´d remove DRS (too videogame for me) but would do the necessary changes in aerodynamics to allow passing. If that means return to 1960 aero, then so be it.

Other thing they could put is bigger batteries for KERS. Right now, they´re recovering a small amount of the energy it can produce.

 

Seems gimmicky to me

As for all this talk about magnets (lol), what's wrong with good old gravel traps?

 

Get rid of the downforce, period. No wings. No undertrays.

If you got rid of the downforce cornering speeds would go down signficantly, hence safety would be much greater. There would be additional time that would allow passing under braking (as there used to be), so the show would improve. Since cornering speeds would be lower, this would reduce straight line speeds too, since if the cornering speed is down and you can't put as much power down (no downforce to increase traction) on corner exit you can't accelerate as well.

Without the downforce, the amount of power would be much less important, and engines need not be as stressed, so the'd last longer.

The upshot is drivers would have to DRIVE the car, modulate the power, and earn their pay, and the real drivers would rise to the top. Setup for mechanical grip would be key critical (as it was in the 60's) and the combination of great driver and chassis engineering (think Jim Clark) would dominate.

Unfortunately it won't happen, since the series is built on the concept that it is the pinnacle of the sport, and to do that you have to be the fastest series out there. If a Indy car could do a faster lap time, then F1 wouldn't be that pinnacle, so it won't happen. But it would be a heck of a show.

 

I admit I have not ironed out all the bugs... but if cars get airborne all bets are off.. but fiven the nature of crashes most ( not all ) are simple over shoot, bump & spin things... I think with the nature of computer control the magnets is a good idea and safer ( i think ) not sure how powerful they have to be etc? maybe completly crazy.

I also think the fans attending need to be much more included, NOT sure of how many have been to Austin or any GP lately but when you compare it to F-1 in the 80's and early 90's its completly different.

back then you could walk the track.. there was a lot of general viewing - non grand stand space so you could see the cars in action all around the circuit. if you wanted a seat you could get one also... but slowly that has gone away - austin had a good amount but if you notice there is almost no internal viewing anymore - Spa, Monza, Monaco & street circuits and that is it... used to be all the tracks you could be inside the track or out - or both.

Paddock access - Near impossible. I spend 1 day at Austin with the folks at Deloitte who hooked me up big time at McLaren... but even then - it was like you were going to the white House - your credential was checked 9 times... 9 Times!!! single file into the paddock ... anyhow, fans are so excluded you cant even get remotly close the the cars or drivers etc... that is so dissapointing ... you get to see some of the cars on exibition but not the actual cars and teams working on them.... back in the day - you could watch the teams prepare the cars, and it was usually the real fans that stayed to see the cars & drivers ... why is that so bad? I know the rich and famous dont want to mix the ordinary humans but really? you can let them in for a couple of hours each day walk up and down the paddock and pit lane ... just cordon off the sides and let the crowds in... you could even charge for Paddock access - give it away to charity or what ever... the local fans that attend really get the shaft... Austin looked ok, but at places like Brasil, Hungary, etc... its crap.

 

Agree 100% F1 has a lot to learn from Nascar with regard to this...

 

+2

It's a lot easier to whine about it though! As for improving it, we can see from the huge diversity of ideas herein that it ain't easy.......

No sir. That little bit of artifice was dreamed up to slow 'em down. Nothing more, nothing less.

As for a "single racing line" and a bunch of clag - It's pretty much *always* been that way.... Lifted from a Clarkson article from 2006;

Even back in the dark ages of the seventies there was but a solitary line late in the race.......

FWIW, the complete article (link below) makes pretty good reading - Including his defense of Michael's infamous parking episode in Monaco.....

Cheers,
Ian
http://www.funenclave.com/formula-1/jeremy-clarkson-on-michael-schumacher-2472.html