2021 F1 changes

Yesterday i received by mistake an 1/18 model of last years ferrari (if anyone is interested pm!)..just for fun i put it alongside a la ferrari, same scale..the f1 is so much bigger, unbelievable!!! First thing to do should be to make smaller cars, at least 50cm shorter!!!, how can they fight and pass with such monsters!!???

 

I doubt it's gonna make any changes. They should go back old school, and make the cars really difficult to drive. These days, some youngster shows up for breakfast, and by lunch, they are already setting fastest laps.

 

I couldn't disagree anymore strongly. Pit stops are essential. Refueling? Maybe not . .

The tyre stops have evolved over the past decades to become an important part of the strategy. They also lend an element of suspense as well as giving the hard working team members a moment in the limelight.

 

I don't want strategy managed from the pitwall, I want racing from lights to flag !

In any series, races without pitstops are more exciting: touring cars, Blancpain GT, Porsche Cup, etc ...

They don't have pit stops in MotoGP, and that's pretty exiting !

 

I don't see how one could race do the 24 heures du Mans without pit stops.

 

Hahaha

 

Along with the incredibly complex/expensive powertrains and the incessant/meaningless aero development, this is the core of the problem. How did we get to the point of having legions of engineers trackside, in the garage and back at the works crunching the numbers and guiding the drivers during the course of a race? Most F1 drivers would be completely lost without the constant coaching by their race engineer throughout the race. All of this is unseen and imperceptible to spectators. And of little interest.
Fans watch racing to see a spectacle--wheel-to-wheel competition. In years past the team and driver worked to put the best possible package onto the starting grid. When the green flag dropped--barring a problem--you raced to the finish.

 

https://www.autosport.com/f1/feature/9333/ask-gary-the-fundamental-flaw-with-f1-2021-plan

Gary's verdict on the 2021 F1 regulations
Do you think the 2021 concept is the right direction for F1?
Mario Colombo, via email
I totally agree with the Formula 1 teams that if the new 2021 regs are too prescriptive then all the cars will be indistinguishable and may lack design intrigue and any wow-factor. I fail to understand why the rules cannot be 'restrictive' rather than 'prescriptive' so that the form and shape of the cars can be different. Yes, maybe, the cars will all eventually converge on a similar optimum design but we may at least get a few years of divergence.
Guy Dormehl, via email
How can Formula 1 improve overtaking as some drivers are still struggling even with DRS due to a lack of front downforce?
Carl Bailey, via Facebook
I will answer these three related questions as one, because it will reduce the need for me to repeat myself and allow me to cover the complete subject in one answer.

I haven't seen the regulations in full and I don't really think they fully exist yet, so what we are seeing is still really a list of suggestions and a styling exercise.

I am also not a big fan of the regulations being too prescriptive. There needs to be a high percentage of latitude to allow the teams to put their own stamp on the concepts and designs.

F1 has set up a group to examine these regulations and 'hopefully' (its word, not mine) find any potential loopholes that might just eliminate something exploitative. By doing so, it is reducing the potential for innovation from any of the teams.

The teams have fought any change that potentially makes F1 into what could be considered a one-make formula. But under the surface that seems to be what has been proposed here. I have sat in many meetings with the FIA and the teams' technical directors and the one person that would have fought these proposed changes more than anyone else was Ross Brawn. He presided over Ferrari in the days when it dominated with Michael Schumacher but still would not recognise that F1 needed help even back then.

Image Unavailable, Please Login

We all want to see changes that allow the drivers to race closer for longer, but no matter what those changes are, any car that produces downforce to give it increased grip will by definition suffer when in the turbulence of another car. I would dispute the claims of 45% loss of downforce, and even more strongly dispute the 90% reduction in this that is being talked about with this new concept.

Just as an example - take an aeroplane flying along smoothly in free air. Then it hits some turbulence and it gets a bit rocky. Planes that have flightplans that mean they must cross each other or follow each other have to fly at something like 500 feet altitude separation just to reduce the potential turbulence of flying in 'dirty air'.

That said, the intention of the 2021 concept seems to be to generate a much higher percentage of the car's downforce from using ground effect. This can only be positive as it is less critical to turbulent airflow.

However, and it's a big however, the devil will be in the detail and that needs to be left up to the teams' designers as opposed to an underfloor profile defined by the FOM research group. Coming up with a workable solution for the complete package will be a balancing act of the tunnel throat location, its leading-edge profile and its diffuser ramp rate. This, combined with how the outer 5-10cm of the floor edge interacts with the underfloor, will define the underfloor's centre of pressure.

That, in turn, will define how much load is required from the front and rear wing assemblies and so it goes around in a circle until you end up with a car that can be aerodynamically balanced - in clean air. And that's where the problem will still lie.

It has always been and always will be very difficult to write regulations that will define a racing car that will work in all environments, even IndyCar, which is after all a one-make formula, still has its cars suffering in traffic at the high downforce circuits and even at Indianapolis - where they run more or less no wing. So the problem doesn't just go away because of running less wing downforce. The car set-ups get optimised to suit a required circuit level of downforce and anything that effects that airflow will have a detrimental effect on its handling.

At the moment, and for the foreseeable future, the teams are tasked with designing the fastest car possible from a set of regulations. Until some changes are put in place that forces the teams to have to design a car that works in traffic, I believe the problems are here to stay.

Many people, myself included, though that the Austrian and British races were really exciting. I still think they were pretty good but in hindsight it might just be because the others were so bad.

I spoke with a few of my casual motorsport-watching friends, who after all are the big viewing numbers, and they didn't really agree with me. They did think they were less boring but when you do look at them in depth the excitement was limited to a couple of laps at the beginning and a few highlights through the race.

Image Unavailable, Please Login

We

 

I have zero faith in this or new teams. We shall see....

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/145300/carey-cost-cap-a-must-for-prospective-new-teams



Formula 1 CEO Chase Carey says potential new teams have stressed that the cost cap and other financial changes are key to deciding to join the championship.

A cost cap of $175m (£144m) has been agreed for 2021 - although it does not include key elements such as marketing costs, driver salaries and any fees associated with engines - and it will be in place for five seasons up to and including '25.

The number is now fixed and is not part of the ongoing negotiations about future rules, where there will be a redistribution of income.

Carey says that potential new entrants have said F1 has to provide a healthy business model.


"Clearly one of the goals in terms of the cost cap is to create a healthier sport," he said in a call with Wall Street analysts. "We've talked about the competitive goals, but it is equally important that the cost cap creates a business model that is healthy and growing and positive for our existing teams, and potential new teams coming into it.

"That has been enforced as we've had discussions with potential new teams.

"All have looked at steps in terms of cost discipline, and probably a more balanced revenue distribution, as being cornerstones to creating what they think is an exciting opportunity."

Despite concerns that teams could "trick" the budget cap and slow progress over the 2021 rules package, Carey says existing teams have embraced a limitation on spending.

Image Unavailable, Please Login

"One of the real positives is the evolving attitude towards it. We feel quite positive about where we are with the cost cap. In many ways teams, some of whom had issues or concerns going in, are increasingly supportive," said Carey.

"By and large, right now the support is quite broad, I think everybody believes it's an important element to the future of the sport.

"So I do think of the support, and the teams really are behind it, as being an important cornerstone to building the sport going forward."

Carey is confident that F1 and the FIA will be able to police the cost cap.

A 2020 "dry run" will act as checks on spending with all the teams, despite the fact the cap will not have been put in place before '21.

"We wouldn't have done it if we didn't think it was enforceable," said Carey.

"There's no reason to [not] head down a path. You can account for everything, what you really need to make sure is that you have access to the right information to do the accounting, and that's just about us being disciplined and firm about what we need.

"We've addressed that. We're going to use 2020, all the teams will participate in what I guess you could call effectively a dry run.

"The cost cap won't actually be enforced with consequences until 2021, but, in 2020, what we really are actually going to go through is shaking out the bugs of accounting for the costs."

 

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/145453/ferrari-calendar-growth-and-budget-cap-poses-risk

Formula 1 teams will face a "risk" in getting the staff required for an increased calendar within the proposed 2021 budget cap believes Ferrari's Mattia Binotto.

F1 is expected to expand to a record 22 races next year, and with owner Liberty Media maintaining its push to add new events the schedule could balloon further the year after.

While Binotto is not opposed to the expansion in principle, as he is aware of the "business necessities", the Ferrari team boss says new races will demand personnel reinforcements.

"I think we need first to make sure that from the financial [side] we are doing the right choices," Binotto told Autosport.

"There should be a benefit in terms of the overall financial balance.

"If the balance is positive, yes, we need to [re-]organise ourselves. We cannot afford an entire season of 24 races with the same single individuals."

Binotto believes a further increase in grand prix events will require rotation of not just mechanics, but the higher-ups in the teams' structures.

"It means we will need extra people, to rotate them, from the mechanics to the engineers, even key people, because some mechanics already today are rotating, but key people normally not.

Image Unavailable, Please Login

"I think as a team we want to make sure you're keeping your people in the future, [so] you need to really try to manage the effort throughout the season, so in the end, it will have a big impact.

"It will have a big impact from the number of people, it will have a big impact logistically, because you need to somehow manage the transport of all the parts.

"So it's not easy, and there's very little time to organise ourselves as well, because increasing the number of people is not something you do easily, [and doing so] using the budget cap.

"So here is the risk, because you may not [be able to] afford the right number of people simply because you need to manage extra salaries [under the budget cap]. Not an easy one."

F1 is poised for a $175m spending cap per year in 2021, which Binotto says is still "very high for small teams" while admitting the big teams may overspend in the next two years to make up for its impact in advance.

The growing F1 calendar also carries with it a likely reduction in pre-season testing days, with a revamped winter testing schedule already on the agenda for 2020.

However, Binotto believes slashing pre-season testing from eight days to six or five will not significantly compromise teams.

"[In the past] the shakedown of the new car normally was early January, then you got a couple of months before starting the season.

"Now you've got two weeks and then you go straight to Australia - whatever problem you've got in the two weeks, you will not fix them for the first race.

"So I think that today that it's really winter testing where you start to shake down your car, you will know the initial problems, you will know the initial behaviours, but you never have time to address whatever big problems you will have before the start of the season.

"That's why we are all developing internal facilities - benches, simulator, whatever it is, without waiting for track time, to get developing your car at its best, before you're starting the season."

 

More Ferrari resistance- https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/145470/ferrari-pushing-back-against-2021-standard-parts


Ferrari is "not happy yet" with the proposed 2021 Formula 1 regulations and is pushing back against standardisation, according to team boss Mattia Binotto.

F1 owner Liberty has been keen to put an increased emphasis on standard parts in F1's 2021 rules revamp for cost reasons/

The 2021 car blueprint unveiled in July has included standard wheels and brake systems in addition to other aspects of the car being simplified.

The final rules will not be signed off until October, meaning that the degree of standardisation could yet be changed.

Speaking ahead of the summer break, Binotto said Ferrari was sceptical about the proposed direction of the 2021 car design rules and in particular did not see a point to the standardisation.

"I am not happy yet," Binotto told Autosport. "I am not happy as Ferrari yet. I think since the very beginning we always said that we are against the standardisation, and I feel we are going too much in the direction of standardisation.

"Why are we against [it]? Because we believe that, first, the DNA of this sport is competition, and standardising somehow is against the spirit.

"Second, because, whatever you're doing standard doesn't mean that you are saving money, because you need to re-engineer your car, your components, towards the new component, and that has an impact as well on the economical [side]. So I'm not sure that the balance is positive."

Binotto said that adding more standard components would not serve much of a cost-cutting purpose in 2021 given the impending introduction of the budget cap.

"Sustainability is a key factor, and I think the budget cap we are all in favour of, we have all subscribed already, and the financial regulation is a key point of the future as well, because it's stopping expenses, it's closing the gap between the small and the big teams - even if maybe the budget which has been agreed is very high for small teams, but at least you reduce the gap," he added.

"And I think that, again, it's back on the standardisation. I don't think we need standard parts to save money, because we will anyway spend whatever is the cap.

"At least the top teams will spend whatever is the cap, so on the standard parts will not be affecting that respect.

"So, while I understand the reason of them, I think we need to be careful in evaluating the risk versus benefit, and not forgetting also the final objective."

Image Unavailable, Please Login

Binotto also admitted to his reservations about the aero revamp for 2021, in which the championship will return to a 'ground effect' concept. Giorgio Piola's illustration above shows how the current and future design philosophies are likely to compare.

"We have always been very concerned by the new aero regulation, since the very first time, for two main reasons here again," he said.

"First, we believe that starting from scratch, a new regulation, there may be a lot of unintended consequences, so the level of risk is very high.

"And the second, because we feel that aerodynamics should remain a performance differentiator.

"We should not transform the sport into a show, I think that still it has to remain a sport, the show by itself has short legs.

"Certainly we need to improve the spectacle of our sport, which is two different things [show and spectacle].

"So, by doing that, we need to really be careful on what we are deciding, we should avoid overreacting.

"I think we may have spectacle today, there are few things that need to be improved and which we are all in agreement on. I think we should be focused on those."

 

Listen Ferrari...your aero department isn't so hot right now so much reduced aerodynamics and exploitation of the rules/dependency of aero is good for you! Embrace the rules...build a great engine and a chassis that likes to go around corners and win a f'in title...

 

So long 3 engines per car a season cost minimum 15 million, and the manufacturers selling those engines at an enormous loss, the cost cap is a myth.

 

Increasing the number of GPs per year to 22, and proposing a budget cap at the same time ?

Something is not right there ...

 

The fun will begin next month. The new rules are set for approval in October. I do not see that and Ferrari are setting the stage for a re-consideration of all this.

 

Yep, that's why some team principals were anxious for the new rules to be decided already in June, to stop some of the "reconsiderations" from the top teams.
The budget cap, and the standardisation of some parts seem to irk Mercedes and Ferrari.
I suppose some suggestions from Liberty will not be part of the final proposal in October.

 

OK, no DRS, better looking HALO. For that alone I approve.

Yes, they´re still too big and heavy and the wheel hubs look terrible, but it can´t be worse than what we have now.

 

It's promising but I'm not sure their whole idea of reducing the dirty air issue will actually work: Yes, their tests showed only a 10% of loss as opposed to the current 50% loss of downforce for the following car but I have a feeling given enough time the aerodynamicsts will figure out ways to make the front wing more efficient again. It just doesn't seem radical enough as a solution.

 

"The proof of the pudding is in the eating", they say. It's too early to know if some of these changes will work, so I reserve my judgement.
Most of these news rule are about the aero, which are the bane of modern racing; we will see if they work.
As for the budget cap, I think it's a red herring. How can they expect teams operating in different countries to abide by the same financial constraints?
It will be interesting to see how they will police that, and I expect some "fraud" in that area!
These new rules will fuel endless discussions, I gather...

 

If you believe in the slippery slope theory, this seems to be an incremental move in the direction of a spec series. More standardized parts. I also wish they would stop with all of the financial limitation attempts. F1 is supposed to be the best racing possible because it is the bleeding edge of state of the art. You don't get to the bleeding edge without spending money. And the innovations funded by F1 can make a real, actual, positive impact on the real, actual world... if you let them spend some money. An overall cap? Okay, as long as it's high. Deciding what teams can spend on this or that is just old Biddy Busybody intrusiveness.

I do like a lot of the technical revisions to the cars. It would be nice if F1 cars - the bleeding edge of state of the art - were not ugly... as they are now. Too bad they'll still sound like leaf blowers.

 

That will become an area for cheating with intense fraud, "black budgets", and undeclared expense accounts.
You just cannot stop people from spending money.

This budget cap has as much chance to succeed as the Prohibition !

 

I will wait and see. Did they keep a way to add DRS back to the design if this fails. The 'faith' in FIA and others is not strong in me lol

 

Spec series.

FIA/Liberty: “We encourage innovation in F1. We will tell you the innovations that will be permitted.”

 

My belief, knowing a bit about aerodynamics, is that the bigger teams will find some way of using the underbody aero and a small flap (or 3) to create a highly disturbed area behind the car after using the laminar airflow in the venturi--completely or mostly eliminating the direction of the desired rule changes.