Brawn Wants to Experiment with Race Formats

Yah but if Indycar can do it safely currently, then surely F1 can as well.

True, it doesn't solve all the problems. It does give smaller teams better chances to place higher based on fuel strategy though. One could argue if this is actually adds any excitement to the sport.

I'm not a huge fan really, but I can see certain scenarios where it could lead to some great racing scenarios - late yellow, "correct" amont of fuel for multiple competitive cars and fresh tires and able to push 100% the rest of the way vs saving one or the other. Maybe I'm too optimistic though.

 

Yah but the tires are designed to peak and then degrade....and not just in F1 either - this is even the case in a lot of feeder series as well. If you give Pirelli a different mandate, they will produce different tires. They might not offer the same peak grip, but they could last the length of the race.

 

Says who? It already is

 

But then it won't be a sport anymore, just show business...

 

Indy has longer races, no? Up to 500 miles, which is almost 3 times longer than a GP. They probably need refuelling, or the cars would have to carry an enormous amount of fuel.

Also, I don't know if they still do, but they used to burn methanol. Methanol isn't a very efficient fuel, and you end up with very high fuel consumption if you use it.

I guess it was a choice between the danger of refuelling, and the danger of risking a pile up with 30+ cars each with gallons and gallons of very volatile fuel, as we have seen in the past (1965?) .

But I wouldn't say Indy handles refuelling in complete safety; there are numerous incidents.

Also, if you think refuelling gives "smaller teams better chances to place higher based on fuel strategy", what do you think the top teams are doing? Do you think they are stupid and sit on their thumbs waiting to be outsmarted by the minnows? No, they also decide their strategy around refuelling, and they can employ an army of tacticians in the pits to do so. So, in the end, races are decided by tactics, and not driving.

 

Tyre degradation is something F1 wanted to justify tyre changes to add to the show.

Any tyre maker can make a compound that lasts a race.

 

First of all Alonso was an example...
Second: how do you know how the engine behaves on the dyno? I doubt that the engine does not work at all on the dyno or they would simply not bring it along. Most likely most of the issues of the engines show when installed in the car like the oil tank they had problems with...
Alonso might not win after testing but at least he would be able to improve...

Sorry but that does not make sense to me at all...
On one side you say you do not want the strategist and pits to be involved in the result of the drivers championship and one the other side you are not willing to differ between Alonso as a driver and the results he gets with this crap car....Neither Hamiltons, Vettels or Alonsos ranking in the last WDC has anything to do with their skills but more with the car so that point is achieved even without the refueling/strategy input you do not want.

 

Crikey mate, what you are saying is that regardless of what we see of a driver, only his latest performances count?

Alonso is one of the best drivers out there, yes, he chose to go to mclaren (rather than retire) and hasn't won since. That's mclarens fault, nothing to do with alonso. And yes, if the testing ban were lifted, mclaren would be able to get on top of their car issues, and Alonso would be competitive.

At least your logic can be used to explain Elton, once he lost to rosberg, that categorically means he's ****, so I'm almost forced to agree with you mate!

 

You do not need track testing to check the engine functions or the installation on a car.
You can obtain just the same by simulation on a rolling road.
It's used by many teams from touring cars to endurance teams, etc... and it's a way to get mileage on the components without getting on the track.

With the ban on unlimited testing, I would have thought that a team like McLaren would have invested in a good rolling road to reproduce track conditions and circumvent the ban on testing, just like they have invested in sophisticated simulators to get their drivers to practice since they are deprived of track time.
That would avoid them to find out that the engine installation is not correct, etc... in the full glare of publicity.

By the way, rolling roads exist since the 60s, introduced by Ford when they were preparing their cars for Le Mans.

 

Drivers are like jockeys; if they constantly ride the wrong mounts and don't gather wins, they slip down in the ranking.

It's as simple as that.

For the last 2 years at least, Alonso have been nowhere near the front, hasn't challenged the leaders nor shown any sign of performance.

People say his car is to blame, and I agree with that. But the McLaren may also hide a decline in his abilities; who knows?

There is, at the moment, nothing to show me that he is still as good as he was 10 years ago, or better than Verstappen, Ricciardo or others?

In F1, you cannot live only on past glory.

 

Two issues with the Indy car comparison

The fuel is alcohol and extinguished with simple water.

Pit stops are a lot longer.

 

But methanol fires are difficult to detect and to stop since you cannot see the flames!

 

True.

It's E85 Ethanol (15% gasolline) in Indycar now; no more methanol. Other series with refueling also use Ethanol blends to my knowledge - E10, E20, etc. IMSA Prototypes as one example. The flames are quite visible.

It can also be low cost and quite "green" depending on the raw material used. Does F1 still care about that or have we finally abandoned that? ; )

 

Thanks for that.