FIA Proposal for 2011 Season

27/06/2007

The World Motor Sport Council met in Paris on 27 June, 2007. The following decisions were taken:

The WMSC received a report on the status of current discussions* on the FIA Formula One World Championship from 2011. Proposals include:

Engine efficiency

To limit engine power by imposing a maximum energy flow rate. However, there will be few restrictions on the engine cycle, which can include turbo-charging and energy recovery. It is believed that this will lead to a gain of at least 20% in thermal efficiency.

Drag

To allow moving aerodynamic devices, which will reduce drag by over 50% and allow a 40% reduction in the power required to maintain current speeds.

Energy recovery

Energy will be recovered during braking and returned to both front and rear axles when accelerating. The amount of energy returned on each straight will be limited in order to prevent top speeds exceeding the safety criteria for the circuits.

Fuel

The total amount of fuel energy to be consumed during a race will be regulated, encouraging further overall efficiency. The CO2 emitted will be further reduced by the introduction of gasoline which is partly derived from sustainable, non-food bio sources but complies fully with pump fuel legislation.

Overtaking

Formula One cars currently find it very difficult to overtake because of the influence of the car in front. New aerodynamic rules will halve the downforce, and de-sensitise the car to the influence of the wake of the car ahead. It is also proposed to eliminate automatically the downforce deficit of the following car.

Regulations

The best estimates of what these measures will mean in terms of regulations are currently as follows:

# 1.3-1.5 litre, 4-cylinder engine;

# No RPM or boost limit;

# Energy flow rate to generate 300kW, including energy recovery from the exhaust;

# 200kW brake energy recovery, front and rear axle;

# 400-600kJ energy return per straight;

# Pump-legal bio-fuel;

# FIA specified and supplied undertray and possibly other aerodynamic components;

# 50% 2007 downforce;

# Adjustable, regulated wings and cooling;

# Automatic downforce adjustment when following another car;

# Lap times and top speeds maintained at 2009 levels;

# Over 50% reduction in fuel consumed.}

Costs

A number of measures to constrain costs are proposed, including:

# Standardisation of components;

# Homologation of components and assemblies;

# Material restrictions;

# Extended life of assemblies;

# Restrictions on personnel and work at races;

# Restrictions on the use of certain facilities (eg wind tunnels).

All these measures will be developed into detailed regulations in close collaboration with the teams and manufacturers.

Note the # 1.3-1.5 litre, 4-cylinder engine

 

This ought to get real interesting real fast. Wonder what the Manufacturers and Constructors are going to think?

 

no there turning F1 into Honda civics!!!

I say forget the green and go back to v12's. after its not called motor sports because i use to have an engine in it.

 

More details at FIA website.

http://www.fia.com/sport/Championships/F1/formula_one_2011.html

 

These guys are killing motorsport!!

Watching classic, historic, vintage or veteran cars racing seems more and more interesting to me!!

 

WTF 1.4 - 1.5 liter engines? But then again these are only proposed changes.

 

They might as well go to Motorcycle engines. Maybe Honda will be better off using their Moto gp motor.

 

I know that I am in the minority here but think this is fantastic news.
Motor-racing when boiled down to its essance is about competition. Lets tighten that up between drivers and teams. Downforce (actually poor slipstreams) can be reduced allowing for easier passes.
As far as engines; do you really care if they are 4,6,8, or 24 if the levels of speed can be kept up ? Can you tell the differance between 16,000 and 19,000 rpms ? The only downside I see is that turbos can muffle the scream slightly.

Honda used to and still does send its young bright engineers to F1 to sharpen them. Lets sharpen them on responsible use of the limited resource of fuel.
Regenerative braking, more efficient fuel consumption, less or more usefull drag.
Come on people, this is good news as the FIA accepts and may embrace a different way of thinking.
Lets have F1 lead the new (responsible) technologies again.

 

Some of us old-timers remember when F1 was limited to 1.5 liters unsupercharged (1961-65). The racing was very good (and of course, very dangerous). In the final year of the formula, Ferrari came out with the 1512, which had a 1.5 liter flat twelve!

http://www.sportscarmarket.com/profiles/2006/March/Race/index.html

 

I like all the proposals - it sounds like it would make an amazlingly fun season!

 

IF these go into effect it will certainly throw a wrench into every teams design strategy. Alot of the ideas sound good, but I don't know how the fan base as a whole will react to them. The only things that I really don't like are the ones stating that the FIA will provide more of the parts to the teams leaving less of the car up to the actual constructors.

 

I like everything excpet these proposals on costs. Do not turn F1 into a cup series. Also, the FIA should ban the roaming hotel RVs the teams carry around instead of forcing them to fire mechanics. They would save millions more that way.

 

Back to the 80s!

I like the sound of these rules. It seems they've decided to scale back on what teams can spend on aero (what teams now spend the most on) that'll never have any kind of effect on what we drive on the road and shift that spending to engines. Something that might actually benefit the majority of the manufacturers.

 

Looks like European NASCAR to me.

I hope it lights the fires of imagination and new thinking, that will benefit us Citizens, in what we can afford to drive, safely. This is important as the weights are reduced, to increase efficiency's, as well as the prices will also be increased.

 

Looks like its time for Ferrari to wave goodbye to F1 and hello to endurance racing.

 

Yes indeed - and what a great variety of engine types there were. Some of these even continued to run, enlarged a little, as the teams tried to catch up to the later 3-liter formula.

I think the big difference was that most of the rules back then were minimalized as far as mechanical issues - just size, weight, general safety, etc. You would need a boardroom of lawyers to interpret some of the stuff that comes out now.

How much engineering diversity can come when you specify the number of cylinders, electric motors fore and aft, KW on each axle, downforce in lbs, etc. etc. etc...?

Is it possible that this kind of news leak is just a trial balloon to make the public think F1 is really quite "green" and to see how much the traditional teams scream in outrage?

 

These are the bad bits. Everything else is awesome. Will certainly be an improvement on the stagnant F1 of today, whatever the naysayers and old fogeys might claim.

 

That's exactly what I was thinking too when I read it, kinda fitting considering the Prost-Senna duel at McLaren during the 80's and today's Alonso-Hamilton duel at McLaren. Just hope that it won't mean the return of those dark days at Ferrari as well.

 

I was thinking the samething, but I have a feeling once Alonso's contract is up with McLaren 09, he won't stick around until 2011.

 

You've got to be kidding me... This is total bull**** and everybody knows it. How is it the FIA can just screw with REAL racing? Mess with WRC or something. I'm shocked. Its never enough for those guys! Max has season after season of 'Screw You' woven into the carbon fiber.

Homologation of parts? What does this mean?! Because from my point of view it sounds allot like A1GP. "Everybody drives the same car so as to make it an even playing field." Ferrari are (or should be) the best because our components and materials and INNOVATION and mechanics are second to none! Minardi pulled out because they sucked. Plain and simple. If they had the technological know how and mechanics of a team like the Scuderia, that would be another story. It's is up to the teams to develop their cars and mechanics skills in order to win races and finish solid in the championships. Now the FIA is throwing every low budget team a HUGE bone here by saying - "alright, so your not the best... Here's a leg up so that you don't have to spend on development and tech-guys." Thats not racing! Racing is expensive. Eddie Jordan can tell you that. Case in point. If you don't want to spend the millions and millions on technological R&D not to mention salary and transportation etc. you drop your name plate. You have good teams and you have bad teams. Thats why there is a 'last spot' on the grid. For the person in LAST place.

What they need to do is say "no holds bar - here are a few restrictions: engine size, car length/height, no turbos, same fuel. However, the rest is up to your development teams. Go at it!" This separates the men from the Kias and so it should be!!!

Even-playing-field this Max, lets just make it a one lane track with a story for each driver - like a car park. They can all race over top of one another, so everybody can win!

This is ridiculous!




Regards
Jon

 

What we have now is not racing; its an engineering exhibition performed in a procession.
The FIA is going to, and has been, changeing the rules often so as to "mix things up". No one gets to rest on their laurals.
Why not make rules changes that make environmental, economic, and political sense ?
If it increases the level of competition then FANTASTIC !
Or is the sky falling again ?

 

1.4L 4 cylinder with unlimited boost sounds great. Maybe Bernie loves the days of the Brabham BMWs.

 

+1

 

If Mosley really wants to tackle the disparity between constructors and private teams, and make F1 cheaper by limiting the cost, here are a few things he should examine:

- limit the number of staff in a F1 team, to say 50 maximum.

- limit the number of staff attending GPs to, say 20 maximum.

- limit the number of wind-tunnel each team can get access to, and limit the number of hours to, say 80 hours a week.

- limit the size of corporate hospitality suites.

- limit the number of vehicles and trailers for each team and allow replacement only after 5 years.

- limit the entertainment and catering budget for each team.

Mosley would find that miraculously most of the constructors teams would save and the private teams wouldn't be penalised.

The idea of restricting F1 to 1.5L 4-cylinder is stupid. Speed reduction has to be achieved through more aerodynamic constraints, and tire redefinition and not reduction in power. But why reduce speed anyway?

 

4 Cylinders of 1500cc's.

Let's go in another direction instead, when excellence was expected and mediocraty, abhoard. Look and listen to these clips I found, that absolutely leave me in awe! This is from 40 to 70 years ago and longer! We should reach out, not withdraw.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZMPDCNyQxE&mode=related&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myxMudtFX6g&mode=related&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdVdRMwwRXI

I'll let these videos speak for themselves.

What do these videos have to do with Ferrari? Our beloved Tazio Nuvolari, left Alfa-Romeo, and our Patron Enzo Ferrari and the Scuderia Ferrari, back then to drive these cars. We know the rest.

Ciao...Paolo