I hope that you don't have a problem with fuel restrictions as Moto Gp have been running fuel limit rules for many seasons, and for 2014 they are even tighter. Factory machines this year can only run a maximum of 20 litres, 1 litre less than during 2013.
I've been a rabid MotoGP fan for years... I'll be honest... You may not find solace there either. It's very rare that 22 lap races ever get that far. By lap 12 or so, any non Repsol or factory Yamm rider has to give up the ghost due to ripping their tires up trying to stay in contention. After that it's uaually very much like yesterday's F1 where veryone just settles in their spot and goes for a ride around the track. With the exception of a handful of dramatics like the one pitstop race that made things somewhat interesting, or watching Marquez drag his elbows... It's been a pretty boring two or three seasons. There are few moments each race, but that's about it. I don't even get upset anymore if I miss a race. I think I feel that way about F1 now too. I'm definitely not going to Austin now. That was an easy decision, especially after reading that Mag couldn't chase down Ricciardo because of fuel. Thats no longer racing in my book.
Too many changes in one season. They could have kept the move to green just by increasing the role and power of the electric component. I don't find racing restricted by fuel limitation (fuel flow in this case) interesting at all. At the end of the race, Magnussen (sp.?) was being instructed what setting to run in order to have enough fuel to finish. Then was "allowed" to go to a higher setting the last two laps. At this point, you could see him catching back up to Ricardo. Not very satisfying to watch or for Magnussen to experience. The cars are way too squirrelly with the increased torque of the turbo and especially electric motors. They should have limited the spoiler changes to one end of the car or the other, or both. Too many changes at one time!! I'm surprised the drivers didn't seem more outraged, but on the surface, they seemed content. Or maybe resolved is the right word.
Actually, if you read the interview with Mclaren, it wasn't a map to save fuel. It was to charge the batteries more so he'd have more electric assist for a few laps. Due to the safety car period, most teams said they didn't have to worry about fuel. Oops, guess you'll have to complain about something else.
I don't think FIA went for hybrid and energy recovery cars to save fuel during races. No, they adopted these technologies to be in tune with the cars in the streets tomorrow and to push reseach and development. Renault, Honda, Mercedes and Ferrari will learn a lot racing hybrid powerplants and will be able to translate the result in the range in years to come. F1 is an enginnering championship nowadays.
The idea has already been mentioned and that may well happen one day. Public events may be banned in some countries because of the carbon cost of people attending them. People will have to watch sport and concerts only on their screens at home, and there will be no public attendance. Let's be fair, you see F1 better at home on TV than at the track; inboard cameras, several camera angles on the circuit, expert commentary, pit gossips, interviews, etc... You don't get that watching the race from the stands.
It seems that your point is to encourage cheating. Reb Bull thought they were clever and didn't conform to FIA rules; they were caught red-handed. Not the first time a team blatantly ignore the rules and expect to get away with it. Fuel flow above the set rate allows for more power; hence an unfair advantage.
Without wings, F1 cars would become highly dangerous. Wings provide the downforce necessary to mainatain grip. With less grip, lower cornering speed, longer braking distances and more wheelspin under accelaration. It's not the power that matters, but the way it can be delivered. Without a certain amoung of downforce, cars would be undrivable.
It HAD ALREADY happened, actually. At least here, in France, for those old enough to remember. After the Yom Kippour war, in October 1973, and the rise of the oil prices decided by the OPEC countries as retaliatory measures towards western countries, the french government decided to ban motor racing; this held for four months, if my memory serves me well. The world changes, we have to accept it. It is not the question of the actual emissions of the cars, we know these are negligible. It is the symbol F1 is: if they don't show the way towards more environmentally-responsible technology for tomorrow's car, they will be banned, or forgotten. Why does nobody actually make true efforts towards a return of the French Grand Prix? Because there is a general feeling here that Formula One is a symbol of ridiculous waste, and a thing of the past. If F1 does not show that it makes efforts towards tomorrow's technology, it will die, it is as simple as that. Rgds
Baloney. I'm not encouraging cheating. Give them so much fuel and tell them it has to last to the end of the race. Simple and understandable and you don't need some stupid FIA issued value with some pencil pusher FIA bureaucrat telling everyone after the race someone is disqualified. It's nothing but engineering mumbo jumbo for the sake engineering mumbo jumbo. The only people who give a crap about "flow rates" are anal engineers and nerds. 99.9% of the people out there just want to see the fastest car and driver win. They didn't come to see a technical read out later in the day of how fast a car burnt its fuel vs another car. "Wow look! It only burnt 22.7 grams per second on lap 28!"
Agreed. I think it's a step before the future introduction (I hope) of a formula based on energy flow (measuring calories, instead of fuel) and allowing ANY sort of power plant, and ANY type of fuel.
Agreed. I think it's a step before the future introduction (I hope) of a formula based on energy flow (measuring calories, instead of fuel) and allowing ANY sort of power plant, and ANY type of fuel. To me, the ideal formula would be one giving total freedom for powerplant, and imposing just a calory flow rate. The FIA went half-way by imposing the engine design.
GP are run under some rules, that you like it or not. When a team ignores these rules, it gets its car excluded from the result. End of story. If you don't like the rules, don't compete, or in your case don't watch!
So, why doesn't the FIA make a rule that you can't blow a fart during the race. And, they put a fart sensor in his pants to measure the methane content. If he blows a fart, the FIA will know it and he will be disqualified. What's wrong with that? It's a RULE. End of story. You casually say "please don't watch". The problem is you're saying that to many millions of hard core F1 fans. If you think you're going to get those people back after seeing a great drive be disqualified over how fast some value measured fuel, you're crazy. It will be the end of the sport.
How wrong can one person be? F1 ONLY exists for the FANS. The FANS pay the bills. The advertisers and sponsors pay money because the FANS watch them race. If fans don't like what they are watching, then F1 will die. It's ALWAYS about the show. It's never about the stage lighting. Nobody goes to a play because the theater is lit with Mercury bulbs. They go to see the actors perform. If they can't see the actors perform because the mercury bulbs don't light up well enough to see anything, the show ENDS, not matter how "green" the lighting system is.
Disqualifications are not new in F1, unless you started watching GP 1 years ago. You seem to forget that Hunt was disqualified in the past, so was Button, so were... several drivers. Disqualifications lost people points, races, possibly championship because of them.
Of course people are disqualified. Its WHY they are disqualified that matters. Thank your for proving my point! When you put in stupid, meaningless technocratic rules that the average fan couldn't give a crap about then disqualify people for it, fans toss up their arms and will LEAVE -- and not come back.
