Ask The Apex
- Thread starter Galahad
- Start date
Kamui-FastestChefInTheWorld
Points Scorer
by the FIA? OK, thanks 
I've got a question, how come when showing highlights from pre 2009 years, BBC either used their own radio commentary or only showed Brundles commentary. But with Sky, they actually have Allen/Brundle (or Brundle/legard/Coulthard) when there are clips, why would that be?
They have a deal with the BBC, don't forget!
FOTA I think (don't take my word for it), in which case they can do what they like. They won't make any friends adopting that attitude, though.
Doh. A late answer that was some way off the mark from me. 
In modern day F1 racing teams under fuel the cars to make them as light as possible then they turn the wick down on the engines to get them to the end of the race.
My question is;
Why not put enough fuel into the cars so the the driver can have full engine power surely the extra power would offset the extra weight giving the driver an advantage?
We are only talking a couple of kilo's here.
My question is;
Why not put enough fuel into the cars so the the driver can have full engine power surely the extra power would offset the extra weight giving the driver an advantage?
We are only talking a couple of kilo's here.
The pictures are copyright Forlmula One World Championship Limited, not the broadcasters who air them. The commentary is difference as that copyright rests with the commentator's empoloyer.
BBC basically didn't want to pay ITV any royalties for their commentators pre-2009. Sky will have acquired these audio rights where the BBC chose not to, alongside the pictures and historic footage from FOWC.
Josh
Champion Elect
I think because the time you gain is actually less than the time you lose. Also because there's a limit on the amount of engines one can use during a season the teams can't risk running their engines on full power all the time.
That's what I think anyway, it's probably not entirely correct though.
That's what I think anyway, it's probably not entirely correct though.
Let's just say the team starts with 10kg more (because we know this costs about 0.34s a lap around Melbourne). Carrying that amount extra around for the whole race will add 19.72 seconds to the driver's race time.
Lets say that fuel is used evenly thoughout the race. It is simplest to say that the cost is halved (it is still 0.34s on lap 1 and 0 on lap 58). So, can you use your extra 10kg of fuel to go more than 10 secs faster in the race?
There comes a point in the equation where this is no longer true. Finding that point is really important because 10kg too much fuel and it costs you 20 secs. 10kg too little fuel and it costs you a load of time in fuel saving mode.
So quite a complicated equation then between loss and gain and also difficult to get spot on especially if some teams take into account the probability of a safety car?
Can I assume then that at a track like monaco with it's relatively low speeds it would actually be better to carry more fuel as the extra weight would give more mechanical grip?
Can I assume then that at a track like monaco with it's relatively low speeds it would actually be better to carry more fuel as the extra weight would give more mechanical grip?
I'm not sure that the extra weight does lead to more grip? If it does, it certainly is less relevant to laptime that acceleration and braking distances. While Monaco's fuel penalty is lower, so is the gain from running a higher engine setting I expect but it is probably true that it makes less sense to be marginal there than is does in Malaysia or China where the fuel penalty is very high.
Fenderman
Rooters Reporter
Has there been a rule change or clarification about overtaking the safety car as it comes out of pit lane? Di Resta happily cruised past it well after it had crossed the white line that is marked across the track. Not that I would have wanted Di Resta's efforts to be spoiled but it seems odd that it went unnoticed by commentators and Stewards alike.
Kamui-FastestChefInTheWorld
Points Scorer
The safety car had its green light on, meaning it was waiting for the leader.
How much on average does it cost to host an F1 grand prix?
I just read that Korea have signed a cheaper deal and will be saving $20.5 million dollars with this new deal...well that's massive amounts of money, this current deal is to 2015 or 2016.
Saving 5 million a year.
I just read that Korea have signed a cheaper deal and will be saving $20.5 million dollars with this new deal...well that's massive amounts of money, this current deal is to 2015 or 2016.
Saving 5 million a year.
In 2010, Formula One Administration turned over $1,082m, of which $532m is believed to have come from race hosting fees. There were 19 races in 2010, so $28m per race.
This average hides a huge range of different amounts. I don't know the exact figures, but Monaco does not even pay anything and even kept their own trackside advertising revenues. Silverstone pays a fee but in the $10-15m range I believe with a much smaller escalator than some places. Austin's price is $25m for year 1.
Singapore, China, Korea, Abu Dhabi on the other hand pay $40-50m backed by state subsidies.
Some confusion over whether the saving is $20.5m total or per year. Yahoo Sports reporting it is per year (and that they paid $55m last year).
Having said that, other rumours are that Argentina will pay top dollar, but the idea that they can get all that built by the end of 2013...? Put it this way, judging by recent new venues, that might be pushing it!
Similar threads
- Article
- Article
