Technical Between Season Discussion Thread.

[canis]

marksawatsky actually none of those decisions would be low cost to implement.

1 would require a complete re-design of cars and tooling to produce that material.

2 would require again a complete re-design of chasis as well as massive cost for the tyre manufacturer.

3 would increase costs to teams for the fuel used and move away from what F1 is trying o achieve in not only being the fastest sport but also a sustainable one. Running old engines would mean having different chasis again so once again increasing costs.

4 would be a massive cost just in transport unless the teams had to pick their tyres before they had even seen the track and understood the challenges.

In fact, the only way to simplify and reduce costs is having a spec car series. The costs in allowing more freedom between the teams will never be capped in any realistic way. There is always a way around cost capping (some of which are in use today by even the smallest teams, hence why the manufacturer of Caterham F1 cars went into receivership and not the team itself).

 

[KekeTheKing]

Paddy Lowe calls Red Bulls gambit for a switch to Twin Turbos for 2016 for what it is.

http://adamcooperf1.com/2014/12/02/paddy-lowe-red-bulls-engine-proposal-is-all-about-self-interest/

 

[marksawatsky]

Dieter Rencken wrote an interesting article on why manufacturers prefer WEC over F1. It's interesting how WEC teams can run a whole operation for less money than an F1 team spends on engines alone. And how a Diesel V6, Turbo V4 and NA V8 can all win races in one season. http://plus.autosport.com/premium/f...for-wec/?_ga=1.205849815.574509771.1392783627

 

[marksawatsky]

marksawatsky actually none of those decisions would be low cost to implement.

1 would require a complete re-design of cars and tooling to produce that material.

2 would require again a complete re-design of chasis as well as massive cost for the tyre manufacturer.

3 would increase costs to teams for the fuel used and move away from what F1 is trying o achieve in not only being the fastest sport but also a sustainable one. Running old engines would mean having different chasis again so once again increasing costs.

4 would be a massive cost just in transport unless the teams had to pick their tyres before they had even seen the track and understood the challenges.

In fact, the only way to simplify and reduce costs is having a spec car series. The costs in allowing more freedom between the teams will never be capped in any realistic way. There is always a way around cost capping (some of which are in use today by even the smallest teams, hence why the manufacturer of Caterham F1 cars went into receivership and not the team itself).

I'm not going to pretend that I know better but The suggestions I have made could be implemented over time and would cost less than the changes made for this year. The V6 hybrid costs double that of the V8 and little creativity is allowed in it's design. With a more creative set of rules, manufacturers can do what is right for them, including the use of an engine configuration similar to a production vehicle, and thus the costs can be written off as R&D for road going cars. I guess I should address my suggestions point by point:
1.Single plane aluminum wings: The teams bring as many as 19 different CF wings to the 19 races, each one requiring many hours of wind tunnel time and cost to manufacture. A recent article I read said the cost was $140,000-$160,000 per front wing, factoring in wind tunnel time http://www.tsmplug.com/f1/average-cost-of-formula-1-car/
You will never convince me that it would cost more to design and manufacturer 4 different aluminum single plane wings to attach to current F1 cars. Plus aluminum doesn't explode into tiny bits of shrapnel when it touches another car, it just bends. It's just sheet aluminum and rivets forchristsake
2.there already is a move towards 18" wheels in F1, the widening of the tires can take place at the same time
3.Fans are not asking for sustainable, this was Max Mosleys idea. Besides, the same amount of fuel is being burned over a race distance so if a team can make a naturally aspirated 3.0 V8 win a race on only 100 kg of fuel, why shouldn't it? Plus, the 3 R's of Environmentalism are Reduce, Re-use and Recycle-so maybe Re-using already developed V8 or V10 engines isn't such a bad idea?
4.The teams would have to inform Pirelli 7 days in advance what tires they are using so no extra tires would need to be transported.

 

[Il_leone]

Next season the number of engines used will reduce from 5 to 4 on the basis this covers a 20 race season calendar

- the proposed calender has 21 races including Korea which is unlikely going to happen which would allow 5 engines a season
at least one engine manufacturer wants to run 5 engines to keep up with Mercedes

 

[gethinceri]

I think Mr Hamilton's invention is a fine idea, allowing F1 fans to identify drivers in foggy conditions or if the lights fail during night races.

 

[Bill Boddy]

In foggy conditions? If it's that foggy the race would be red flagged.

One way of making it clear to the fans who is driving which car is by big roundels with a big number, one on each side.

 

[cider_and_toast]

The rules on displaying a number as they stand.

19.1(b)(iii). This number must be clearly visible from the front of the car and on the driver’s crash helmet.

An example of "Clearly Visibile from the front"

 

[rufus_mcdufus]

I don't get the numbers thing - I realise it's historical and some fans like it to the casual viewer, i.e most, the number has no meaning whatsoever. I only know a few of the driver numbers and I'd consider myself a pretty dedicated viewer. We already have a 3-character abbreviation for each driver so why not display that instead?

 

[KekeTheKing]

I think helmets are how most people recognize the drivers from afar. From even greater distances I look for the fluorescent roll hoop. I'm not sure this is really an issue?

 

[cider_and_toast]

That was fine Keke, until drivers started changing their helmets week in week out.

It's not a massive issue. We're just having a chat about it, that's all.

 

[KekeTheKing]

I think Seb has the record for helmet changes and in 2013 it wasn't hard to find him anyway, streaking away at the front was a good place to look.

The "issue" comment was mainly in regards to Mr. Hamilton's "solution". Chatter on.

 

[gethinceri]

In foggy conditions? If it's that foggy the race would be red flagged.

One way of making it clear to the fans who is driving which car is by big roundels with a big number, one on each side.

View attachment 9139

Come come sir, you thought I was serious?

 

[Bill Boddy]

No. Did you think that I was serious?

 

[gethinceri]

No, hence my rather archaic turn of phrase.
I think every car should trail a barrage balloon emblazoned with their name and all their previous race stats from all formulae so drivers following can decide on the level of risk likely in overtaking and viewers have the ability to substantiate their comments on drivers' capabilities.
That's a much better proposal than Hamilton's.

 

[Bill Boddy]

I bet Newey would design the barrage balloon with least drag.

 

[gethinceri]

I would design one with this much drag:

 

[Bill Boddy]

Is that a selfie?

 

[rufus_mcdufus]

I fear they could go for a technical solution such as applying a computer-generated 'tag' to the moving car, much like the info graphics we saw popping up on what looked like the side of the track for a driver in Abu Dhabi. This would be really irritating.

 

[gethinceri]

I have less hair, but only on top of the head.