I can. Driverless cars. Boom. Safety sorted where's my noble peace prize?
F1 rule change 2017
- Thread starter RasputinLives
- Start date
If some solution can be found that keeps the essence of F1 and saves people's lives, even if it only helps once per decade, for example, then it's probably worth it, no? Hopefully they come up with something that looks a lot better than the mock up Ferrari are trying this week.
soccerman17
Race Winner
Great idea. No more driver injuries, only fan injuries!
Isn't that what we have now? High speed impacts, cars flipping, cars landing on top of each other... yet the drivers get out and walk away.
Wheels have tethers, rear suspension springs aren't meant to fly off, tractors shouldn't be on the circuit.
Having those things doesn't mean we should stop looking for areas of improvement, though. Safety changes have rarely been popular if you look back at the history of F1 but now we have a sport that doesn't kill/seriously injure someone every year because of it. Even more minor recent improvements like the HANS device were initially criticised.
I didn't like the way the Ferrari halo mock up looked either, but I think it's (literally) a dangerous precedent to criticise the FIA for looking to implement something like that. I hope they find a better looking solution but even if they don't I'm sure I can get used to it and accept it knowing it's slightly less likely that I see someone die on TV.
I didn't like the way the Ferrari halo mock up looked either, but I think it's (literally) a dangerous precedent to criticise the FIA for looking to implement something like that. I hope they find a better looking solution but even if they don't I'm sure I can get used to it and accept it knowing it's slightly less likely that I see someone die on TV.
I am old enough to remember my namesake and DSJ saying that motor racing in general was being neutered by the safety rules. Come to think of it they were against seat belts in road cars on the basis that you might be stuck in the car, concious but unable to remove your seatbelt, whilst you were burnt alive.
snowy
Champion Elect
This is the kind of bullshit ideas and statistical evidence that F1 bases its decisions on:
In 2000 there were 11 overtakes per race and in 2015 there were 27.
In the 1960's 40% of cars finished the race and 85% in 2015
In the 1950's the gap between winner and runner up was on average of 50 seconds in 2015 it was 8 seconds.
Module 6: Are Races Getting Closer?
Would Formula 1 be more thrilling without cutting-edge tech?
In 2000 there were 11 overtakes per race and in 2015 there were 27.
In the 1960's 40% of cars finished the race and 85% in 2015
In the 1950's the gap between winner and runner up was on average of 50 seconds in 2015 it was 8 seconds.
Module 6: Are Races Getting Closer?
Would Formula 1 be more thrilling without cutting-edge tech?
Yeah that's a bullshit argument because no matter what the regulations are now the races will be closer than the 50s/60s because the general understanding of what makes a race car fast, reliable etc. is so much better.
Do they not understand that part of what made it so much more entertaining was the fact that you weren't quite sure if you driver would make it to the end or if his car would blow up in burst of flame and smoke?
Also, that cutting edge technology they are talking about that has made our lives so much richer wouldn't be DRS by any chance? after all, that's the biggest factor in the increased amount of overtakes.
In the 1960's Jim Clark had to pull into the pits with an issue, a puncture if I recall correctly, and came out a lap down. In the course of the race, not only did he manage to unlap himself but he also went on to re-take the lead. Somehow, I don't think we'd see that happen so easily today.
Also, that cutting edge technology they are talking about that has made our lives so much richer wouldn't be DRS by any chance? after all, that's the biggest factor in the increased amount of overtakes.
In the 1960's Jim Clark had to pull into the pits with an issue, a puncture if I recall correctly, and came out a lap down. In the course of the race, not only did he manage to unlap himself but he also went on to re-take the lead. Somehow, I don't think we'd see that happen so easily today.
Only because Jim's no longer around.
There are silly rules like what the maximum engine revs are allowed to be. It should be as high as the engine itself will allow.
Cosworth got one of their 2.4 litre engines to rev up to 21,000 rpm but weren't allowed to race it because of the 18k rev limit. That said, with the accuracy of modern manufacturing equipment I doubt even letting the engineers push these sorts of limits would make the machines any less reliable.
Just ditch the fuel flow regulations and watch how they will rev those engines
Similar threads
- Article
- Article
- Article
