[Rules] Future Rule Changes

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Greem

My comment was based on "artificial" aids to racing.

Without writing the whole essay again, all racing is artificial. The sooner people stop banging on about "pure" racing, the better off we'll all be.

DRS is a form of PTP, just not as brutal.

If F1 had the same tech as Indy Car, there would be the same outcry - likely from the same people.

It's 2014. It isn't *insert favourite era of F1 here* any more. Can we look forward rather than back, do you think?

I agree PTP is artificial.

It does get a little difficult to look forward, when gimmick after gimmick is introduced; double points, sparks and traditional GP tracks are passed over in favour of countries with no motorports heritage and where one is not going to develop, despite hosting the race.

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by Greem

Without writing the whole essay again, all racing is artificial. The sooner people stop banging on about "pure" racing, the better off we'll all be.

Please link it. I'd like to read it.

Until the 1970's, when it became necessary to limit speeds for safety, I would say racing was pretty "pure". There were some rules, but for the most part, racing cars were the fastest people could make them.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

I agree PTP is artificial.

It does get a little difficult to look forward, when gimmick after gimmick is introduced; double points, sparks and traditional GP tracks are passed over in favour of countries with no motorports heritage and where one is not going to develop, despite hosting the race.

DRS (PTP) is simply drafting reintroduced.

Without it racing ceases entirely.
Aerodynamics producing massive down force has no place in competitive motor racing, they are great for time trial cars, useless in racing cars! The quality of the racing is inversely proportional to the amount of aerodynamic downforce available!

As far as the rest goes I couldn't agree more BJ.

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by wnut

The quality of the racing is inversely proportional to the amount of aerodynamic downforce available!

[Greem]

Originally Posted by miatanut

Please link it. I'd like to read it.

Until the 1970's, when it became necessary to limit speeds for safety, I would say racing was pretty "pure". There were some rules, but for the most part, racing cars were the fastest people could make them.

It was about tyres:

http://tentenths.com/forum/showpost....6&postcount=81

Or rules:

http://tentenths.com/forum/showpost....4&postcount=86

Or tyres:

http://tentenths.com/forum/showpost....&postcount=746

Hrm. It appears I may have a doctrinal view of racing which is a bit different to other people. I might have to do something about that!

As you probably realise, I don't think there has ever been an era of F1 (or more generally racing as a whole) which has been "pure", or void of artificiality.

Yes, there was a short time when F1 (or racing generally) was simply about racing for racing's sake but I think that probably ended pre-WWII, when the fuel/oil companies and friends started advertising and putting up prize money.

If you really want purity in this era, then there would be zero TV coverage. Hell, maybe we're heading that way anyway with everything disappearing behind paywalls; as the viewership drops, the money goes away, budgets fall... Yeah, maybe there is a future there. Back to racing on a shoestring.

(As an aside, I was talking to a spectator at Donington yesterday who'd been to the British GP for the first time this year. He pointed out that his grandstand was less than half full all weekend, until about 1230/1300 local time on the Sunday when it suddenly filled to bursting. All the people who'd suddenly arrived around him were on corporate freebies. I thought that was interesting, but maybe for another thread).

[bjohnsonsmith]

Newey criticises restrictive F1 rules.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/28594309

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by Greem

It was about tyres:

http://tentenths.com/forum/showpost....6&postcount=81

Or rules:

http://tentenths.com/forum/showpost....4&postcount=86

Or tyres:

http://tentenths.com/forum/showpost....&postcount=746

Hrm. It appears I may have a doctrinal view of racing which is a bit different to other people. I might have to do something about that!

As you probably realise, I don't think there has ever been an era of F1 (or more generally racing as a whole) which has been "pure", or void of artificiality.

Yes, there was a short time when F1 (or racing generally) was simply about racing for racing's sake but I think that probably ended pre-WWII, when the fuel/oil companies and friends started advertising and putting up prize money.

If you really want purity in this era, then there would be zero TV coverage. Hell, maybe we're heading that way anyway with everything disappearing behind paywalls; as the viewership drops, the money goes away, budgets fall... Yeah, maybe there is a future there. Back to racing on a shoestring.

(As an aside, I was talking to a spectator at Donington yesterday who'd been to the British GP for the first time this year. He pointed out that his grandstand was less than half full all weekend, until about 1230/1300 local time on the Sunday when it suddenly filled to bursting. All the people who'd suddenly arrived around him were on corporate freebies. I thought that was interesting, but maybe for another thread).

Interesting, but maybe it depends on how you define "purity."

If any rules at all make it impure, then I agree, there is no purity in any sport.

For me, purity was the period when the various innovations you list in the second post came into being, and it became impure when innovation turned into something to be stamped out.

Back in the "pure" days, the innovations were part of the entertainment. Now the emphasis seems to be on trying to make the cars as equal as possible so all the entertainment comes from the driver drama.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Newey criticises restrictive F1 rules.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/28594309

Newey has got rich and is now bored with what he has to do, and can afford to go off and do something else that interests him, nice situation to be in!

Still blame him as one of the prime architects of making aerodynamics so critically important to F1 performance! The OWG (Overtaking Working Group) allowed the front wings to dramatically increase in size, complexity and importance, while imo knowing full well that they were doing nothing to promote overtaking in F1, just dealing aerodynamics further in to the F1 equation.

[mikuni]

Originally Posted by wnut

Newey has got rich and is now bored with what he has to do, and can afford to go off and do something else that interests him, nice situation to be in!

Still blame him as one of the prime architects of making aerodynamics so critically important to F1 performance! The OWG (Overtaking Working Group) allowed the front wings to dramatically increase in size, complexity and importance, while imo knowing full well that they were doing nothing to promote overtaking in F1, just dealing aerodynamics further in to the F1 equation.

I agree but I don't think it is to do with money. Newey is interested in aero dynamics, more to the point I guess, fluid dynamics. Hence he wants to head to design Americas Cup yachts. Sure he pushed F1 in the direction he had interests in, but that was the direction many people wanted it to go. There's no argument that seeing an F1 car with huge aero lapping a circuit at full speed is an impressive spectacle, but as you say it comes at the price of good racing.

I've said it before, but I think the fact that Newey doesn't like the new regulations and is keen to leave because of them is a positive for the sport. It means they are stamping down on aero development meaning there isn't much you can do here. Everyday people are never going to be able to tell the difference between F1 cars if they were all painted white, it hasn't been this way for many, many years. I don't think this really matters, providing there are some differences between the vehicle both aesthetically and mechanically. I like F1 cars to sound different and respond differently in different areas of the track, corner exit, top speed, high speed corners etc. So I'm not too worried about what they look like, but I'd stop short of saying a control chassis is the way of the future.

[Teretonga]

newey trained in aerodynamics. when he started to design cars his knowledge of aerodynamics gave him the understanding of where good ground could be made that would give his designs an advantage over the opposition. he an brawn were contemporaries. When Newey did the Leyton House 881, brawn was working on the Arrows A8/A8B.

When active suspension was banned aero possibilities and development fell into Newey's hands so his successful designs reflected his wisdom. And the lemmings at other teams followed him.
At Red Bull they created a department that gave him the financial backing and support to do what he wanted to within the confines of the regulations.
We have seen what that emphasis has done to F1.
Now there is an official recognition and realisation that limiting F1 aero has a positive effect on the racing and competition, and Adrian probably realises that his era is coming to an end. So he's losing interest. Nothing unusual about that, 'there are other mountains to climb so I'll go and try those' thinking is fine.

Now they are moving away from aero down force toward mechanical grip F1 will change, significantly, but that's not a negative. there may be some issues that are driving a conformity in design and that may be because there is still an ethos that is thinking 'we have to contain cornering speed.'
Part of that may be right but in that case it is the rule makers who need to think about how to do that creatively without spoiling the racing.
But I do not think the constructors should have a say in that nor should the aerodynamicists.

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by mikuni

Everyday people are never going to be able to tell the difference between F1 cars if they were all painted white, it hasn't been this way for many, many years. I don't think this really matters, providing there are some differences between the vehicle both aesthetically and mechanically. I like F1 cars to sound different and respond differently in different areas of the track, corner exit, top speed, high speed corners etc. So I'm not too worried about what they look like, but I'd stop short of saying a control chassis is the way of the future.

I think that is the key part. It WAS true that most anybody could tell the differences between the cars if they were painted white.

From 1976:




Think anybody would have trouble telling either of those apart if they were just painted white?

Sure, they were the extremes. But look at the others (click on it for a larger view):


Compare that to now.

Sure, if you had the same rules now, all the engines would be concealed under bodywork because the CFD would say that is the way to go, but there would still be significant differences in noses, perhaps some cars with more than four wheels, differences in cooling strategies, difference in tire sizes.

The cars won't have different performance envelopes as long as the F1 rules over-specify the car, and prevent different designers from going different ways in their designs.

[wnut]

Whoever drew that layup was very kind to the Ligier Miatanut






That thing was really ugly!

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by wnut

Whoever drew that layup was very kind to the Ligier Miatanut






That thing was really ugly!

It kind of seems ugly now, but think back to the time! It was the peak of the big airboxes. Probably the rules restricting the airboxes for the next season were on the books, so they decided to do one people would remember. It certainly made an impression on me!

From an engineering standpoint, it's all very smooth and faired, so even if it was meant as a fashion statement as much as function, they would feel they weren't paying any significant drag penalty and they would net some publicity.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by wnut

Whoever drew that layup was very kind to the Ligier Miatanut





That thing was really ugly!

That poster will have been made for the European part of the '76 season, after the US GP West, when airboxes were banned.

[NaBUru38]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

a races shouldnt cost more than $5-6 per race imo (so basically the price to rent a new release movie on itunes)

If boxing and mixed martial arts can charge US$ 50, F1 won't charge less.

[wolfhound]

Originally Posted by NaBUru38

If boxing and mixed martial arts can charge US$ 50, F1 won't charge less.

$50 x 20 races $1000 Sky sports looks like a bargain then.

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

That poster will have been made for the European part of the '76 season, after the US GP West, when airboxes were banned.

I didn't remember that being a mid-season change. Sheesh! The rot had crept in earlier than I remember.

[mikuni]

Originally Posted by miatanut

I didn't remember that being a mid-season change. Sheesh! The rot had crept in earlier than I remember.

I think it may be those rose tinted glasses you are wearing.

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by mikuni

I think it may be those rose tinted glasses you are wearing.

Could be, but still, look at those cars. Some are kind of doorstop shaped, some have pointy mosquito noses, you can't see it from the poster, but some of the noses were kind of shovel shaped, quite a variety in airboxes, radiator placement, sidepod shape, rollbar shape, the way the cockpit transitions to the surrounding bodywork. Now, with CFD, they would be more similar, but there would still be different design concepts.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by miatanut

Could be, but still, look at those cars. Some are kind of doorstop shaped, some have pointy mosquito noses, you can't see it from the poster, but some of the noses were kind of shovel shaped, quite a variety in airboxes, radiator placement, sidepod shape, rollbar shape, the way the cockpit transitions to the surrounding bodywork. Now, with CFD, they would be more similar, but there would still be different design concepts.

That's what I liked about the mid '70s era, the different approaches designers used, to give their team that advantage over the other teams.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by miatanut

I am completely indifferent on that subject. We have fuel flow meters now, and there is no reason it couldn't stay that way. It would prevent the complaints about "economy runs." To me, they both accomplish the same thing. If the cars get too fast for safety, you can cut back their fuel. With a flow limit, as you pointed out, there would be more control over top speed, although depending on how a team wanted to use energy stored from regenerative braking or other energy recovery strategies, it may not be effective that way.

For the sake of safety, fuel-efficiency and relevancy both a fuel consumption limit and a fuel-flow limit are necessary.

However, I still think the FIA should consider a limit on certain performance parameters instead. It should not be that difficult to control engine power, as teams already use torque sensors and the FIA have been enforcing a rev-limit since 2007, hence one year before the engine control unit became standardized.

[codename_47]

I think there's a great irony in F1's perception at the moment compared to 10/15 years ago.

In the 2000s F1 had:
Refuelling, which meant the majority of the racing took place with cars on different sections of the track putting in the best laptimes they could (Max Mosley's exalted "200MPH chess match" )

Excess of topside aerodynamics: Meaning the cars couldn't follow closely in high speed corners and had less of a slipstream for the car behind to make up the time lost too.
Also the ridiculous amount of aerodynamic flick ups meant any smooth surface on a racing car was filled with ugly appendages that made the cars look much worse than the pointy noses do today imo (It pains me to look back on Fernando's or Lewis' title winning cars....yuck!)

Grooved Tyres: Which meant the cars couldn't pick up any mechanical grip to offset the dirty air from the car in front.

Dominance: One team dominating the early part of the decade and ensuring there would be no racing between its drivers

And yet F1 would carry itself with a degree of self importance and elitism, market itself like you were lucky to see these cars on track and you will enjoy whatever product you're lucky enough to be served up while the cars are on track.

Today we have

DRS: Which for all the scorn poured on it when in it's early life it was too powerful and allowing too easy overtaking, is a tool they've finally worked out how to use correctly and does not get the credit it deserves for keeping the cars close in the DRS zones and allowing passes like Riccardos at Hungary which, although it happened outside the zone, it's unlikely a red bull would be able to keep up with a Mercedes on the straight without DRS to be able to pass it.
It's great at cancelling out the aerodynamic wash tbh.

Pirelli: They get such a slaughtering (unjustifiably too, it was the team's fault) for races like Silverstone 2013 but they have done a brilliant job of doing exactly what they're asked to by the FIA: Giving us different compounds with different grip levels to ensure different cars are faster than others at different times in the race.

Power Trains: So much torque from these new beasts that, despite the stupid whining about the noise (Who goes to a motorsport event to become deaf?)
they are hard to drive once again and the throttle pedal needs to be treated with respect.
Love seeing the 2014 spec cars squirm around under braking and the driver wrestling with them under acceleration.

And yet F1 and the people employed by it keep making statements about how bad things are in the sport, how things need to be spiced up and how we're on a decline.

Well, 10 years ago I was depressed by what F1 was serving up on track and yet today I'm much more of a fan of the proper motor racing they're giving us than I was back then, when I turned to Champcar or touring cars to fulfill my racing fix.

Sort yourself out Formula 1. Your problems aren't from 1pm to 3pm on a Sunday.
They're in the week/two weeks in between.
Hire a marketing department, start getting stuff on youtube, promote yourself via social media, and hey, maybe don't hide half of your races behind a paywall, then maybe people will be able to experience all the great racing you're putting on at the moment.

Have a little self confidence like you did back then, would you?

[VIVA GT]

^^What a jolly good post! (I just wish someone had downsized the Ligier picture before posting it. Scrolling my screen right & left to read it was annoying!)

[wnut]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

^^What a jolly good post! (I just wish someone had downsized the Ligier picture before posting it. Scrolling my screen right & left to read it was annoying!)

I will apologize for this crime!

I thought that the images resized themselves to fit on the page, as a matter of fact after you posted your annoyance, the images did appear resized, but now they are not doing so.

If somebody has knows how to stop it, I will do so in future!

[hondafan37]

More power, less downforce please
http://gordonkirby.com/categories/co..._is_no446.html