|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
2 May 2017, 13:34 (Ref:3730556) | #2276 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 11,147
|
Anything is better than having a carpet of marbles off the racing line after mid-distance. People want good racing, well the first part of that is to have the racetrack clear of debris so that drivers can move offline, then you go from there. The ludicrous tyres they mandated completely fly in the face that the FIA has stood for which is safety at (almost) any cost. So they were ok with having a mass sea of marbles which could in theory cause a crash should a driver run a bit wide?
|
||
|
2 May 2017, 23:36 (Ref:3730647) | #2277 | ||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 23,144
|
I don't know why F1 doesn't want keep tyre options simple; one hard compound, one soft?
|
||
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying." Colin Chapman. |
4 May 2017, 12:31 (Ref:3730982) | #2278 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 979
|
Quote:
|
||
|
4 May 2017, 19:57 (Ref:3731080) | #2279 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 42,425
|
These things are not unrelated.
|
||
__________________
Seriously not taking motorsport too seriously. |
8 May 2017, 17:32 (Ref:3732283) | #2280 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,719
|
didnt want to start a new thread for this but motorsports.com has a article about the breakdown of the 2016 prize money.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/r...r-2017-903197/ obviously Ferrari made the most despite their 3rd place finish and while not discounting their importance to the series as a whole, this meant they made $108 million more than Force India who came in at 4th place last year. i also dont like how Williams does not qualify for the Championship Constructors Bonus (CCB)....i guess its their fault for not being better at negotiating though. no doubt their are numerous reasons for all of this... so here is to hoping the next round of negotiations lead to a more equal and even playing field! |
||
__________________
Home, is where I want to be but I guess I'm already there I come home, she lifted up her wings guess that this must be the place |
8 May 2017, 21:47 (Ref:3732336) | #2281 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,547
|
Quote:
|
||
|
11 May 2017, 12:04 (Ref:3732792) | #2282 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 1,406
|
I have so far agreed with Ross Brawn's idea's for improving the show of F1. But I do not agree with this. Not one bit of it.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/a...ier-f1-903516/ |
||
|
11 May 2017, 18:03 (Ref:3732870) | #2283 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,719
|
i question how much the small teams would benefit from this. even if they got to inspect what the top teams have produced how much money would it cost them to replicate it?
for teams with the resources it could shorten the development time and reduce the amount of time any one team has an advantage so maybe no more of multiple seasons in a row where one team dominates. immediate benefit could be some of the more esoteric tricks would be found out earlier and either adopted by all the teams or outlawed outright. if this is to be done in public, it would be cool to see more of the cars. can see both pro and cons of this suggestion. does it actually serve its purpose in Nascar? |
||
__________________
Home, is where I want to be but I guess I'm already there I come home, she lifted up her wings guess that this must be the place |
11 May 2017, 22:23 (Ref:3732889) | #2284 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,695
|
My first thought is F1 cars are moving aero devices, there would be there is no point looking at something without seeing the CFD or wind tunnel data that goes with it.
The second thought is that NASCARs are pretty much built to a Spec with different body shells and engines. Seeing that pole has set their front camber 1/2 a degree more than second and third did in qualifying is immediately transferable. F1 cars are Twin prototypes, they are built to regulations with each pair having been born from a design concept that runs through the cars. Making a carbon copy of Ferrari's front wing and putting it on say a Sauber, won't work, because the overall design of the Sauber of the Sauber, is conceptually different. I can also see it raise costs as well, as lesser teams will try to make possibly lots of variations of the top teams wings, floors or body parts to force radical changes to their cars in effect making a b-spec car, rather than continuing to evolve their own design concept. Having said all that teams being a little less secretive about what's under the skins of the cars wouldn't go a miss. Stopping the nonsense of mechanics standing blocking the World feed cameras should be one of the first and easiest ways of allowing fans/TV viewers more access into what's happening in the garage. Last edited by ScotsBrutesFan; 11 May 2017 at 22:28. |
||
|
12 May 2017, 08:11 (Ref:3732931) | #2285 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
Quote:
They really need to make sure that the engines are all run in the same specification. How on earth can a customer teams fully tune engines to works specs. The FIA has to force the works teams to make all their engines the same specification, you just plain don't run an update until you can produce all the engines to the same specification as the new works update, this will close the grid up better than any other regulation that could be introduced. The maximum price of the engine supply must also be fixed. |
||
|
12 May 2017, 09:22 (Ref:3732958) | #2286 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,547
|
Quote:
|
||
|
13 May 2017, 00:32 (Ref:3733098) | #2287 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
Quote:
|
||
|
13 May 2017, 01:12 (Ref:3733102) | #2288 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 42,425
|
Why introduce a rule to solve something that isn't really an issue anyway?
|
||
__________________
Seriously not taking motorsport too seriously. |
13 May 2017, 01:58 (Ref:3733106) | #2289 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,320
|
I don't care about the grid spread. It's not a problem for me. I think the sport, though, is a little embarrassed at Honda and Renault's ongoing lack of pace, they don't want to lose those two bigees so they're placing themselves under pressure and toying with these schemes.
I'm agnostic on open scrutineering. Yeah, maybe at half season or one third season, open up all the cars for inspection. I dunno. It's just not a problem for me. |
||
__________________
If I had asked my customer what they wanted, they would've said a faster horse. -Henry Ford |
13 May 2017, 02:10 (Ref:3733107) | #2290 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
||
|
13 May 2017, 06:15 (Ref:3733126) | #2291 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 42,425
|
Shall I respond with another remark with the same purpose? Like, so wnut, would you prefer every just has a spec. engine and car? I know that's not really what you are getting at, so why would I? I'd be more interested in sensible discussion that actually moves on from continual inaccurate remarks about suppliers being unfair.
I presume you did get my meaning. My point was that there is no real issue with teams getting different spec. engines and hasn't been for years. Especially from Mercedes who you appear to have a problem with. It's not even on the radar of things that could actually make a difference and improve F1. But, as you bring it up and this is an appropriate thread, I'd rather change F1 so it is less aero dependent for potential to race and open up the regs for more innovation. It is likely that would spread the field out, but the sport would be more pure in its ultimate aim to find the best. Similar to Paradise City's comment above. And when someone, with or without a bespoke engine, catches another car they can get past. Perhaps it makes me sound old and just want to hark back to the old days. I think the transparent scrutineering in NASCAR is definetely good for NASCAR. I'm not so sure about F1. Although maybe they can make them all park on a grassy paddock so that it would be naturally more open. See http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-21740060 I hope these have ligthened the mood Last edited by Adam43; 13 May 2017 at 06:20. |
||
__________________
Seriously not taking motorsport too seriously. |
13 May 2017, 09:47 (Ref:3733156) | #2292 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 979
|
FIA extends the DRS zones 100m at Barcelona
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/f...ish-gp-905103/
FIA extends the DRS zones 100m at Barcelona Personally what I would like if the DRS zones were moved closer to the last corner instead of lengthened to the last corner. Why? Because now the speed difference is so large at the end of the straight often it isn't really a fight. (I know Barcelona is different because of the the last two corners). If you keep the DRS length more or less the same but instead move it closer to the last corner you achieve two things: 1 You "remedy" the problem closer to where is occurs, namely cars having difficulty following each other in fast corners. You allow the following car to close back up earlier and from there they have a chance. 2 The DRS closes sooner as well so the speed difference at the end of the straight will be smaller which makes for more interesting and less dangerous battles. (remember the outcry by some about MAX daring to move on the straight in Spa?) I know it won't be possible everywhere, because at some tracks the DRS/straight is already to short with these cars. But on the tracks that do have the room and there are many (Canada, Monza, Bakuh, Austria, Spa, Mexico, probably some more) this would be the preferred option in my view. PS1 I understand that at higher speed (end of the straight) DRS makes more of a difference PS2 Yes I too would rather not have/need DRS in the first place. |
|
|
13 May 2017, 11:05 (Ref:3733178) | #2293 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 18,325
|
I just want to wish the people that are in charge the best with giving us better races than we are having to watch
|
|
__________________
He who dares wins! He who hesitates is lost! |
21 May 2017, 08:36 (Ref:3734850) | #2294 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,547
|
Ross Brawn was behind the move to allow non strategy group teams attend as observers, no real surprise there.
http://classic.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/129635 It would not surprise me if the strategy group ends up in the dust bin with it being replaced with a better structure which is more inclusive. |
|
|
10 Jun 2017, 07:20 (Ref:3739880) | #2296 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,695
|
Do you have a source or link to go with this?
|
||
|
10 Jun 2017, 07:33 (Ref:3739882) | #2297 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 11,147
|
I want anti lag... pop pop pop pop pop pop.
|
||
|
13 Jun 2017, 15:26 (Ref:3740887) | #2298 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,719
|
there is probably a road relevance thread somewhere but was easier to put it out here.
so given Sainz' explanation that his mirrors/blind spot visibility was the cause, should F1 be looking at road cars for solutions? a rear/side camera screen (possibly in the steering wheel) is probably a little too much but some sort of blind spot sensor on the mirrors or in the cockpit, as they have in many new road cars, could be a relatively cheap solution. or are the cars all too close together at the start that the indicator light would just be on the whole time negating its usefulness? or even a more analog solution with a manual ability to move the angle of the mirrors so they can optimize between starts and the remainder of the race or as they see fit? |
||
__________________
Home, is where I want to be but I guess I'm already there I come home, she lifted up her wings guess that this must be the place |
13 Jun 2017, 20:10 (Ref:3740987) | #2299 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 950
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
I haven't got a life, just an anorak. |
13 Jun 2017, 20:49 (Ref:3740999) | #2300 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,803
|
Quote:
Use the force Luke! I don't need any of your whining about not being able to see when the blast shield is down! Act on instinct! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owvpRNzoaVU Richard |
||
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[Rules] Are more rule changes necessary ? | Marbot | Formula One | 51 | 27 Sep 2009 17:19 |
F1 future rule changes | TheNewBob | Formula One | 57 | 20 Dec 2006 09:19 |
Sensible ideas for future technical regs anyone?/Rule changes - more to come [merged] | AMT | Formula One | 74 | 12 Nov 2002 16:09 |
Future Tourer Future | Crash Test | Australasian Touring Cars. | 13 | 17 Jul 2002 23:01 |