[Rules] Future Rule Changes

[ASCII Man]

Sarcasm is hard to detect, it seems.

But the way some people talk it's like something banned is banned forever, without any chance of revisiting when the technology is safe.

[Oldtony]

The general drift of info coming from the future power unit discussion seems to be that the MGU-H is to go to reduce complexity and cost.
They seem to be also proposing a 10kg extra fuel allowance so that "racing can be at full power".
As the prime purpose of the MGU-H is to extract otherwise wasted energy from heat I would think that would be nowhere enough extra fuel to compensate and it is likely that fuel saving will become even more prevalent.
Sounds like we are in for dumber, slower cars just to satisfy those people who like loud noises.

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by Oldtony

The general drift of info coming from the future power unit discussion seems to be that the MGU-H is to go to reduce complexity and cost.
They seem to be also proposing a 10kg extra fuel allowance so that "racing can be at full power".
As the prime purpose of the MGU-H is to extract otherwise wasted energy from heat I would think that would be nowhere enough extra fuel to compensate and it is likely that fuel saving will become even more prevalent.
Sounds like we are in for dumber, slower cars just to satisfy those people who like loud noises.

Sadly I think you have hit the nail right on the hea there!

[ASCII Man]

<sigh>

Lower costs, more entrants, more competition.

But that's a concept too hard to grasp.

[Oldtony]

Originally Posted by ASCII Man

<sigh>

Lower costs, more entrants, more competition.

But that's a concept too hard to grasp.

It would seem that there is potential for at least 2 less entrants ( Ferrari & Merc) if the boards of those companies cannot see justification for putting their R&D budgets into F1. And if they go where do the power units come from?
I grasp the cost cutting concept you mention but it is still aiming at dumber slower cars.

[Peter Mallett]

And that's really what we need. The clever technology has made it so that only the big manufacturers can play. As I've said previously the best solution is to dump the technology and go back to normally aspirated engines. If you one really want the technology, go watch sportscars.

It's all there and good racing too.

[marcel82]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Here is an attempt to get across how everything we collectively ask for is, at best, hard to achieve. Close lap times, enough performance difference for overtaking. Quick cars, simple cars. Design freedom, cheap cars.

Don't perfornance differences do exactly the opposite of creating overtakes?
I mean you have qualifying, which is aimed at putting the best guy in the best car in front (and the current system even further promotes that).
How is a slower driver in a slower car supposed to overtake him?

Minimize the performance gap, I say.

[Akrapovic]

Ferrari are not going anywhere, and they never will. Let them go build IndyCars to their heart's content.

[ASCII Man]

Originally Posted by Oldtony

It would seem that there is potential for at least 2 less entrants ( Ferrari & Merc) if the boards of those companies cannot see justification for putting their R&D budgets into F1.

That is exactly what F1 needs, to cut loose from the stranglehold these two manufacturers have on F1 and finally make a rule set that benefits the sport.

Longer braking distances through perhaps steel brake discs, a vast reduction in wake turbulence possibly through a greater use of ground effect, etc. ...
Having the cars designed AROUND the safety device, instead of plopping something on the existing designs like they have stubbornly done in the past.

There are a multitude of ways to improve the sport, but the only thing truly needed is that whoever is making those decisions decides to grow a pair and stand up to manufacturer extortion.

[EffectiveSprinkles]

I do find it a bit hilarious that people think they have the panacea to fix everything in F1, if only the big heads at the top would listen!

Ignoring the fact that they've already tried everything suggested here, sometimes multiple times, with either no or an adverse effect.

[ASCII Man]

Originally Posted by EffectiveSprinkles

Ignoring the fact that they've already tried everything suggested here, sometimes multiple times, with either no or an adverse effect.

I would call bullshit on that, because that's what it is.
But that'll be the last comment I'll make here, as the effort expended is apparently nothing but a waste.

[steve_r]

Originally Posted by ASCII Man

I would call bullshit on that, because that's what it is.
But that'll be the last comment I'll make here, as the effort expended is apparently nothing but a waste.

FWIW I agree with most what you suggested.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by EffectiveSprinkles

I do find it a bit hilarious that people think they have the panacea to fix everything in F1, if only the big heads at the top would listen!

Ignoring the fact that they've already tried everything suggested here, sometimes multiple times, with either no or an adverse effect.

If you look at the entirety of things suggested here there are a number in which F1 has not implemented, or have implemented in a half hearted way that does not allow its benefit to be truly realized.

And it’s less about those in charge listening than it is about specific player refusing to participate in specific ideas as at the core many of those ideas are designed specifically to tear down their dominance of the sport. Asking someone to give up their hard fought advantages is a hard sell. However I feel it is imperative that it is done for the sake of the sport.

With that said, I also feel there are some truly terrible ideas espoused here at times. And both the good and bad ideas are not new, or unique to this forum.

Richard

[Peter Mallett]

I'm not sure any idea is terrible. That way lies failure. What we can't do here is analyse what that idea means practically which is why we propose things that we hope rather than know will work.

As everyone knows I come from the less tech, more driver input school of thought. But many see that as a backward step. What do I know? I'm just an old bloke that races cars.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Ferrari are not going anywhere, and they never will. Let them go build IndyCars to their heart's content.

They did that in the mid '80s, with the Ferrari 637 but never raced it.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by marcel82

Don't perfornance differences do exactly the opposite of creating overtakes?
I mean you have qualifying, which is aimed at putting the best guy in the best car in front (and the current system even further promotes that).
How is a slower driver in a slower car supposed to overtake him?

Minimize the performance gap, I say.

Yes, but in the race you need performance differences. So anything that changes the relative pace of each competitor through the race should be encouraged.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

I'm not sure any idea is terrible. That way lies failure. What we can't do here is analyse what that idea means practically which is why we propose things that we hope rather than know will work.

As everyone knows I come from the less tech, more driver input school of thought. But many see that as a backward step. What do I know? I'm just an old bloke that races cars.

rightly said imo.

it is interesting to note what background each of us have as that reflects on our perspective about which changes we think are needed and why we come to those conclusions.

myself, coming from accounting/financial background probably explains why the changes i typically advocate for are about financial stability, cost controls, budgets caps, how payments are managed...the typical refrain from any good accountant i would think.

[keithcollantine]

The problem is the more you simplify the more you risk looking like, as Marchionne said, 'global NASCAR'. And he's not change his tune even since Liberty's presentation to the teams.

[Peter Mallett]

Can't say that I've ever equated single seaters with NASCAR. He may be referring to the standardisation of componentry which is something I'm against.

[wolfhound]

Changes to the front wing and the rear wing flap have been pushed through by the FIA and Liberty with the support of the 3 Mercedes powered teams and Sauber.

http://classic.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/135718

Lets hope it works.

[Skam85]

Sauber agreeing is an interesting power play.

[MissClarrpz]

It will have a "simplified front wing with a larger span and low outwash potential, simplified front brake duct with no winglets, plus a wider and deeper rear wing that will make DRS more effective."

I agree with the front wing and brake ducts but the FIA way of making DRS more powerful I don't like. The teams ran CFD tests for each change apart from extra bargeboards so that was not approved. Why all the Mercedes cars AND Sauber voting for this?

[S griffin]

I like the fact they are simplifying the front wing, but for goodness sake, we don't want anymore DRS influence! We just want less downforce and they should start by getting rid of all the ugly winglets that adorn an F1's bodywork these days. Or are the FIA too scared to admit they were wrong to increase downforce for 2017?

[ASCII Man]

If it's pushed by the 3 Mercedes teams then it's bad by default.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by MissClarrpz

It will have a "simplified front wing with a larger span and low outwash potential, simplified front brake duct with no winglets, plus a wider and deeper rear wing that will make DRS more effective."

I agree with the front wing and brake ducts but the FIA way of making DRS more powerful I don't like. The teams ran CFD tests for each change apart from extra bargeboards so that was not approved. Why all the Mercedes cars AND Sauber voting for this?

The Mercedes teams have the best PU, and if the Mercedes customers can dumb down the better aero of the Renault and STR teams they will have a better chance of beating them. That is why they are voting the way they are.

Divide and rule, with only 4 teams voting in favour of the change?

Now for the PU change, hopefully Renault and Honda teams can vote to change the PU's, which will be good.