Tilke-Designed Circuits

[Purist]

Yes, Tim, I agree there, and even some of the old tracks that have been updated have that problem. You used to be able to identify the start/finish area at Spa right from the off, but now it's just so damn straight and wide like every other GP grid, except Monaco.

As to the terrain, I'm not certain on all the site grading requirements. I didn't bring it up earlier, but I suppose I'll mention it now. Appendix O of the Technical Regulations includes some rather unfortunate stipulations.
1. The start/finish straight of a GP circuit should have a slope of no more than 2%.
2. Off-camber corners are to be avoided if at all possible, and if unavoidable, can have an apex speed of no more than 125kph.
3. Corner banking may be no more than 10 degrees without specific FIA approval.
4. It is preferable that corners NOT include elevation changes.
5. The first corner (a turn of more than 45 degrees) should have an apex speed not exceeding 125kph.
6. (This last one I haven't read in a while, and have had a hard time finding of late). Decreasing radius corners should be avoided, but if present, should have an apex speed of no more than 75kph.

Thankfully, looking at some recent circuits, I think the 2% slope rule on the start straight is mainly for the starting grid, and does NOT prevent other portions of the straight from having a greater incline. Take a look at Algarve/Portimao for an example of this. That track also would indicate that there is some definite wiggle room on some of these rules/suggestions, since Algarve, even with all its elevation changes and other features, has at least an FIA Grade 1 rating, if not a Grade 1T rating.

And speaking of Algarve, that circuit, as well as Potrero de los Funes to a somewhat lesser extent, PROVE that you CAN design and construct a good, interesting, and soulful circuit to FIA Grade 2 or Grade 1 requirements in this day and age. And especially for one of the Middle Eastern tracks, Dubai Autodrome certainly isn't bad either.

[Purist]

For those who have yet to see it, this is a diagram of Moscow Raceway, not to be confused with Eurasia Autodrome. Moscow Raceway is, of course, designed by Hermann Tilke. Construction has been underway for several months on the 4.070km (2.529-mile) circuit 77km from Moscow itself. The main/back straight is 873m.
http://www.motorsport-total.com/news..._big/39737.jpg

[Belatti]

Originally Posted by Purist

Appendix O of the Technical Regulations includes some rather unfortunate stipulations.
1. The start/finish straight of a GP circuit should have a slope of no more than 2%.
2. Off-camber corners are to be avoided if at all possible, and if unavoidable, can have an apex speed of no more than 125kph.
3. Corner banking may be no more than 10 degrees without specific FIA approval.
4. It is preferable that corners NOT include elevation changes.
5. The first corner (a turn of more than 45 degrees) should have an apex speed not exceeding 125kph.
6. (This last one I haven't read in a while, and have had a hard time finding of late). Decreasing radius corners should be avoided, but if present, should have an apex speed of no more than 75kph.

Safety is boring. Overtaking is not boring. So overtaking ≠ safety. Today´s cars, tracks and rules are safety inspired.

With Spa full of asphalt arround Eau Rouge, Blanchimont and Pouhon, or other any track where a cuff crap filler curve is surrounded by alphalt and mistakes are forgiven, with new Tilke tracks with no banked and elevation changing curves, with new tracks like Potrero de los Funes in Argentina left behind because those FIA "A" track rules...

More processions will follow!!!

[Yannick]

I'd like to do the "unthinkable" now and commend on the regulations for track design.

Originally Posted by Purist

Appendix O of the Technical Regulations includes some rather unfortunate stipulations.
1. The start/finish straight of a GP circuit should have a slope of no more than 2%.
2. Off-camber corners are to be avoided if at all possible, and if unavoidable, can have an apex speed of no more than 125kph.
3. Corner banking may be no more than 10 degrees without specific FIA approval.
4. It is preferable that corners NOT include elevation changes.
5. The first corner (a turn of more than 45 degrees) should have an apex speed not exceeding 125kph.
6. (This last one I haven't read in a while, and have had a hard time finding of late). Decreasing radius corners should be avoided, but if present, should have an apex speed of no more than 75kph.

#1, #2, #3 are OK with me. #4 may be meant to avoid accidents with cars that stopped on the racing line of blind corners, but it does a lot more than avoiding blind corners. Still, it's mainly the marshalls' job to avoid such accidents since there exist blind corners that are absolutely flat. But technically, #4 would make impossible the classics Eau Rouge, Mirabeau, etc.
Most of my own fantasy track designs on the "My Tracks" sub-board of this forum have got elevation changes during corners.
#5 asking for a slow first corner, looks like it was a product of the Overtaking Working Group. It is a completely unnecessary rule, which Copse Corner has proven every year, despite me thinking it has a lack of runoff.
#6 looks like a completely unnecessary restriction as well, as long as the corner in question has got enough runoff. You can create an interesting layout for a fantasy track just by using increasing and decreasing radius corners alone.

[Purist]

I'm pretty sure that #5 and #6 have been around for a while. Based on a couple of books I have, it looks like #5 has been in place at least since the start of the 1993 season (these rules of course apply principally to new tracks after said rules are in place). And Copse has had some paved run-off for a couple years now. As for #6, the two main examples of it seemingly being applied that I can think of are Mexico City (getting rid of Espiral before the 1986 GP) and Fuji (reprofiling 100R and destroying 300R).

Well, #1 definitely rules out Road America or Laguna Seca for F1. I assume it's to help prevent false starts in a standing start situation. However, I suppose on that one, my thought is, "The cars have brakes, don't they?" On #2, I know one of the best corners out there is a 250+kph off-camber, double-apex curve (for LMPs anyway). I think Turn 4 at Mosport, along with Turn 2, is off-camber as well. And of course, I'm pretty sure Turn 1 at Istanbul breaks this rule too.

I think it would be easier to say which tracks don't violate rule #4. I mean, the only ones that avoid that issue completely appear to be Melbourne, Montreal, Valencia, and Singapore.

I suppose I could have added one more rule that's in Appendix O.
7. It is preferable to have at least 250m from the start line to the first corner.

I'm sure Montreal breaks that one, as did Magny Cours. I'm suspicious of Abu Dhabi and Silverstone in this regard as well, and Valencia has its first curve right after the starting line (though that one perhaps doesn't meet the first turn requirements based on one of the other aforementioned rules).

[duke_toaster]

Note that #4 says that it is "preferable", not mandatory.

[duke_toaster]

Originally Posted by Purist

For those who have yet to see it, this is a diagram of Moscow Raceway, not to be confused with Eurasia Autodrome. Moscow Raceway is, of course, designed by Hermann Tilke. Construction has been underway for several months on the 4.070km (2.529-mile) circuit 77km from Moscow itself. The main/back straight is 873m.
http://www.motorsport-total.com/news..._big/39737.jpg

Didn't they hack together a video of CGI, footage of other tracks and Quutamo by Apocalyptica (this song, without the vocals)? IIRC it was on a website called RuTube or something. I don't speak Russian though.

[ECW Dan Selby]

I'm really a bit shocked by those rules. How limiting?

I think maybe people can begin to appreciate the leash Mr Tilke is on...

Be interesting to migrate some of these rulings over to the 'My Tracks' section and see what people can do

Selby

[Go_For_Pole]

Does anybody know who designed Algarve?

[ECW Dan Selby]

I believe that was a Mr Tilke creation, and a good one at that.

Selby

[Yannick]

Portimao / Algarve is a better circuit than all of the Tilkedromes that actually made it onto the F1 calendar.

Originally Posted by Quintin03

I must correct Yannick: even though John Hugenholtz was involved in the building of Zandvoort he didn't design it. The design was done by a pre war le mans winner. John was involved in safety only.

Thank you Quintin for pointing that out. I wasn't aware of that beforehand.

Originally Posted by Tim the Grey

I just get confused between Tilke tracks. They all look the same. At least in the old days I could tell where a photo was taken because every track was different...

With quite a few new tracks and track edits having hosted races in F1 in recent years, I've noticed the fact, too, that a lot of these tracks look strangely alike.
Even the new front straight of Spa looks alike.
I have gotten the impression that that may have something to do with how an abstract concept from the field of marketing and advertising is implemented in F1. I'm of course talking about the concept of "corporate identity". Franchisers use it so that, for example, every hamburger restaurant looks alike. Its effects on the customer are meant to make him or her feel at home in an environment he knows and therefore be more willing to buy more product or be more appreciative of advertising.
Hence, I assume that Bernie's FOM, who is selling ad space at the circuits by the bundle, is the driving force behind new circuits looking more and more alike.
I feel they should get away from this perspective because it makes watching races on TV less special and more boring than interesting. They went into the opposite direction of corporate identity with the Singapore track. It would be short-sighted to attribute the event's success only to it being a night race.

[Quintin03]

Originally Posted by ECW Dan Selby

I believe that was a Mr Tilke creation, and a good one at that.

Selby

Probably not. Such a track can't be designed by a company that get's approval to build any circuit they design. I can't imagine there are no requirements to keep this qualification.

[Quintin03]

Originally Posted by ECW Dan Selby

Got an image of that one by any chance, Quintin?

I'm certainly a fan of some of his tracks from what i've been told

Selby

Though it is a little late I have a link to a place where you can find an image plus a KMZ (google earth) file of the track: http://www.gdecarli.it/php/index.php?var1=1&var2=2

Click NED in the left side batr and go down to Zeist.

[Purist]

Algarve was designed by former bike racer Paolo Pinero.

That particular track does confuse things as it does have a Grade 1 certification. It makes you wonder just what is mandatory for that level of clearance, and what can be, technically, overlooked.

Duke, you are correct about that video facsimile of Moscow Raceway. I think that track would make a better test track than RACE track, especially with those eight slow to medium speed corners with no straight between them. I looks like it could be slower on average than Hungaroring.

I think part of the overcomplicated nature of newer tracks is also that the powers-that-be don't want a really high average speed on the tracks. I mean, it looks like lately they've been shooting for something like 128-135mph average on the new permanent circuits. The new urban circuits are a bit slower still. A relatively simple circuit of 4.0km minimum could quite easily have an average speed, for F1, of over 140mph, or even 150+mph (like Monza). Mosport is 2.459 miles to the lap, but F1 cars might be capable of lapping the place in under a minute.

[olly83]

Tilke's circuits are nice if you like ostentatious archetecture and the odd one or two (Sepang, Turkey) might be quite fun to drive. As a spectator though, i dont really fancy visiting any of them.

From what I can see on the telly the tracks are 3 miles wide, the barriers are in a different postcode and the spectators have to be equipped with astronomical telescopes to see anything! (Ok I might be exaggerating a bit!)

Thing is, when you've got places like Spa and Monza, who'd go to Bahrain for goodness sake?! (obviously not the locals by the look of things!)

You cant blame Tilke for building his circuits in the locations he is given but the apparent lack of atmosphere and pathetic crowd sizes rather taint my view of his tracks.

Tilke might be pushing the boundaries a far as glamour and luxury go but for entertainment I feel he falls short of the mark.

[Purist]

On the overtaking front, I was looking at some video compilations of particularly well remembered overtaking maneuvers from the last 20 years or so, and it definitely seems as though drivers used to be more willing to stick their nose in there and go for the position than appears to be the case a lot of times now. Heck, one of the video clips was of a short back and forth tussle at Monaco; nobody seems terribly willing to try to pass at that track anymore.

As for Tilke's other F1 designs, I actually think Cape Town is good compared to most of his other efforts. It would have a couple of decent overtaking opportunities. That track has a nice shape and reasonable flow to it. It has at least as many high-speed corners as any of his other original designs. The combination of the long straights, AND high-speed sweepers, would make car set-up very interesting. Also, Cape Town is Tilke's longest F1 proposal at 5.7km, and would probably have been his fastest in terms of average lap speed.

On India, the top section on the diagrams looks like it could be interesting; it really depends how fast those esse bends and that carousel are though. The bottom is pretty basic Tilke fare. This could be a fairly low downforce circuit, which it would be nice to have another one of those in F1.

i think Korea could be alright. Some of those corner combinations ought to be good if they're fast enough. There is a very nice series of flowing corners from the latter part of the upper circuit through the first portion of the lower extention. Also, the last two corners on the F1 circuit look like they could be fun, if they're fast enough, of course. Also, it doesn't have as bad an overall flow as some of his other works.

Russia would make a better test track. Moscow Raceway only has one decent straight if you're going for overtaking into a hairpin. The other straights are simply too short for that to work. And, of course, that sequence at the far end of the track from the pits is incredibly technical, but is going to be so long and slow that it's awful in terms of racing potential. If Moscow comes off, it may well replace Bahrain at the bottom of my list.

[Purist]

Yannick, I definitely agree about the whole bit of a corner NOT having to be slow in order to allow for overtaking. I was thinking of Dijon as well with that, and mentioned in the recent "Czech Republic GP" thread that I thought the first corner at Brno had overtaking potential, and that the circuit as a whole was reasonably good in my eyes.

I think that a challenging track can be inviting to overtaking, but yes, it can also be a hindrance to it. However, it's not a universal thing. It really depends on the track.

Suzuka and Spa certainly aren't simple layouts, but they offer real overtaking opportunities. Monza and Fuji are rather simple by comparison, but with the chicanes and/or hairpins that have been added, racing at those circuits isn't particularly better than at the two aforementioned venues. Of course, a track like Mosport is rather simple, but works, whereas Barber Motorsports Park is quite complicated, but doesn't making passing at all easy for the bigger cars.

[Purist]

I thought, with recent events, that this thread should be returned to the fore.

In particular, we now have reconfigurations of Bahrain and Silverstone to consider. As far as I am aware, Tilke has been overseeing the revisions at Silverstone, and one of his original works, Sakhir, is having its lap extended as well. Any particular thoughts on these two?

I also thought of this, looking at the date, and seeing that we have now had some more time to let our memories and impressions of Abu Dhabi settle. Does anyone have something more to contribute about that venue, or have any of you changed your views on it?

It looks like there have been a few revisons to the Korean circuit since the initial layout was shown. Do these changes look to you like they will make things any better or worse overall?

Finally, hopefully you guys have had a chance now to see what the Indian Grand Prix circuit is supposed to look like. What do you think of it?

P.S. To an earlier comment about the Abu Dhabi stadium, the stadium section around Turns 5-7 at Abu Dhabi is MUCH better than what Tilke did with those infield 'arenas" he inserted at Nurburgring and Hockenheim. However, I really do wish they would just bypass that Turn 5-6 chicane at Abu Dhabi.

[Quintin03]

Bahrain isn't being extended. The track layout is just changed to one that wasn't used by the grand prix.

[Sodemo]

The new Bahrain loop is just full of 2nd gear corners, not too much to get excited about, should punish the rear tyres though.

[chunterer]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

The new Bahrain loop is just full of 2nd gear corners, not too much to get excited about, should punish the rear tyres though.

Lewis could be in for a tough time there then!

[Purist]

By extended, I simply meant that the new layouts at Bahrain and Silverstone are longer than the configurations they have been using. I am aware that most, if not all, of the tarmac being used for these revised circuits existed before the Grand Prix circuits were modified to use it.

[Tathrim]

The 'new' layout in Bahrin was ued for a sportscar 24 hour race sometime after the Inaugural F1 race. And whilst silverstone's tramac was tehre in the most part, it wasn't all enritely there, as Ireland is going to be reprofiled.

[jab]

I don't think Silverstone is being done by Tilke, is it? Thought it was Populous or one of the others

[Purist]

There are some definite Tilke cues in that tight "arena" bit on the new Silverstone layout, and Hermann has been behind EVERY approved new circuit or circuit modification for F1 since the middle of 1996; the last one to not be done by Tilke was Melbourne.

And yes, supposedly the new French GP circuit near Paris is being done by Apex Circuit Design instead of Tilke, but I have not heard anything new and official about that project in some time, whereas the Tilke jobs are covered quite extensively by comparison.