Home  
Site Partners: SpotterGuides Veloce Books  
Related Sites: Your Link Here  

Go Back   TenTenths Motorsport Forum > Single Seater Racing > Formula One

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12 Dec 2008, 13:24 (Ref:2353474)   #1
Down F0rce
Veteran
 
Down F0rce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Scotland
Aberdeenshire, Scotland
Posts: 4,900
Down F0rce should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridDown F0rce should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridDown F0rce should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridDown F0rce should be qualifying in the top 3 on the grid
2009 and 2010 regulations to be released today.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/72456

The one that leapt out at me the most was a ban on refuelling for 2010!
Down F0rce is offline  
__________________
I can't drive 55.
Quote
Old 12 Dec 2008, 13:34 (Ref:2353482)   #2
safc_fan89
Veteran
 
safc_fan89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,936
safc_fan89 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridsafc_fan89 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Most of it I think seems fair enough, but reducing engine revs to 18000rpm doesn't exactly go with F1 being 'pinnacle of motorsport'. GP2 cars will be faster soon. I think that's a rubbish idea and should be reconsidered...

No doubt it won't be though.
safc_fan89 is offline  
Quote
Old 12 Dec 2008, 13:35 (Ref:2353483)   #3
andybg40
Racer
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
England
Kent
Posts: 120
andybg40 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/72459
andybg40 is offline  
Quote
Old 12 Dec 2008, 13:39 (Ref:2353489)   #4
Marbot
Retired
20KPINAL
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
United Kingdom
Posts: 22,897
Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!
The ban on refueling is good,although the possibilty of shorter race distances (is this an attention span thing I wonder) is not so good.

Renault get to fiddle with their engine which means Alonso 2009 WDC,Webber to Renault etc.
Marbot is offline  
Quote
Old 12 Dec 2008, 13:41 (Ref:2353490)   #5
Pingguest
Veteran
 
Pingguest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Netherlands
Heemstede, The Netherlands
Posts: 3,190
Pingguest should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
The ban on refuelling and tyre warmers are good. But why do they want to make the races shorter? I think the mid-season ban on testing is reasonable, but I oppose the on-going proces of standardization.

If they really wanted to reduce engine production costs, they should have lifted the engine freeze and allow only one engine per season.
Pingguest is offline  
Quote
Old 12 Dec 2008, 13:50 (Ref:2353494)   #6
Marbot
Retired
20KPINAL
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
United Kingdom
Posts: 22,897
Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pingguest

If they really wanted to reduce engine production costs, they should have lifted the engine freeze and allow only one engine per season.
One engine per season,like DTM then.

It's not really the production costs that will be the problem.It will be the development costs,which means building loads of engines to test that will never see the light of day.Plus if you're only allowed one engine per season when do you introduce the upgrade?
Marbot is offline  
Quote
Old 12 Dec 2008, 14:13 (Ref:2353517)   #7
Pingguest
Veteran
 
Pingguest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Netherlands
Heemstede, The Netherlands
Posts: 3,190
Pingguest should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marbot
One engine per season,like DTM then.
Yes. Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't support such a rule. But about limiting engine use, they should only choose for not restricting, or restricting to one engine per weekend or one engine per season. All other options requires an artificial, complex and possibly unfair set of rules.

Quote:
It's not really the production costs that will be the problem.It will be the development costs,which means building loads of engines to test that will never see the light of day.
Ironically, the FIA never considered this as a problem when they introduced and tightened the rules for enforced engine reliability.

Quote:
Plus if you're only allowed one engine per season when do you introduce the upgrade?
If they FIA would allow only one engine per season, mid-season engine development would be impossible and hence effectively banned.
Pingguest is offline  
Quote
Old 12 Dec 2008, 14:35 (Ref:2353540)   #8
Devilsadvocate
Rookie
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 75
Devilsadvocate should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
So no in season testing, will that mean best car at first race is likely to remain best car all season? Will this affect Ferrari and McLaren more than others? They are two teams who have relied heavily on in season development.

I don't get the shorter races idea. How will that save any money? Bit of fuel perhaps and engines doing less milage (minimal) but I just don't see the point in that one.

Overall I am pleased though. Particularly with the market research proposals. Does that mean we might finally get our views listened to and actioned upon?
Devilsadvocate is offline  
Quote
Old 12 Dec 2008, 14:46 (Ref:2353546)   #9
REALIST
Racer
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 461
REALIST has a lot of promise if they can keep it on the circuit!
What will they call this type of racing? Because it sure as hell won't be Formula 1 any more.

Desperate times call for desperate measures I suppose, and some of these are truly desperate.
REALIST is offline  
Quote
Old 12 Dec 2008, 14:47 (Ref:2353548)   #10
Stefvh
Veteran
 
Stefvh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Belgium
Posts: 840
Stefvh should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
I think shorter races are due to the ban on refuelling, rather than costs.
Stefvh is offline  
__________________
"Without racing there is no Honda". Soichiro Honda
Quote
Old 12 Dec 2008, 15:03 (Ref:2353558)   #11
Silk Cut Jaguar
Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
United Kingdom
Bath, UK
Posts: 1,349
Silk Cut Jaguar should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridSilk Cut Jaguar should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Devilsadvocate
So no in season testing, will that mean best car at first race is likely to remain best car all season? Will this affect Ferrari and McLaren more than others? They are two teams who have relied heavily on in season development.
They're going to have to put a lot more faith in their wind tunnels and CFD results, that's for sure.

I really hope they don't shorten the race length though, it'll end up with Monza being a 30 minute sprint before long.
Silk Cut Jaguar is offline  
__________________
Real cars have roofs.
Quote
Old 12 Dec 2008, 15:10 (Ref:2353568)   #12
chillibowl
Veteran
 
chillibowl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Canada
winnipeg, canada
Posts: 9,698
chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!
so instead of developing a more fuel efficient engine they are opting to ban refueling and shortening the race to make it work. what does that even mean?

are they thinking about moving to a race weekend comprised of several sprint races or just going to increase the size of the fuel tank?

so since everyone will have to start with a full fuel tank, what format will quali take on now. as i like the current format, maybe just a tweak to Q3 will be all that is required.
chillibowl is offline  
__________________
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
Quote
Old 12 Dec 2008, 15:10 (Ref:2353569)   #13
nycuk
Veteran
 
nycuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
England
Banbury, Oxfordshire, England
Posts: 591
nycuk should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Generally these new regs look pretty good as far as I'm concerned. I'm glad that refuelling is going - never liked it, glad to see the back of it. Not sure about shorter races though - how long will they be? 2 x 45 minutes?

The FIA say that some (still to be decided) changes will be based on the results of market research - how and when will this be conducted?
nycuk is offline  
Quote
Old 12 Dec 2008, 15:11 (Ref:2353570)   #14
nycuk
Veteran
 
nycuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
England
Banbury, Oxfordshire, England
Posts: 591
nycuk should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stefvh
I think shorter races are due to the ban on refuelling, rather than costs.
Running 180+ miles on one tank wasn't a problem before 1994 - can't the fuel tank size just be increased to go a race distance?
nycuk is offline  
Quote
Old 12 Dec 2008, 15:48 (Ref:2353579)   #15
Stefvh
Veteran
 
Stefvh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Belgium
Posts: 840
Stefvh should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
I think they can, but don't want.
Stefvh is offline  
__________________
"Without racing there is no Honda". Soichiro Honda
Quote
Old 12 Dec 2008, 16:10 (Ref:2353598)   #16
ECW Dan Selby
Veteran
 
ECW Dan Selby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
England
Essex, England
Posts: 4,067
ECW Dan Selby has a real shot at the podium!ECW Dan Selby has a real shot at the podium!ECW Dan Selby has a real shot at the podium!ECW Dan Selby has a real shot at the podium!ECW Dan Selby has a real shot at the podium!
To me it sounds like the shorter race distance will be pitched to the general public... Which is good and bad, I guess. It doesn't really seem to have much impact as far as being more "green" goes. I honestly think it's just to try and attract the every day Joe Bloggs to F1. The most common whinge is "how can you watch these cars zoom round for so long???". So yeah, it could be good or bad :/

Selby
ECW Dan Selby is offline  
Quote
Old 12 Dec 2008, 16:10 (Ref:2353599)   #17
duke_toaster
Veteran
 
duke_toaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
European Union
Englandland
Posts: 5,100
duke_toaster should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridduke_toaster should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
2009 aspects

Engine changes : Good
Testing : Good
Other bits : Good
Sporting spectacle : No medals please.

2010 Aspects

Engine : Good
Transmission : OK ...
Chassis parts : Sensible thinking
Spec radio and telementary : Great idea - any chance of having them non-encrypted and all available for TV though?
Tyre warmers ban : Sensible
Refueling ban : WHY? WHY? WHY? Maybe don't have the plane refuelling rigs and instead just use NASCAR-style cans? It would cut costs but not remove one of F1's more unique aspects and not need the shorter races. GPs that aren't 300km wouldn't have the same ring (Monaco is just 78 laps ... let's hope that one isn't changed).

Any news if the SC rules have changed?

The new engine rules are something I'd want to see first, I'd like to see smallish turbos with current power levels, but with rules on the materials used to ensure relevancy.
duke_toaster is offline  
__________________
Marbot : "Ironically, the main difference between a Red Bull and a Virgin is that Red Bull can make parts of its car smaller and floppier."
Quote
Old 12 Dec 2008, 16:42 (Ref:2353631)   #18
the sniper
Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
European Union
Birmingham
Posts: 682
the sniper has a lot of promise if they can keep it on the circuit!
It's interesting that rule changes concerning the replacement of points with medals, changing the qualifying format and shortening races will depend on the results of 'Market Research'. Though I doubt they will, I hope they have a survey on the FIA site like they did a few years ago, this way us proper fans will be able to get our view across on what we think of these stupid ideas.

It's more likely though they'll just ask a bunch of glory hunting Hamilton fans who think F1 started in 2007...
the sniper is offline  
__________________
Taki Inoue, the only driver in F1 history who's been driven into by a course car, twice!
Quote
Old 12 Dec 2008, 16:50 (Ref:2353642)   #19
Pingguest
Veteran
 
Pingguest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Netherlands
Heemstede, The Netherlands
Posts: 3,190
Pingguest should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
I don't see how standard board radios will really reduce spending. I guess the radios are already more or less standard. I don't like the standardization of telemetry eiter: they should have banned that technology.
Pingguest is offline  
Quote
Old 12 Dec 2008, 17:00 (Ref:2353654)   #20
Marbot
Retired
20KPINAL
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
United Kingdom
Posts: 22,897
Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!
With regards to the 2010 refuelling ban: Will it mean that they'll be a tyre made to last a race distance and that tyre stops will be optional rather than necessary do we think?
Marbot is offline  
Quote
Old 12 Dec 2008, 17:02 (Ref:2353655)   #21
Aloysius
Racer
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 117
Aloysius should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Well, everything looks pretty good, except banning tire warmers(which are a safety measure), and refuelling, which is what makes races exciting. The idiocy of these two ideas astounds me. I can't understand why the FIA goes aroung unecessarily screwing up circuits by adding chicanes in the name of safety(a la Barcelona), but then goes an banns tire warmers, which leads to more accidents. Also, they say they are always looking for more overtaking, but they ban refueling. Don't they realise that for overtaking to take place you have to have cars running different speeds, and if you have straight up qualifying and no in race strategy, there is no opportunity to have slower cars in front of faster ones. So you end up with less passing.

Still, the changes could be much worse. Lets just hope they don't pick up medals system.
Aloysius is offline  
Quote
Old 12 Dec 2008, 17:06 (Ref:2353657)   #22
Glen
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,598
Glen should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridGlen should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridGlen should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
One detail that might have slipped the attention - team numbers to be reduced by sharing info about fuel and tyres, hence removing the need for spotters. If you do that then surely you may as well qualify virtually dry?
Glen is offline  
Quote
Old 12 Dec 2008, 17:37 (Ref:2353679)   #23
safc_fan89
Veteran
 
safc_fan89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,936
safc_fan89 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridsafc_fan89 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aloysius
Well, everything looks pretty good, except banning tire warmers(which are a safety measure), and refuelling, which is what makes races exciting. The idiocy of these two ideas astounds me. I can't understand why the FIA goes aroung unecessarily screwing up circuits by adding chicanes in the name of safety(a la Barcelona), but then goes an banns tire warmers, which leads to more accidents. Also, they say they are always looking for more overtaking, but they ban refueling. Don't they realise that for overtaking to take place you have to have cars running different speeds, and if you have straight up qualifying and no in race strategy, there is no opportunity to have slower cars in front of faster ones. So you end up with less passing.

Still, the changes could be much worse. Lets just hope they don't pick up medals system.
Refuelling means drivers can wait to overtake until their strategy allows it. I would have thought that was obvious, that is why it has been the subject of debate for so many years. It was introduced to try and spice up the racing, and as with most attempts, it failed.

Everyone uses just about the same strategy now anyway. Top 7 or so go for two-stoppers, everyone else fuels to half distance and hopes for the best. How is that interesting? I used to think it was interesting when the top teams had two, maybe three, alternatives, but that is not the case now.

Btw if everyone carries the same amount of fuel, surely no-one will need to do any fuel spotting?
safc_fan89 is offline  
Quote
Old 12 Dec 2008, 19:43 (Ref:2353775)   #24
Marbot
Retired
20KPINAL
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
United Kingdom
Posts: 22,897
Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aloysius
Well, everything looks pretty good, except banning tire warmers(which are a safety measure), and refuelling, which is what makes races exciting. The idiocy of these two ideas astounds me.
So you're OK with refueling which is dangerous,but you don't think that a professional Formula One driver is capable of driving on cold tyres! ?

Tyre warmers were never introduced as a "safety measure",they are a 'performance enhancement'.Refuelling was introduced to 'spice things up'.It has failed miserably!
Marbot is offline  
Quote
Old 12 Dec 2008, 20:20 (Ref:2353803)   #25
ivanalesi
Veteran
 
ivanalesi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Bulgaria
Posts: 1,137
ivanalesi should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Everything is OK, I like the ban of refueling. I remember it was introduced just to please Ferrari because they had V12 engines, now everybody has V8, so no need for it and it makes for waiting games.
But I don't like the in-season testing, it will be very unfair for some drivers. Just imagine 2007, Kimi and Fernando would have made much much less progress. Usually it's one driver that the car suits more and w/o in-season testing you don't give much chance to the other.
ivanalesi is offline  
Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Season five (2009-2010) Calender RichardRenes A1GP 230 6 Dec 2009 09:46
[FIA GT] 2009 FIA GT Calendar Released airbusA346 Sportscar & GT Racing 36 15 Nov 2008 00:31
ACO regulations for 2006 released Alistair_Ryder ACO Regulated Series 96 14 Nov 2006 08:10
2004 Regulations just released hartham Sportscar & GT Racing 71 15 Dec 2003 19:23


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:35.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Original Website Copyright © 1998-2003 Craig Antil. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2004-2021 Royalridge Computing. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2021-2022 Grant MacDonald. All Rights Reserved.