|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
16 Feb 2016, 12:02 (Ref:3615085) | #1451 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,578
|
wnut, although I can fully understand the sentiment behind what you have written/quoted, it really has no bearing on modern day racing. Back then, a man and his dog could run the show, but because technology has now become so sophisticated, it requires an army to go racing.
I think, though, that some issue can be taken over some of the claims. Yes McLaren ran three M23s in 1974, winning what we now call the Constructors Championship based only on two of the cars. In fact, they also had involvement in a fourth M23 for a S. African team that ran 3 races. (Don't you just love Wikipedia ). Yep, they won the Indy 500 that year. However, McLaren (as an entrant) pulled out of CanAm in 1972, whilst Gethin won the Tasman F5000 series in a Chevron B24 in 1974; the years of the McLaren dominance in F5000 seem to have been between 1969 and 1971, mainly with the M10A and M10B with Gethin winning the European championship in 1969 and 70, once in each car. And I don't believe that McLaren were involved in F2 during 1974; in fact, and I am happy to be corrected on this, but I think that the only year that Mclaren were involved in F2 was in 1968 when Matra swept all before them. Mclaren probably does employ more than a thousand people nowadays, but I would hazard a guess that possibly just over half that number are involved on a day to day basis for the F1 team, the rest working on all the other McLaren projects. |
||
|
16 Feb 2016, 12:17 (Ref:3615086) | #1452 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
I was merely quoting Caldwell from the podcast Mike.
On a quick check< I think you are right about F2 in 1974. The four races that McLaren ran for the S African team would have been in 1973 and the driver was Jody Scheckter who was part of the McLaren works efforts at that stage F5000. Sure modern teams are different from then, but I would like to see how RBR's design staff under Newey compares numerically to that of McLaren. It would also be interesting (impossible but interesting) to see numerically who actually carries the bulk of the workload at the various teams. ie The essentials rather than the nice to haves. Last edited by wnut; 16 Feb 2016 at 12:24. |
|
|
16 Feb 2016, 12:53 (Ref:3615089) | #1453 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,578
|
Quote:
This is really where all the problems arise. Modern technology and working practices dictates how many people you need, rather than just have. For example, it actually only needs one person to change the wheels on the car during a pit-stop, but most teams will have 10 - 12 personel on that duty. And does it need 4 or 6 people sat in a container at the pit wall; that used to be the job of the driver's wife/gf with a stop-watch and a clip-board! Does a team really need to have three 40 foot artics driving around Europe for nigh on six months so that the teams can have fancy "motor-homes", each tream vying with the others to be the place to be! And their electronics trucks so that they can communicate with the white coats who are securely secreted in the bunkers back at HQ? I don't long for the old days, but I do hanker for a simpler form of racing, one that does not need 400 bods to keep just two cars on a track for just two hours every two to three weeks |
|||
|
16 Feb 2016, 15:22 (Ref:3615127) | #1454 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,748
|
it has got a bit ridiculous with the amount kit of staff on hand but i must admit to being a fan of the white coats in secreted bunkers side of things.
that level of global connectivity, real time data transmissions, and super computers does appeal to the inner nerd in me although are they better at calling a race strategy then the experience of Brawn and Schumi or Button in making his own calls when to switch to or from wets? its kind of refreshing that despite the high level of technology and computer simulation the need to have smart and experienced people on hand still provides the superior advantage. people over machines and feel over data....i wonder if those two extremes can ever be properly reconciled within a sport that values both so highly? side point, it is often asked what benefits does F1 have for road car development and certainly real time data acquisition and analytics is high on that list, but the applications Mclaren has found for their technologies outside the auto industry are far more interesting imo. not bound to hold important technologies until it can be properly (and commercially) mass produced for road cars, Mclaren works within their communities, universities, and hospitals to implement their know how into helping make peoples and patients lives better. real time data acquisition and analytics might just be the most important and real world relevant work F1 is doing right now. i think its scope should be expanded not limited. |
||
__________________
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 |
16 Feb 2016, 15:45 (Ref:3615133) | #1455 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,578
|
Yes, it is amazing how F1 teams have harnessed technology, and how they have used it to enhance outside industries and services. However, they need to tell our government (the UK's) how to use modern communication methods. Within the last 5 years they cancelled a new IT system that was supposed to connect all our hospitals and medical practices together (those paid for by the state) to make the availabilty of medical records seemleess. That cost £15 billion, all down the drain. As it is now, a doctor in one hospital cannot see what has happened to a patient just 5 miles down the road!
But back to F1. Is the racing for the benefit of the teams, or is it to entertain viewers and spectators? If it's the latter, then as a generalisation, then the public are not interested in how quickly the data generated by a sensor on a racing car gets from Outer Mongolia to the lead-lined concrete bunker at Milton Keynes. They want to see how fast the car can go, and whether it can beat the other team mate's car as well as the rest of the field. We seem to be edging closer and closer to a time when F1 will no longer need drivers in the cars; there is getting to be enough electronic wizardry in the cars that will make the driver redundant. And that is not something that I look forward to reading about. |
||
|
16 Feb 2016, 17:42 (Ref:3615171) | #1456 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,193
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
'Aerodynamics are for people who can't build engines.' - Enzo Ferrari |
16 Feb 2016, 18:57 (Ref:3615202) | #1457 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,871
|
I will try to listen to that later today. I always like "back in the day" stories. To the comment of a headcount of 34 people. Even putting the PSU and other "complexities" aside, there is no way anyone could run an F1 team today with only 34 people if you factor in everything to design, construct and race a modern F1 car. I am curious as to the size of even some of the small race car manufactures like a Ginetta, Elan or maybe even someone a bit bigger like a Riley. What is their "total" headcount.
Quote:
Quote:
Richard |
|||
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
16 Feb 2016, 20:03 (Ref:3615232) | #1458 | ||||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,748
|
Quote:
i suspect engine tech would still top the list by a great margin though. data acquisition would be low but i think it will grow over time. this is after all the cell phone generation and telecommunications is becoming the language of our times. Quote:
its been suggested before in the closed cockpits thread, but adding the canopy allows for the opportunity to develop smart windshields, tactical displays, and HUD systems. instead of a driver asking for data from the pitwall, the raw data would be provided on their HUD and the driver would have to be able to process and use that data on their own while driving. if one tire is over heating then the driver will know about it in real time and have to adjust based on their own ability to correlate the data, they want to know their split times, fuel consumption etc etc. budget wise its a new area of expense while not necessarily eliminating any track side positions (probably adding to the size of the team actually so bad on that front) and its years if not decades down the road but i think there is something to this idea that makes being a driver both more complex while adding a level of modern interest to the role. on the surface it seems to satisfy the need for the driver to be the central figure. |
||||
__________________
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 |
23 Feb 2016, 07:00 (Ref:3616948) | #1459 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
This is as good a place as any for Bernie's latest rant - "F1 is the worst it has ever been."
http://www.f1reader.com/news/ecclest...squs_container We will see ...Beyond rubbish solutions! |
|
|
23 Feb 2016, 07:12 (Ref:3616949) | #1460 | |
Veteran
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,211
|
So, the desiccated little garden gnome thinks fiddling with the grid will fix the problems of F1. I will let history be the judge of that.
|
|
|
23 Feb 2016, 11:33 (Ref:3616992) | #1461 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,578
|
BCE obviously wants something changing or to be done. Horner, who is at the last saloon meeting today between the teams, the FIA and FOM to try to sort out the new rules for 2017, is suggesting that Mr E is proposing to reverse the top ten qualifiers for the start to inject greater interest. I wonder what he wants that he will get instead.
|
||
|
23 Feb 2016, 12:24 (Ref:3617001) | #1462 | |
Veteran
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,211
|
It all sounds like BE wind up to me as I am sure he likes to have a bit of fun and get the tongues wagging.
|
|
|
23 Feb 2016, 14:18 (Ref:3617016) | #1463 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 18,399
|
He said he wouldn't pay to bring his family to watch a Grand Prix. Well neither would a lot of us, because the prices are sky high!
|
|
__________________
He who dares wins! He who hesitates is lost! |
23 Feb 2016, 15:39 (Ref:3617026) | #1464 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,748
|
Quote:
no doubt he is up to his old tricks, spouting loudly in order to generate F1 headlines and/or push his agenda, but even though he doesnt go into details as to why this is the case, it is hard to argue with the truth of his comments. also he has started up a nice little back and forth between the main title protagonists which sets up the Merc vs Ferrari story line which we all hope comes to fruition this year. all in all a nice bit of promoting. |
|||
__________________
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 |
23 Feb 2016, 19:27 (Ref:3617101) | #1465 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,005
|
|||
__________________
Heaven is a checkered flag. |
23 Feb 2016, 19:46 (Ref:3617110) | #1466 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,303
|
Why fiddle with it? I actually like qually as it is
|
||
|
23 Feb 2016, 19:49 (Ref:3617112) | #1467 | |||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 23,243
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying." Colin Chapman. |
23 Feb 2016, 19:50 (Ref:3617114) | #1468 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,748
|
cant say i find the current format entertaining at all.
really need a lot more details but it sounds confusing and exciting at the same time. i feel like we will get a lot of mixed up grids as a result so thats something that could upset the Merc apple cart. that they agreed to anything unanimously might be the best part of it though lol. |
||
__________________
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 |
23 Feb 2016, 19:55 (Ref:3617117) | #1469 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,303
|
But its a spectacle seeing the last 10 cars out in Q3. We will end up with just 2 ??
|
||
|
23 Feb 2016, 20:00 (Ref:3617120) | #1470 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,578
|
So, Bernie floated the reverse grid idea to get this! Why, oh why, do they or is it just he, keep on trying to reinvent the wheel?
|
||
|
23 Feb 2016, 20:35 (Ref:3617134) | #1471 | |
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 16,760
|
i can't see how this is going to be anything other than a big confusing mess for anyone actually watching it at the circuit. it's a bit ballroom dancing, isn't it?
|
|
__________________
devils advocate in-chief and professional arguer of both sides |
23 Feb 2016, 21:12 (Ref:3617149) | #1472 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 10,241
|
Well, my first thought is who asked for this? No wonder they were able to agree unanimously, it doesn't really change anything, or fix any of the problems. The order will basically be set by the first round of fast laps and then it will be a case of touring round until you are inevitably eliminated.
I think it will quite easy to follow. As long as you make a note of which car has failed to come around again each lap, you'll know exactly the order of elimination (and hence the grid order too). |
||
|
23 Feb 2016, 21:17 (Ref:3617150) | #1473 | |
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 16,760
|
appreciate that, but it seems a bit weird that in formula one, during a qualification session, instead of looking for the guy on a blinding quick lap we're going to spend all session looking for the guy going the slowest...
|
|
__________________
devils advocate in-chief and professional arguer of both sides |
23 Feb 2016, 21:19 (Ref:3617151) | #1474 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,748
|
Quote:
actually from both a TV and trackside point of view i always liked was 2004? rules when it was the two sessions (one low fuel to set the order for the 1 lap shoot out) with both sessions on the same day (Sat). both on TV and track side i found it engaging the whole time. anyways all the tweaking over the years sort of just reinforces how inherently uninteresting quali can be. even the pre mid 90s format (low fuel with quali trim) with its freedom was boring as most teams just sat around for 50 minutes and ran like crazy for the last 10 minutes. once they changed it to make cars plod around for 10 or so laps first to fill in the TV program its all been an attempt to introduce some excitement into something not particularity exciting. dont get me wrong some of those Schumi vs Mika shootouts were epic but there has never been much more than 5-10 minutes of excitement to be had from any qualifying format. Jerez 97 being the only exception...the exception that proves the rule really. so im fine with them trying something new. |
|||
__________________
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 |
23 Feb 2016, 21:25 (Ref:3617157) | #1475 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 10,241
|
Quote:
Last edited by pirenzo; 23 Feb 2016 at 21:29. Reason: extra thought |
|||
|
|
|
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 |