[Rules] Future Rule Changes

[BSchneiderFan]

Originally Posted by wnut

At last! This is a MASSIVE STEP in the right direction by the FIA! Engine parity!

"The FIA recently sent a technical directive to all F1 teams reinforcing the existing requirement for engine suppliers to give identical hardware to their customers by insisting that henceforth all cars also have the same software and operating conditions.
Customer teams now also have to receive identical fuel and oil specifications to works cars, unless they have opted for a different supplier." Adam Cooper F1 Reader.


http://www.f1reader.com/news/mercede...ampdown-190775

This is by far the most significant development in F1 in years imo, well done the FIA!

Haas won’t be beating Ferrari any time soon.

[F1Guy]

Not sure why some people are getting so excited by this news??

It's not if the status quo is all of a sudden going to change now is it? As if.
The top teams will remain the top teams. Nothing to see here, move along.

[S griffin]

It may make it a bit more equal, but probably won't change much in the long run

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by F1Guy

Not sure why some people are getting so excited by this news??

It's not if the status quo is all of a sudden going to change now is it? As if.
The top teams will remain the top teams. Nothing to see here, move along.

I would say any step in the right direction is noteworthy. Why not celebrate? I doubt anyone expects this to really shake up the order of things, but let’s see what the impacts are before we dismiss it. The alternative is to keep to the normal cynical nature of this forum and thumb our nose at everything and everyone.

Richard

[chillibowl]

i vote for keeping the cynical nature of this forum intact!

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

i vote for keeping the cynical nature of this forum intact!

I don't think you need to vote for that, it's a given.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by F1Guy

Not sure why some people are getting so excited by this news??

you think?

of course just speculation on my part but typically these things in F1 are about more then just an application of a rule (particularly a rule that cant really be enforced given various loop holes, development cycles, supply dates, different software packages, different oils/fuels being used etc).

im seeing this as a growing rift between the team principles before they all need to sit down and figure out the new engine rules.

so part of a larger and certainly more important story.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

i vote for keeping the cynical nature of this forum intact!

What will wnut post about now? @wnut

Christian doesn’t seem that bothered.
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/13...-engine-ruling
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/13...-engine-ruling

Autosport’s summary: https://www.autosport.com/f1/feature...-engine-debate

[Richard C]

In an effort to keep up the cynical and conspiratorial nature of the forum...

So the customer teams dropped the "anti-competitive" complaint in late January. While I think that was mostly around distribution of money, might also this recent new level playing field with respect to customer power units be related to those teams dropping that complaint? Some quid pro quo?

Note: For all I know that is exactly what is in the Autosport articles linked above, but I can't get to them as I think they are behind the paywall.

Richard

[Adam43]

The articles are about the engine partity ruling. I don’t think the first two are behind the paywall as they are just news. The last is as it is a plus article.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Adam43

The articles are about the engine partity ruling. I don’t think the first two are behind the paywall as they are just news. The last is as it is a plus article.

Sorry, yes, I can see the first two, but not the last (which is the summary of the situation).

I can't name the source (may even be a post on this forum), but I believe I have read information that is contrary to what is said in those articles. If I remember correctly it was along the line of even if the software is the same, that the customer teams may not be provided with the information to unlock or take advantage of specific capabilities. That the teams may have specific instructions that provide basic operations, but not the secret sauce stuff.

I can make up an example... Imagine Mercedes has (had) some type of oil burn feature last year. It might have been something like strategically opening up a special valve (PVC) at the right time to allow for specially crafted oil vapors (or the oil itself) to exit from the crank into the intake manifold to boost performance during qualifying. Given they are not overtly to burn anything other than petrol as fuel, I am sure the software doesn't say "oil burn mode", but rather some combination of settings may trigger this (wink wink, nudge nudge!) My point is that this type of information may not be shared with customer teams.

I am just speculating, could very much be wrong, and as I note, the above is a made up example even if it may have some roots in a potential actual scenario.

It seems odd that this new rule would happen unless someone asked for it. I can also imagine that a customer team may have asked (not officially) so as to not be at odds with their supplier. That could even allow them to continue to say "we didn't ask for this and our supplier has always given us parity". Does anyone really think a customer team is going to stand up and say..."Yeah, they have been screwing us. We are glad this change happened." They are at the mercy of whoever supplies them and that includes maintaining a good relationship. About the only one who seems to not be afraid to be critical of their supplier in a customer scenario is RBR. But I actually doubt they asked for this, but who knows.

Richard

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

i vote for keeping the cynical nature of this forum intact!

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by F1Guy

The top teams will remain the top teams. Nothing to see here, move along.

Weren't McLaren and Williams once the top teams? Things do change, and this might contribute to that.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

i vote for keeping the cynical nature of this forum intact!

I wish people would be more responsible with their cynicism. It is a great tool that can be used for great effect. Many though just use cynicism as a substitute for intelligence.

[Adam43]

I’d forgotten about this, as it was announced ages ago (over a year?).
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/13...dure-this-week

Standing starts after SC!

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Adam43

I’d forgotten about this, as it was announced ages ago (over a year?).
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/13...dure-this-week

Standing starts after SC!

how do they expect any of the drivers to find their new grid spot without an attractive lady holding a sign?

[S griffin]

Seriously why do the people running the sport still think standing restarts after SCs are a good idea? Coupled with the ridiculous SC free pass rule, although this is unlikely to happen, this is how I see the worst case scenario happening

Basically a driver has been running a lap behind, on his own pretty much all race, then suddenly in the closing stages, the SC is out, there are say 12 cars running, and the last place driver gets a free lap back. Then on the standing restart he makes a good start to get into the top ten, while in front the two leading cars collide, not enough to cause a big incident, but enough to delay others, while that driver who spent most of the race at the back, manages to find a clean way through, and ends up in the lead and wins the race. Is that really how races should be won? No!

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Adam43

I wish people would be more responsible with their cynicism. It is a great tool that can be used for great effect. Many though just use cynicism as a substitute for intelligence.

Cynical responsibility or responsible cynicism, that is the question.

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Seriously why do the people running the sport still think standing restarts after SCs are a good idea? Coupled with the ridiculous SC free pass rule, although this is unlikely to happen, this is how I see the worst case scenario happening

Basically a driver has been running a lap behind, on his own pretty much all race, then suddenly in the closing stages, the SC is out, there are say 12 cars running, and the last place driver gets a free lap back. Then on the standing restart he makes a good start to get into the top ten, while in front the two leading cars collide, not enough to cause a big incident, but enough to delay others, while that driver who spent most of the race at the back, manages to find a clean way through, and ends up in the lead and wins the race. Is that really how races should be won? No!

This driver who's been running at the back for most of the race then manages to carve his way to the front on the restart. It's not Fernando Alonso is it?

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Basically a driver has been running a lap behind, on his own pretty much all race, then suddenly in the closing stages, the SC is out, there are say 12 cars running, and the last place driver gets a free lap back. Then on the standing restart he makes a good start to get into the top ten, while in front the two leading cars collide, not enough to cause a big incident, but enough to delay others, while that driver who spent most of the race at the back, manages to find a clean way through, and ends up in the lead and wins the race. Is that really how races should be won? No!

i have to be honest...i would actually love to see that!

if a lapped car found a way, all be it through a very unique set of circumstances, to win the race then i would easily rate that race a 10. as a spectator i would literally be glued to my seat! so much the better if its a midfielder who does it.

i do pretty much agree though that this is not necessarily a safer way to do things (risks of another first corner incident due to cold tires and overly optimistic driving etc) but it certainly adds a level of drama even if it is of the manufactured variety.

[F1Guy]

Can't win. We have seen lapped cars get in the way at restarts and either cause accidents or get in the way of a very exciting finish. People complained then, and that's why the rule to allow lapped cars pass during SC periods was bought in.

If for example, lapped cars were in second and third positions, and the race was then restarted, but now the forth placed car is being held up while the leader is getting away, and then goes onto to win, is that a race result you'd like to see?? And what if the championship decider was between the leader and that forth placed driver? Is that the end to the championship you'd like to see??

Whinge, whinge, whine, whine....

[chillibowl]

indeed, i would also like to see those scenarios play out!

and if these things do happen, i also look forward to discussing it on the forum....just need to bookmark this post to make sure i remember the position i have taken.

[wnut]

A grid start on tyres at different stages of wear and not up to temperature, sounds like a recipe for another safety car to me.

[ScotsBrutesFan]

The thing is the teams are going to have to be told once the track is clear 2 -laps to form up or some such message, so the question then becomes

Pit and join the back of the queue for a standing restart on fresh tyres straight from the blankets with a loss of position that the new tyres could make back.

Stay out keeping position but then risking a standing start on worn tyres who's pressures and temps will be low due to laps behind the safety car.

It could be interesting , but then it could be a damp squib as well.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by ScotsBrutesFan

The thing is the teams are going to have to be told once the track is clear 2 -laps to form up or some such message, so the question then becomes

Pit and join the back of the queue for a standing restart on fresh tyres straight from the blankets with a loss of position that the new tyres could make back.

Stay out keeping position but then risking a standing start on worn tyres who's pressures and temps will be low due to laps behind the safety car.

It could be interesting , but then it could be a damp squib as well.

This makes pitting under a Full Course Yellow in IndyCar seem like child's play. If F1 can, they will over complicate something. Just leave it as it is.