[WEC] LMP Future Regulations (was Le Mans EVO rules - now hypercar rules)

[deggis]

I was reading this 1-month old link...

http://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/n...id-technology/

“We cannot continue with an idea that this championship can cost more than $100 million Euro [per year] because you have to develop and do a lot of R&D,” Neveu said.

Fillon said they’re aiming to give an equal chance to varying levels of hybrid technology, unlike the current regulations, which slightly favors cars in the 8MJ hybrid subclass.

“The question is not the number of hybrid systems,” Fillon said. “The question is how you can spend with the same performance and same chance.

“The idea is for the new rules is that, ‘OK you can spend X million if you want to… but you will take no advantage.’

Fillon and Neveu said other measures, including a further reduction in testing and introduction of a Formula One-style “token” system are also ways to reduce costs but fell short of confirming that either measure would be implemented.

Just a bit more EOT between the MJ categories and a token system would be a pretty big disappointment. And the latter one only helps painting competitors further into a corner and as proven recently in F1.

[chernaudi]

IMO, we don't need a token system or a slightly tweaked EOT system

We should just go back to a tweaked 2013 rules package: air restrictors vs fuel flow meters (saves several thousands of dollars per car), go back to 2000mm wide cars (limits top speed though drag), less emphasis on huge hybrid systems (make them roughly equal in performance or introduce a 4-6MJ cap), but keep some of the freedoms of the current regs (some restrictions on hybrid deployment like 2012/13, but no speed limit for FWD hybrids).

Also, open up the aero regs slightly (get rid of the exhaust positioning, maybe allow a passive DRS system like the Audi exhaust blown diffuser or Toyota's rotating wing elements, both within limits), allow engines of varying sizes to compete and various concepts (stock block, small turbo vs larger NA, allow for NA engines to make something of a comeback).

All of that can easily reduce costs to 2011 or earlier levels, which are expensive but sustainable for most factory teams.

[Speed-King]

Does anybody know when today's ACO/new rules press conference is scheduled to start?

Edit: Never mind, found it. 11 am.

[chernaudi]

Bullet points from DSC:

http://www.dailysportscar.com/2017/0...-outlined.html

Some of it sounds pretty stupid IMO. Just a continuation of a lot of the current regs, wider and taller cockpits, and all hybrid cars have to cross the finish line on EV power.

[Acid09]

The way I see it, this will at best entice Porsche & Toyota to stay, zero incentive there for new manufacturers to join.

Well, I guess the ACO knows best about how interested other manufacturers are. If there's no hope of attracting someone new, the best you can do is to try and solidify the status quo.

[PascaLM]

"Cars in the Le Mans 24 Hours must cross the finish line in full electric mode" is not decided yet. Sir Owen-Jones said it's still at study.

Good idea to let the pilot hearing the fans shout and applaud.

[chernaudi]

I don't see how these regs will reduce costs, or get new manufacturers in, or keep things interesting or balance different hybrid systems.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Bullet points from DSC:

http://www.dailysportscar.com/2017/0...-outlined.html

Some of it sounds pretty stupid IMO. Just a continuation of a lot of the current regs, wider and taller cockpits, and all hybrid cars have to cross the finish line on EV power.

The EV-zone thing is a stupid, stupid gimmick, but I think the other points actually address the main problem of the current ruleset - and that's the breakneck pace of development and the associated costs.

8MJ Hybrids shouldn't be a big deal in 2020 anymore, and the limits to areo-development are quite sensible as well as that's the area of the car where there's the least teach transfer to roadcars.

The thing about being only able to work on one area of the car (chassis, areo, engine) every year is a bit weird, though. I get the line of thinking behind it, but what are manufacturers going to do with their army of highly qualified and paid aero-wizards when they decide to work on the engine for an off season and not on the aero (or vice versa)?

[chernaudi]

Again, some of this is even more stupid than the current rules. Good thing that these are only proposals. Maybe Toyota and Porsche ditching LM and the WEC will wake the ACO up. Audi leaving didn't.

[Akrapovic]

I think it's fine. Cap on 2 hybrid systems and 8MJ will have a cost reduction. If you can't recover more energy to use then it's pointless throwing money at it. All teams converged on batteries and road cars use batteries so realistically that was all they were ever going to be using. Not sold on the EV mode for the finish but it could prove interesting if it's a close finish.

Slightly higher cars was always going to happen because of the new seating position. Hopefully the wider cockpit balances that out. Would be nice to see the cars made wider to take into account the higher cockpit.

The limitation on aero development is sensible. Why spend $20m on developing a Le Mans aero kit when all they're trying to do is reduce drag? Just give them active aero on a couple of parts and you save an entire body kit. Incremental development on areas seems like a good idea too, if it works.

Apart from the bleh EV stuff it seems fine. But even with the EV stuff we still have good old fashioned engines burning fuel until 2024. That's good.

[chernaudi]

Still pretty underwhelming, considering that Peugeot's own self imposed budget cap is 50 million Euros and I don't see how that's going to happen unless the ACO balance different MJ options equally (IE, scrap the ERS incentive), which I didn't see mentioned so far.

Seems like barely enough to keep TMG and VAG involved after this rules cycle.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Still pretty underwhelming, considering that Peugeot's own self imposed budget cap is 50 million Euros and I don't see how that's going to happen unless the ACO balance different MJ options equally (IE, scrap the ERS incentive), which I didn't see mentioned so far.

I don't think Peugeot have a hard and fast cap*... and they were in the 70-million range with the 908 IIRC. Which seems attainable to me with the new ruleset, at least over the course of a program, seeing how innovation (and spending) from year to year will be limited. What it means, though, is that you pretty much need to get your car right from the get-go, which might lead to a longer development period before a car's race debut.

* I think you got that from the article I translated, but please take another look at the relevant paragraph:

No manufacturer - and that includes Peugeot - is willing to provide a budget of the magnitude currently spent by Toyota and Porsche. At the same time, teams and manufacturers in Europe and the US are preparing for a future that could be called a Plan B: According to these deliberations, the ACO and the FIA could on the one hand open up the LMP1-Lights-Class for manufacturer entries - which would drop the costs in the top class in one swoop from €150 million to under €50 million.

The thing about Peugeot and the potential budget for a factory P1L-budget are not directly connected.

[Akrapovic]

A reduction in staff, reduction in body kits and a cap of hybrid systems is all cost cutting. Hybrids will naturally get cheaper now they can't progress past their current point.

[Akrapovic]

Also being introduced is group manufacturer test days, run by the ACO, to reduce the overheads of testing. And limiting the amount of hours that can be spent in a wind tunnel.

[PascaLM]

I hope that the new dimensions of the cockpit won't ruin the look of the cars, but the driver's safety is the most important.

First kilometre on electric only ? We will recognise the cars which leave the pit.

Originally Posted by Speed-King

The thing about being only able to work on one area of the car (chassis, areo, engine) every year is a bit weird, though. I get the line of thinking behind it, but what are manufacturers going to do with their army of highly qualified and paid aero-wizards when they decide to work on the engine for an off season and not on the aero (or vice versa)?

I agree, and I think the works on the engine and aero are linked. A modification on the torque or power of the engine leads to modify the downforce or the finesse.

[Japanese Samurai]

http://www.fiawec.com/en/news/2020-l...announced/5198

[chernaudi]

I hope that the ACO have a plan B in case it looks like this won't work. And I still haven't seen mention of the big thing, which is equalization between different hybrid classes. I get the fact that such systems are supposed to be cheaper by 2020, but the hybrid systems are by far the most expensive part of the current cars.

Not to mention that you probably have to be 6+MJ to do 1km after pit exit and still have meaningful power for the rest of the lap.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by Japanese Samurai

http://www.fiawec.com/en/news/2020-l...announced/5198

The more I read that the more I like it. Don't like the the 1km electric and finish on electric stuff but whatever. Rest seems good.

[chernaudi]

I know that active aero is supposed to do this, but why not mandate that teams focus on making their LM kit, and the adapting it for the sprint races (gurney flaps, dive planes, etc) like in the LMP900 and early LMP1 days?

With the active aero, we'll probably see teams make a sprint kit and basically leave it alone, since it's the wing and to a lesser extent the front diffuser that make most of the drag.

How are the front flaps expected to work? Basically an active version of the Audi wing diffuser?

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

I know that active aero is supposed to do this, but why not mandate that teams focus on making their LM kit, and the adapting it for the sprint races (gurney flaps, dive planes, etc) like in the LMP900 and early LMP1 days?

With the active aero, we'll probably see teams make a sprint kit and basically leave it alone, since it's the wing and to a lesser extent the front diffuser that make most of the drag.

How are the front flaps expected to work? Basically an active version of the Audi wing diffuser?

I don't think they were talking about active aero in the sense of aero-parts moving on their own during the race (i.e. like the rear wing on a Mclaren P1 or something the like) but rather about it being possible to adapt the sprint kit to Le Mans by changing the wing angle and by losing dive planes.

[PascaLM]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

I don't think they were talking about active aero in the sense of aero-parts moving on their own during the race (i.e. like the rear wing on a Mclaren P1 or something the like) but rather about it being possible to adapt the sprint kit to Le Mans by changing the wing angle and by losing dive planes.

I have understand active flaps, on the rear wing and behind the splitter. Other small aero tricks under the car will be banned.

[marcel82]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

I don't see how these regs will reduce costs, or get new manufacturers in, or keep things interesting or balance different hybrid systems.

I don't believe any tech rules can cut the costs. If you don't allow money to be spend on A, they will spend it on B. if they spend 100M making 10 steadily improved A's, and you say they can only make 5, they will spend 100M on 5.

if you want to enforce cost-cutting, put financial rules in place.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

I know that active aero is supposed to do this, but why not mandate that teams focus on making their LM kit, and the adapting it for the sprint races (gurney flaps, dive planes, etc) like in the LMP900 and early LMP1 days?

You're proposing that the teams be allowed to make one aero kit, and then adapt it. That is exactly what these new regulations are - one aero kit that is then adapted. With 9 out of 10 races requiring a more 'regular' aero setup, it makes very little sense to concentrate on a Le Mans aero kit and then try to add downforce. It's much easier and more efficient to design a standard aero kit, and then use active aero to achieve the La Mans straight line speeds. This proposed regulation is exactly what you're asking for. One kit for all tracks, that gets adapted

You're remembering LMP900 as simpler times when it wasn't. Teams did not simply go to Sebring and add dive planes to the Le Mans aero. The R8 and Bentley were quite different kits. Different types of dive planes, different front end cooling, different ways of venting pressure from wheel arches, different rear wings. They had as many, if not more, bodywork variations for those cars than we do in LMP1 2016. The Bentley ran 2 different rear wings simultaneously in 2003.

Originally Posted by chernaudi

With the active aero, we'll probably see teams make a sprint kit and basically leave it alone, since it's the wing and to a lesser extent the front diffuser that make most of the drag.

That's the point. When you leave things alone, you aren't spending money on it. This is a cost saving.

Originally Posted by Speed-King

I don't think they were talking about active aero in the sense of aero-parts moving on their own during the race (i.e. like the rear wing on a Mclaren P1 or something the like) but rather about it being possible to adapt the sprint kit to Le Mans by changing the wing angle and by losing dive planes.

I believe they are. From the FIAWEC link earlier -

Introduction of active aerodynamics with moveable wings (front and rear) to increase the efficiency of the car and compensate for the restrictions on aerodynamic development brought in to reduce costs

Basically, why spend millions developing an aero kit when you can achieve the same thing just moving a couple of bits of carbon fibre about.

[Speed-King]

I believe they are. From the FIAWEC link earlier -

Introduction of active aerodynamics with moveable wings (front and rear) to increase the efficiency of the car and compensate for the restrictions on aerodynamic development brought in to reduce costs

Yeah, you're right. Hadn't seen that yet when I posted.

Basically, why spend millions developing an aero kit when you can achieve the same thing just moving a couple of bits of carbon fibre about.

Well, what stopping them from spending millions to move the couple of bits of carbon fibre about more effectively?

[Acid09]

Opinion piece from Motorsport Total's Roman Wittenmeier who was there and talked to the key players:

http://www.motorsport-total.com/wec/...-17061606.html

In a nutshell, the enthusiasm from Porsche and Toyota is lukewarm at best. Even those going on record about their quotes are not very enthusiastic, the people commenting off-record are even less happy.