[Training] The return of testing?

[Marbot]

Mr Todt says that he would like to reintroduce some limited in-season testing. Good, bad or just plain sensible?

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/91253

[Andy77]

Ferrari would need it most at the moment I guess

[phoenix]

It does make me wonder why he will impose testing on the teams in 2013 if the majority don't want it.........

It makes me think there has been some lobbying going on from one or more teams.

Any suggestions?

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Andy77

Ferrari would need it most at the moment I guess

Indeed. But it won't be happening this season, and may not even happen next season.

[Pingguest]

It seems the ban on in-season testing didn't result in any cost saving, as teams, particularly the bigger ones, heavily invested in simulation technologies. Lifting the ban would make sense, although much financial damage is already done.

[phoenix]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

It seems the ban on in-season testing didn't result in any cost saving, as teams, particularly the bigger ones, heavily invested in simulation technologies. Lifting the ban would make sense, although much financial damage is already done.

So, is it your belief that imposing testing on the teams will save them money?

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by phoenix

So, is it your belief that imposing testing on the teams will save them money?

It seems that expensive simulation technologies enable teams to work around the ban on in-season testing ban to some extent. The smaller teams usually don't have that technology, hence allowing in-season testing will enable them to close the gap to the front without investing much money in simulation technologies.

[phoenix]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

It seems that expensive simulation technologies enable teams to work around the ban on in-season testing ban to some extent. The smaller teams usually don't have that technology, hence allowing in-season testing will enable them to close the gap to the front without investing much money in simulation technologies.

Oh, I see. Todt didn't mention that his intention was to mainly help the less well funded teams, so I didn't realise that was his intention.

As all teams work under a maximum funding budget I can't see it saving any money at all.

[Marbot]

On track testing will always be better than simulation testing, no matter how sophisticated it may be. So it's probably only a good thing in moderation.

Did banning in-season testing save money? Well if you tested pretty much at every opportunity that you could test, then the obvious answer is yes. Particularly if you were already using simulators as well.

[phoenix]

Originally Posted by Marbot

On track testing will always be better than simulation testing, no matter how sophisticated it may be.

Particularly in terms of areo testing; a simulator can only operate within the limitations of the data available to the software, so if aero data from CFD or the wind tunnel does not represent what happens on track 100% (and it rarely if ever does) then the simulation will be innacurate.

Hence the frustration this season with upgrade 'bits' tested on Friday not making it onto the car in the race.

[gttouring]

How is testing regulated at a private track like Fiorano? I would be doing a whole lot of " press and customers " days if it was me.

[Empty Box]

I believe in the past the teams were limited to a set number of press days as you mention, but the cars had to run on tires that were more or less rocks.

Anyways,

Is it a good idea? Most certainly. How is a smaller team to up their game if the only option they really have are on the race weekends and some simulations?

On one hand it "prevents" teams going to the track an absurd amount of times to find .00001 of a second. But on the other it slows progress on the back end. Considering the fact track time beats out simulations, even per cost the track time has to be a better option.

[bjohnsonsmith]

It's got to be good for the smaller teams.

[cptkablamo]

Completely unlimited testing is foolish but I think that having 3 official test days during the season would be good. Just make it that is the only time you can test...

[Tourer]

Bernie has long disliked testing - I can see his logic too - it costs as much and probably more for teams to test as race so why not have more races and less tests as the races are a source of revenue.

On the other hand, I think that a total lack of testing goes too far - it encourages teams to spend vast amounts on simulation technology and can take away from a season's racing quality. Those teams trying to catch the front runner will be turning up to races with new but untried parts and may not improve their performance - could even be slower, potentially making a lop-sided year.

Same applies for drivers - some testing is needed to get the new drivers up to speed and competitive.

So a few group, official test days through the season makes plenty of sense and done that way should fit within the desire to keep budgets sensible(ish).

[bjohnsonsmith]

It looks like the teams are going to vote against testing:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/91347

[phoenix]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

It looks like the teams are going to vote against testing:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/91347

Having read that I think Todt's motivation is now clear. No teams want testing ......... except Ferrari.

[Knowlesy]

[jobdone]

Gutted this doesn't look like going through. F1 testing at Silverstone used to be much better than the GP itself. More tracktime, better access, less people. Brilliant!

[Knowlesy]

Originally Posted by jobdone

Gutted this doesn't look like going through. F1 testing at Silverstone used to be much better than the GP itself. More tracktime, better access, less people. Brilliant!

Agreed. I went twice in 2006 and it contributed to me deciding not to bother with paying for GP weekends.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

Agreed. I went twice in 2006 and it contributed to me deciding not to bother with paying fo GP weekends.

Ah! So maybe that's reason enough, right there.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by jobdone

Gutted this doesn't look like going through. F1 testing at Silverstone used to be much better than the GP itself. More tracktime, better access, less people. Brilliant!

Me too.

Used to work as a team gofer in the old days (70s) ... it was amazing!

[JeremySmith]

This is the problem caused with constant flip flopping and changing of the rules in F1..

The teams have done away with their test teams and sold many of the transporters, so to reinstate all of this stuff would be very expensive.

The only way this could work is to use the Monday after or the Thursday before each race as a testing day..

These days of course they do much virtual testing of parts using their simulators which is not the same thing as on track the same applies to wind tunnel testing, as wind tunnels do not create cross winds..

[Marbot]

There was some suggestion that Fridays would be used more for testing, which makes a lot of sense really. But it would only ever allow those with more to do more. The nice thing about simulators is that, like wind tunnels, they don't always transfer to the track what is shown by the numbers.

[Knowlesy]

Great stuff.