Cost of upgrading (and reprofiling) a track

[MagVanisher]

I was thinking about this that it needs to be discussed. I know that upgrading (and reprofiling) tracks like Hockenheim and Fuji Speedway are painful, what's the cost of it for a Formula One race?

[wolfhound]

Originally Posted by MagVanisher

I was thinking about this that it needs to be discussed. I know that upgrading (and reprofiling) tracks like Hockenheim and Fuji Speedway are painful, what's the cost of it for a Formula One race?

That's how long is a piece of string type question. It would depend on a track's current FIA grade. If its less than FIA grade 2 then it probably cost as much as a brand new track. If its a grade 2 track then the track itself is probably ok but you will need to spend a small fortune on paddock facilities to satisfy Bernie and grade 1. Look at how much it cost Silverstone to do their new pits and paddock to have a good idea.

[ScotsBrutesFan]

There is also Grade2/1T, which is the F1 test circuit grade.
Barber in the US and Jerez and Motorland Aragon in Spain amongst others have this rating.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

That's how long is a piece of string type question. It would depend on a track's current FIA grade. If its less than FIA grade 2 then it probably cost as much as a brand new track. If its a grade 2 track then the track itself is probably ok but you will need to spend a small fortune on paddock facilities to satisfy Bernie and grade 1. Look at how much it cost Silverstone to do their new pits and paddock to have a good idea.

What I don't get is how the Monaco, Singapore, and to a lesser extent circuits like Melbourne are able to hold a GP with very limited run offs and all the new circuits have to have millions of acres of paved tar mac surrounding anything that resembles a corner with the spectators sitting over the horizon from the track.

How do the regimes of Tilke dome vs. Street circuit become reconciled?

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by wnut

What I don't get is how the Monaco, Singapore, and to a lesser extent circuits like Melbourne are able to hold a GP with very limited run offs and all the new circuits have to have millions of acres of paved tar mac surrounding anything that resembles a corner with the spectators sitting over the horizon from the track.

How do the regimes of Tilke dome vs. Street circuit become reconciled?

Remember Webbers launch off at Valencia? I was astounded at how much run off their was at the end of that straight....
When a new track receives its approval it is settled for a time and unless their is a major accident with extreme consequences the track's history in subsequent years validates the rating and safety decisions at the time of the initial approval.
Spa has huge speeds and limited run off but we have not seen a major high speed incident that demanded extreme run off be available because the corner speeds are relatively high, no need for extreme braking except at La Source and the chicane before the pits has reduced the braking needs.

If there was a major at any circuit then it would be re-evaluated in the light of the modern incident. New tracks like Sochi and Azerbaijan will have different (bigger?) hoops to jump through.

[Tucky]

I may be completely off base here so feel free to correct me, but wasn't one of the reasons the run off's were increased was so that if a car made a small mistake then they didn't end up stuck in the gravel traps right next to the track. That would have meant that more cars would carry on in the race, providing more of a spectacle rather than drivers having to end their race early because they locked their tyres and just went off the circuit a bit.

[ScotsBrutesFan]

This has become an accepted by product that no one really complained about, I'm not sure it was at the top of the list of reasons to extend the run off or make it all tarmac.

[MagVanisher]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

That's how long is a piece of string type question. It would depend on a track's current FIA grade. If its less than FIA grade 2 then it probably cost as much as a brand new track. If its a grade 2 track then the track itself is probably ok but you will need to spend a small fortune on paddock facilities to satisfy Bernie and grade 1. Look at how much it cost Silverstone to do their new pits and paddock to have a good idea.

I see, but I'm hoping that it'll not cost much... Maybe in the hundred-million to 1 billion dollar range.

On the other hand, what's the cost range of changing the track profile, assuming the facilities are already upgraded to Grade 1 standards? Looking at Indianapolis with regards to the road course didn't cost much compared to some other F1 tracks in my opinion.

[Tucky]

I suppose what you could do is look at how much they wanted to spend on upgrading Donnington and use that as a base line (even though it wouldn't have been enough)

[MagVanisher]

Okay, let's start with that.

Upon looking at news sources and doing comparison, I guess that the recent upgrades with Indianapolis Speedway is slightly cheaper than the failed Donington Park upgrade from 2009.

If Donington Park will just upgrade the existing facilities, plus simply extending the length of the track, it might cost cheaper than the projected 100 million pounds.

Source:

http://www.autoweek.com/article/2013...ycar/131219986

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/mot...r-upgrade.html

[Teretonga]

The cost of the actual track (tarmac) is relatively a small part of the overall budget.
cost of the land, the naure of the ground itself , which determines the amount of engineering to go on, the type and standard of the ancillary buildings, and the purpose for which the track is built, all make significant difference to the budget need.

The Moscow Grade 2 circuit cost 150 million USD, which is a hugely extravagant amount for what they got for their money.

Motorland Aragon, Navarra and Monteblanco in Spain all focussed on the track, buildings for function and less on grandstands etc for spectators, cost less than Silverstone's new wing and track changes.

Portimao in Portugal cost more but it had more expensive earthworks and civil engineering and more elaborate building features.

A Grade 2 circuit recently built in NZ cost about $25 million USD (not including the land) and includes a restaurant and a museum, and three alternative layouts, but had perfect foundational flat land which made it simpler and easier to build.

You get for what you spend but there can be a lot of wasted money, and if public money is involved there are all sorts of costs going on in the background. Smart people spending there own money usually get better value than corporates or publicly funded grandiose schemes.

[wnut]

The cost of reprofiling and upgrading a track is usually the racing!
The tracks now have huge run offs of such good quality that they indistinguishable from the track.
This leads to the drivers being able push the limits with no consequences at all, once again favouring the driver with the best and fastest equipment.
The outer limit of the track should be grass or perhaps teflon Astroturf, followed by a deep and soft gravel trap.
This would make racing a greater challenge for the drivers, reward precision, and make racing far more exciting and unpredictable to watch without putting anyone’s life in danger. The knob with the best car would also not always win.
The sooner the era of being able to make a virtually unlimited amount of big scenery visiting mistakes without even affecting your lap time by more than 0.1 seconds comes to an end the better in my book!

You screw up, you lose!

Most reprofiled tracks are less interesting to drive and much worse from a spectator point of view.

[MagVanisher]

Originally Posted by wnut

Most reprofiled tracks are less interesting to drive and much worse from a spectator point of view.

Agreed to that statement.

Let's say if I want to reprofile a boring track like Fuji Speedway, I might use 50 to 80 percent from my $160 million to change it, assuming that the facilities are already being upgraded by another party.

Now by the way, I know that it might not belong here but I feel that it's included. Since the Motegi oval portion is in a damaged state and it might not be usable in the future, should the cost of destroying the raised oval track is higher than $160 million?