[Rules] Future Rule Changes

[Akrapovic]

Was the FW16 really such a dog? All of the cars suffered from the lack of electronic aids in 1994. The only car which didn't was the Benetton, which was later found to have some driver aids still installed. If the only car the FW16 couldn't beat was the B194, and the B194 was illegal, it says the FW16 wasn't that bad and that the cars that year were just difficult to drive in general.

[bobec]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Was the FW16 really such a dog? All of the cars suffered from the lack of electronic aids in 1994. The only car which didn't was the Benetton, which was later found to have some driver aids still installed. If the only car the FW16 couldn't beat was the B194, and the B194 was illegal, it says the FW16 wasn't that bad and that the cars that year were just difficult to drive in general.

You are correct about the Benetton, and also it was a really good car to begin with.

But yes, I think the FW-16 was terrible at least for the first two races, though it probably wasn't sorted out until at least the Spanish GP, when B-spec elements started to be introduced.

We know Newey has admitted there was a defect in the front aero of the car, which was apparently discovered at Imola, and the first real steps at improving the car took place before the Friday qualifying. In fact, it is said that Senna was happy for the first time with the setup of the FW-16 after winning provisional pole.

Then we have the passive suspensions issue, which was already mentioned. I think the team just didn't do enough to prepare for the passive suspension regulations, or maybe their car was just unfinished at the beginning of the season.

I think Hill's performance in the first several races says a lot. It was nothing like what he showed in 1993. He was usually starting from second row even after Imola, he got lapped in the first race in Brazil, and overall his results were dismal until the Spanish GP.

[wolfhound]

There is some talk within F1 about changing the rules about track limits. This has been partly brought about by the Spa punctures being suspected to being caused by drivers abusing track limits and driving on the dirty stuff off track.

http://uk.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1-...k-limits-abuse

I think this vague rule we have at the moment is letting drivers away with too much.
I think a simple solution would be that every body has to be inside the white lines and the only reason for not being there is due to another car putting somebody off track. Any other off track incident would be an automatic drive though on second offence. A bit flexability might be allowed at the first corner.

P.S. this should not be needed at Monaco!

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

I think this vague rule we have at the moment is letting drivers away with too much.
I think a simple solution would be that every body has to be inside the white lines and the only reason for not being there is due to another car putting somebody off track. Any other off track incident would be an automatic drive though on second offence. A bit flexability might be allowed at the first corner.

If someone spins or has an off which loses time, do they still get the drive through? There are grey areas there already.

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

If someone spins or has an off which loses time, do they still get the drive through? There are grey areas there already.

By the same argument, if a car crashes into the Armco & knocks all its wheels off, will the drive-through be postponed until the car is mobile again and applied at the next race?
(Apologies, but after spending mere seconds looking I have been unable to find the This comment is made with my tongue pressed firmly into my cheek smilie!)
I appreciate that we're talking about Formula One here, but hopefully common-sense should prevail and if there's any doubts, isn't that wnet the "driver steward" is supposed to be there to advise on?

[wolfhound]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

If someone spins or has an off which loses time, do they still get the drive through? There are grey areas there already.

The drivers can be allowed one off track visit but the next one.......

As a suggestion Monaco any drivers who exceed the track limits should be allowed to choose their own punishment.

These could include:-

Instant exclusion from the event.

A visit to their pit and let the team make the choice for them.

They could continue and the car might decide what their punishment might be.

[Sodemo]

2 metres of grass minimum between the track and tarmac run off area. That would sort it instantly.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

The drivers can be allowed one off track visit but the next one.......

As a suggestion Monaco any drivers who exceed the track limits should be allowed to choose their own punishment.

These could include:-

Instant exclusion from the event.

A visit to their pit and let the team make the choice for them.

They could continue and the car might decide what their punishment might be.

Nice to see we have a purist in our midst!

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

2 metres of grass minimum between the track and tarmac run off area. That would sort it instantly.

I was watching them accelerating at full throttle on some of the "grass" on the outside of the Monza turns, it appears that the track officials have solved how to stick the stuff down and how to give it as much traction as asphalt. Nice to see to see development in F1!

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by wnut

I was watching them accelerating at full throttle on some of the "grass" on the outside of the Monza turns, it appears that the track officials have solved how to stick the stuff down and how to give it as much traction as asphalt. Nice to see to see development in F1!

Astro Turf's proving to be quite versatile.

[Casper]

Take all the kerbs and white lines away and let the drivers work out the quickest way round the track then there are no infringements. That was easy!!

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Casper

Take all the kerbs and white lines away and let the drivers work out the quickest way round the track then there are no infringements. That was easy!!

What is the fastest way around a black quadrangle?

[Casper]

Originally Posted by wnut

What is the fastest way around a black quadrangle?

I reckon it would be an interesting exercise and some of the answers might be surprising. It would certainly add some interest while they were working it out.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by wnut

What is the fastest way around a black quadrangle?

The IMS is a black quadrangle, just watch any Indy 500, .

[wnut]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

The IMS is a black quadrangle, just watch any Indy 500, .

Try run wide there and see what happens!

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by wnut

Try run wide there and see what happens!

Safer Barrier,

[wnut]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Safer Barrier,

Exactly, bet they'd short cut those a lot less than a white line, and I don't think you would need a steward making inconsistent decisions to implement the rule either!

[Adam43]

You'd love Indycar as there are "inconsistent" decisions all over the place.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Adam43

You'd love Indycar as there are "inconsistent" decisions all over the place.

There certainly have been some very inconsistent caution periods given.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Adam43

You'd love Indycar as there are "inconsistent" decisions all over the place.

No questions there, and not very attractive either!

[chillibowl]

my issues with barriers or less favorable run off areas is partially rooted in safety concerns but more selfishly i dont want to see me periods of SC or VSC while cars are removed, debris cleaned up etc.

i know more penalties is not a popular idea at the moment, but a few years ago the FIA sort of changed the system of driver penalties so i wonder if that could not be expanded to include points for 4 wheels off the track to a degree where a driver repeatedly using too much run off would result in future race suspensions.

it would solve the issue of having to pursue every infraction in real time with the points being added up after the race sort of thing.

[sizzle]

They solved it in Moto3 by telling them to drop back one position.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

my issues with barriers or less favorable run off areas is partially rooted in safety concerns but more selfishly i dont want to see me periods of SC or VSC while cars are removed, debris cleaned up etc.

i know more penalties is not a popular idea at the moment, but a few years ago the FIA sort of changed the system of driver penalties so i wonder if that could not be expanded to include points for 4 wheels off the track to a degree where a driver repeatedly using too much run off would result in future race suspensions.

it would solve the issue of having to pursue every infraction in real time with the points being added up after the race sort of thing.

A barrier, safer or otherwise, would be a rather drastic measure and raises safety issues but I think making the run off area less favorable would be a good idea.

[chillibowl]

true just seems unfair to me to pass the problem and costs to the track owners.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

true just seems unfair to me to pass the problem and costs to the track owners.

I agree. The tracks have to pay enough to Mr. Ecclestone as it is. If modifications arise because of rule changes, then those costs should be met by the FIA.