[Rules] 2022 and beyond... What will be the impact of the new regulations?

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Plantagenet

...Roll on 2022, and the majority of downforce will now come from the underside of the car.....which is not visible. Therefore, I wonder if the faster cars will have a longer period of competitive advantage because understanding the aero working of the faster cars will be more difficult...

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

...The rules allow for the shut stuff down. The problem is that with financial caps, it is risky to try something really out of the box if a removing it becomes costly...

great questions!

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

One of my disappointments in Mercedes not going ahead with the formal appeal was that whatever is wrong in the 'system' and the way the process is being enacted is that we may never see the clear delineation of process and responsibility that we would require from a governing body.

It seems that Mercedes (and particularly Hamilton) are still trying to hold the FIA to account in some way:

Lewis Hamilton: Mercedes driver to decide on F1 future after Abu Dhabi inquiry

Lewis Hamilton will not decide whether to return to Formula 1 this season until he sees the results of an inquiry into the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix.

Hamilton is "disillusioned" with F1, his Mercedes team boss Toto Wolff has said, as a result of last year's title-deciding race.
[...]
The team and Hamilton are said to be aligned on the issue and waiting to see what action the FIA takes to address the matters raised by the Abu Dhabi race.

[bjohnsonsmith]

According to this BBC article: ''the FIA said it would be done (the inquiry) in time for 'any identified meaningful feedback and conclusions to be made before the beginning of the 2022 season'. ''

Make of that what you will. It just sounds a little vague.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/59951382

[Anyopenroad]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

I think the teams have been asking the FIA to review ideas before they implement them. That if the FIA gives thumbs up, then good, if thumbs down, then they don't do it. And I also think there may have already been some clarifications on design ideas? The rules allow for the shut stuff down. The problem is that with financial caps, it is risky to try something really out of the box if a removing it becomes costly.

This describes a spec formula in all but name.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Anyopenroad

This describes a spec formula in all but name.

I think calling it a spec formula is overstating it by quite a bit. But I understand your point. They want to continue to make the box smaller and to try to not facilitate rewards for finding loop holes that go beyond their intent.

I think something I have always agreed with is that there is no "spirit of the law". That F1 has really been more about following the "letter of the law" (at least with respect to technical regulations). So in that case finding and exploiting a loophole has always been the goal. But I think now, they are pivoting toward the desire to really protect the "spirit". And to do that, they are willing to change the "letter" as needed.

Teams can be creative, but only within the boxes. Don't play outside the boxes (even if the rules are somehow poorly written). As I mentioned above about rule clarifications. I can also imagine teams coming up with creative ideas that fit within the rule and then going to the FIA so that they can say "no, don't do that" just to exclude others from giving it a try.

In a vacuum, and with all other considerations ignored. I like 100% total technical freedom. However, I know that this can't work given the multitude of other real life factors. So I think it will be interesting to see how this goes in 2022 because it is a much tighter box.

Richard

[Richard C]

Here are a few articles that talk to the points I call out above. Some old, some newer.


Late December of this past year interview with FIA chief technology officer Nikolas Tombazis. (my quote below translated from German to English via Google Translate)

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/...chef-tombazis/

Tombazis talks about adjusting rules mid-season as needed...

Tombazis is confident that Formula 1 has learned from this experience: "The goals were correct. The basic measures too. The mistake was that the teams were given too much freedom. That is why the goals were missed in the end." For this reason, the 2022 rules are not cast in stone. "I expect adjustments over the course of the season if things don't work out as intended."

Old 2019 arcticle

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/fi...85798/4985798/

Tombazis talks about teams exposing loopholes to the FIA in advance of car design (note, this is from 2019 when teams would have been much earlier in design)...

"The reason teams, depending on their attitude or whether they are risk-prone or not, will do that is because they have found some loophole, they know it is against the intention of the rule, and we have up until a certain point in time to adjust the rules and make corrections.

"They don't want to necessarily spend three months on something and have the carpet pulled under their feet and lose three months.

"So sometimes some teams discover [something] and before they start spending resource there they want to be sure that it won't be somehow banned or whatever."

Article from fall of last year (2022 cars should have been mostly set in stone with respect to mechanical and aero concepts at this point)...

https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/96880...gest-fear.html

Pat Symonds calling out that the FIA will protect the goals of the new rules...

The transparency between the FIA and the teams is also there to ensure that the teams don't get any nasty surprises. "The FIA can ban a development if they feel it is not in the spirit of the regulations," warns Symonds. In view of the budget cap, the FIA banning certain developments could have nasty consequences if teams have to go back to the drawing board.

Richard

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

According to this BBC article: ''the FIA said it would be done (the inquiry) in time for 'any identified meaningful feedback and conclusions to be made before the beginning of the 2022 season'. ''

Make of that what you will. It just sounds a little vague.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/59951382

The FIA has conducted a timely investigation into the FIAs application of the FIAs rule book during the FIA officiated event. The FIA concludes that the FIA has done nothing wrong and obeyed the FIA rule book. The FIA considers this matter closed.

Having people investigate themselves should be classified as corruption.

[Mike Harte]

Richard, for as long as I can remember, teams have often approached the technical arm of the FIA to present ideas that they have which they feel may be within both the rules and the spirit of them, and to get those ideas approved by the FIA in writing.

This has often resulted in other teams requesting clarification of those modifications/ideas when they discover them. One such being Mercedes' steering (was it last season?).

Sometimes the FIA gives the go-ahead, others they reject.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

Richard, for as long as I can remember, teams have often approached the technical arm of the FIA to present ideas that they have which they feel may be within both the rules and the spirit of them, and to get those ideas approved by the FIA in writing.

This has often resulted in other teams requesting clarification of those modifications/ideas when they discover them. One such being Mercedes' steering (was it last season?).

Sometimes the FIA gives the go-ahead, others they reject.

Yes. Sorry if I gave the illusion that is a new practice.

Richard

[wnut]

Has anybody seen if anything has been done about Mercedes gaming the PU rules and the intent of the cost cap rules by gaming the system with replacement PUs?

It would seem that a 5 place penalty on the grid or worse on the Sprint race grid is wholly inadequate for the performance gain.

Is this loophole being closed?

[Adam43]

The FIA have confirmed that the rules are the same for each team. Also they have ratified that if you don’t take the grid penalty you are allowed a better chance to score points in the sprint.



Nice list of the changes to the PU for each driver:
https://www.f1-fansite.com/2021-f1-s...unit-elements/

[bjohnsonsmith]

Looking at that table the majority drivers ended up using four ICEs, TCs and MGU-Hs. It would seem the FIA have underestimated how long of each of those elements will last, before they need replacing during such a long season. I think they might need to re-evaluate that.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by wnut

Has anybody seen if anything has been done about Mercedes gaming the PU rules and the intent of the cost cap rules by gaming the system with replacement PUs?

It would seem that a 5 place penalty on the grid or worse on the Sprint race grid is wholly inadequate for the performance gain.

Is this loophole being closed?

Why is it a loophole?
What is wrong with it as it is?
What is the 21st century obsession with creating reasons to penalize and penalizing people when once upon a time in the not too distant past you could use as many engines as you liked.
Even one for practice, one for qualifying and one for the race.....
There is a budget allowance and some penalties for engine failures. Engine failures are usually mechanical, not driver mistakes, so why should a driver be penalized for something beyond his control?

[S griffin]

I don’t see the point of the penalties for extra parts. It won’t stop people using more than the allocated amount. It’s frustrating seeing too many grids changed by these penalties. I can understand them trying to cut costs, but it doesn’t really work

I do hope the rules are changed in this regard. Most team do spend wisely anyway. And yes it is unfair the driver is penalised for these technicalities which he didn’t necessary choose to do

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

Why is it a loophole?
What is wrong with it as it is?
What is the 21st century obsession with creating reasons to penalize and penalizing people when once upon a time in the not too distant past you could use as many engines as you liked.
Even one for practice, one for qualifying and one for the race.....
There is a budget allowance and some penalties for engine failures. Engine failures are usually mechanical, not driver mistakes, so why should a driver be penalized for something beyond his control?

It is a loophole because in a formula that is allegedly trying to cut costs, the stupendously expensive PUs introduced by the manufacturers, are outside the cost cap, and are now being changed by the manufacturer teams to gain a significant performance advantage over other teams who cannot afford to indulge in this luxury.

For my 2 cents worth, I think that the cost of the PUs should be limited to $100 000 dollars each, should be allocated to the teams by the FIA out of a stock held by the FIA, and anybody should be free to use as many as they like during the season - within the cost cap.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Teams have still yet to vote on this season's sprint races, requiring 8 of the 10 teams to vote in favour of them but there is a stand-off over costs.


https://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12...JLvPWQXXO3AEFo

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

Why is it a loophole?

1 extra ICE = +10 grid places
2 or more extra ICEs = +5 grid places each

Many people think that is silly and I expect will be corrected in the 2022 sporting regulations.

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Teams have still yet to vote on this season's sprint races, requiring 8 of the 10 teams to vote in favour of them but there is a stand-off over costs.

Good riddance to the Sprints!

[chillibowl]

i hope they keep the sprints. makes the weekend harder/additional challenge and provides some much needed format change within an overabundance of race weekends.

drivers used to routinely put in over 150 laps over a couple of days (many many more if you were TGF!) in cars which were (relatively speaking) far more difficult to drive.

now they do a fraction of that...in other threads, the need for this to be a sporting challenge first and foremost is often expressed yet we seem ok with a reduction in the athletic effort/difficulty required.

at this point they will not make the cars harder to drive (they take away downforce and they find more elsewhere), they dont really need to complete many laps in practice anymore, and you cant really increase the length of a GP either.

so short of additional race features during a GP weekend, how would one go about making this more of an athletic competition?

maybe i am connecting apples and oranges here but i would speculate that there is a correlation between a decrease in difficulty and an increase in the need to inject entertainment?

[wnut]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

i hope they keep the sprints. makes the weekend harder/additional challenge and provides some much needed format change within an overabundance of race weekends.

drivers used to routinely put in over 150 laps over a couple of days (many many more if you were TGF!) in cars which were (relatively speaking) far more difficult to drive.

now they do a fraction of that...in other threads, the need for this to be a sporting challenge first and foremost is often expressed yet we seem ok with a reduction in the athletic effort/difficulty required.

at this point they will not make the cars harder to drive (they take away downforce and they find more elsewhere), they dont really need to complete many laps in practice anymore, and you cant really increase the length of a GP either.

so short of additional race features during a GP weekend, how would one go about making this more of an athletic competition?

maybe i am connecting apples and oranges here but i would speculate that there is a correlation between a decrease in difficulty and an increase in the need to inject entertainment?

I think the sprint races add very little, and detract from the GP, horrible idea.

I do think you will still have them though, the are Ross Brawn's pet and will be foisted on us come hell or highwater.

How about they get the W series to provide a set of W series F3s to the F1 drivers under the same conditions for the F1 drivers to race on Saturday. Now that would be a race worth watching.
Perhaps another Procar series.
Allocate constructors championship points for the teams' division of revenue at the end of the year based on this championship.

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by wnut

I think the sprint races add very little, and detract from the GP, horrible idea.

I do think you will still have them though, the are Ross Brawn's pet and will be foisted on us come hell or highwater.

How about they get the W series to provide a set of W series F3s to the F1 drivers under the same conditions for the F1 drivers to race on Saturday. Now that would be a race worth watching.
Perhaps another Procar series.
Allocate constructors championship points for the teams' division of revenue at the end of the year based on this championship.

Yes the sprint races were a solution to a problem that was never there and they didn't really add much. I wouldn't be sad to see t go

Bringing back a Procar series is a nice idea, although probably would never happen. I guess if they did, the Porsche Supercup would be the most logical way to do that

[Akrapovic]

You couldn't do Procar/PSC because of branding (Mercedes will not have Lewis driving a BMW on a race track), however I prefer this concept to the F1 sprint race. F1 drivers in some unbranded sports cars. That is interesting.

[chillibowl]

i feel like im through the looking glass here into a world where turning actual laps under race conditions in actual F1 cars is considered boring or not adding anything.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

i feel like im through the looking glass here into a world where turning actual laps under race conditions in actual F1 cars is considered boring or not adding anything.

Would be nice to see the world's top drivers in a series where
the car was not the be all and end all.

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by wnut

Would be nice to see the world's top drivers in a series where
the car was not the be all and end all.

There are 20+ Carrera Cup Porsches at most Grand Prix meetings...?

The idea that skill driving an open wheeler translates to driving a production-based sportscar, in a competition of tenths, is not exactly iron-clad though. You might find that Latifi is the best driver in Porsches, so what would that prove about driving a Grand Prix car...?

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by wnut

Would be nice to see the world's top drivers in a series where
the car was not the be all and end all.

Unfortunately has never happened, nor will ever happen.

The closest thing we have is probably Indycar, and even with a spec chassis, theres lots of differences with damper development, teams, engineers, budgets etc.

You will still end up having the best drivers, in the best cars, with the best engineers and biggest budget.

More often than not the car and engineering team makes the initial difference in any series, the driver is usually a relatively cheep but important component in the equation to ensure that engineering investment doesnt go to waste.