The Formula 1 Thread - 2015
#931
These cars with more torque do move around more. Go back 10 years when they had traction control and the cars really did look like they were on rails.
I agree about longer braking distances, and it may actually be safer in reality (because they start braking earlier they've got more time to lose speed in the event of a brake failure).
#932
Reverting to steel and not carbon brakes would be good step for F1 except it's what the Yanks did in Indycar and we can't have F1 following them, can we ...
Perhaps another material ... like wood ... or cheese
(I've stopped taking this seriously)
Perhaps another material ... like wood ... or cheese
(I've stopped taking this seriously)
#935
The could limit the size of the brakes but perhaps that would cause too many heat problems.
Nigel Mansell Staying on Track: The Autobiography just turned up. I'll tell you all if it's any good.
#937
Registered User
The only thing that is going to work is the budget limit and then go Carte Blanche with the design. And if they are going to have a budget, it should include the drivers salaries.
Active suspension and skirt should definitely make a reappearence.
But the one thing I think would really work is to make 50% of the front wing a positive lift generating device. This wouldn't detract from the look of the cars, nor the advertising space, but it would mean that when the cars got close, not only would the downforce diminish, so would the lift!
#938
A budget cap is completely unworkable, because it ignores the infrastructures which the teams already have in place, and the fact that some teams manufacture their own engines and, even though this in itself could be catered for, it doesn't take account of the fact that a team making their own engine can integrate it into the basic architecture of the car better than a customer team. Mercedes, for example, didn't supply details of their 2014 power units to their customer teams until the Autumn of 2013, when the car designs were already well advanced. The Mercedes unit had the "cold" side of the turbocharger at the front of the engine, which meant shorter intercooler pipe runs and smaller radiators and intercoolers could be used, so packaging the engine meant the customers had to hurriedly redesign significant areas of the car.
Sliding skirts should not return under any circumstances. Any failure of the seal between the skirt and the ground results in a sudden and catastrophic loss of downforce. Which is why they were banned.
And any time the FIA have mandated changes to wing design the designers have recovered most of the lost downforce within a season or so, having spent vast amounts of money in order to do so. Or at least, the designers working for the front-running teams have, because they can afford to throw money at the problem, thereby increasing the gap between the "Haves" and the "Have nots".
The problem of single-team domination has been present ever since Formula 1 has been around, and people have always complained about it. Yet the circus continues, and FOM, in the guise of Bernie Ecclestone, can charge extortionate hosting fees and television licensing fees. Until somebody breaks the circle and devises a means to level the playing field, we will always have larger teams dominating the sport. The FIA may tinker with the rules, but Formula 1 employs some of the smartest brains on the planet and it's their job to find a way to defeat them.
I quite like the idea of smaller teams having greater technical freedom, in a similar manner to MotoGP, which places more stringent restrictions on the big factory teams. Although Yamaha and Honda have dominated again this season, it does give the privateer teams a chance to close the gap - perhaps the twin turbo V6, without any hybrid systems might have appealed to such as Caterham and HRT who entered F1 in 2010 on the promise of a budget cap which never materialised.
Sliding skirts should not return under any circumstances. Any failure of the seal between the skirt and the ground results in a sudden and catastrophic loss of downforce. Which is why they were banned.
And any time the FIA have mandated changes to wing design the designers have recovered most of the lost downforce within a season or so, having spent vast amounts of money in order to do so. Or at least, the designers working for the front-running teams have, because they can afford to throw money at the problem, thereby increasing the gap between the "Haves" and the "Have nots".
The problem of single-team domination has been present ever since Formula 1 has been around, and people have always complained about it. Yet the circus continues, and FOM, in the guise of Bernie Ecclestone, can charge extortionate hosting fees and television licensing fees. Until somebody breaks the circle and devises a means to level the playing field, we will always have larger teams dominating the sport. The FIA may tinker with the rules, but Formula 1 employs some of the smartest brains on the planet and it's their job to find a way to defeat them.
I quite like the idea of smaller teams having greater technical freedom, in a similar manner to MotoGP, which places more stringent restrictions on the big factory teams. Although Yamaha and Honda have dominated again this season, it does give the privateer teams a chance to close the gap - perhaps the twin turbo V6, without any hybrid systems might have appealed to such as Caterham and HRT who entered F1 in 2010 on the promise of a budget cap which never materialised.
#939
Registered User
A budget cap is completely unworkable, because it ignores the infrastructures which the teams already have in place, and the fact that some teams manufacture their own engines and, even though this in itself could be catered for, it doesn't take account of the fact that a team making their own engine can integrate it into the basic architecture of the car better than a customer team. Mercedes, for example, didn't supply details of their 2014 power units to their customer teams until the Autumn of 2013, when the car designs were already well advanced. The Mercedes unit had the "cold" side of the turbocharger at the front of the engine, which meant shorter intercooler pipe runs and smaller radiators and intercoolers could be used, so packaging the engine meant the customers had to hurriedly redesign significant areas of the car.
Sliding skirts should not return under any circumstances. Any failure of the seal between the skirt and the ground results in a sudden and catastrophic loss of downforce. Which is why they were banned.
And any time the FIA have mandated changes to wing design the designers have recovered most of the lost downforce within a season or so, having spent vast amounts of money in order to do so. Or at least, the designers working for the front-running teams have, because they can afford to throw money at the problem, thereby increasing the gap between the "Haves" and the "Have nots".
The problem of single-team domination has been present ever since Formula 1 has been around, and people have always complained about it. Yet the circus continues, and FOM, in the guise of Bernie Ecclestone, can charge extortionate hosting fees and television licensing fees. Until somebody breaks the circle and devises a means to level the playing field, we will always have larger teams dominating the sport. The FIA may tinker with the rules, but Formula 1 employs some of the smartest brains on the planet and it's their job to find a way to defeat them.
I quite like the idea of smaller teams having greater technical freedom, in a similar manner to MotoGP, which places more stringent restrictions on the big factory teams. Although Yamaha and Honda have dominated again this season, it does give the privateer teams a chance to close the gap - perhaps the twin turbo V6, without any hybrid systems might have appealed to such as Caterham and HRT who entered F1 in 2010 on the promise of a budget cap which never materialised.
#940
Budget engines have been dropped already:
http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/story/_/id/...ve-engine-plan
Couldn't see that coming.
http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/story/_/id/...ve-engine-plan
Couldn't see that coming.