Fueling (for green reasons) is the easiest thing to fix by a mile. Everyone starts on exactly the same fuel level of x litres, no more, no less – deploy as you see fit!

Next season make that x-1 litres – woohoo we’re saving polar bears!

Or is there a reason why F1 have felt the need to make it incredibly complicated?

I wonder if there’s merit in going back to a form of ground effect type design, but with an early 90s “push to pass” suspension that lifts the cars a few millimeters clear of the track to aid overtaking.

I wonder if there’s merit in going back to a form of ground effect type design,

A simpler (than the 70s) ground effect system was tested by Williams last season. Reading between the lines I think this is getting kicked out due to Pirelli’s recent concerns about tyre loads.

I think this is getting kicked out due to Pirelli’s recent concerns about tyre loads.

Pirelli have been pretty vocal about teams running outside their parameters for pressures / cambers, as they don’t want the negative press associated with high speed tyre failures. Running a G/E set-up would just load more stress through an already weak tyre, so I’m not surprised they put a stop to it.
The tyres have been designed to fail, yet all the teams / FIA / fans get their panties in a twist when they do just that.
Just make the damn things last 3 times as long and not degrade. I’m still at a loss as to why they enforce a driver to use 2 different compounds during a race.

I hope Renault’s F1 budget is ring-fenced!…

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35309674

Or is there a reason why F1 have felt the need to make it incredibly complicated?

Because manufacturers want to use it as a technology showcase for hybrid powertrains.

holst – Member
Because manufacturers want to use it as a technology showcase for hybrid powertrains.

Fuel flow rates mean naff-all to the general public though. I still believe my way up there is better and easier, and doesn’t get in the way of the hybrids either

@legend

I agree, it would be much better racing. The manufacturers will not agree though, they want to develop hybrid technology. He who pays the piper, etc.

Fuel flow rates mean naff-all to the general public though. I still believe my way up there is better and easier, and doesn’t get in the way of the hybrids either

There must be some appeal/draw from the technology side though?

If people just wanted to watch simple, close racing then Indycar would be bigger than F1.

And if F1 didn’t help manufacturers to develop and sell their cars they would soon shift their money elsewhere.

The tech, bluffing, soap-opera side of F1 has always been as big a draw for me as the racing is.

The technology side would still be interesting as the teams are stretched to meet the fuel limit and work out how best to deploy what they have through the race.

Plenty of drama too when the FIA (possibly) go “this year was too easy, next year you’re losing x% of your fuel”

Easier as a marketing tool for the manufacturers, showing how they get more power with better fuel economy.

Just seems a lot better to me than the current fuel flow situation

The technology side would still be interesting as the teams are stretched to meet the fuel limit and work out how best to deploy what they have through the race.

Plenty of drama too when the FIA (possibly) go “this year was too easy, next year you’re losing x% of your fuel”

This is already the case. Fuel weight limits are (were!), due to reduce over time.

They are limited to 100kg of fuel now (down from approx 160kg in 2013). They’ve done a great job and are often running races with a fair bit less than 100kg on board.

The fuel flow rate is to stop them dumping massive amounts of fuel into the engine for short bursts.

The problem IMO lies with the F1 promotors – they are so tied to old TV only broadcast methods they are failing to get these message out to the average punter. The internet is King now, and they need to embrace it.

They’ve done a great job and are often running races with a fair bit less than 100kg on board.

The fuel flow rate is to stop them dumping massive amounts of fuel into the engine for short bursts.

Running less than 100kg as they know its more efficient for lap times than starting heavy. Then the bore-a-thon ends up kicking off as they’ve effectively been conserving fuel since the start of the race. Hence the idea of everyone being forced to start on the same load.

Fair enough if you need to keep some (high) limit in place to avoid afterburning for the first 5 laps as they try to get back to the situation above. Apart from that let them crack on, the latter parts of the race could get much more enjoyable as it becomes clear who has managed their allocation better and can turn up the wick to the finish.

Fair enough if you need to keep some (high) limit in place to avoid afterburning for the first 5 laps as they try to get back to the situation above. Apart from that let them crack on, the latter parts of the race could get much more enjoyable as it becomes clear who has managed their allocation better and can turn up the wick to the finish.

As is ever the case in F1 I don’t think it was that simple! I’m read an article last year that said the fuel rate was a much for safety as anything else.

You could have a (possibly rare) situation where one car is on a Banzai series of laps on full wick that comes across another on a fuel saving period. The closing speeds could be massive and to introduce this possible scenario wasn’t in F1s interest.

If I was making the rules, they would be allowed to use any engine or tyres they liked, but the fuel tank would only be allowed to hold the same weight of fuel as the driver weighs naked and the rear wing would have to be a flat plate with a chord of 6 inches. Refueling would be allowed, but the teams would have to draw the fuel out of a drum using a bucket and then carry it over to the car. Tobacco sponsorship would be allowed, but any driver with tobacco sponsorship would be required to smoke from the time he reached the circuit to the end of the race.

Pirelli have kept quiet about their snow-chain compound!… 😀

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2016/01/14/verstappen-takes-to-the-ski-slopes-in-a-red-bull-rb7/

Oh and stop this obsession with employing old drivers sons, it is nepotism of the worst kind.

I dunno if Jonathan Palmer would have the clout to get his son a drive if he wasn’t pretty quick.

It’s the first week of January. What are you expecting…………..

Hard hitting investigative journalism based on this template:

(Insert team name 1) has replaced the long-serving (Insert personnel name 1) as (Insert job title) with (Insert team name 2) ‘s (Insert personnel name 2).

(Insert personnel name 1) joined (Insert team name 1) in (Insert year) and progressed through the ranks to (Insert job title) in (Insert year) when the team was owned by (INSERT TEAM NAME 4). He retained the role after (INSERT TEAM NAME 4) departure from the sport at the end of that season.

The (Insert nationality) is set to leave (Insert team name 1) to join (INSERT TEAM NAME 4) in (Insert name of rival racing series) and the team has payed tribute to his long service.

“(Insert personnel name 1) has decided to leave our company after more than (Insert length of service) years of service to pursue another challenge,” a (Insert team name 1) spokesperson confirmed. “We would like to thank (Insert personnel name 1) for his dedicated and highly valued collaboration over all these years. We wish him all the best for the future.”

(Insert personnel name 1) is being replaced by (Insert team name 2) ‘s (Insert personnel name 2) (Insert personnel name 2), who joined the outfit when it was known as (Insert team name 3) in (Insert year). He remained an (Insert job title) when the team became (Insert team name 2) in (Insert year) and was promoted to (Insert job title) in (Insert year), a role he retained until the most recent season.

(Insert team name 1) is excited by the experience (Insert personnel name 2) can bring from his experience of multiple championships.

“We are very pleased to announce (Insert personnel name 2) as our new as (Insert job title). (Insert personnel name 2) has been working for more than (Insert length of service) years for one of the big F1 teams. We are confident that we can benefit from his long-time experience in order to improve our performance.”

If I was making the rules, they would be allowed to use any engine or tyres they liked, but the fuel tank would only be allowed to hold the same weight of fuel as the driver weighs naked and the rear wing would have to be a flat plate with a chord of 6 inches. Refueling would be allowed, but the teams would have to draw the fuel out of a drum using a bucket and then carry it over to the car. Tobacco sponsorship would be allowed, but any driver with tobacco sponsorship would be required to smoke from the time he reached the circuit to the end of the race.

You’re just reading aloud from the 1968 rulebook and I claim my five pounds.

I see injuns have come down in the January sales…. Psst! Wanna buy a cheap injun….?

Just seen on Facebook both JB and Mclaren sharing stories that Honda have ‘found’ 220bhp+ over the winter, 70bhp in the engine and 160’ish in the hybrid system, Alonso now 4th favourite for title!!!

what of the odds of it blowing up on the grid ?

Klunk – Member

what of the odds of it blowing up on the grid ?

You mean you think it’ll even get to pre-season testing??

That will be Japanese BHP.
They are unable as a culture to say “no” and let you down. That will result in them losing face.

Manor seem to be hiring some decent staff at the moment, they may not end up at the back this year.

I reckon the middle of the pack could be very interesting this year.

well they will probably have more than one, maybe we should have a number of engines sweepstake.

Manor seem to be hiring some decent staff at the moment, they may not end up at the back this year

Yup, and they’ve got the Merc engine, so hopefully unlike 2015 they’ll have the start-up codes come Australia.
It’ll be interesting to see how far back the Renault ends up, with Lotus having seriously little cash to develop their 2016 contender towards the middle and end of last season it could be a contest between Renault and Sauber for the back of the grid.

ut standard aero packs for the front and rear wings would be good

You don’t have to go that far; a constant profile across the width of the element would do it. You pick your profile and run 6 foot of it; cut to suit the width of your wing.

Webbo gobbing off this morning; very funny. Maldonado the worst he ever drove against, out of his depth…

Anyone going to argue against that?

I think sauber not turning up at the first test maybe their first problem. I reckon renault above sauber

160 of those Honda horses comes from sorting out their deployment problems – mainly mgu-h, which even Newey conceded was an easy fix. Don’t think missing the first test is such a big deal given the minimal amount of time between them this year, if you find a fundamental problem in the first test then it’ll be difficult to fix it before the second anyway. Stupid testing rules.

I thought webber was a bit harsh on alonso given that they’re reasonably friendly for f1 drivers.

It’s pretty much guaranteed that Honda will be much better than last year, but those numbers are basically just made up. Until they run the engine in the car, they won’t really know what the real-world figures are. My guess is that they’ll start the year where they should have started last year, midfield on a good day but with enough development potential that they can aim to be regular podium contenders by next season without people laughing out loud.

Renault still haven’t put a sign up outside their factory where the old Lotus sign used to be. Either they still haven’t finalised the deal or they don’t have the money.

(or they could be busy building cars, but where is the conspiracy in that theory)

To be fair to MacHonda, there have been worse engines, although I’m not sure that’s quite what Ron Dennis had in mind.

The W12 Adventure

Interesting the way the wet test is being reported by some “more engine problems for honde” rather than “stoffel stuffs kimi”. Ie an end of life 2015 Honda unit eventually gave up after more than a race distance but van doorne still posted a quicker time than kimi.

stoffel does catch the eye every time hes in a car. I wonder if its kimi dislike of testing duties. That said it is testing and ultimately lots of variables.

So who is going to be in the final seats at manor? Kmag, Rio, Rossi, werhlein, stevens, mehri or anyone else?

The one with the biggest wallet.

Looks like Crashtor may be finally on his way out…

http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/magnussen-on-verge-of-f1-return-with-renault-670349/

Let’s hope so. He’s a joke.

Today’s bigger news may be the adoption of driver head protection, probably the Halo concept. Fugly but hard to argue against someone who wants a tiny bit of protection from flying objects. Just as the main distributor of loose carbon fibre loses his seat.

we might see some credibility come back to f1.. no wait theres still Bernie to contradict everything

Helmet’s helping to smooth out that relationship with Renault I see:
http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/marko-tells-renault-to-focus-on-red-bull-over-own-f1-team-670324/

It’s official – no Maldonado this year…

http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/maldonado-confirms-he-won-t-be-on-the-grid-in-2016-671006/