2016 F1 Constructor tech info/development thread. (READ 1ST POST)Formula 1

[TenEightyOne]

Pirelli is now claiming that they can' t do tyre for the 2017 with the new specs...I have enough with Pirelli, give us Michelin back please.

I think we've already started to cover that in this thread, no?

As @prisonermonkeys has told you Michelin won't be able to employ differing laws of physics. To run a tyre of that width under that unprecedented load (the highest that any racing tyre will ever have achieved) the compounds and required minimum pressures will drastically reduce lateral grip to the extent where the cornering-speed increase from downforce is effectively offset.

What do you suggest Michelin could do differently? I wonder if your anti-Pirelli stance is to do with their difficult history in F1, and I wonder if you've taken into account the unreasonable specification/parameters that were handed down to them or if you've considered Michelin's own speckled F1 history?

 

[twitcher]

Ya, Michelin is the best, they never had any issues with tires when they were an F1 supplier

It's just like people screaming "F1 should use Goodyear." To them I say, go talk to Tony Stewart

 

[AJ]

Spoiler: I can't think of a more apt situation to post this.

 

[TenEightyOne]

A return to in-race refuelling is to be discussed on Monday. Some team principals like the idea of bringing some unpredictability back to F1, others are against the idea and think that the discussions will go nowhere. If approved then it might return as early as 2017. BBC.

 

[twitcher]

I think they should make it so the drivers have to get out and change their own tires. That would make the racing more exciting!

 

[TenEightyOne]

I think they should make it so the drivers have to get out and change their own tires. That would make the racing more exciting!

And proper Le-Mans-style running starts

 

[twitcher]

And proper Le-Mans-style running starts

Or like the start they had at Aus GT round at Highlands That was proper motor racing Just imagine Nico or Fernando's beautiful locks flowing in the wind as they sprint down the paddock. It would be glorious!!

K I'll stop now

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

A return to in-race refuelling is to be discussed on Monday. Some team principals like the idea of bringing some unpredictability back to F1, others are against the idea and think that the discussions will go nowhere. If approved then it might return as early as 2017. BBC.

In race fueling again, like that time they talked about it and it got shot down...oh wait that was last year. Not sure if they're running out of ideas over there or what. Let's make it simple for them...do what was being said early last year for 2017, and if it doesn't work just do what you always do. Change it two years later.

 

[GTPorsche]

In-race refueling would work. All they need to do is program a failsafe on the car that puts it in neutral when the fuel nozzle is connected and won't allow the car to go into gear until the nozzle is removed. That would prevent the issues they had that led to refueling being banned.

 

[Scuderia Paul]

Has anyone got any dates for when some cars are being unveiled? Ferrari usually shows it's hand in January but I've heard nothing yet. Perhaps they are all waiting until the first test day.

 

[GTPorsche]

Ferrari is doing an online launch at some point, I'm not sure of the date. Haas reveals their car at the first test. The other teams I haven't seen info on yet.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I think they should make it so the drivers have to get out and change their own tires. That would make the racing more exciting!

Limit the number of mechanics that can work on the car - one per wheel, not three.

Have a fuel dump, where a minimum amount of fuel must go into the car; the system can be designed so that excess fuel comes back out of the car.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Update - Manor's 2016 car has passed its crash tests, while the team has hired former Ferrari designer Nikolas Tombazis with immediate effect:

http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2016/...-former-ferrari-aero-chief-joins-the-f1-team/

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Pat Symonds says that the 2017 regulations have been diluted compared to what was originally proposed:

http://m.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/122510/f1-2017-plans-now-diluted--symonds

It's utterly predictable that the teams would do this, but Symonds also think that further revisions for 2018 are an option, depending on the success of the 2017 rules, which I begrudgingly admit has some merit to it.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

In-race refueling would work. All they need to do is program a failsafe on the car that puts it in neutral when the fuel nozzle is connected and won't allow the car to go into gear until the nozzle is removed. That would prevent the issues they had that led to refueling being banned.

Refueling wasn't only banned for that reason, though. Teams also would try an push the limits of how fast fuel would pump into the cars, to get a slight edge in stops. I don't see how a refueling situation would change what we currently have, which is hoping the team ahead of you on the grid, screws up in pits and you leap frog them with your stop.

Or the ever so rare, genius strategist of the GP that allows the team to make the call at the right time to leap frog. Both situations are few and far between, thus this wont do much to shake up anything, especially when a pecking order is established once the season gets going.

Pat Symonds says that the 2017 regulations have been diluted compared to what was originally proposed:

http://m.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/122510/f1-2017-plans-now-diluted--symonds

It's utterly predictable that the teams would do this, but Symonds also think that further revisions for 2018 are an option, depending on the success of the 2017 rules, which I begrudgingly admit has some merit to it.

Thanks you Pat, this is why I've said if the FIA simply go back to the original proposal instead of teasing and then taking back over and over we'd be set to go. People would be as excited for F1 in 2017 as they were when the new engine overhaul was set for 2014. But leave the FIA to screw everything outside of their precious baby the WEC when it comes to regs.

Has anyone got any dates for when some cars are being unveiled? Ferrari usually shows it's hand in January but I've heard nothing yet. Perhaps they are all waiting until the first test day.

Nah, not really but with the winter lockout and the later start to the season it probably wont be any time this month as has been the norm or even the start of next month. I'd say probably end of February during first test or mid Feb if were lucky.

 

[GTPorsche]

Give them a fuel can to use on pitstops then. Fuel will only go in as fast as gravity and fluid dynamics will allow.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Give them a fuel can to use on pitstops then. Fuel will only go in as fast as gravity and fluid dynamics will allow.

Yes that's true, but there are safety measures in the fuel can that allow flow rates to be done in a safe manner, and teams will try to abuse these measures. But I agree give them an FIA mandated and regulated can at each GP weekend, and this shouldn't be an issue.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

But leave the FIA to screw everything outside of their precious baby the WEC when it comes to regs.

I think it's more the teams that derailed this. The Strategy Working Group has only ever looked after their own interests, and while the FIA enabled it, I think that the manufacturers really left them with no alternative. The situation is akin to a football match where the team managers are allowed to consult on every single refereeing decision. The major manufacturers have enjoyed far too much power and influence over the regulations for far too long. And they have always cultivated a perception that the FIA is imposing unfair regulations on them. Sadly, we're now in a position where the only meaningful change can come about if the teams vote to relinquish their powers, and seeing as how that means losing the ability to shape the future of the sport in line with their interests, they will never agree to it.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I think it's more the teams that derailed this. The Strategy Working Group has only ever looked after their own interests, and while the FIA enabled it, I think that the manufacturers really left them with no alternative. The situation is akin to a football match where the team managers are allowed to consult on every single refereeing decision. The major manufacturers have enjoyed far too much power and influence over the regulations for far too long. And they have always cultivated a perception that the FIA is imposing unfair regulations on them. Sadly, we're now in a position where the only meaningful change can come about if the teams vote to relinquish their powers, and seeing as how that means losing the ability to shape the future of the sport in line with their interests, they will never agree to it.

I could see that, but I think they derailed it after the 1000hp was shot down among other things. Then again the line between what team (not teams since it's usually one of the big teams) mucked this up and what the FIA mucked up, is a blur many times. I mean I'm aware that teams have this power, but the FIA also needs to have more bearing on what they do when teams act out like Mercedes or Red bull or Ferrari.

At some point sadly it's either we keep doing this song and dance and have this conversation or someone stands their ground and we see who folds and goes from there. At this time I've yet to see the FIA have interest in standing their ground. This is why I feel their importance is more invested in WEC and F1 is just a burdensome squabble between them and teams and who gets what.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

This is why I feel their importance is more invested in WEC and F1 is just a burdensome squabble between them and teams and who gets what.

Maybe that's the long-term plan - give the appearance of abandoning Formula 1 for the time being and focus on the WEC to convince the manufacturers to back down.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Maybe that's the long-term plan - give the appearance of abandoning Formula 1 for the time being and focus on the WEC to convince the manufacturers to back down.

Yeah but wouldn't they just jump ship and try the same bull in WEC?

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Yeah but wouldn't they just jump ship and try the same bull in WEC?

No, because the FIA retains control over the WEC. The teams would only get additional power if the FIA allows it, and if they want to stop the teams from taking over the WEC the way they have Formula 1, they won't allow it.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

No, because the FIA retains control over the WEC. The teams would only get additional power if the FIA allows it, and if they want to stop the teams from taking over the WEC the way they have Formula 1, they won't allow it.

So then the better blame is due to the self entitlement they've gained due to the FOM which gets translated over to the FIA dealings in the same sport.

 

[DK]

If anyone's interested, Stefan Johansson wrote three articles for motorsport.com (1, 2, 3) on what he thinks is going wrong with motorsport in general and F1 in particular, and has proposed his solutions for F1. And yes, it involves cutting down on downforce.

 

[twitcher]

If anyone's interested, Stefan Johansson wrote three articles for motorsport.com (1, 2, 3) on what he thinks is going wrong with motorsport in general and F1 in particular, and has proposed his solutions for F1. And yes, it involves cutting down on downforce.

Read through those the other day, and was thoroughly underwhelmed. His "suggestions" don't really seem to be that different from what the comments section of any F1 article from the last 1-2 years. Hell, a person could have picked through these forums and found most of those ideas.

2 of the ideas really left me scratching my head:

• ban communication between teams and factories on race weekends. No proposal on how the hell you would enforce that without the help of the NSA, not to mention is an age where cutting costs is a priority, this guy wants to waste resources on enforcing communication blackouts...as if teams won't spend stupid amounts of money to circumvent that kind of a rule.

• his issue with blocking. I wasn't even aware there was a major issue with blocking in F1, at least not since Magnussen lost his ride. To me, his statement "if you have a clean exit from a corner, you have a right to overtake the car in front without lifting," (paraphrased) umm sorry WHAT? As long as the lead driver only makes one move (remembering he can also continue his turn past the track out point, and that does not count as his 1 move) down the straight, the following driver doesn't have a right to jack squat until they have significant overlap.

Yes we want more passing, but not by removing any defensive options a driver might have. Should be use telemetry to monitor and punish drivers who park their car on the apex?

Steve also suggests removing overtaking gimmicks like DRS, so the overtaking is more natural. Next sentence he's talking about push-to-pass like in Indy. Yes, it's slightly different, and P2P can be used for defense as well, but it's still a bloody gimmick.


Other than that, I agree with the rest of his points, even though I don't think any of them are new or original ideas.

 

[DK]

I've had this idea floating around in my head for a while - a sort of reverse DRS. Instead of the car having the DRS flap open on designated areas, it'll be open all of the time until the driver hits the brakes, and re-opens once the car hasn't been turning for at least one second.

 

[Pezzarinho17]

I had a "reverse DRS" idea a little while back, in that the current cars struggle to follow through corners because of the reduction in downforce from the slipstream. So why not have additional wings close / available when within 1 second? I'm not sure how it would be best applied, but in explanation it would be like having the rear wing DRS open all of the time (and therefore designed and set up with that intention - unsafe currently) but for designated corners and in the correct scenario the flaps would close, allowing the car behind a temporary aerdoynamic advantage, negated by the slipstream effect.

I imagine the easiest way for this to work would be if the front wing flaps were moveable, and when activated they would move to the higher angle for additional downforce (and drag) and retract back to the preset angle on the straight.

The system would also leave all of the work to the driver, as it would just get them in a position at the exit of the previous corner to be able to mount and execute an overtake before the next. There will still be a large group claiming it is a gimmick, but it has to be better than cars flying past far too easily along a straight...

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Damon Hill reckons Williams should leave Mercedes at the earliest possible opportunity if they want to compete for regular race wins and championships:

http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12...lliams-should-swap-mercedes-engines-for-honda

He reckons that if Honda get on top of their issues, it would be the ideal choice.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Damon Hill reckons Williams should leave Mercedes at the earliest possible opportunity if they want to compete for regular race wins and championships:

http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12...lliams-should-swap-mercedes-engines-for-honda

He reckons that if Honda get on top of their issues, it would be the ideal choice.

Why because past history would allow this? Thus a McLaren block would be null because Honda says. I mean if that is the thought process on it then I can see that I suppose, because RB didn't have such a history, and why join a team that just trashed their current engine provider for the past year and a half when things didn't go the chassis builders way. Other than that I don't see how Williams would get a deal and expect some kind of parity with McLaren, in fact they'd just be in the same situation but perhaps less so since McLaren isn't Honda.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Why because past history would allow this? Thus a McLaren block would be null because Honda says

There's talk of regulations that would force engine manufacturers to make their engines available to a minimum number of teams if they are capable of supplying more than one yeam. They won't be forced to supply multiple teams, of course; it will be down to the teams themselves as to which manufacturer they get their engines from. But the proposed regulation is designed to stop teams from blocking other teams from getting their engines because there has been grumbling about the balance of performance between the engines used by works teams and the engines supplied to customers. There have been accusations that Mercedes have deliberately prevented their customers from competing with their works team by supplying a different specification of engine. If the FIA can enforce a balance of performance between works and customer engines, then the regulation obligating manufacturers to supply multiple teams if that is possible (and such a supply chain would be a condition of entry) is a way of closing off a loophole that would limit the ability of other teams to compete.

In this case, Hill is only advocating for Williams to join Honda in 2017 if Honda produce a better engine this year.