2017 F1 Constructor technical info/developmentFormula 1

[AudiMan2011]

Quite a bone headed move given how unpopular the Halo has been from both aesthetic and visibility standpoints. With Liberty wanting to make F1 more appealing again, the FIA are still completely detached from reality.

 

[Scuderia Paul]

From 2018, fins and mini-wings have been banned because they don't look appropriate, yet this Halo monstrosity is deemed acceptable? Right...

 

[DesertPenguin09]

Formula 1... there really is nothing like it (on every level).

 

[shoemaker]

Ugly and quiet cars. 2 reasons why F1 is changing for the worse. Going completely behind a paywall in 2019 could nearly kill the sport. These things need addressing urgently.It is suicide !

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

McLaren seem to be turning into a Lotus/Brabham/Cooper team sliding permanently towards the rear of the grid with weaker and feebler engines from a former period as a front-running innovator.

Feels more like the new Williams. A team that was cutting it at the top of the grid late 00s to early 10s (late 80s and early 90s Williams), and then fell to mid pack and the started squabbling for scraps at the bottom half. I'm quite sure McLaren could easily come to the mid pack again, but would simply have to settle for what they know wont allow them to win, and that's the fact that they will be a customer. The same reason Williams believe they can't make that final approach.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Going completely behind a paywall in 2019 could nearly kill the sport. These things need addressing urgently.It is suicide !

Chase Carey is a Murdoch man through-and-through, Liberty seems to effectively be a new arm of News Corp. The good news is that it looks like the base Sky F1 channel will become free-to-air while the new channels that have just been added (4K, 360 view, tons of switchable cameras etc.) will remain part of the through-the-nose arrangement.

 

[DesertPenguin09]

Feels more like the new Williams. A team that was cutting it at the top of the grid late 00s to early 10s (late 80s and early 90s Williams), and then fell to mid pack and the started squabbling for scraps at the bottom half. I'm quite sure McLaren could easily come to the mid pack again, but would simply have to settle for what they know wont allow them to win, and that's the fact that they will be a customer. The same reason Williams believe they can't make that final approach.

I heard Cosworth is planning on returning as an engine supplier in 2020 or something. That could help

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I heard Cosworth is planning on returning as an engine supplier in 2020 or something. That could help

It could, but they haven't been that strong since the DFV days they had some moments in the 90s but ever since then they're just a low budget F1 engine go to. To compete with the likes of the bigger teams you really do need either a factory effort that actually works on the end they're hired for, building engines. Or you need a high quality well funded team (say RBR) with a decent engine, not great but reliable and not far off power from the best. I think McLaren has the aero team to win races, but obviously not the engine. If they can still be strong aero and mechanical wise by 2020 and 2021, they could be back at the top fighting for podium at least.

 

[TheElbows]

Yeah, I think now would be the time for a smart 3rd party engine manufacturer - if they could get through all of the blocks that Ferrari etc. would try to force on them. Imagine if something like Audi Customer Motorsports decided to make a genuinely competitive engine that teams could buy, etc. Would be a serious game changer. I don't think it can happen, but it's a nice thought.

 

[EngieDiesel]

From 2018, fins and mini-wings have been banned because they don't look appropriate, yet this Halo monstrosity is deemed acceptable? Right...

I can understand the basic reasoning: it at least does what it is supposed to do (in testing at least), and if they don't have something functional in place by next year, they'll get roasted by the media for missing their own self-imposed deadline after making a huge deal out of it. Plus this'll give teams more time to properly develop a shield/windscreen option that fits into the cars' designs organically and hopefully won't cause any visibility problems.

It's a hideous stopgap solution to be sure, but it's not like it was instated for the sole reason of "We're the FIA, 🤬 you".

 

[aarror]

I'm not against F1 introducing a viable head protection system. I am against the FIA rushing a half-assed, under-researched design in order to protect themselves. Sure this might not stop a small piece of debris from striking the driver in the head (like, say, a spring), but the FIA will be able to say they met their self-imposed 2018 deadline! And that means no lawsuits!

Let's be honest: this has very little to do with actually improving safety, and quite a lot to do with the FIA looking as though they've done something to improve safety in the wake of the Justin Wilson and Jules Bianchi incidents.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I'm not against F1 introducing a viable head protection system. I am against the FIA rushing a half-assed, under-researched design in order to protect themselves. Sure this might not stop a small piece of debris from striking the driver in the head (like, say, a spring), but the FIA will be able to say they met their self-imposed 2018 deadline! And that means no lawsuits!

Let's be honest: this has very little to do with actually improving safety, and quite a lot to do with the FIA looking as though they've done something to improve safety in the wake of the Justin Wilson and Jules Bianchi incidents.

This perfectly sums it up. I can't think of any rational fan that is against head protection or even safety, but rushed safety that hasn't even been remotely tested to the degree many of us have witnessed in F1 does with other parts... Isn't a good way to "improve the safety of drivers" in the sport.

Also I haven't heard one pundit or engineer claim this would have saved JB, and Wilson's accident was so freak it's hard to know. So as you said half-assed really.

 

[shoemaker]

Chase Carey is a Murdoch man through-and-through, Liberty seems to effectively be a new arm of News Corp. The good news is that it looks like the base Sky F1 channel will become free-to-air while the new channels that have just been added (4K, 360 view, tons of switchable cameras etc.) will remain part of the through-the-nose arrangement.

I have heard nothing about sky f1 becoming fta. Sky have paid alot of money for exclusive coverage from 2019. Do you have a link ?

 

[Touring Mars]

I have heard nothing about sky f1 becoming fta. Sky have paid alot of money for exclusive coverage from 2019. Do you have a link ?

From what I can see, it doesn't mean Sky F1 being free-to-air - it is just that Liberty don't like the current deal (that Ecclestone struck) that will put F1 exclusively behind a paywall between 2019-2024. It would appear that Liberty want to maintain something like we have now - Sky show 100% of the races (behind a paywall) but there is also 50% of races on live (and 100% as highlights) shown on free-to-air (e.g. C4 in the UK). The current deal would apparently wipe out that free-to-air coverage, and Liberty are not happy about that (which is good).

Incidentally, Sky are fundamentally reshaping their Sports packages:

http://www.skysports.com/relaunch

Soon each sport will have its own channel (although I notice that the English Premier League will have its own channel over and above 'Sky Football'), so it would be surprising if Sky F1 were to be made free-to-air.

 

[shoemaker]

From what I can see, it doesn't mean Sky F1 being free-to-air - it is just that Liberty don't like the current deal (that Ecclestone struck) that will put F1 exclusively behind a paywall between 2019-2024. It would appear that Liberty want to maintain something like we have now - Sky show 100% of the races (behind a paywall) but there is also 50% of races on live (and 100% as highlights) shown on free-to-air (e.g. C4 in the UK). The current deal would apparently wipe out that free-to-air coverage, and Liberty are not happy about that (which is good).

Incidentally, Sky are fundamentally reshaping their Sports packages:

http://www.skysports.com/relaunch

Soon each sport will have its own channel (although I notice that the English Premier League will have its own channel over and above 'Sky Football'), so it would be surprising if Sky F1 were to be made free-to-air.

Sky channel changes have been done. Yes i know liberty are not happy about the tv deal, but what can be done about that now ? Its been all done, so unless liberty buy sky uk out of that 2019 contract, they and we are all stuck with it. I know liberty want a streaming service asap, but again, that sky uk 2019 contract is the problem. Sky paid alot for exclusive rights, an official live streaming platform in the uk would infringe on that 2019 tv deal. I think a contract buy out from liberty is literally the only option.

 

[Touring Mars]

Sky channel changes have been done. Yes i know liberty are not happy about the tv deal, but what can be done about that now ? Its been all done, so unless liberty buy sky uk out of that 2019 contract, they and we are all stuck with it. I know liberty want a streaming service asap, but again, that sky uk 2019 contract is the problem. Sky paid alot for exclusive rights, an official live streaming platform in the uk would infringe on that 2019 tv deal. I think a contract buy out from liberty is literally the only option.

Yeh, I can't see how Liberty can change things directly - but the teams, drivers and sponsors could play a major role... Mercedes are not happy with the prospect of F1 being unavailable free-to-air, and may set the scene for an exodus from F1 unless steps are taken to negotiate with Sky regarding making some content available for free-to-air broadcasters... arguably, there would not be much value in have exclusive rights to a sport that is dying on its arse.

 

[RazorSharkz]

 

[fortbo]

This perfectly sums it up. I can't think of any rational fan that is against head protection or even safety, but rushed safety that hasn't even been remotely tested to the degree many of us have witnessed in F1 does with other parts... Isn't a good way to "improve the safety of drivers" in the sport.

Also I haven't heard one pundit or engineer claim this would have saved JB, and Wilson's accident was so freak it's hard to know. So as you said half-assed really.

The sad thing is that there are a lot of irrational fans out there that would say that they are against any type of head protection or even extra safety in F1. According to some of the comments I've seen, none of them on here, many think the sport should be more dangerous.

 

[Dylan]

View attachment 661549

Stunning

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

The sad thing is that there are a lot of irrational fans out there that would say that they are against any type of head protection or even extra safety in F1. According to some of the comments I've seen, none of them on here, many think the sport should be more dangerous.

Which is why my post avoids those implicitly, so why bring it up? My conversation isn't for someone that isn't rational to begin with, that's just counter productive in a conversation about advancing F1 and safety. However, I've yet to see an irrational person come out on the forums since the Halo has been made mandatory.

 

[fortbo]

Which is why my post avoids those implicitly, so why bring it up? My conversation isn't for someone that isn't rational to begin with, that's just counter productive in a conversation about advancing F1 and safety. However, I've yet to see an irrational person come out on the forums since the Halo has been made mandatory.

It hasn't been people on the forums.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

It hasn't been people on the forums.

Then I'm not concerned, and to be honest there isn't much you can do so why let it bug you?

 

[baldgye]

This perfectly sums it up. I can't think of any rational fan that is against head protection or even safety, but rushed safety that hasn't even been remotely tested to the degree many of us have witnessed in F1 does with other parts... Isn't a good way to "improve the safety of drivers" in the sport.

Also I haven't heard one pundit or engineer claim this would have saved JB, and Wilson's accident was so freak it's hard to know. So as you said half-assed really.

Halo wouldn't have saved JB, but do you know what would have? The VSC, which, was introduced after his death, as was much more stringent penalties for going too quickly under yellows.

I can't see how Halo will do any good what so ever, and it seems designed for such a massive failure of so many other safety components... it would be like demanding the drivers wear bullet proof vests, just in case an armed madman gets onto the track and tries to shoot the drivers.

 

[TenEightyOne]

I can't see how Halo will do any good what so ever, and it seems designed for such a massive failure of so many other safety components.

Airborne debris in the path of a quick moving car isn't such a rare occurence. The head forms a small part of the frontal area so it's more rare for it to be in that area (by default) but one day the halo will likely save a driver from serious injury or death and will at that point be vindicated.

That doesn't alter the fact that it seems to be an ugly, graceless solution. We haven't seen any working alternatives yet, that's the problem.

 

[baldgye]

Airborne debris in the path of a quick moving car isn't such a rare occurence. The head forms a small part of the frontal area so it's more rare for it to be in that area (by default) but one day the halo will likely save a driver from serious injury or death and will at that point be vindicated.

That doesn't alter the fact that it seems to be an ugly, graceless solution. We haven't seen any working alternatives yet, that's the problem.

Sorry I changed my post after first typing it out and accidentally removed the part I put about debris.

Debris is 100% a serious and real problem in F1 and I welcome moves to help address this problem without stopping wheel to wheel battling. The problem is the Halo does little to nothing to protect the drivers from debris.

Simply introducing the Halo because there isn't anything better YET is not (in my opinion which has no importance to the FIA I am aware haha) good enough. The areo screen needs proper work and development and for me, the Halo takes away from that and also adds more extra cost for the teams who now have to work around the Halo and then in a few years time, possible a full windscreen.


I see the future of F1 being the RedBull X car thing from GT5, but this is a misstep that only makes the cars heavier and the impacts harder and more dangerous

 

[Jimlaad43]

It also comes a year after the new regulations have produced cars that everyone loves to look at. We're losing the awesome shark fins for the awful Halo? F1 finally fixes something and decides to ruin it a year later.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Halo wouldn't have saved JB, but do you know what would have? The VSC, which, was introduced after his death, as was much more stringent penalties for going too quickly under yellows.

I can't see how Halo will do any good what so ever, and it seems designed for such a massive failure of so many other safety components... it would be like demanding the drivers wear bullet proof vests, just in case an armed madman gets onto the track and tries to shoot the drivers.

Yes I agree and realize that, that's always been the talking point though with the halo that needs to be argue. It's that "well what about Jules Bianchi?"

As well as another user bringing up Surtees, and what's interesting is that in both cases. There has been a massive safety evolution before the Halo came about that changed the landscape to make sure those incidents don't happen. As you've said and put quite well, I think the Halo is intended to be a last resort but also PR so the FIA can say, "we're doing something and being 'innovative' "

 

[baldgye]

It also comes a year after the new regulations have produced cars that everyone loves to look at. We're losing the awesome shark fins for the awful Halo? F1 finally fixes something and decides to ruin it a year later.

I was with you on the shark fins, however, after going back and watching a few races from '07 and '08, I've switched my opinion and now I think they'll be better without haha

 

[TenEightyOne]

Pirelli results are in on Vettel's damaged tyre at the British GP, Raikkonnen's results not available at time of this post.

 

[baldgye]

You know what, I think after reading some more into it and talking with others, I've changed my mind on Halo and I'm actually now in favour of it, to some extent, though I still think that this is almost literally one stage before they simply put a screen in front of the Halo structure.


The teams can deck it out in aero parts (at least the top and sides) and it will stop some debris and the odd freak accident. I also guess that at least come the car reveals for next season will also be super interesting and a bit more exciting seeing how each team has dealt with it and it could allow some teams to develop different aero packages and concepts in the midfield.


I still stand by my previous post about the fact that safety devices shouldn’t be developed around the possibility of other safety devices failing, but no one wants to see anyone else killed in motorsport and neither do I.