DesertPenguin
(Banned)
- 10,691
- Long Island, New York
- DesertPenguin_
Just the fact that Renault powered Toro Rosso and now they don't. It's a joke...
2018 F1 Constructor development/techFormula 1
- Thread starter LMSCorvetteGT2
- 331 comments
- 23,852 views
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
How? They now power another team, they literally moved down the grid. They did't lose anything
, do you know what you're on about?
DesertPenguin
(Banned)
- 10,691
- Long Island, New York
- DesertPenguin_
It's just a joke... if it doesn't make sense then fine. But please move on, the horse died 5 minutes ago.
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
No the horse died when they signed the Renault deal last year and no longer used Ferrari engines, man you sure you watch F1?
DesertPenguin
(Banned)
- 10,691
- Long Island, New York
- DesertPenguin_
Okay good now we're having fun 
- 4,773
- Hope Mills, NC
- GTP_Dylan_GTP
- 2,908
- Columbus, Ohio
Several teams will be providing aerodynamics data to Formula 1's tech department to help develop regulations in the future.
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
Also should be noted since I saw this posted on one of the discord servers several days ago. However, the stillborn Marussia will be used as the baseline for the study since it was built around the 2017 regulations. So the FIA purchased that car/model to use.
So... they need to see the CFD data in order to come up with what is the obvious answer?
What's the obvious answer? They want to have their own tests done so teams can't easily manipulate stuff as well it would seem. Which is why having team data and their own data from the Marussia will help them set rules and have less loopholes potentially. Though writing rules better could save a ton of money on that end...
- 1,970
- United Kingdom
The obvious answer would be to simplify the aerodynamics.
Yes, the 2017 rules ticked the box marked "5-6 second improvement in lap time", but they did nothing to improve the range of which the cars could follow, and pass, each other. If anything, unintentionally or otherwise, they made it worse.
Yes, the 2017 rules ticked the box marked "5-6 second improvement in lap time", but they did nothing to improve the range of which the cars could follow, and pass, each other. If anything, unintentionally or otherwise, they made it worse.
DesertPenguin
(Banned)
- 10,691
- Long Island, New York
- DesertPenguin_
They need to do something about the way aero works at the back of the car because that's what causes the issue of the following car not being able to get close. As it is, the closer they get the more "spoiled" (or ruined) the air is they have to drive through and it creates a huge aero deficit on the front wing.
- 1,561
- United States
Formula 1 wants two opposing things:
1) Faster lap times. By now this is mostly down to more grip/more aero.
2) More passing.
Those two simply don't work. Until we see F1 reduce driver aids, reduce tires or aero, etc. you simply won't see it. Ricciardo came out the other day and stated he believes the cars do too much of the work - and I agree. You can't have faster, more technically brilliant cars and somehow hope you stumble upon amazing racing.
1) Faster lap times. By now this is mostly down to more grip/more aero.
2) More passing.
Those two simply don't work. Until we see F1 reduce driver aids, reduce tires or aero, etc. you simply won't see it. Ricciardo came out the other day and stated he believes the cars do too much of the work - and I agree. You can't have faster, more technically brilliant cars and somehow hope you stumble upon amazing racing.
Pete05
Premium
- 7,085
- Melbourne, Australia
IMO, the mechanical grip level from the tyres is fine.
It's the amount of aero grip generated by the wings that spoils the whole balance.
They need to reduce the wings & if they still want aero-generated grip, take a page out of Indycar's book. Give them a floor that sucks the car to the track but doesn't spoil the aero of the car behind.
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
The cars were still able to pass, even without DRS there were great moment of passing and fighting between cars in various races over the season. The issue more so became the fact that when you expand on Aero any time in F1, you have to continually keep growing with it over a season and thus cars in the field will began to show a significant pecking order.
By simplifying aero, you would assume that cost might go down (they already have under this current form), and that teams wouldn't see such gaps to one another. However, simplifying aero would just shift the attention to another portion of the car, like engines and what not. If you did simplified aero you would still have other issues where cars wouldn't be as fast, unless you implemented ground effects. The problem with that is the big danger it poses even in a modernized situation.
So a middle ground would probably be best.
- 12,974
- United Kingdom
The solution is actually quite simple. The engine modes need to be reduced massively. Currently there's like 200 different settings and engine could run at, just put it in the regulations that they are allowed 5 only. One quali full power one, one fuel saving recharge setting, and 3 somewhere in between.
That way, it's very easy for people to be on vastly different engine setting when they get to each other, and aren't allowed to slightly increase "Magic 3" or some other bovinepoo to make the car slightly faster at one point on the track so overtakes can't happen.
Put regulations in that gives a cooldown timer after each engine mode is selected in the race. Maybe overtake mode can be switched off whenever, but if you go into full save mode, it takes 3 laps before you can change it up again. Makes each mode more tactical.
That way, it's very easy for people to be on vastly different engine setting when they get to each other, and aren't allowed to slightly increase "Magic 3" or some other bovinepoo to make the car slightly faster at one point on the track so overtakes can't happen.
Put regulations in that gives a cooldown timer after each engine mode is selected in the race. Maybe overtake mode can be switched off whenever, but if you go into full save mode, it takes 3 laps before you can change it up again. Makes each mode more tactical.
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
It would just be how you code the ECU really, you could do what you're saying have a controller that retards or mitigates some of the fuel flow perhaps and decreases power. Though people would argue gimmick, like that of the old turbo boost pass of the 80s, or DRS of now. The only other option is making the series more partial to spec. But that's not F1, and I'd say if fans are here for F1, true fans of the series, they'd understand what that means.
If you're simply a racing fan foremost though, then I can see why F1 being F1 wouldn't matter much.
- 1,561
- United States
I'd like to see two possible solutions which we won't see...lol.
1) Bring back refueling, add fueling back as a strategic element - allowing teams to qualify on whatever fuel load they wish, etc. The difference in 50-100 lbs. of fuel can be quite big on a car like an F1 car. While "dangerous" it would add back another tactical choice on how to manipulate your race. Adds a bit more excitement. Also, pit stops would become longer and thus more important.
2) I'd like to see an alotment of total tires provided to the teams at the beginning of the season (you get 20 sets of this, 30 sets of that, etc.). Keep the Ultra/Hyper/Silly softs to a minimum. Allow a team to decide which two compounds it wants to bring to a race (submitted in secret to the FIA/F1 say X number of days before the race). Introduce this as a strategic element as well - allowing slower teams to risk running harder tires and reducing stops on tracks, even if we would normally have softs/super-softs, etc. Keep the really soft/tacky tires to a minimum compared to others so it becomes a big decision when/how to use them.
Both silly things that won't happen - might not have a huge impact on passing, but could introduce a bit more interest.
1) Bring back refueling, add fueling back as a strategic element - allowing teams to qualify on whatever fuel load they wish, etc. The difference in 50-100 lbs. of fuel can be quite big on a car like an F1 car. While "dangerous" it would add back another tactical choice on how to manipulate your race. Adds a bit more excitement. Also, pit stops would become longer and thus more important.
2) I'd like to see an alotment of total tires provided to the teams at the beginning of the season (you get 20 sets of this, 30 sets of that, etc.). Keep the Ultra/Hyper/Silly softs to a minimum. Allow a team to decide which two compounds it wants to bring to a race (submitted in secret to the FIA/F1 say X number of days before the race). Introduce this as a strategic element as well - allowing slower teams to risk running harder tires and reducing stops on tracks, even if we would normally have softs/super-softs, etc. Keep the really soft/tacky tires to a minimum compared to others so it becomes a big decision when/how to use them.
Both silly things that won't happen - might not have a huge impact on passing, but could introduce a bit more interest.
- 23,936
- It/It
- GTP_TheCracker
I don't think refueling really fits in with the current engine ethos of 'efficiency'.
If they want more overtaking but still quick lap times, they should allow ground effects again - the circuits currently are safe enough if something fails, which was the reason they were banned originally. If you do this you can regulate single-plane front wings (rear wings would then have to be simpler to maintain aero-balance) and this should reduce turbulence for following cars and then increase braking distances by banning carbon-ceramic discs. This shouldn't slow cars over a lap, just make them both quicker and slower at the points that matter for close racing.
If they want more overtaking but still quick lap times, they should allow ground effects again - the circuits currently are safe enough if something fails, which was the reason they were banned originally. If you do this you can regulate single-plane front wings (rear wings would then have to be simpler to maintain aero-balance) and this should reduce turbulence for following cars and then increase braking distances by banning carbon-ceramic discs. This shouldn't slow cars over a lap, just make them both quicker and slower at the points that matter for close racing.
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
Most of what you said is reasonable other than the carbon ceramic, you'd want more ability to stop a car the sooner you feel it may be getting out of hand. Plus the pinnacle racing series going backward in tech also doesn't fit the ethos.
- 23,936
- It/It
- GTP_TheCracker
True about tech going backwards, but with potentially higher cornering speeds you've got to try and slow them down in the braking areas otherwise you are just creating less chances for overtaking. You could maybe make the tyres harder across the range but no one wants to see races with no pit stops either. Carbon brake technology only has a limited cross-over into road car usage anyway, especially with the trend to cars getting lighter and regenerative braking on hybrids and full electrics.
- 12,974
- United Kingdom
The racing this year was good when it happened, but there wasn't enough. It'll be better next year, all because of one company - Pirelli. They went for conservative tyre constructions, so they were a bit too hard this year, leading to one-stop races. Now Pirelli have good data about the new cars, they can easily adjust them, which is why we now have 7 compounds, all of which are pretty much softer than they were last season, so there should be more 2 and 3 stop races. That's the strategic variable that made seasons like 2012 so awesome, and should work on 2018.
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
Which is why you want carbon ceramic breaks, and with the newer aged versions they have uses that can be applicable to road cars, just higher end. However, the technology of the engine is the only thing manufactures care about getting a return on so, that's the only aspect that should have some carry over.
- 9,401
- Western Sydney
- mustafur
I hope F1 in the future can hope to bring in more tyre brands for open competition, less predictability on what package works the best at each track and condition is more enjoyable.
I think for a series like F1 N/A engines mated to electric power is better for the sport then turbos, its harder to find extra power from an N/A engine then a Turbo one so engine performance should be closer whilst still keeping each engine individual.
To improve overtaking a more simple solution then trying to understand how to make the aero better for racing would be to make the cars harder to drive if the drivers are struggling to keep the car smooth it will open more chances for drivers to capitalise on each others mistakes.
Make the cars have really short wheel bases or something to make them more twitchy and remove power steering to add more fitness element.
I think for a series like F1 N/A engines mated to electric power is better for the sport then turbos, its harder to find extra power from an N/A engine then a Turbo one so engine performance should be closer whilst still keeping each engine individual.
To improve overtaking a more simple solution then trying to understand how to make the aero better for racing would be to make the cars harder to drive if the drivers are struggling to keep the car smooth it will open more chances for drivers to capitalise on each others mistakes.
Make the cars have really short wheel bases or something to make them more twitchy and remove power steering to add more fitness element.
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
Problem is you probably wont see more tire brands, Brawn and the FIA wouldn't be too keen on it, considering what it did prior. Drove prices high, exclusive tires to certain teams to be dominant, and pushing other brands out of the picture. Then there is the consideration that many of these tire manufactures, like automotive manufactures, want to develop a tire that is road relevant and the current size format is far from it. I'd like tire competition and more brands but the desires between tire companies and F1 seem different at this point
We've seen in times past how easy it is to have disparity in N/A engines between groups, the "great" Renault V8 had to have massive help in 2009/10 to fix problems that made it unreliable after the engines and been development frozen.
The last two points I agree with especially ending power steering, though I'd imagine F1 would argue with doing so, since every racing series has it.
- 9,401
- Western Sydney
- mustafur
With the current regs it would be easy to police the tyre situation if there was multiple brands involved, the FIA take all tyres after each session and allocate.
In the V8 Era, the engine difference wasn't anything like it has been in the turbo era, Redbull won races easily all during the time their engine wasn't the best, but you can't compare those years to now as they where supposed to be fixed so it was a bespoke situation to that time, in 2006 when the engine regs where open the engine differences where quite close, at Monza in qualifying the difference between the top cars was tiny and we are talking multiple engines here.
Of course you also got to add the electric part as well, but im not really sure how big the differences are between the teams on this one since it doesn't make as much as the ICE it's not the biggest factor in outright speed.
- 1,433
- Germany
- psychoazubi
- 31,567
- Buckwheat City
- Dennisch
Christian Horner is worried about the Mercedes engine, which supposedly is pumping out 1000hp this year, and that the gap with the Renault engine might be once again too large.
Battle for the win between the Mercs and Toro Rosso this year!
Battle for the win between the Mercs and Toro Rosso this year!
Similar threads
