The Formula 1 calendar development threadFormula 1 

In particular, I'm talking about the outside of turn 1, the outside of turn 5 (more like between T4 and T5 after the kerbs end) or on the right hand side while breaking for turn 12. Is this really astroturf there? Looks very natural to me.
During the practice sessions, they said Interlagos uses turf and AstroTurf. The area you're looking at is probably turf.

They were concerned over mud and grass being dragged onto the track. The turf is actually raised up above the track level. I'm assuming they just layed rolls of turf on top of the pavement. If they do that just for the F1 race, that seems like an aweful waste of turf.


Yet you keep bringing up holograms, which aren't physical things. Yes, they have projectors, but you have to place them in an area where they are of no danger of being hit, then you have to have the power supplies and the wiring running to them.


Yet you offer no alternative to this.

"Holograms" is not a solution to anything.
So now I have to provide alternatives to an idea which was proposed as an alternative...yet you have yet to produce anything yourself, aside from negativity. Maybe you should try producing that stick from your ass.

A system of devices which project holograms are physical objects. My idea was the entire system, not just a hologram that magically appears. And now look at you, you want to argue over symantics. "Holograms are not physical objects." Really?

In reference to the bold part, again, your spewing nonsense. What the hell does sentence have to do wth anything? "You have to run wires to them"......Ya, and?? You have to plug in your TV too? The hell is your point? And how is it linked to the previous sentence on which you state "holograms are not physical objects"?

You have a chip on your shoulder and you are failing to use any kind of logic or reason.

The only reason I even went down the "physical" path was mocking your stupid phrase, "physical idea".


But Ya, you guys are right, we should just go back to bitching about paved runoffs and complaining that things aren't the way they used to be 👍
 
Ok, sure. I'm the one spewing nonsense.... :rolleyes:
In case you haven't figured it out yet, my issue isn't that don't like the hologram idea. My beef with you is the way you go about expressing your opinion. You waltz in, basically called the idea stupid, provided no logical reasoning as to why it's stupid (you gave "reasons", but none of them make sense, or are extemely short sighted), and have offered no alternatives to paved runoffs of your own.

Like I said, I don't need to be Dr Phil to be able to tell that you have a chip on your shoulder because of the NASCAR thread.
 
Girls, girls, don't get your panties in a bunch.

No matter what brilliant idea we will come up with, the FIA will ignore it and find a way to ruin racing anyway.
 
In case you haven't figured it out yet, my issue isn't that don't like the hologram idea. My beef with you is the way you go about expressing your opinion. You waltz in, basically called the idea stupid, provided no logical reasoning as to why it's stupid (you gave "reasons", but none of them make sense, or are extemely short sighted), and have offered no alternatives to paved runoffs of your own.

Like I said, I don't need to be Dr Phil to be able to tell that you have a chip on your shoulder because of the NASCAR thread.
I have no need to answer to you if that's how you're going to act.
 
I'm going to DP this on purpose to change the topic and get things back on track. My apologies to everyone else for my role in derailing the thread.


Going back to the topic of modern track design, Tilke, and high speed sweeping corners vs lower speed angular corners.

I came across an episode of Racer's Edge which raised an interesting point I had never really considered. Overall the video is a little dry, but has lots of interesting info. The relevent bit starts after 9:20.


The way I understand what was said, the drivers of today all have the ability to attack high speed corners in nearly identicle ways. On the other hand, slow corners allow for different techniques and driver nuances to come into play.

So based on that, is it fair to say that slow corners are more condusive to producing wheel to wheel racing, whereas high speed corners tend to lead to processions (due to both the loss of aero grip while following close, and drivers attacking the corners the same way which leads to no time lost or gained between drivers)?


Now, all that said, as a spectator, I still think it's more exciting to watch cars go around fast corners as opposed to slow ones. At the same time though, I find myself guilty of wanting to see more wheel to wheel action.


Another angle to take is, even though slow corners may lead to more wheel to wheel action, would that action feel "manufactured," or perhaps cheapened in a way?
 
It is always more entertaining to watch a driver with the cahonies* to go out onto the marbles around the outside on the edge of grip and stick a pass at 150mph.


*not a clue how to spell that.
 
This dry moldy sock just needs to give them $5 million (he's a damn billionaire, he can afford it). Also, thanks Republicans for refusing to fully fund a race that BENEFITS the economy and causing this whole problem.

Huh? Not his business, not his problem.

You don't have to like Bernie (and many don't) but he does exactly what he says. And, as he said in that link, if he says he'll do something then he does it. That's why he builds in penalties for people who say they'll do something and then don't, he doesn't like people taking those gambles when they're his customers. Personally I find it hard to like him but easy to respect his business acumen.

It sounds like your beef should be with the local fund-holders (such as the Republicans, to repeat your example), if it's good for the local economy then they should consider helping the race to survive. Why would a businessman choose to spend money on something that neither he nor his business will see a return on when there are other customers who will make good on their promises?
 
Huh? Not his business, not his problem.

You don't have to like Bernie (and many don't) but he does exactly what he says. And, as he said in that link, if he says he'll do something then he does it. That's why he builds in penalties for people who say they'll do something and then don't, he doesn't like people taking those gambles when they're his customers. Personally I find it hard to like him but easy to respect his business acumen.

It sounds like your beef should be with the local fund-holders (such as the Republicans, to repeat your example), if it's good for the local economy then they should consider helping the race to survive. Why would a businessman choose to spend money on something that neither he nor his business will see a return on when there are other customers who will make good on their promises?
Sorry for me having the wrong opinion regarding Bernie.
 
Last edited:
Sorry for me having the wrong opinion.

And I replied with mine. Outside the opinions themselves it's fact that Bernie owns no part of COTA and that it's them who've made promises to him that they need to honour. I'd say the logic that follows is that floating their business isn't his problem, if they can't make it as one of the 20-per-year then the show will go on elsewhere.
 
And I replied with mine. Outside the opinions themselves it's fact that Bernie owns no part of COTA and that it's them who've made promises to him that they need to honour. I'd say the logic that follows is that floating their business isn't his problem, if they can't make it as one of the 20-per-year then the show will go on elsewhere.
I honestly just wish the Democrats would take over as they would fully fund the race.
 
Not so sure about that, racing isn't exactly green.
But they like spending money, unlike the republicans, who only spend for giant foreign oil companies. The rest of the world doesn't have a far right government (republicans) and they fund races.
 
Not so sure about that, racing isn't exactly green.
In theory, ERS is more effective and more efficient than your average hybrid. McLaren have already experimented with this in the P1, using the ECU to regulate the power to keep the car at peak performance. That could be tweaked to keep an engine running at peak efficiency. But the technology is still in its infancy - it's a long way from being applied to mass-produced and affordable road cars. That's where Formula 1 comes in: because it's a competitive environment, the sport can develop the technology faster, mote efficiently and more effectively than if you just left it to the road car manufacturers.
 
USGP listed as "Provisional" for 2016, no real surprises there. BBC.
If it's gone I can't see the US getting another one for another 5 years or when Bernie gives up the ghost. The Mexican GP existing and occurring in such close proximity cannibalized some of the profits COTA had.
 
If it's gone I can't see the US getting another one for another 5 years or when Bernie gives up the ghost. The Mexican GP existing and occurring in such close proximity cannibalized some of the profits COTA had.

Yup, there are already two other North American races that seem more popular (we'll see how Mexico lasts, of course) and one very popular South American race with another mooted. It's a shame, I liked the USGP track but I'd still like to see them back at Indy :)
 
I would have imagined the storm on the weekend of the race would have had some effect on the crowd size, and that it's not just the effect of the Mexican GP being revived. I'd be sad to see CoTA go, it's one of the better Tilkedromes.
 
Yup, there are already two other North American races that seem more popular (we'll see how Mexico lasts, of course) and one very popular South American race with another mooted. It's a shame, I liked the USGP track but I'd still like to see them back at Indy :)
The revamped circuit is really good for the Indycar race and the chicane in the oval turn 1 should makes it safe :).
 
If it's gone I can't see the US getting another one for another 5 years or when Bernie gives up the ghost.
Tavo Hellmund has said that he is looking at establishing another event in northern California. If anyone can do it, it's him.
 
Tavo Hellmund has said that he is looking at establishing another event in northern California. If anyone can do it, it's him.
Is Sonoma what he had in mind? It's still a huge cash payout to Bernie's piggybank.
 
Back