It's only gotten wore is probably the reason.
Hopefully the research done by Sommerville at the behest of Brawn will actually see the sport take a logical step in the right direction, rather than just making shit up and seeing what sticks.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
FIA Formula One 2018 |OT| Halo: Racing Evolved
- Thread starter Aiii
- Start date
Hopefully the research done by Sommerville at the behest of Brawn will actually see the sport take a logical step in the right direction, rather than just making shit up and seeing what sticks.
Yea I get that, Melbourne spooked a lot of people, but they have been actively making changes that have made this problem worse for a few years now.
Last year the regulations made aero even more important. Sure it made cars probably faster than ever, but at the same time it made the overtaking problem even worse than it was.
I really hope they come to their senses this time.
Last edited:
Who could have predicted it when we went for wider cars with wide and lower rear wings,
lol agreed.
The urgency is because Liberty must be pushing, but it's nevertheless funny to see F1 scramble now after for ages doing nothing to improve (and actually making worst) the root of the overtaking problem.
Last edited:
Indeed.
The last raft of changes were done not for better racing, but for faster lap times and cooler looking cars because the people in charge were still of the mindset that to make F1 good again you simply have to make the cars look a bit like they did in the 80s. There can be little doubt that the cars do indeed look cooler with the fat tyres and the lower rear wings and as we all know they are also faster.
This set of changes that Brawn is looking at is specifically to cut down the mess that is the wake of a car. It finally looks like they've got someone in charge of this who will actually think about the consequences, rather than people like Bernie who would suggest something, everyone would say "that's going to be shit", it would happen anyway and indeed be shit.
The primary area they are looking at cleaning up seems to be the front wing as that is causing a lot of the issues. So all the research the teams have done making 13241 element front wings might go out the door.
OP
OP
I don't even care. If they don't like these great proposals, they can bugger right off, don't need 'em.
Had they tried with all their might - they couldn't have come up with a dumber, more logically unsound proposal than this one. It's going to destroy F1 as we know it. Farewell cutting edge prototype racing. It was nice while it lasted.
That rumored 150mil cost cap would probably take a long time to take effect because it doesn't instantly remove the advantage of currently having superior facilities and personell from past investments. Plus there's the supplier company trickery that would probably pop up immediately.
If you introduce a salcap, you not only have to make sure those shenanigans are impossible, but you have to include payroll for everyone (including drivers) as well. Doesn't make the slightest bit of sense.
May not be a turbo issue.
Max reported a "false neutral" first. According to BBC 5 Live they couldn't get Danny's car fired up at all to begin with. He's just gone out so hopefully all is ok.
Points to an installation issue. Hopefully Max will be out in this session.
Two points:
- when you introduce a salcap, you have to include everything including payroll, otherwise some big sponsor/oligarch/etc.pp. will simply buy up the top talent and dominate at will
- 150Mio$ is ridiculously low. At this sum you can either develop a chassis OR an engine, not both. Which can only lead to the big manufacturers losing interest and the series to develop into some kind of unified series with either standard chassis or standard engines. Which would totally destroy what makes F1 unique.
Yeah, I don't get it, the proposals seem reasonable:
- The Power Unit must be cheaper, simpler, louder, have more power and be more reliable. It must be road relevant and thus hybrid. New rules must be attractive for new entrants.
- A cost cap will be introduced and standardised elements will be introduced for parts that do not have an effect on the racing or excite the fans.
- A new more balanced revenue distribution (with the usual sweeteners for Ferrari).
- Cars to be made more raceable, with driver skill promoted over technological development.
- A simplified structure of governance.
To your second point. Clearly the cap wouldn't include engine development as that would hamper engine providers over customers.
Correct me if I'm wrong but engine development happens in entirely separate companies/divisions - and they sell those engines to other teams. The cap would have no impact on that.
Half of the grid ALREADY spends below 150mil, and the majority of the remaining half doesn't get their money's worth anyway.
If no cap is introduced, the richer teams will keep spending as much as two or three other teams combined to hold on to their advantage.
If a cap is introduced, worst case is that nothing changes because the richer teams jump through a bit more organizational hoops.
Best case is that it brings the teams closer together.
Of course there's this apocalyptic scenario where this upsets Merc and/or Ferrari enough to leave (I don't see Red Bull leaving as long as the engine regulations are palatable to them, same for McLaren and Renault), but I would personally not shed a single tear over Mercedes after how much damage they've done to the perception of this sport with their domination borne from high budget professionalism, and Ferrari would have to make true about their plans for another racing series which would be entertaining to witness on its own.
Yeah, I don't see any downsides to the current proposals. A budget cap and a fairer distribution of revenue has been long overdue for the sport. Now they just need to clean up the aero junk on the cars and they could have something exciting to watch come 2021.
I'd gladly take a grid of 10-14 Renault/Williams/Force India/Haas/Toro Rosso teams over Mercedes+Ferrari and a bunch of tier 2 teams.
I'd gladly take a grid of 10-14 Renault/Williams/Force India/Haas/Toro Rosso teams over Mercedes+Ferrari and a bunch of tier 2 teams.
Last edited:
If engine dev wouldn't fall under the salcap, it would just open another can of worms on its own. Manufacturers could price them to hamper the competition and additionally hide dev costs for the car in the engine development.
Half of the grid spending below 150Mio is wrong. The cheapest right now is 120Mio plus.
If you want change, you have to ask to what purpose. If you want tighter more competitive races, simply getting more cars on track is not the answer. The tech regs would have to get loosened broadly, so that the teams would have a chance to experiment with totally different setups and configurations for the chassis. But this only makes sense with a salcap that is somewhat realistic. Putting shackles on development basically alltogether will make for boring cars and even less change from year to year.
Half of the grid spending below 150Mio is wrong. The cheapest right now is 120Mio plus.
If you want change, you have to ask to what purpose. If you want tighter more competitive races, simply getting more cars on track is not the answer. The tech regs would have to get loosened broadly, so that the teams would have a chance to experiment with totally different setups and configurations for the chassis. But this only makes sense with a salcap that is somewhat realistic. Putting shackles on development basically alltogether will make for boring cars and even less change from year to year.
Only 1.3 seconds separate 6th from 19th. Dat midfield.
Where are you getting that info from? Because any numbers I can find about 2016 and 2017 put the 5 smaller teams (FI, Haas, TR, Sauber, Williams) under 150mil, and often closer to 100 than 150.
CEO of Aston Martin likes the proposals:
This is exactly what Liberty will be after, major players signalling their interest make any threats from Merc or Marranello ring a little hollow.
This is exactly what Liberty will be after, major players signalling their interest make any threats from Merc or Marranello ring a little hollow.
Why not have a luxury tax with the cap where RB and Ferrari can spend $400 million or whatever if they want, but little teams get more money.
Aston Martin does not have the budget, the people or the technology to make F1 power units. They currently buy engines from Mercedes and rebadge them for their road cars.
I'd be more interested to hear what Porsche and Cosworth has to say.
I would claim that losing works teams would improve F1 would be a good thing. Design your chassis and get a customer engine. Like it was common back in the days.
So we should let two teams hold the sport hostage? It's time someone called their bluff, they aren't going anywhere.
Well obviously this didn't just happen by chance, the F1 people have probably had their talks with Aston Martin and other companies to have some support.
Maybe enough people would see it as a good thing. It just wouldn't be F1 anymore, it would just simply be one of the other countless series out there.
Let's wait and see, as MER does with Marchionne right now.
Aston Martin is one of the two potential buyers RB lined up for their teams. It looks like a good chance 2021 will have neither RBR, MER or FER.
And of course AM wouldn't develop their own engine - they plan on buying one and just slap their name on it.
Really, any talk about how "this isn't the DNA of Formula 1!" is kinda moot considering how long F1 spent with practically everyone using the same Cosworth customer engine for years.
I don't want to see them go either but I've already lost my interest in F1 right now that I would trade all three of them for a more exciting F1 and I'm not even talking about the old 70-90s. The first F1 season I watched was 99 and it was one of the best I've seen.
My major issue with cost caps is that the bigger teams will DEFINITELY find a away around it. Will make things less even, not more.
Saw my first live race at the track in `86. Yeah, I share the sentiment that races have to become tighter and more competitive. I'm just arguing that they are going all wrong about it.
The way they are setting this up - yeah, definitely.
I think F1 should implement a token system where depending on the results, each team would get a certain number of tokens to improve their cars. For example, Mercedes gets the pole and wins the race. They get zero tokens after that race, while Force India gets like 10 tokens, and Sauber gets 20. So, for example, developing a new front wing would cost 15 tokens, then Sauber would be allowed to bring a new wing to the next race if they manage to develop one. Force India would have to wait a little longer, while the development on teams like Mercedes would be practically frozen. With a system like that the bigger teams would be forced to spend less in development through out the season, and smaller teams would be able to catch up.
I still remember the times when people talked about to stop the large works teams themselves to buy into F1.
Now we have Mercedes which will sell their engines to other teams but we know that Mercedes powered team will ever be threat for the main team because the other teams are getting a slower revision of the same or they will just don't get their engines at all.
My proposal would be twofold:
- freeze the engine development as it is today, for as long as possible
--- this would greatly minimize dev costs, and in a second step cheapen the engines sold to other teams
--- it has always been the case in F1 that nothing stays secret forever, so the longer one reg is in play the more teams get closer together as simply everyone builds a copy of the best solution
- severely loosen the regs on the chassis, let teams go wild. I wan't to see three axle cars again, watch geniuses come up with crazy stuff like blown diffusers or active bodyworks - that's what made every new season full of surprises and gave basically everyone a chance to dominate a year
Do you really think that there would be that much difference? Even if there was, it would surely only be for a couple of years before everyone saw what worked and went with it.
The rules were changed every year to combat the cool new thing until we ended up where we are today.