|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
12 Dec 2008, 13:24 (Ref:2353474) | #1 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,900
|
2009 and 2010 regulations to be released today.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/72456
The one that leapt out at me the most was a ban on refuelling for 2010! |
||
__________________
I can't drive 55. |
12 Dec 2008, 13:34 (Ref:2353482) | #2 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,936
|
Most of it I think seems fair enough, but reducing engine revs to 18000rpm doesn't exactly go with F1 being 'pinnacle of motorsport'. GP2 cars will be faster soon. I think that's a rubbish idea and should be reconsidered...
No doubt it won't be though. |
|
|
12 Dec 2008, 21:13 (Ref:2353835) | #3 | |||||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 44,192
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
It isn't that bad overall. Needs must, although I'm not happy with some of it. I'm no fan of restrictions here. Could have been worse though. That is what Max was heading for though wasn't it; people like me thinking that it isn't too bad (compared to the horror he was suggesting). I shall consider some more. He's losing me anyway, this will mearly slow the decline IMHO. |
|||||
__________________
Brum brum |
12 Dec 2008, 23:37 (Ref:2353919) | #4 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,725
|
Could have been a lot worse.
Refeuling ban AND no tyre warmers effectively makes pit stops a liability rather than a tactical advantage. Brings up the question of tyre supply choice. Will Bridgestone give the choice of a tyre which goes the whole distance? Brings out (or back) a whole new set of skills for drivers in conserving both tyres and fuel. The suggestion of a standardised KERS system so soon is just plain daft. This is an area where there a whole range of potential concepts to explore. I am concerned that a lot of criticism of KERS in forums like this really does not recognise how revoloutionry this technology could be applied to stop start city driving. A real contribution to everyday driving for all of us, and potentialy more applicable than electric cars or battery hybrids. The shortened race distance fits with TV schedules and the rapidly diminishing attention span of the new group of fans the Formula has attacted in recent years. If we want to keep them interested suppose we have to put up with it. One would hope that the testing ban will be to some degree countered by extended testing time on the Friday and Saturday at race meetings. They will certainly be busier giving circuit ticket sales a boost on those days. Be interesting to see the format and the questions in the "market survey" excersise, and will it be aimed at core fans or fringe supporters. No mention anywhere of the Customer Car issue, is it due for revue further down the line or are we stuck with the present rule? |
||
__________________
Geting old is mandatory, acting old is optional. |
12 Dec 2008, 13:35 (Ref:2353483) | #5 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 120
|
|||
|
12 Dec 2008, 13:39 (Ref:2353489) | #6 | |
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
The ban on refueling is good,although the possibilty of shorter race distances (is this an attention span thing I wonder) is not so good.
Renault get to fiddle with their engine which means Alonso 2009 WDC,Webber to Renault etc. |
|
|
12 Dec 2008, 13:41 (Ref:2353490) | #7 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,195
|
The ban on refuelling and tyre warmers are good. But why do they want to make the races shorter? I think the mid-season ban on testing is reasonable, but I oppose the on-going proces of standardization.
If they really wanted to reduce engine production costs, they should have lifted the engine freeze and allow only one engine per season. |
||
|
12 Dec 2008, 13:50 (Ref:2353494) | #8 | ||
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
Quote:
It's not really the production costs that will be the problem.It will be the development costs,which means building loads of engines to test that will never see the light of day.Plus if you're only allowed one engine per season when do you introduce the upgrade? |
||
|
12 Dec 2008, 14:13 (Ref:2353517) | #9 | |||||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,195
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||
|
12 Dec 2008, 14:35 (Ref:2353540) | #10 | |
Rookie
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 75
|
So no in season testing, will that mean best car at first race is likely to remain best car all season? Will this affect Ferrari and McLaren more than others? They are two teams who have relied heavily on in season development.
I don't get the shorter races idea. How will that save any money? Bit of fuel perhaps and engines doing less milage (minimal) but I just don't see the point in that one. Overall I am pleased though. Particularly with the market research proposals. Does that mean we might finally get our views listened to and actioned upon? |
|
|
12 Dec 2008, 14:46 (Ref:2353546) | #11 | |
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 461
|
What will they call this type of racing? Because it sure as hell won't be Formula 1 any more.
Desperate times call for desperate measures I suppose, and some of these are truly desperate. |
|
|
12 Dec 2008, 15:03 (Ref:2353558) | #12 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,349
|
Quote:
I really hope they don't shorten the race length though, it'll end up with Monza being a 30 minute sprint before long. |
|||
__________________
Real cars have roofs. |
12 Dec 2008, 16:10 (Ref:2353598) | #13 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,067
|
To me it sounds like the shorter race distance will be pitched to the general public... Which is good and bad, I guess. It doesn't really seem to have much impact as far as being more "green" goes. I honestly think it's just to try and attract the every day Joe Bloggs to F1. The most common whinge is "how can you watch these cars zoom round for so long???". So yeah, it could be good or bad :/
Selby |
||
|
12 Dec 2008, 14:47 (Ref:2353548) | #14 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 840
|
I think shorter races are due to the ban on refuelling, rather than costs.
|
|
__________________
"Without racing there is no Honda". Soichiro Honda |
12 Dec 2008, 15:10 (Ref:2353568) | #15 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 10,029
|
so instead of developing a more fuel efficient engine they are opting to ban refueling and shortening the race to make it work. what does that even mean?
are they thinking about moving to a race weekend comprised of several sprint races or just going to increase the size of the fuel tank? so since everyone will have to start with a full fuel tank, what format will quali take on now. as i like the current format, maybe just a tweak to Q3 will be all that is required. |
||
__________________
Home, is where I want to be but I guess I'm already there I come home, she lifted up her wings guess that this must be the place |
12 Dec 2008, 15:11 (Ref:2353570) | #16 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 591
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
12 Dec 2008, 15:10 (Ref:2353569) | #17 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 591
|
Generally these new regs look pretty good as far as I'm concerned. I'm glad that refuelling is going - never liked it, glad to see the back of it. Not sure about shorter races though - how long will they be? 2 x 45 minutes?
The FIA say that some (still to be decided) changes will be based on the results of market research - how and when will this be conducted? |
||
|
12 Dec 2008, 15:48 (Ref:2353579) | #18 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 840
|
I think they can, but don't want.
|
|
__________________
"Without racing there is no Honda". Soichiro Honda |
12 Dec 2008, 16:10 (Ref:2353599) | #19 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,100
|
2009 aspects
Engine changes : Good Testing : Good Other bits : Good Sporting spectacle : No medals please. 2010 Aspects Engine : Good Transmission : OK ... Chassis parts : Sensible thinking Spec radio and telementary : Great idea - any chance of having them non-encrypted and all available for TV though? Tyre warmers ban : Sensible Refueling ban : WHY? WHY? WHY? Maybe don't have the plane refuelling rigs and instead just use NASCAR-style cans? It would cut costs but not remove one of F1's more unique aspects and not need the shorter races. GPs that aren't 300km wouldn't have the same ring (Monaco is just 78 laps ... let's hope that one isn't changed). Any news if the SC rules have changed? The new engine rules are something I'd want to see first, I'd like to see smallish turbos with current power levels, but with rules on the materials used to ensure relevancy. |
||
__________________
Marbot : "Ironically, the main difference between a Red Bull and a Virgin is that Red Bull can make parts of its car smaller and floppier." |
12 Dec 2008, 16:42 (Ref:2353631) | #20 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 682
|
It's interesting that rule changes concerning the replacement of points with medals, changing the qualifying format and shortening races will depend on the results of 'Market Research'. Though I doubt they will, I hope they have a survey on the FIA site like they did a few years ago, this way us proper fans will be able to get our view across on what we think of these stupid ideas.
It's more likely though they'll just ask a bunch of glory hunting Hamilton fans who think F1 started in 2007... |
||
__________________
Taki Inoue, the only driver in F1 history who's been driven into by a course car, twice! |
12 Dec 2008, 17:02 (Ref:2353655) | #21 | |
Racer
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 117
|
Well, everything looks pretty good, except banning tire warmers(which are a safety measure), and refuelling, which is what makes races exciting. The idiocy of these two ideas astounds me. I can't understand why the FIA goes aroung unecessarily screwing up circuits by adding chicanes in the name of safety(a la Barcelona), but then goes an banns tire warmers, which leads to more accidents. Also, they say they are always looking for more overtaking, but they ban refueling. Don't they realise that for overtaking to take place you have to have cars running different speeds, and if you have straight up qualifying and no in race strategy, there is no opportunity to have slower cars in front of faster ones. So you end up with less passing.
Still, the changes could be much worse. Lets just hope they don't pick up medals system. |
|
|
12 Dec 2008, 17:37 (Ref:2353679) | #22 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,936
|
Quote:
Everyone uses just about the same strategy now anyway. Top 7 or so go for two-stoppers, everyone else fuels to half distance and hopes for the best. How is that interesting? I used to think it was interesting when the top teams had two, maybe three, alternatives, but that is not the case now. Btw if everyone carries the same amount of fuel, surely no-one will need to do any fuel spotting? |
||
|
12 Dec 2008, 19:43 (Ref:2353775) | #23 | ||
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
Quote:
Tyre warmers were never introduced as a "safety measure",they are a 'performance enhancement'.Refuelling was introduced to 'spice things up'.It has failed miserably! |
||
|
12 Dec 2008, 16:50 (Ref:2353642) | #24 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,195
|
I don't see how standard board radios will really reduce spending. I guess the radios are already more or less standard. I don't like the standardization of telemetry eiter: they should have banned that technology.
|
||
|
12 Dec 2008, 17:00 (Ref:2353654) | #25 | |
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
With regards to the 2010 refuelling ban: Will it mean that they'll be a tyre made to last a race distance and that tyre stops will be optional rather than necessary do we think?
|
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Season five (2009-2010) Calender | RichardRenes | A1GP | 230 | 6 Dec 2009 09:46 |
[FIA GT] 2009 FIA GT Calendar Released | airbusA346 | Sportscar & GT Racing | 36 | 15 Nov 2008 00:31 |
ACO regulations for 2006 released | Alistair_Ryder | ACO Regulated Series | 96 | 14 Nov 2006 08:10 |
2004 Regulations just released | hartham | Sportscar & GT Racing | 71 | 15 Dec 2003 19:23 |