Current F1 Power Supply Units

[knighty]

AER have lodged a formal interest to supply with the FIA, see their web release below, and I have to say as the V6 LMP1 twin turbo engine is currently in use and un-branded AER are therefore in a very good position to supply. Timing is tight for 2017, which could be gobbled up very quickly in 2016, hence removing about 6 months of design, procurement and de-bugging from any timing plan again puts AER in a good position to supply, I would say AER's only downfalls are they are not a big name like Ilmor, Mechachrome and Cosworth, but most of all they are not french/swiss, much like why they lost the FIA-GP3 engine contract to Mechachrome (formerly Heini Mader) when AER has supplied a flawless V6 engine for 3 seasons......unless I'm missing something???.....

http://www.aerltd.com/news/

.

[Szisz]

Slightly controversial suggestion, but does anyone else think refuelling would benefit F1?

The main principle of overtaking is that the quicker car goes past the slower car, and one way of slowing a car down is to fatten it up with fuel. It might also add a bit more strategic variety, and generally just make a Grand Prix more interesting than the snooze-a-thons of the last few years.

[ASCII Man]

It's kind of funny, they banned refueling in part to improve the spectacle by keeping the overtaking on the track instead of during the pitstops.
But now we want refueling back to improve the spectacle?

[Szisz]

I think it's fair to say that F1 has a pretty good history of trying things to improve the spectacle, only to realise they're awful. Remember double points?

At least if they brought back refuelling you might have some kind of overtaking, and maybe more than just Verstappen and Ricciardo doing the overtaking. And if a lighter car is behind a heavier car, they may indeed be able to overtake them on the track.

[ASCII Man]

If you may recall, the ones that took on heavy fuel loads were generally the ones that were way at the back of the grid anyway, so I fail to see how reintroducing refueling would increase the spectacle in any meaningful way.

[Paradise City]

Just cut down on the blasted downforce.

[chillibowl]

personally i liked fuel stops, wasnt too bothered about passing in the pits provided the race director was smart enough to focus on the in and out laps, but really liked those that went heavy to start the race because they wanted to try a one stopper.

that said whether i or others liked fuel stops, given the current tire philosophy of having races with 2 to 3 stops no one is in a position to try a one stopper anyways.

also given where we are with the environment, the increases in fuel efficiency these new engines produce is the far more compelling story. also it was getting dangerous with ever decreasing pitstop times and the rush to force feed gas into the cars as fast as possible. disaster waiting to happen really.

on the whole, probably better fuel stops are gone.

[Pingguest]

I would go the way: ban put stops entirely and force drivers to do the race distance on their own.

[Paradise City]

Eliminate all pit to car radio and get drivers thinkin' for a change.

[Casper]

And take away all the buttons on the steering wheel and stop live telemetry from the car entirely, nothing nada. Engineers have caused all this unnecessary stuff and it is about time they were reined in. They might even save some money in the process which is one of the primary gripes about the whole thing. Let a race car engineer loose and the first thing to suffer is your pocket.

[S griffin]

Less downforce, fatter tyres, an end to the soft/hard tyre sillyness, no DRS and manual gearboxes and you're away

[chillibowl]

appears that Mecachrome is in the running as well now.

http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/ex...engine-tender/

interesting point (to me) is that they highlight the need to have at least two teams to make it financially doable because they already have an engine ready (or one that is easily adaptable).

for me this is starting to become a question of whether or not only one low cost supplier should be allowed or should it be a more open opportunity for whomever wants to jump in? greater competition and all that.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

for me this is starting to become a question of whether or not only one low cost supplier should be allowed or should it be a more open opportunity for whomever wants to jump in? greater competition and all that.

I may be completely wrong (I usually am not), but I think it highly unlikely that they will introduce a second tier power-unit. This is just Todt and BCE trying to force the 4 PSU suppliers to reduce their lease costs to the customer teams, and already there is some movement from the manufacturers. The FIA/FOM want a price of about €12 million and it seems as though the big four are going to counter this with an offer of €16 million per unit.

My guess is that they will settle for a figure of about €14 million, and everybody will say that they got their way. After all, the FIA have only asked if anyone would be interested in supplying the new units, and they have not involved the potential suppliers in any costs apart from sending a lettter/e-mail to confirm their interest.

By tomorrow we should know more as they have been holding the latest Stategy Group meeting today, and it seems as if Ferrari were prepared to use their veto again (I know, I said before that they wouldn't dare, but I think that they have got their dander up over this).

[chillibowl]

fair point, for all we know this is probably still just a shell game to push the manus.

i guess what caught my eye was the comment about two teams...which just happens to be the same number of Red Bull teams. coincidence perhaps and i am also reading how Kaltenborn is also dismissing the idea of a low cost provider as a waste of time.

to be honest i never really saw this as something that the smaller teams wanted in the first place or as something that would benefit them (Sauber has Ferrari and Manor have a Merc so they theoretically have better engines already).

hopefully we do know more after the next meeting (my guess is that the only decision made will be to decide this at a later date), but i still think that if RB are not sufficiently mollified then this is not a rule/policy change that will go away any time soon. rather i think this is more about RB and not saving money for the smaller teams (an issue that could have been unilaterally solved by giving those teams more money so they can hand it over to the PSU manus to effectively bribe them to sell to RB).

again i am seeing conspiracies everywhere

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

to be honest i never really saw this as something that the smaller teams wanted in the first place or as something that would benefit them (Sauber has Ferrari and Manor have a Merc so they theoretically have better engines already).

There has been little (as far as I can see) talk around how they plan to balance the performance between this alternative spec (single supplier) and the current spec (open to anyone to build to). They can clearly adjust power up/down in various ways as they control the spec, but there is also things like fuel consumption which may impact how much fuel/extra weight at team would need to put in the car. It may be hard to make a new solution that doesn't have pros and cons even if it has the power.

Anyhow, broadly speaking... how powerful should it be? In my perceived pecking order you have Mercedes > Ferrari > Renault > Honda. Which manufacture do you screw by providing a cheaper solution to what they provide now. Some of them? All of them? I have a hard time imagining them cranking it up to the level that it can challenge Mercedes and Ferrari.

And to your point about some of the smaller teams already having Mercedes and Ferrari power... might they be potentially going backwards (lesser solution), but just doing it more efficiently (less money spent)? Does that help anyone really?

Originally Posted by chillibowl

rather i think this is more about RB and not saving money for the smaller teams

If this is about RBR and not the smaller teams (and frankly I have no idea who this is ACTUALLY targeted at regardless of what they say)... I can't expect RBR accepting this solution "for themselves" unless it had Mercedes level of power (or overall competitiveness).

Overall, I still think this is a stick used to beat teams/manufactures back in line. I can even see it going out to tender and engines being built. I wonder if the contract will have any guarantees around customers? I can see FOM (and FIA?) spending X amount of money (cost of doing business) to pay to have the engine built even if nobody uses it.... IF in the long run it ends up achieving whatever their goals are (low costs engines for some teams, keeping RBR around, something else?) How much money do you think has actually been spent so far given the level of drama and discussion around this?

Richard

[chillibowl]

im not sure i have any answers to those question RC other than some more, potentially crazy, ramblings.

[Casper]

The overall problem for F1 is that whatever happens here no one is a winner and the unrest is going to continue. Bad management and greedy people are at the bottom of the present turmoil and that is not going to change. They are in the process of continuing the bad management by seeking to make the motor if introduced a sole supplier model which is crazy as it limits options. What happens if it is a motor that does not have the performance expected? Then they are stuck with it because management was so short sighted they left no alternative path to follow. The lack of competent thinking in all this is breath taking to say the least. Anyone who thinks a motor such as they envisage can have parity with the present PU is delusional, it simply will not happen and all the problems will come back once again.

[wnut]

The sooner the independent engines are brought in the better.
The sooner it is an alternative spec that anyone can build to, even better!

http://www.pitpass.com/55250/Matesch...-get-an-engine

and

http://www.pitpass.com/55249/Mosley-...i-small-minded

Sure Ferraris decision is a "business decision", wonderful to have the underprivileged paying for your program.
Even better that you can ensure they are uncompetitive.


The manufacturers are not interested in the sport, all they care about are their own interests.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by wnut

The manufacturers are not interested in the sport, all they care about are their own interests.

As are CVC, BE and everyone else who has their snout in the trough unfortunately. The days of sport are long gone, the days of spin, political manouverings etc are here to stay or until it implodes into a black hole.

[wolfhound]

The F1 commission has voted down the alternative engine proposal.

https://joesaward.wordpress.com/2015...ne-voted-down/

It will be interesting to see what happens next as there are a lot of little thing agreed at the commission but nothing definite by the looks of things.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

The F1 commission has voted down the alternative engine proposal.

https://joesaward.wordpress.com/2015...ne-voted-down/

It will be interesting to see what happens next as there are a lot of little thing agreed at the commission but nothing definite by the looks of things.

So from

http://www.pitpass.com/55250/Matesch...-get-an-engine

Indeed, Mercedes boss Toto Wolff subsequently suggested the FIA is blackmailing the engine manufacturers.

Who are in their turn blackmailing the category!

So hopefully the FIA has the internal fortitude to:

If the FIA is determined to go ahead with the independent engine plan it could, despite today's vote by the Formula One Commission, use force majeure to push the issue through, though this would surely lead to even more rancour.

[Casper]

I have just read Saward's words of wisdom which are always good for a laugh as he is as self centred as any of those he writes about and loves pursuing his own agenda. He made a point about the whole thing finishing up in court in one of his pearls of wisdom and I have always wondered what court that would be, any ideas as I want to book seats.

[Mike Harte]

It would appear that the 4 manufacturers must have threatened to take their toys away as it is apparent that Todt and Ecclestone didn't use their 12 votes to outvote the teams' six; see http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1...ns-659522/?s=1 .

The big 4 now have until January 15th 2016 to put forward their proposals. This is just being kicked further and further down the road (or into the long grass - whatever you prefer!)

[Casper]

I suggested that a major fight was on the way if BE pushed his proposal and would make the RB issue look like a minor disagreement. It seems that RB still has no motor for 2016 and BE has not got the muscle to break enough arms and force a manufacturer or RD to give them a motor. If in fact that is true I can't see RB having the time to put a car together and be anywhere near competitive and they must have the entire staff of 600 sitting around doing nothing.

[chillibowl]

at least now we have something to keep us entertained during the off season!