F1 - General discussion and 2016 Season

[Polish]

So, anyone on the forum interested in the more technical aspects of F1? Like engine and car design, aerodynamics, etc...

this is what we discuss here

 

[thestaggy]

Yes they were, very popular, i think because they produced many racing greats. When i say produced i mean brought into F1. Just realized even Mark Webber drove for them.

Sjoe, that sounds like a million years ago. In actual fact, all these drove for them. Some awesome history.

Christijan Albers
Michele Alboreto
Fernando Alonso
Luca Badoer
Fabrizio Barbazza
Paolo Barilla
Zsolt Baumgartner
Gianmaria Bruni
Adrián Campos
Andrea de Cesaris
Anthony Davidson
Robert Doornbos
Giancarlo Fisichella
Christian Fittipaldi
Patrick Friesacher
Marc Gené
Jean-Marc Gounon
Ukyo Katayama
Nicolas Kiesa
Pedro Lamy
Giovanni Lavaggi
Bas Leinders
Tarso Marques
Pierluigi Martini
Gastón Mazzacane
Gianni Morbidelli
Roberto Moreno
Shinji Nakano
Alessandro Nannini
Chanoch Nissany
Luis Pérez-Sala
Stéphane Sarrazin
Jarno Trulli
Esteban Tuero
Jos Verstappen
Mark Webber
Justin Wilson
Alex Yoong
Alex Zanardi

True, they were the starting point for many top drivers, but they also had an awesome small-team charm about them. They stuck around for 20-years while never having a major sponsor or serious manufacturer support. They were always near or at the back and got by on shoestring budgets, yet they were one of the friendliest and most accessible teams on the grid. There were other small teams that came and went but these guys, with all their problems, stuck around much longer. They sucked on a professional level. They also had a knack for designing pretty decent cars with their tiny budgets. They went racing for the passion of it.

There were also never serious dramas involving them, aside from a handful of questionable pay-drivers (Lavaggi, Nissany and Yoong). No dodgy investors and tales of poorly prepared cars being put on the track, which was common with so many other struggling teams.

 

[stixx]

this is what we discuss here

No, not really.... I have read this thread from start to finish but nothing about understanding how vortex generators work, the effect of crosswind on the vehicle, things like that. The technical engineering aspects.

 

[stixx]

Interesting article, the F1 cars of today are up to 8 seconds a lap slower than 10 years ago.

http://formulafreak.kinja.com/f1-c...fb_source=feed_opengraph&action_object_map={

 

[Polish]

No, not really.... I have read this thread from start to finish but nothing about understanding how vortex generators work, the effect of crosswind on the vehicle, things like that. The technical engineering aspects.

you are more than welcome to enlighten us.

here we talk open-wheeled single-seater motorsport stuff because we love it, if you can contribute technical knowledge then great

 

[Polish]

Interesting article, the F1 cars of today are up to 8 seconds a lap slower than 10 years ago.

http://formulafreak.kinja.com/f1-c...fb_source=feed_opengraph&action_object_map={

but wasn't that the FIA objective for a long time ?

to slow them down without them looking slower

 

[thestaggy]

No, not really.... I have read this thread from start to finish but nothing about understanding how vortex generators work, the effect of crosswind on the vehicle, things like that. The technical engineering aspects.

Just post away. Some of us will have limited understanding when it comes to certain stuff, but we'll enjoy learning something new regardless.

 

[Polish]

This is an old pic, from above linky, but nice pic.

Year ?

 

[stixx]

you are more than welcome to enlighten us.

here we talk open-wheeled single-seater motorsport stuff because we love it, if you can contribute technical knowledge then great

I am no means an expert Was too lazy to become an engineer in my university days But I will contribute in what way I can.

Here are some pics of classic racing (thanks to F1T forums)


Belgian GP, Spa, 1965, Jackie Stewart


Team Tyrrell, L to R: Patrick Depailler, Ken Tyrrell, and Ronnie Peterson Argentine GP, 1977


Jackie Stewart takes the media on a tour of the circuit US GP, Watkins Glen, 1973


James Hunt takes over as tour director Canadian GP, Mosport Park, 1976


Niki Lauda with Ronnie Peterson

 

[stixx]

This is an old pic, from above linky, but nice pic.

Year ?

View attachment 162323

This was 2010? I remember from the black nose on the Mercedes cars.

 

[thestaggy]

Interesting article, the F1 cars of today are up to 8 seconds a lap slower than 10 years ago.

http://formulafreak.kinja.com/f1-c...fb_source=feed_opengraph&action_object_map={

That is a significant drop-off, but the ultimate goal I guess.

I done a quick comparative between 1986 (the height of the turbo engines with their unlimited boosts) and first 1989 (the end of turbos) and 1996 just for the 10-year spread.

Sample track - Monza, due to being F1s quickest track.
1986 Pole time - 1:24.078 [Teo Fabi, Benetton-BMW 1.5lt T F4 (the BMW turbo was the most potent engine in F1 history when boosted for qualifying)]
1989 Pole time - 1:23.720 (Ayrton Senna, McLaren-Honda 3.5lt V10)
1996 Pole time - 1:24.204 (Damon Hill, Williams-Renault 3lt V10)

Engine power was definitely down between 1996 and 1986, but it is clear that there were significant aero advancements that counter-balanced the loss of horses as the fastest time at Monza was pretty consistent, despite radical differences in engines. That is why they have gone on a crusade against aerodynamics and tyres in the past 15-odd years then.

 

[stixx]

Aero has drastically improved from about 1990 onwards - to the detriment of overtaking. I think if we were to have the 1000hp engines of the 1980s together with the aero of the early 2000s we would see lap times 20 seconds a lap faster than current on some tracks.

The FIA will always try to slow down cars, whether it be with aero, tyres, engines or some other artificial method, all in the interest of safety.

Maybe if the FIA tried to protect the driver even better than they currently are, say with closed cockpits, then we could have much better racing and people will come back to the sport.

 

[stixx]

A letter written to Todt by Caterham, Marussia, Sauber and Force India, a copy of which has been seen by AUTOSPORT, laid bare just how expensive F1 was.

It provided an example of what a midfield team was now spending - excluding driver salaries, building leases, hospitality, marketing and media.

Bigger teams are spending more, in some cases much more, while F1's minnows Caterham and Marussia have been trying to get by on much less.

The breakdown for an average team went as follows:

Hybrid power system $28 million
Gearbox and hydraulics $5 million
Fuel and lubricants $1.5 million
Tyres $1.8 million
Electronics $1.95 million
IT $3 million
Salaries $20 million
Travel and trackside facilities $12 million
Chassis production/manufacturing $20 million
Windtunnel/CFD facilities $18.5 million
Utilities and factory maintenance $2 million
HR and professional services $1.5 million
Freight $5 million
TOTAL $120.25 million

Full article: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/116518

 

[thestaggy]

Full article: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/116518

From these figures we can see why there is demand for customer cars. A team could eliminate roughly $38.5 million from its budget if it did not have to design and build its own cars. Probably more as the wage bill could be slashed as you will need less staff and you will probably find that the guys in the aero department are your biggest earners after your drivers.

 

[stixx]

From these figures we can see why there is demand for customer cars. A team could eliminate roughly $38.5 million from its budget if it did not have to design and build its own cars. Probably more as the wage bill could be slashed as you will need less staff and you will probably find that the guys in the aero department are your biggest earners after your drivers.

In comparision, Formula E has a $3.3 Million budget cap, while the top Indy teams run on ~$15 Million.

It just shows how far out F1 is in comparison to rival series. If Bernie would allow the TV revenue to be distributed more evenly, the smaller teams wouldn't struggle so much. Things like customer cars will be very useful in cutting costs, but apparently Williams stand in the way of this happening.

The problem with customer cars though, imagine if Sauber decide that they want to buy the Red Bull chassis and the Mercedes engine, that will be a force to reckon with.

 

[Polish]

The FIA will always try to slow down cars, whether it be with aero, tyres, engines or some other artificial method, all in the interest of safety.

This is really stupid imo.

Whether a car is doing 360km or 300km surely the results of the impact will not be too different.

 

[thestaggy]

Aero has drastically improved from about 1990 onwards - to the detriment of overtaking. I think if we were to have the 1000hp engines of the 1980s together with the aero of the early 2000s we would see lap times 20 seconds a lap faster than current on some tracks.

The FIA will always try to slow down cars, whether it be with aero, tyres, engines or some other artificial method, all in the interest of safety.

Maybe if the FIA tried to protect the driver even better than they currently are, say with closed cockpits, then we could have much better racing and people will come back to the sport.

Aero advancements have definitely ruined the sport as a spectacle. Understandable as they are. You do not become a pinnacle sport by driving soapboxes around.

I'm against closed cockpits. More drivers have died in ''tin-tops'' in recent years than in F1. Brazilian Stock Car saw 2 deaths in the space of two weeks in 2011. Since Senna and Ratzenberger, NASCAR has seen 5 fatal accidents across its 3 top categories. That number increases to 10 when their regional/feeder series are included. Since 1994, 11 people have been killed in NHRA-scantioned events in the USA.

 

[Polish]

I'm against closed cockpits. More drivers have died in ''tin-tops'' in recent years than in F1. Brazilian Stock Car saw 2 deaths in the space of two weeks in 2011. Since Senna and Ratzenberger, NASCAR has seen 5 fatal accidents across its 3 top categories. That number increases to 10 when their regional/feeder series are included. Since 1994, 11 people have been killed in NHRA-scantioned events in the USA.

But isn't that due to the nature of the formula and the lack of other safety features we already have in F1 ? Would adding a closed cockpit to existing safety infrastructure not be beneficial ?

 

[stixx]

But isn't that due to the nature of the formula and the lack of other safety features we already have in F1 ? Would adding a closed cockpit to existing safety infrastructure not be beneficial ?

It would avoid almost all types of injuries that have happened in recent times e.g. Massa's head injury, Bianchi's accident in Japan, and would have made Webber's upside down flip and Alonso's brush with Grosjean less scary. There would also have the benefit of making the cars faster due to better aero.

 

[thestaggy]

In comparision, Formula E has a $3.3 Million budget cap, while the top Indy teams run on ~$15 Million.

It just shows how far out F1 is in comparison to rival series. If Bernie would allow the TV revenue to be distributed more evenly, the smaller teams wouldn't struggle so much. Things like customer cars will be very useful in cutting costs, but apparently Williams stand in the way of this happening.

The problem with customer cars though, imagine if Sauber decide that they want to buy the Red Bull chassis and the Mercedes engine, that will be a force to reckon with.

Apparently, the TV revenue is skewed in favour of the big teams - primarily Ferrari - to avert a breakaway series. Ferrari is the crown jewel of single-seater racing. They've been doing it for 50-years. They're an asset to the sport and primary draw card. Enzo Ferrari even had an IndyCar chassis built in 1986 to scare the FIA, so it is nothing new that F1 looks after the only team that has been there from the start.

As for Williams, I can understand their opposition to customer chassis. They too have been through rough times financially yet they have remained a successful privateer team, building and developing their own cars. They have invested accordingly, developing the in-house engineering and tooling necessary to design and build their own cars. To have an upstart walk in with half to a third of your budget, buy a B-Spec Mercedes F1 W05 and then go and beat you is a bit of a bugger. It goes against the spirit of the sport. Eventually you risk getting swamped by B-Spec teams and suddenly you ask yourself ''Why are we still trying to do our own thing?''

Also, relying on customer chassis does not necessarily guarantee your future and you risk becoming a one-make sport. It has happened in both of the State's top series, CART/Champcar and IRL/Indy Car. From multiple manufacturers to single makes. Ferrari is the only team in the sport's history to stick around. The likes of Mercedes, Renault, Honda and BMW have come and gone, along with many other privateers. If they supply chassis and then suddenly pull out the variety of your grid is further reduced as more and more teams use the same chassis-engine combinations. It sounds great from a competition angle, but it isn't the spirit of F1.

The sport is in a precarious situation, I agree. I can see the benefits of customer chassis but I can also see the pitfalls and negative aspects of it.