How is an F1 Track designed??

[f1maniac]

can someone tell me how an F1 track is constructed....plzzzzzz........

[bhall]

Hermann Tilke says to himself, "Hmm, let's see if I can do something where overtaking is damn-near impossible and we can bore the crap out of everyone watching" And poof! It's done.

[manchild]

Hermann Tilke says to himself, "Hmm, let's see if I can do something where overtaking is damn-near impossible and we can bore the crap out of everyone watching" And poof! It's done.

=D>

[peroa]

Well, Bahrain and especially Turkey are quite good, also for overtaking.

It is a shame what they (Bernie ) have done to the Hockenheimring, but I think he made the best what he could out of the situation, overtaking is possible.

Malaysia, I don`t know, I still don`t like it, but it is miles ahead of Shanghai (boring ) regarding the track layout.


IMHO they should consider someone else too to do the job now, too much Tilke certainly is not good.

[manchild]

Hockenheim was good as it used to be, now it is probably most boring race in F1.

[Sawtooth-spike]

I am with you on that one manchild, But i would say Bahrain is the most boring track, Mainly due to the fact that from watching it on tv means you cant tell where you are on track cus everything looks the same, the layout is lame there is not one corner that makes you think wow, Spa Now thats is perfection, (other than what they did to the bus stop)

[joseff]

Well in the old days, they simply picked point A and point B on the map, then race back and forth on whatever roadway is available between said points.

That's how they came up with the greats: Spa-Francorchamps, Le Mans, etc.

[pompelmo]

http://www.f1technical.net/articles/22

[DaveKillens]

Once upon a time a race track was just a regular road that was closed to traffic. But those days are long gone (with the exception of Monaco and LeMans) and they are now dedicated, purpose built racing facilities.
But there are certain elements we can see in almost all tracks. A long straight, a series of esses, a hairpin, an awkward, off-camber corner, a corner critical to hard braking, and some sweeping fast corners. That's the recipe, the designers just try to find how to incorporate all this and deliver a package good for fan access, TV viewing, and safety and infrastructure support.

[Tom]

Although he failed miserably with Bahrain and Shanghia (did he design Malaysi aswell?) Herman outdid himself with Istanbul

Also has anyone noticed that circuits on hills make for great races?
Monaco, Brands Hatch, Istanbul park, Laguna Seca and my personnel favorite, good ol Knockhill.

[Spencifer_Murphy]

...Nurburgring (Nordschilfe that is), Spa-Francorchamps, LeMans.

Its true. A change of elevation not only makes for an intersting circuit layout, it also allows for an intesting array for courners to be built...basically it adds a third dimention to circuit design.

But i agree 100%. Corners like Eau Rouge cant just be droped into a circuit, they are made around the land its built on.

[Scuderia_Russ]

A track like Bahrain, long straights and tight turns, should have theoretiacally given us a circuit with plentiful overtaking opportunities. Doesn't always work out that way though I guess.

[RH1300S]

It's hard to answer the original question, but I expect that they spend a lot of time looking for a site - then working out how best to fit a layout into the space available.

It would be interesting to work out why so many of the newest tracks seem to have gone down like a ton of s*......er..make that lead

Herman Tilke is an enthusiast like us, he races cars and has clearly tried to make good tracks - and I would also argue he has not fully succeeded.

So, why the failure? It's not simply because the original great circuits were street races modified and the new ones were "designed".

Spa - nothing like it's original and was, of course, designed to be the track it is today. Even Eau Rouge is no where near it's orginal shape for example.

Monza - was started off when racing was very different - to call it a temple of speed is quite appropriate. It's layout is not inspiring (imagine if Tilke came up with that one), but somehow it can and could generate great races. It's corners are very simple, but subtly different. The Monza of, say, 1967 demanded precision and courage from it's drivers. Other places might favour the more acrobatic........

Hockenheim - again built to different criteria (originally).

The Nordschleife was designed as a racing circuit (test facility) not as a public road. It has every combination of corner and elevation change (some are huge - Ex-Muhle).

One thread that seems to run through most of the great tracks is SPACE, the use the landscape and cars have room to breathe. The modern tracks seem to feel like they are crammed onto a postage stamp, with corners joined up by straights.

Another thing missing today is variety. Surely it is better that one week a Grand Prix could be run at somewhere like the original Monza or Hockenheim (all about speed) and another week they could be crammed into Brands Hatch or Monaco.

I reckon I could do a better job BTW..........

[DaveKillens]

The last three modern tracks designed by Tilke have many things in common, but his last, Turkey, built on the mistakes of Bahrain and Shanghai has some very interesting aspects that lead to good racing and spectating. But they all are built to maximimize the track on the space available. Al are folded in on themselves. There's many reasons for that.. maximization of space, consideration to access for safety and spectator and TV viewing angles. But somehow the racing itself suffers.
My personal favorites are old school, either places like Monza or Spa, or built on existing roadways, like Monaco and the old 'Ring.
Although parameters like safety access and TV viewing angles are now important to track design, IMO, the action that is created on the track by a challenging circuit should be the primary focus.

[Tom]

I think F1 should go to Macau, I loved the WTCC there, so what if you can't overtake, its just like Monaco