FOTA/FIA agreement

[mahesh248]

Max says , that if they dont standardize the engines, then the lower teams would find it difficult to survive , and these days you can trust your sponcers backing on a bank , and their could be many other criteria , why would the FIA what to cut costs to a drastic level ? Max also says Formual 1 is spend thrice the money that it gets from it , is that true ? I am not in favour of Max , as long as F1 lives I am happy at the same time not handicape its ability to manufacture and engineer new things.

[mahesh248]

[i]The ratio of downforce over speed is more appropriate. See example above, in 2004 the levels of downforce were higher than now, but eau rouge was more difficult to take.[/i]


[i]My bet would be to put natural limitation on maximum downforce gains possible via regulations that limit the possibilities, that would switch then on the aero efficiency and downforce at low speed.[/i]



[b]Well to do this its good thing but how would you check that the team is not exceeding the limit its impossible to build a wind tunnel in all the formula 1 tracks and the management would not surely support this . [/b]

[TenTenths]

Why doesn't the FIA produce a cheap & standard engine that the less fortunate teams can buy and let all the other manufacturers make their own......I would quit to if I were Toyota and How can you tell Ferrari that they can not build their own engine. Wasn't that what Enzo Ferrari was all about.

[woohoo]

Why doesn't the FIA produce a cheap & standard engine that the less fortunate teams can buy and let all the other manufacturers make their own......I would quit to if I were Toyota and How can you tell Ferrari that they can not build their own engine. Wasn't that what Enzo Ferrari was all about.

Uhm, why cant those teams then simply buy an engine from BMW, Mercedes, Ferrari, Renault, Honda, Toyota... ?

[TenTenths]

Because the FIA engine will be less expensive.

[donskar]

Reality check from Toyota, via f1technical.net:

Toyota F1 team boss John Howett declared to the German press that the team will leave Formula One if the FIA pushes ahead its plans for a standard engine. Apart from Toyota, the BMW Sauber F1 Team, Honda, Mercedes-McLaren, Ferrari and Renault are opposed to the introduction of a standard engine as well.

John Howett said: "If the FIA will introduce a standard engine that will be plenty of reason for Toyota to exit Formula One."

[guy_smiley]

i usually read every post in these threads, but i admit im just skipping to the end to share my thoughts cause im in a bit of a hurry, so if its already been said then go ahead and skip it!

Obviously, the teams are completely against standardized engines--and IMO they should be. e.g. http://www.f1technical.net/news/10888

from what ive read over the past couple months, KERS may or may not be beneficial---because of the weight---so we'll see in 2009 whether or not thats true. ill explain below why it makes no sense in terms of cost-cutting***, but for this line im going to say that it is completely in line with f1s green initiative. obviously the 'green' issue is a different story, but it is a step forward. someone enlighten me: have FOTA/FIA discussed much about green racing? or have their discussions been mainly about cost cutting? is there a thread? maybe some knowledgeable person start one? =D>

in my opinion, and given the situation ***again see below....the simplest and most effective solution would be to just enforce a budget cap. if im not mistaken, this was one of the first proposals, but it was quickly shot down. ive read recently that some team managers/important people (to get my point across) were dumbfounded that the 'budget cap' idea was dismissed.

anyway there are probably tons of holes here in my logic, but i need to go!!!!!! so lastly i need to explain all the ****'s in my post...

i live in the usa and watch F1 on speedtv, who feature world championship winning--with benetton--mechanic Steve Matchett as a commentator (a very brilliant and insightful one at that...hes great). he makes a great point about all this stuff and i completely agree. his point is that f1 would be cheaper if the fia stopped introducing all these changes! changing from a v-10 to a v-8 costs tons of money, kers costs a ton of money, completely rehauling the aero costs tons of money, i could go on......
but in summation, the more the fia changes stuff, the more it costs!!! as an emphasis, imagine how much money all the teams would have saved if we were running '05 specs-!-!-!-money saved developing the v-8, money saved developing KERS, money saved on the transition to SECU.....i dunno, my point is that the more the FIA or whoever want to change the sport, the more it costs!!! keep smiling, everyone, believe in people!!!

[mx_tifoso]

The thing is that the regulations cannot be left alone for 3+ seasons, that would be one of the worst ideas to be implemented by the FIA. If a species doesn't evolve and adapt, it will most likely die off, and the same goes for Formula One IMO. What's needed is consistancy and a gradual implementation of future regulations, along with a different FIA president (same goes for the FOM).

Toyota commenting that it might leave Formula One if spec engines are introduced is barely shedding the light on what seems to be a very significant issue regarding regulations and how the teams view them. But what saddens me is that other teams which are more commited and have a longer history within the sport cannot afford to make the same comment on the issue, thus forcing them to bargain with the FIA in a debate in which they can only come out even at best.

'Mahesh248', You definately need to write in a more structured manner, because it was all over the place and it was quite difficult to grasp your overall message the first time around. This comment is given as constructive and positive of course, so please take it well.

[mahesh248]

Yeah Mx , Sorry if I if put you into any discomfort in trying to understand my message, it was all informal and just casual , any ways will make sure my coming messages are well constructed and framed.I am not from an english speaking country probably thats the reason why my english might not up to the standard

[safeaschuck]

I can't forsee the differences it would make to the ability to overtake. I guess given the freedom to do so the teams would end up trying their damdest to keep the air behind the car as dirty as possible. I know corner speed would drop to begin with, but until they get decent camera work it dosen't really come across to most veiwers how pant crappingly fast those things go round a bend.
I just though it might cause the teams to cap their own aero budgets, given the diminished gains that could be wrung out.
Multiple state of the art wind tunnels and supercomputers and all the highly intelligent white coated men & women who staff them working round the clock just to come up with a flick on a sidepod or 'through the nose' vent seem like a bit of a waste of resoursces to me...
If you ploughed that much money into kers/hybrid tech you would really have a case for keeping manufacturers interested.

[axle]

Just a thought on the overtaking front - maybe the KERS boost amount should be adjusted based on grid slot...

[WhiteBlue]

http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/spor ... _13987.hbs

AMuS has another report about the meeting.

Apparently the price for engines dropped from 17 mio € for 40 engines per season to 10 mio € for 25 engines per season with life now extended to 3 race weekends for 2009.

Talks will continue in Brazil with considerations to cut team personnel to 250 heads max, 35 heads per team at races, 20 tons of air freight and only two trucks per team at European races.

The head count would be absolutely radical for McLaren employing more than 1000 people. Ferrari would probably not run far behind. I need to see that to believe it.

[Conceptual]

i usually read every post in these threads, but i admit im just skipping to the end to share my thoughts cause im in a bit of a hurry, so if its already been said then go ahead and skip it!

Obviously, the teams are completely against standardized engines--and IMO they should be. e.g. http://www.f1technical.net/news/10888

from what ive read over the past couple months, KERS may or may not be beneficial---because of the weight---so we'll see in 2009 whether or not thats true. ill explain below why it makes no sense in terms of cost-cutting***, but for this line im going to say that it is completely in line with f1s green initiative. obviously the 'green' issue is a different story, but it is a step forward. someone enlighten me: have FOTA/FIA discussed much about green racing? or have their discussions been mainly about cost cutting? is there a thread? maybe some knowledgeable person start one? =D>

in my opinion, and given the situation ***again see below....the simplest and most effective solution would be to just enforce a budget cap. if im not mistaken, this was one of the first proposals, but it was quickly shot down. ive read recently that some team managers/important people (to get my point across) were dumbfounded that the 'budget cap' idea was dismissed.

anyway there are probably tons of holes here in my logic, but i need to go!!!!!! so lastly i need to explain all the ****'s in my post...

i live in the usa and watch F1 on speedtv, who feature world championship winning--with benetton--mechanic Steve Matchett as a commentator (a very brilliant and insightful one at that...hes great). he makes a great point about all this stuff and i completely agree. his point is that f1 would be cheaper if the fia stopped introducing all these changes! changing from a v-10 to a v-8 costs tons of money, kers costs a ton of money, completely rehauling the aero costs tons of money, i could go on......
but in summation, the more the fia changes stuff, the more it costs!!! as an emphasis, imagine how much money all the teams would have saved if we were running '05 specs-!-!-!-money saved developing the v-8, money saved developing KERS, money saved on the transition to SECU.....i dunno, my point is that the more the FIA or whoever want to change the sport, the more it costs!!! keep smiling, everyone, believe in people!!!

THESE CHANGES COME BECAUSE OF THE VOCAL MINORITY FROM THE FANBASE!

When you have people crying about overtaking, crying about single team dominance, crying about THEIR team not being able to win, you will ALWAYS get changes that are based upon quasi-real arguments (the vocal minority is GREAT at making their case in an ulterior-motivated fashion), and the solutions are most often radical, expensive and completely unnecessary.

We currently have the closest pole-to-caboose gap that I have ever seen in F1. Why you would change ANYTHING when the racing is that close is a mystery to me.

Maybe because a certain team isnt winning, maybe because a certain team is...

Regardless, there is a need at the summit of motor racing, and that is for a pinnacle Formula. Someone is going to fill it, but it may not be F1.

All I know is that my interest will follow the technology, regardless of what series it is.

[Conceptual]

Just a thought on the overtaking front - maybe the KERS boost amount should be adjusted based on grid slot...

Imagine this...

P1 leads the parade lap around, pulls into his grid slot, and stops, spinning up his KERS system..... 20 seconds later, P20 pulls into his grid spot, spinning up his KERS, and the lights go out 5 seconds later...

P20 now has the most stored flywheel energy on the grid, thus giving him an advantage over those that wualified ahead of him.

We will see how this shakes out next year, but if there are non-KERS cars next year, I suspect that they get OWNED off the start, especially with engine equalization next year...

[Ogami musashi]

I can't forsee the differences it would make to the ability to overtake. I guess given the freedom to do so the teams would end up trying their damdest to keep the air behind the car as dirty as possible.

This is impossible. Making "dirty" air is not done by spelling the word.
Turbulence prevision is only possible via statistical observations and given the variation of variables in an F1 car (wing set ups and combination) it is impossible to predict the behavior of the wake and their effect of the following car.

It took several months for the OWG working on one model to find out the best configuration.

And then the configuration in itself limits a lot the wake structure simply by limiting the variables variations.

I know corner speed would drop to begin with, but until they get decent camera work it dosen't really come across to most veiwers how pant crappingly fast those things go round a bend.

What the viewers see is not that, they see drivers driving at high speed. dropping high speed cornering speeds affect the actual driving.
It strikes me everybody want to see something in surface; F1 should be (and imho is already) about interesting driving and racing for the driver. Interesting so that when you know a little about that you can keep with it.

I just though it might cause the teams to cap their own aero budgets, given the diminished gains that could be wrung out.
Multiple state of the art wind tunnels and supercomputers and all the highly intelligent white coated men & women who staff them working round the clock just to come up with a flick on a sidepod or 'through the nose' vent seem like a bit of a waste of resoursces to me...

To me, the real waste is that those flips up and only there because of regulations.
If the rear wing was not so low the flips up would not be here. If the FIA didn't mandate and restrict dimensions, then bodies would be far more efficient.
Like the actual tyres, actual F1 aerodynamics are only a product of the insane regulations.

That said, you never work in vain, you learn a lot from those windtunnel and CFD sessions.