What would you call the new series?

[FGD]

Formula 2008.5, since they want to keep the 2009 rules for Who knows how long minus KERS, the only technical innovation in F1 in the last 15 years.

Where's the statement from FOTA saying they want to go back to 2008? KERS is the only innovation in F1 in 15 years? Clearly, you've been in a coma since 1993. KERS is very interesting but misapplied to F1.

[ISLAMATRON]

Formula 2008.5, since they want to keep the 2009 rules for Who knows how long minus KERS, the only technical innovation in F1 in the last 15 years.

Where's the statement from FOTA saying they want to go back to 2008? KERS is the only innovation in F1 in 15 years? Clearly, you've been in a coma since 1993. KERS is very interesting but misapplied to F1.

What has changed in the cars since 1994? That was when active suspension was banned. What innovative new technology has been introduced since then? Biggest thing might be the inerter.

[Giblet]

Format 1

Incantation 1

Arrangement 1

Composition 1

[FGD]

Formula 2008.5, since they want to keep the 2009 rules for Who knows how long minus KERS, the only technical innovation in F1 in the last 15 years.

Where's the statement from FOTA saying they want to go back to 2008? KERS is the only innovation in F1 in 15 years? Clearly, you've been in a coma since 1993. KERS is very interesting but misapplied to F1.

What has changed in the cars since 1994? That was when active suspension was banned. What innovative new technology has been introduced since then? Biggest thing might be the inerter.

I think you're missing the point. Innovations in F1 as complex and expensive as KERS have never before been mandated by the FIA. Innovations such as mass dampers, active suspension, flexible wings & floors, traction control and even carbon fibre tubs were all born by competing engineers fighting for advantage on the race track. That's what innovation is about.

The engineers in F1 don't need Max, Bernie or anyone to tell them how to be creative.

[ISLAMATRON]

What has changed in the cars since 1994? That was when active suspension was banned. What innovative new technology has been introduced since then? Biggest thing might be the inerter.

I think you're missing the point. Innovations in F1 as complex and expensive as KERS have never before been mandated by the FIA. Innovations such as mass dampers, active suspension, flexible wings & floors, traction control and even carbon fibre tubs were all born by competing engineers fighting for advantage on the race track. That's what innovation is about.

The engineers in F1 don't need Max, Bernie or anyone to tell them how to be creative.

obviously they do because the team presidents would rather battle over who has the better wheelnut than look towards real innovation.... if you didnt notice KERS is not mandatory, it was just reallowed this year after being banned in the mid nineties... the regs have allways said that the engine could be the only mode of propulsion, so the regs were opened up and the teams fight against it, well some of them do, the teams that are headed by idiot politician types and not engineers.(Ferrari, Renault)

Mass dampers, flexi wings and traction control are not innovations but rather just improvements on existing technologies. Again I ask what has been innovative on the cars since active suspension?

[Michiba]

What has changed in the cars since 1994? That was when active suspension was banned. What innovative new technology has been introduced since then? Biggest thing might be the inerter.

I think you're missing the point. Innovations in F1 as complex and expensive as KERS have never before been mandated by the FIA. Innovations such as mass dampers, active suspension, flexible wings & floors, traction control and even carbon fibre tubs were all born by competing engineers fighting for advantage on the race track. That's what innovation is about.

The engineers in F1 don't need Max, Bernie or anyone to tell them how to be creative.

obviously they do because the team presidents would rather battle over who has the better wheelnut than look towards real innovation.... if you didnt notice KERS is not mandatory, it was just reallowed this year after being banned in the mid nineties... the regs have allways said that the engine could be the only mode of propulsion, so the regs were opened up and the teams fight against it, well some of them do, the teams that are headed by idiot politician types and not engineers.(Ferrari, Renault)

Mass dampers, flexi wings and traction control are not innovations but rather just improvements on existing technologies. Again I ask what has been innovative on the cars since active suspension?

semantics. How do you argue what an innovation is and what an improvement is?

[paused]

What has changed in the cars since 1994? That was when active suspension was banned. What innovative new technology has been introduced since then? Biggest thing might be the inerter.

I think you're missing the point. Innovations in F1 as complex and expensive as KERS have never before been mandated by the FIA. Innovations such as mass dampers, active suspension, flexible wings & floors, traction control and even carbon fibre tubs were all born by competing engineers fighting for advantage on the race track. That's what innovation is about.

The engineers in F1 don't need Max, Bernie or anyone to tell them how to be creative.

obviously they do because the team presidents would rather battle over who has the better wheelnut than look towards real innovation.... if you didnt notice KERS is not mandatory, it was just reallowed this year after being banned in the mid nineties... the regs have allways said that the engine could be the only mode of propulsion, so the regs were opened up and the teams fight against it, well some of them do, the teams that are headed by idiot politician types and not engineers.(Ferrari, Renault)

Mass dampers, flexi wings and traction control are not innovations but rather just improvements on existing technologies. Again I ask what has been innovative on the cars since active suspension?

Personally, I think seamless shift is a huge innovation. No doubt others may say this too is an improvement, but from a technical stand point I think that you can make this work reliably is a huge innovation.

[ISLAMATRON]

I think you're missing the point. Innovations in F1 as complex and expensive as KERS have never before been mandated by the FIA. Innovations such as mass dampers, active suspension, flexible wings & floors, traction control and even carbon fibre tubs were all born by competing engineers fighting for advantage on the race track. That's what innovation is about.

The engineers in F1 don't need Max, Bernie or anyone to tell them how to be creative.

obviously they do because the team presidents would rather battle over who has the better wheelnut than look towards real innovation.... if you didnt notice KERS is not mandatory, it was just reallowed this year after being banned in the mid nineties... the regs have allways said that the engine could be the only mode of propulsion, so the regs were opened up and the teams fight against it, well some of them do, the teams that are headed by idiot politician types and not engineers.(Ferrari, Renault)

Mass dampers, flexi wings and traction control are not innovations but rather just improvements on existing technologies. Again I ask what has been innovative on the cars since active suspension?

semantics. How do you argue what an innovation is and what an improvement is?

good question,... wings have been on the F1 cars for some time now, they were an innovation at the time of their introduction, but making them flexible at high loads was an improvement on an already existing technology.

tuned mass dampers have been used long before F1, F1 has been using dampers for quite some time before renault put it in the nose of the R26, they were only new in terms of being placed in the nose of an F1 car. I think some of the other teams had already placed extra mass in their regular suspension dampers to create a similar effect to Renaults.

Traction control might could be considered an innovation but it was introduced before 1994, and it had been used previous to F1.

[ISLAMATRON]

Personally, I think seamless shift is a huge innovation. No doubt others may say this too is an improvement, but from a technical stand point I think that you can make this work reliably is a huge innovation.

It actually is, but didnt they adopt the technology from motorbike racing? When Williams tried that CVT it was defiantly innovative, plus it was theorized it could give them several seconds per lap improvement. Unfortunately the regs didnt let us see seamless shift continue before it was reigned in, but it terms of lap time I dont think it was as big as effective as the introduction of semi-automatic gearboxes.

[Michiba]

good question,... wings have been on the F1 cars for some time now, they were an innovation at the time of their introduction, but making them flexible at high loads was an improvement on an already existing technology.

tuned mass dampers have been used long before F1, F1 has been using dampers for quite some time before renault put it in the nose of the R26, they were only new in terms of being placed in the nose of an F1 car. I think some of the other teams had already placed extra mass in their regular suspension dampers to create a similar effect to Renaults.

Traction control might could be considered an innovation but it was introduced before 1994, and it had been used previous to F1.

Then by definition, as an example, wheel fairings are an innovation?

[paused]

Personally, I think seamless shift is a huge innovation. No doubt others may say this too is an improvement, but from a technical stand point I think that you can make this work reliably is a huge innovation.

It actually is, but didnt they adopt the technology from motorbike racing? When Williams tried that CVT it was defiantly innovative, plus it was theorized it could give them several seconds per lap improvement. Unfortunately the regs didnt let us see seamless shift continue before it was reigned in, but it terms of lap time I dont think it was as big as effective as the introduction of semi-automatic gearboxes.

Yes but I don't think many fans would want to see true CVT's anyway (so probably good they are banned). Half the appeal of racing at this level is "hearing" the cars go through gears. I don't think anyone wants to listen to car sitting on 18K and the CVT adjusting the tourque

[jonathan189]

GP1.

[kilcoo316]

Mass dampers, flexi wings and traction control are not innovations but rather just improvements on existing technologies. Again I ask what has been innovative on the cars since active suspension?

Disappointing.

You know better than that.


Virtually all engineering is an improvement on existing technologies.

[ISLAMATRON]

Then by definition, as an example, wheel fairings are an innovation?

I guess they are, but how sad is it when that might be one of the bigger ones in the last 15 years

Yes but I don't think many fans would want to see true CVT's anyway (so probably good they are banned). Half the appeal of racing at this level is "hearing" the cars go through gears. I don't think anyone wants to listen to car sitting on 18K and the CVT adjusting the tourque

yeah CVT's wouldnt have sounded good, but it would have been cool to see for a little while. TC took away fro the show but they allowed that for a while.

Disappointing.
You know better than that.
Virtually all engineering is an improvement on existing technologies.

True, but I still think there is a clear delineation between basic improvement and true innovation. What was the wheel an improvement on?

[bhall]

What does any of this have to do with a name for the new series?

And on-topic: how about Type A World Championship (or A-type)?