F1T regulations proposal

[matt21]

I started a proposal for 2020 regulations.

Please feel free to add ideas.

http://www.directupload.net/file/d/4029 ... iz_pdf.htm

[VFC_Cipher]

Interesting reading. I am no 3D wiz so I don't think I can generate a model of what you propose, but I am sure Scarbs or someone can.

[Illustrated Tech]

Interesting idea matt. Just out of interest, what's the objective of your proposed regs (better racing, more relevent technology, reduced cost etc)?

[matt21]

Reducing cost and open up the rules to inspire people in coming up with more and different solutions to the challenges of designing a racing car.

The main factor behind this is efficiency. If you have an limited amount of energy you can use and restricted power you will build an efficient car.
And in opening up the rules you don´t have to wring every last detail from the car in order to get more performance. Because imo this is what it makes expensive.

I´m also thinking about putting in a cost cap for what you can spend per year. And this would include everything, from design, engine, labour to the hospitality.

If you want to represent your team at the races for your sponsors, to the media etc., why not setting up a general area where every team gets room to do this. This could be paid for by the commercial rights holder. Would cut cost for driving around your team bases, provide catering etc.

Another point I would include in the races, that everybody who finishes a race and is classified gets half a point (like in WEC).

BTW, I need help for the bodywork rules. So if somebody is keen to help, this would be an area.
Also, what kind of technology would you like to see bearing in mind the cost and reasonable speeds. I want fast and challenging cars. What I don´t want are dangerously fast cars.

[Tim.Wright]

I´m also thinking about putting in a cost cap for what you can spend per year. And this would include everything, from design, engine, labour to the hospitality.

With a cost cap it's almost a trivial task to write a set of interesting regulations. With the costs contained you can really open up everything.

It's the perfect solution - but its impossible to implement.

All of the big teams have parent companies with massive R&D arms, spin-off companies, sister-companies, share holding/equity companies and an army of suppliers where they are able to hide expenses. Any auditing for the cost cap will necessarily have to spread to all of these other entities as well.

You only need to see how much trouble the FIA are having managing the technical side of the sport and that is supposed to be their bread and butter. The business side I imagine would be at least as complicated. Auditing that is likely to come at a prohibitive cost to the FIA.

[Mikey_s]

My 2 cents;
I don't think the sport is too broken, but there are a number of rules that simply don't make much sense to me and detract from the ability of teams to innovate.
I simply don't understand why there is a fuel flow regulation; if a team wishes to use up all the fuel on the first lap of the race, let them do it. Limit the mass of fuel on board, then let the teams use it as they wish
I don't understand why there is a limit to the energy recovery and discharge; This is where novel technologies could be developed which would have direct relevance to road vehicles.
Let the teams decide which tyres they would like to run for the race, in place of insisting that they must use both compounds. Similarly, if they wish to use soft on the front and hard on the rear... why not? - Moto GP does it!
I do understand the need to limit the 'arms race' that was engine technology development in previous years, but I hate the fact that Ferrari, Renault and Honda are unable to develop a competitive power unit. It means that Merc will continue to win for many more races. I have no doubt that the others know exactly what to do, but are simply unable to do it with the current token system. This is killing the racing and driving viewers away from the sport. Merc did an amazing job, they deserve the championship(s) that they have won and will win, but unless the others are able to respond this will go on indefinitely.
... rant over!

[matt21]

[quote="Tim.Wright]
It's the perfect solution - but its impossible to implement.[/quote]
A company has to do a P&L anyhow. If they are obliged to deliver this to an independent instance for checking, this should work. If you spend too much, you´re gone.

I simply don't understand why there is a fuel flow regulation; if a team wishes to use up all the fuel on the first lap of the race, let them do it. Limit the mass of fuel on board, then let the teams use it as they wish

I agree. but if 80% run out of fuel before the race, it would be boring. This is why I would give 1/2 a point to everybody classified at the end of the race.

I don't understand why there is a limit to the energy recovery and discharge; This is where novel technologies could be developed which would have direct relevance to road vehicles.

For that reason, I simply proposose to limit the overall energy stored onboard the car. The more you can recover the better for you.

Let the teams decide which tyres they would like to run for the race, in place of insisting that they must use both compounds. Similarly, if they wish to use soft on the front and hard on the rear... why not? - Moto GP does it!

Agree, but you should limit it to two compounds per weekend/team to be declared to the tire manufacturer prior the race.

I do understand the need to limit the 'arms race' ...

I think, if you open up technology then you don´t have a race like in those days, as you have simpler methods of developing.

[Tim.Wright]

It's the perfect solution - but its impossible to implement.

A company has to do a P&L anyhow. If they are obliged to deliver this to an independent instance for checking, this should work. If you spend too much, you´re gone.

And how do you propose to asses and control whether the work carried out by these hundreds of supporting companies is directly related to a particular team's F1 activities or not?

Practically - it's impossible. That's why it has not been implemented.

[matt21]

And how do you propose to asses and control whether the work carried out by these hundreds of supporting companies is directly related to a particular team's F1 activities or not?

Practically - it's impossible. That's why it has not been implemented.

For sure, you can´t control what any of these companies is doing. But you can control what the team is paying them. And a company can only do R&D on a limited budget. So the suppliers will not spend millions if they don´t get it back.

[turbof1]

And how do you propose to asses and control whether the work carried out by these hundreds of supporting companies is directly related to a particular team's F1 activities or not?

Practically - it's impossible. That's why it has not been implemented.

For sure, you can´t control what any of these companies is doing. But you can control what the team is paying them. And a company can only do R&D on a limited budget. So the suppliers will not spend millions if they don´t get it back.

You can't control any of that. Ferrari for instance could book a lot of its expenses at its automotive side of the company. "That R&D budget into a lighter carbon composite? New Ferrari roadcar, mate!"

It's as Wesley said, you can easily set up a system of contractors and subcontractors and make it appear as such activities are outside F1. Ironically that would benefit the big teams like Mercedes and Ferrari, who are huge companies with many subdivisions, contrary to Marussia who does not have such a system to start with. Or what about Red Bull, a company who is involved in tons of sports? Not a single auditor there would be able to distinguish the several operations.

It's very much comparable to dreaming ideals I hear so often in my country. "We need to tax the 2% richest persons in Belgium to close the budget deficit!" Very nice, until you ask how they'll do it without having those 2% moving their capital to circumvent new laws.

You can't limit the input. You can however limit the output. Free up technical regulations, but limit for instance the amount of materials they can use. Limit cfd and windtunnel time. Limit the technical staff they bring along for the weekends. If you hammer down every single thing a team can pour budget into that increases car performance, you will limit budgets by a much more natural way.

[mertol]

Why is everyone caring about budgets. The problem is not the big budgets, the problem is that the sport is not appealing and that is why there aren't enough money. Reducing costs is the wrong direction.

[Just_a_fan]

Presumably you missed teams going to the wall in the last couple of years? That wasn't due to boredom, it was due to the massive costs of just turning up. Forget competing in F1, just building and running 2 cars for a season requires milti-million dollar budgets. If teams fold we will end up with 10 car grids. Now that will be dull!

We need 20-30 cars on the grid. We also need decent race coverage do that we can watching the racing further back in the field but that seems impossible for Bernie to understand.

[wesley123]

To be honest, that has always been the case. Teams come and go.

However, the problem here is that it's bad for business to have that entire field change every race.

[graham.reeds]

My suggestion is a two tier formula.

Formula One has unlimited costs.
Formula Two has a single engine supplier at a fixed cost. Engine supplied by the previous season constructor winner. Standardised tub and nose. Limited amount of CFD & Wind tunnel work.

Prize money goes into three pots. F1, F2 and overall. The top F2 team might earn more than the bottom F1 team.

No extra money for Ferrari or Red Bull.

[mertol]

Presumably you missed teams going to the wall in the last couple of years? That wasn't due to boredom, it was due to the massive costs of just turning up. Forget competing in F1, just building and running 2 cars for a season requires milti-million dollar budgets. If teams fold we will end up with 10 car grids. Now that will be dull!

We need 20-30 cars on the grid. We also need decent race coverage do that we can watching the racing further back in the field but that seems impossible for Bernie to understand.

So they need better sponsors not cheaper regulations. Notice how the budget limitation mostly affects big teams? It won't do anything for the small, dropping out teams.