[Rules] Future Rule Changes

[wnut]

Originally Posted by 321Go

It's about the racing apparently??



No.. wait, is about development apparently??
Hitting your head against a brick wall can cause confusion I've heard.... mmmkay.

To me F1 is about racing the point of which is development.

[321Go]

Not 2014, but for 2017, the teams and the FIA are considering bringing back active suspension - which has been banned since 1993.

Me like this idea.

[Inigo Montoya]

Originally Posted by 321Go

Not 2014, but for 2017, the teams and the FIA are considering bringing back active suspension - which has been banned since 1993.

Me like this idea.

Yes I also saw this story. It is an excellent idea. I like this continued trend to bring F1 technology to the level of road cars.

However, I am not sold on it being a cost-cutting measure.

[wolfhound]

Originally Posted by 321Go

Not 2014, but for 2017, the teams and the FIA are considering bringing back active suspension - which has been banned since 1993.

Me like this idea.

I wonder who's bright idea that was. I don't understand how its going to cut cost as that was the reason for the proposal.

I wonder which team is going to gain the most if that comes about but the person who designed the cars of the that dominated the previous active era is still doing that today and no doubt would leave everybody else years behind.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

I wonder who's bright idea that was. I don't understand how its going to cut cost as that was the reason for the proposal.

I wonder which team is going to gain the most if that comes about but the person who designed the cars of the that dominated the previous active era is still doing that today and no doubt would leave everybody else years behind.

This is just another ridiculous idea that results from the strategic group that runs F1.

To be a cost saving measure (if it really could save money) it would need to be the adoption of a proven system available to everyone.
In effect a spec system.

If they have freedom to develop it or have to come up with their own (reinvent the wheel) it will only drive up team costs, separate the sharks from the minnows and fragment the racing further.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by Inigo Montoya

Yes I also saw this story. It is an excellent idea. I like this continued trend to bring F1 technology to the level of road cars.

However, I am not sold on it being a cost-cutting measure.

The cost of developing an active suspension system is probably minimal compared to the expenses of the current passive and interconnected suspensions, that require of development, simulation and setup work before and during the race weekends as well as completely different parts developed for different tracks.
The passive front and rear suspensions have been interconnected since a couple years now. Interconnected suspensions are a true masterpiece of engineering but also very expensive, as it is quite difficult to develop a well-functioning basic system and different parts for each track with specific properties are necessary. An active suspension would most likely allow teams to develop just one suspension system for the entire year, as changes needed to cope with different tracks properties throughout the season - if any - can be implemented by simply uploading new software.

I would certainly advocate the reintroduction of active suspensions. It would make Formula 1 more advanced, more efficient and hence more relevant. The banning of active suspension cannot be justified by the assumption that driver aids are evil - an assumption I can no longer agree with - as these do not drive the car and takes nothing away from the driver.

[Inigo Montoya]

Thanks for the excellent explanation Pingguest. I also agree that this is not a driver aid. I look forward to them accepting this rule change.

[chillibowl]

doesnt active suspension also help with downforce thus reducing the need/importance for aero development?

im not tech minded so im probably wrong about that relationship but if it is the case then wouldn't there be savings here (provided the savings are just niot spent on something else of course).

[Pingguest]

The idea might not be as bright as we initially thought: GrandPrix.com and The Telegraph report that the proposed active suspension systems will be standardized.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/mot...abandoned.html

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns27793.html

So far for Formula 1's relevance.

[Inigo Montoya]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

The idea might not be as bright as we initially thought: GrandPrix.com and The Telegraph report that the proposed active suspension systems will be standardized.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/mot...abandoned.html

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns27793.html

So far for Formula 1's relevance.

Bah! More standardized parts. This kills a whole avenue of useful development.

[JeremySmith]

We are going to continue this discussion over in the "Active Suspension" thread

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Inigo Montoya

Bah! More standardized parts. This kills a whole avenue of useful development.

That's one way to cut costs.

[321Go]

Thought this thread might be the best place to post a link to this article by John Leicester - on the new F1, and the fuel reg's.

Well worth a read.

[wolfhound]

Originally Posted by 321Go

Thought this thread might be the best place to post a link to this article by John Leicester - on the new F1, and the fuel reg's.

Well worth a read.

That the sort of message we should be getting from Bernie & Co.

[Peter Mallett]

As Earth's atmosphere warms alarmingly and fills with heat-trapping gases, and the writing on the wall -- "People, we're in trouble!" -- looms ever larger, Formula One has steadily become a guilty pleasure, the motorsport equivalent of blue whale burger or wearing panda fur.

No need to go further. Complete ********.

[mikuni]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

No need to go further. Complete ********.

Agree entirely! "Monster 2.4l V8s"

He's missing the point completely. F1 isn't the problem and it has never been. The new regs are looking to find ways to further increase efficiency in normal vehicles, if you need to justify these new regs at all.

If global sports really wanted to reduce their carbon footprint, reducing the jet setting across the globe to different corners every weekend would save more fuel than an entire race weekend. I'm not saying don't travel, but increasing the efficiencies in how they travel (as F1 has been in recent years) is the way to do it.

[Knowlesy]

Well a lot of the processes involved in F1 are already very green, from the factories to the transport.

In any case, making the cars more fuel efficient in no way precludes the circus from flying around the world. I don't know why people keep raising that point.

Most things the teams can control are more or less environmentally friendly.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by mikuni

Agree entirely! "Monster 2.4l V8s"

He's missing the point completely. F1 isn't the problem and it has never been. The new regs are looking to find ways to further increase efficiency in normal vehicles, if you need to justify these new regs at all.

If global sports really wanted to reduce their carbon footprint, reducing the jet setting across the globe to different corners every weekend would save more fuel than an entire race weekend. I'm not saying don't travel, but increasing the efficiencies in how they travel (as F1 has been in recent years) is the way to do it.

F1 should stop messing around

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dO6JtncrY08

No need for any driver input at all! Job done!

http://www.autoblog.com/2013/12/06/v...ng-cars-video/


Drive through penalty every time a "driver" touches a control!

[wolfhound]

Originally Posted by wnut

F1 should stop messing around

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dO6JtncrY08

No need for any driver input at all! Job done!

http://www.autoblog.com/2013/12/06/v...ng-cars-video/


Drive through penalty every time a "driver" touches a control!

I wonder how good they are at a do or die overtake?

[wnut]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

I wonder how good they are at a do or die overtake?

Can't be much worse than Pastor!

[321Go]

2014 regulations already benefitting road car technology via formula1.com

[bjohnsonsmith]

I don't know if this necessarily comes under 2014 rule changes but the F1 Strategy Group is planning to hold talks, with a view to reintroducing Titanium skid plates and glow in the dark disk-brakes, to name a few ideas or gimmicks, in order to spice up F1 visually.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/113621

[Rgms320]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

I don't know if this necessarily comes under 2014 rule changes but the F1 Strategy Group is planning to hold talks, with a view to reintroducing Titanium skid plates and glow in the dark disk-brakes, to name a few ideas or gimmicks, in order to spice up F1 visually.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/113621

We can have a lot of fun with this.

How about injecting propane into the exhaust trumpet while DRS is open? Think how spectacular it would look if the overtaking car was shooting out a big, bright 5-meter flame from the exhaust as it was overtaking?

Or how about installing 50,000 watt sound systems at all F1 venues, which would play recordings of V10 F1 cars during practices, quals, and the races?

Or the addition of the always-favorite Hotwheels loop-the-loop track sections?.

What's your favorite?

(Seriously -- doesn't the F1 Stragegy Group have anything meaningful to do?)

[Gingers4Justice]

I don't see the problem with it. We're talking about re-introducing something the sport has lost - quite different from introducing a new gimmick like DRS.

[Inigo Montoya]

Originally Posted by Rgms320

(Seriously -- doesn't the F1 Stragegy Group have anything meaningful to do?)

You mean like figuring out ways to make the PU's louder?