After Bahrain do you agree with Bernie?

[Tucky]

Fair point, but the inter-team battles still had some great racing. Mercedes, Force India, Williams all let their drivers battle it out, not to mention that FI and Williams had a good battle between themselves (until Williams suffered too much rear deg that is). Might just be me, but that race was more exciting than a lot of the races the past few years.

[MarkG]

I wonder sometimes if some bods actually "get" what Grand Prix racing is all about.
Is one watching the right motorsport if they think that GP was boring???

You do see some rubbish written on forums. I see some real school kids stuff on the Autosport forum.

[steve_r]

Originally Posted by csirl

Funny how F1 putting out a some spin about it being a good race gets repeated around the media - shows what good PR can do for you. There is a big difference between PR spin and reality.

But were we watching the same race? I found it boring. One team took the lead and romped away from all the others. Even when we got a safety car to bunch up the field - you would think giving others a chance to win - the same two cars romped away again with no prospect that they would ever be caught. The result was never in doubt, baring some freak event. Boorrrrringgg.

Look at the result. With the exception of an out of place FI car which had some mechanical troubles, all of the top ten are Noahs Ark style. Boorrrringgg. This suggests that the race was not a contest - the outcome was predetermined by the relative strengths of the cars. The drivers had zero impact so long as the car was kept on the track. Is this what people want? Drivers having no impact on the result?

We must have been watching different races. Yes the result is noah's ark like, but that doesn't tell the whole story. According to you I must have been dreaming when I saw the Williams, Force Indias, Ferraris, McLarens and Red Bulls all duking it out on track for points paying positions. Perhaps the PR machine brain washed me to believe this actually happened.

But hey, each to his own. Unfortuanetly if you found that race "Boorrrrringgg", I fear you are in for a bad season.

[chillibowl]

do i agree with BE? thats a hard one.

-for the first time the tires did what they were supposed to. two cars on different strategies, find themselves at the end with one on primes the other on options, and they are perfectly matched.

-DRS zones allowed cars to follow closely enough we had several close groups with passes seemingly happening everywhere on track.

- a Tilkedrome layout (in the Middle East no less) proved it could be the perfect compliment to the new rules.

- night race made for a great time slot in the west...which meant people were actually up to watch this magnificent race.

in fairness BE deserves much of the credit for these things. certainly for the local, the time zone, and the gimmicks which actually all came together in perfect fashion.

he might be an old dog, and his recent ramblings aside, at this race his vision shined imo.

[321Go]

Bahrain night race was NOT Bernie's idea. The idea was first put to Bernie by BIC chairman Zayed Al Zayani during the race weekend of 2013, who also wanted the race to be the opening race of the season. Bernie finally agreed to the night race after Bahrain lost the bid to host the opening round of this season, and pressure from Zayed Al Zayani. Don't give the 'old dog' a bone he doesn't deserve.

[JamesH]

Originally Posted by csirl

Funny how F1 putting out a some spin about it being a good race gets repeated around the media - shows what good PR can do for you. There is a big difference between PR spin and reality.

But were we watching the same race? I found it boring. One team took the lead and romped away from all the others. Even when we got a safety car to bunch up the field - you would think giving others a chance to win - the same two cars romped away again with no prospect that they would ever be caught. The result was never in doubt, baring some freak event. Boorrrrringgg.

Look at the result. With the exception of an out of place FI car which had some mechanical troubles, all of the top ten are Noahs Ark style. Boorrrringgg. This suggests that the race was not a contest - the outcome was predetermined by the relative strengths of the cars. The drivers had zero impact so long as the car was kept on the track. Is this what people want? Drivers having no impact on the result?

You do realise that since about 1950, the results of F1 races have been, to a large part, determined by the strength of the car?

I'd stop watching F1 now IIWY. You are guaranteed to be disappointed. Find something better to do with your Sunday afternoons/evenings/mornings. Lots of race circuits around where you can go and watch spec series punching it out. And good fun it is too.

[stripedcat]

I do think that the hybrid type cars are mistake. The turbos - I'm okay with. This idea that F1 can be "green" is absurd - I mean look at all of the equipment and personnel that has to be shipped to each race? How many jumbos is that using?

I do think that DRS does sort of take away the skill of good overtaking. It's also just used as a sort of sticking plaster solution for the dreaded "dirty air problem" of F1.

Also on a related note - wasn't it Bernie grand idea for "double points on the last race"? Another mad idea from him.

Bahrain was a very good race. It was also superb that there was a battle for the lead - and a team allowed both drivers to race one another.

[paddy]

It was great in my view.. I've really enjoyed the season so far. You can see the drivers working in every corner of every lap and they earn their money battling wheel to wheel. I like the sound they make too although a bit louder would be an improvement. To be honest for five very intelligent men Bernie, Vettel, Montezemolo, Horner and Newey have spoken some absolute rubbish over the last few weeks. Bernie commenting on the noise when he hadn't even heard the cars and the other four spouting because they are losing.

[Kempi]

Right, suddenly all is good and anyone who does not like the engine regs is sour grapes because they are losing.

Let's take a look at the race and sound-threads two races ago. Oh, a vast majority found the engine regs crap because the cars did not sound right and there was no racing.

Now, one good race and everything is great? You guys have an opinion, let others (including competitors) have one too.

[P38 in workshop]

We have seen some good racing this year.We have also seen some epic whingeing from those who feel disadvantaged.It is crystal clear that some teams made a good choice of engine partner and each engine supplier has good and less good customers developing cars to carry those engines.Bernie has other matters that should be occupying his attention at the moment and complaining about the sound of the engines seems to be a diversionary tactic.
Ron Dennis made the point at the weekend that those clamouring for an easing of the restrictions on engine development seemed to have overlooked the obvious point that those currently in front would have the opportunity to increase their advantage,just as the laggards would have the chance to make their power units a bit better.
By the way,don't the new engines sound a lot better than the old V8's?

[Knowlesy]

Originally Posted by paddy

It was great in my view.. I've really enjoyed the season so far. You can see the drivers working in every corner of every lap and they earn their money battling wheel to wheel. I like the sound they make too although a bit louder would be an improvement. To be honest for five very intelligent men Bernie, Vettel, Montezemolo, Horner and Newey have spoken some absolute rubbish over the last few weeks. Bernie commenting on the noise when he hadn't even heard the cars and the other four spouting because they are losing.

Pretty much sums it up tbh. I guess that's F1 for you! I too have enjoyed watching the cars dance on the edge, it makes even the worst race moderately entertaining. All that torque!

Originally Posted by Kempi

Right, suddenly all is good and anyone who does not like the engine regs is sour grapes because they are losing.

Let's take a look at the race and sound-threads two races ago. Oh, a vast majority found the engine regs crap because the cars did not sound right and there was no racing.

Now, one good race and everything is great? You guys have an opinion, let others (including competitors) have one too.

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by stripedcat

I do think that the hybrid type cars are mistake. The turbos - I'm okay with. This idea that F1 can be "green" is absurd - I mean look at all of the equipment and personnel that has to be shipped to each race? How many jumbos is that using?

If you looked at it as the regs FORCING the teams to remove some downforce, which would make for better racing with just an incidental benefit of the cars being more efficient, would that make it easier to stomach?

F1 used to be a place that tried all kinds of new technology. F1 has gotten so stuck that if we didn't have paddle shifters now and somebody tried to introduce them, they would be banned. Personally, I'm not in favor of paddle shifters, but they do represent the sort of technical development we used to see in F1.

[JamesH]

Originally Posted by stripedcat

I do think that the hybrid type cars are mistake.

I don't. It one of the few things in F1 that may have some road relevance, and that makes it more interesting from a technical perspective. That's where the greenness comes in, not in the F1 circus itself.

And the fact that these car are only a tiny amount slower than last years, on 30% less fuel is miraculous. And since they are fuel saving most of the time, imagine how fast they could go with just a little extra fuel flow - even faster than last year. BUT, the cars are already at the safety limit speedwise, so that's not an option. So there is nothing wrong with the PU, in fact, they are probably the best PU's ever to grace an F1 car. How can that be a mistake?

[wnut]

Originally Posted by JamesH

I don't. It one of the few things in F1 that may have some road relevance, and that makes it more interesting from a technical perspective. That's where the greenness comes in, not in the F1 circus itself.

And the fact that these car are only a tiny amount slower than last years, on 30% less fuel is miraculous. And since they are fuel saving most of the time, imagine how fast they could go with just a little extra fuel flow - even faster than last year. BUT, the cars are already at the safety limit speedwise, so that's not an option. So there is nothing wrong with the PU, in fact, they are probably the best PU's ever to grace an F1 car. How can that be a mistake?

Set the minimum weight at 450 kg and make the PU / KERS and battery approach optional and unlimited!
Then we will see if it is a nonsense technology or not!

[Paradise City]

I only saw bits of the interview as I was multitasking at the time but being 'green' or being seen to being green is politically important. When renewal of contracts are up for grabs or even an entry into a new market, the politicians and players are reluctant to be seen to be endorsing some activity that has the reputation of being a wasteful, polluting extravagance. So if its relevant to the spirit of our age - and that's green technologies - then the sports bosses will take it in that direction.

I don't care about the noise as long as there is some noise. It's easily fixed or should be anyway.

[JamesH]

Originally Posted by wnut

Set the minimum weight at 450 kg and make the PU / KERS and battery approach optional and unlimited!
Then we will see if it is a nonsense technology or not!

Well, if that is the case, I'd be using a gas turbine to generate electricity, to in hub electric motors giving 4 wheel drive, with supercapacitors for energy recovery storage under braking.

You don't need an IC engine at all if all bets are off.

Although this sort of spec would require robot drivers as they would be too fast for humans.

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by JamesH

And the fact that these car are only a tiny amount slower than last years, on 30% less fuel is miraculous.

I was marveling yesterday how the noise has gotten so much attention and not one peep about this, which is truly miraculous.

[JeremySmith]

I just watched an interview with Bernie, I think he is so out of touch with how F1 should move forward with new technology and marketing the sport ..

[wolfhound]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

I just watched an interview with Bernie, I think he is so out of touch with how F1 should move forward with new technology and marketing the sport ..

Bernie is known for having a reason for saying something and is a past master at diversionary tactics. I came across an article in Autosport that suggests that he is trying to buy back F1. With that information a lot of what he has said recent times started to make sence.

http://plus.autosport.com/premium/fe...o-buy-f1-back/


http://tentenths.com/forum/showpost....5&postcount=93

[Adam43]

F1 isn't green. That's a very simplistic statement.

A highly competitive arena developing these technologies is going to push forward knowledge and competence in this area. This may not even be directly, but could be indirectly in working practices and processes that can be applied to similar or not so similar technologies.

Oh, and it is a sport with an interesting technical challenge.

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by JamesH

Well, if that is the case, I'd be using a gas turbine to generate electricity, to in hub electric motors giving 4 wheel drive, with supercapacitors for energy recovery storage under braking.

Sounds like my entry, except I'm using flywheel energy recovery in place of the supercapacitors.

Originally Posted by JamesH

Although this sort of spec would require robot drivers as they would be too fast for humans.

Nah, just cut the fuel allocation back to 60 KG.

Instead, we get the Bernie version of F1.

[JeremySmith]

Sorry Adam what are you saying ?

[JeremySmith]

Bernie read this ..

http://willthef1journo.wordpress.com

[wnut]

Originally Posted by JamesH

Well, if that is the case, I'd be using a gas turbine to generate electricity, to in hub electric motors giving 4 wheel drive, with supercapacitors for energy recovery storage under braking.

You don't need an IC engine at all if all bets are off.

Although this sort of spec would require robot drivers as they would be too fast for humans.

No you wouldn't!

Do you know what a 150 hp electric motor weighs?
Now you have 4 all as unsprung weight!
Plus a 600 hp generator.
Plus a gas turbine.
Plus a turbojet to be used as a gas generator.
Plus the capacitors.
The whole lot to weigh less than 450 kg, not likely!

James, I think you are specifying a locomotive, not a GP car.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

Sorry Adam what are you saying ?

The benefits aren't developing a hybrid solution you can simply use in a road car, the benefits are improved ways of thinking, packaging, processing, developing a similar (or not so similar) technology in road and other applications. The development of these ideas happens much quicker in this highly competitive environment.

Consider how the teams turned round their testing woes before the first race. Very impressive, in such a short time and with no running.