Debate: Is Formula One Heading in the Right Direction?

[shedz]

Clearly F1 is heading the wrong way and it seems it will not change in the coming years.
FIA world motor sport council just gave more mandate to Bernie and Todt to "solve urgent problems in F1" Seriously ?

I am watching F1, Indycar, WEC, ELMS and MotoGP.
F1 is by far the most boring one. Once first lap completed (sometimes even first corner passed), you can switch off the TV, you know who is the winner.

Here are my thoughts:
- All the rules to manage cost have miserably failed. Why ? Because it is in the nature of this sport to spend hundred of millions to be on top. No matter what saving is intended, team will spend their money elsewhere.
- The engine and gearbox limit is fine for the sake of reliability but not for the sake of cost cutting.
- The penalty system is just madness:
How on earth can you give a 65 place grid penalty to a driver because his engine failed ??? Most of the time it is not his fault, so the driver should not get penalized, only the team. To effectively penalize the team, you can take points out of the manufacturer championship or put in place financial penalties.
All the penalties for just racing a bit aggressively... are ruining the fun. I mean I don't watch F1 to see crashes but just let the drivers race each other. Dangerous moves needs to be punished for sure (changing line in the breaking area when being passed is forbidden and yet we see many young drivers do it and never get penalized whereas the are penalized for aggressive racing (e.g. Max Verstappen in Abu Dhabi).
- get rid of the bloody f****g radio. I can't stand to here those whiners constantly complaining ("too much rain", "not enough this", "too many that", "He didn't give me enough space") Just shut up and drive !
- Racing: no comments, just watch:
At Spa, start at 1:50

Here again at silverstone (it went on for several laps in a row, I almost died watching this) :

Wet track ?? : at Fuji

- Tyres: F1 is all about that nowadays: tyre economy... unbelievable (and F1 is supposed to be the pinnacle of the sport...). it's like saying to Usain Bolt on a 100m : "save energy...

- rules: In F1 there are so complex. Every new design or invention is immediately banned, progress is not allowed. It is only a question of areodynamics (that destroy racing by the way)
The WEC rules on the other hand for the LMP1, made by the ACO are totally open. You have a quantity of energy available, you are free to develop any power plant that gives you this quantity of energy. The Audi as a big Diesel engine + a flywheel. The Porsche as a very small petrol engine (2l V4) + a battery pack. Yet their performance is similar and they are able to race each other quite effectively.

In F1, to have good conscience, they went to the crappy so called hybrid engine... but they did not allow engine manufacturer to develop these engines. Because in the end, the F1 leaders didn't wanted this form of progress, they were against it right from the start (just see the recent discussion about the cheap F1 engine). Just take all the buzz around the engine sound... yes its crappy so what? Look (hear) at the audi and the porsche in WEC, the diesel hasve nearly no sound (main sound from the audi is aerodynamic) and the porsche one is quite weird. Is the racing less interesting due to that ? I don't think so.

- qualification format: it must change. Those Q 123 are just messing up with the logic of high speed racing. How a Sebastien Vettel can start from the back of the grid for a strategy error in qualy ? OK he did an awesome race to finish 4th. I wonder what would have been his race if he started third? maybe he would have put some trouble in the touristic race of the mercedes...

- the whole organization of F1 is the basis of the crisis: the rule book should be written by people having no financial interest other than the success of the sport and that have a real technical knowledge of what will do a good race car. Teams and manufacturer should not have their words in the rules.

- Safety: that's one positive thing: safety has been dramatically improved other the last 20 years (since Ayrton Senna's death). But it could/should be again improved. and the same old people against progress appears. Closed cockpit: some says "it wouldn't be F1 anymore".
Oone thing is sure: Justin Wilson would still be there, I don't know if it would have saved Jules Bianchi, Massa is ultra lucky to have survived.
In LMP1, not so long ago, they had open cockpit. They all moved to closed one some year ago. It probably saved Alan McNish from his huge crash in Le Mans 2011. LMP2 will be all closed cockpit in the coming years as well. It is just a question of willingness.

-Tracks: modern tracks are soooo boring...

I could go on or hours... unfortunately, reading all the previous post, it seems the community has bright ideas. the F1 big bosses surely thought about it as well but are not willing to put them in place because although it is for the interest of the sport, it doesn't fit their economical/financial agenda.

That's the most sensible, logical argument I've read. Great write up, you should send it to the motorsport racing magazines.

 

[heresy666]

I haven't been on the sport as long as many of you (been around since '96 / '97), and I'm not an engineering expert. But pointing out the problem to me is easy: COSTS. The sport has been getting very expensive, at the point that on an everyday basis many teams ditch great talents that might get them some good sponsorship money on the long term, in favour of shitty drivers with a huge wallet, and money on the short term that they desesperately need in order to not go bankrupt.
Motorsports in general appear to be losing investors, I don't know why. I'm not a marketing expert to analize why many companies choose not to invest on motorsports anymore.
To me, the hyrbrid power units are the main issue. The technology and it's application is great, yes. But it's way too expensive and complicated by now. Maybe on 10 or 15 years it will be better to use it on motorsports, but we should stay away from it by now. On the WEC works, but not on it's entirity, the LMP1's have only 3 or 4 official teams, that are factory supported; and privateers cannot afford running an LMP1 program. I'm not a fan of that, if it was up to me, I would like 10 or 12 teams battling for the victory on the main class. But everybody seems to be okay with it; and I'm gonna have to find a way to be okay with it as well.
I think they should go back to traditional naturally aspirated engines. And also find a way to limit the aerodynamic develop, because that consumes a lot of money as well.
I'm not an expert and I can't guarantee it is 100% correct, but that is my opinion. Positive criticism is welcome !

 

[Matt Orr]

Costs are a non issue. Actually, let me correct that - costs should be a non issue. No, that isn't a boneheaded dream alternate reality as in everyone should be able to throw money at it, but rather cost saving doesn't exist and does not work.

Take a look at this article :
https://f1metrics.wordpress.com/2015/05/01/how-money-predicts-success-in-formula-1/

Specifically the section under "Recent Changes" about a third of the way down. There is a pretty interesting graph plotting the estimated budgets since the late 90s up through 2014 and for the most part, it's pretty level when adjusted for inflation. And don't there is pretty much no in season testing now but there are more races now than ever, which increases the budget even if the team isn't using it for development.

Marussia / Manor were / are no worse off today than Minardi of yesteryear. Budget wise, Mercedes of today is Honda of yesterday - only successful.

It's the same thing in the WEC - it's always "cheap" until it becomes "the thing" and then it dies because of "costs". Group C did it. 90s GT1 did it. LMP900 did it. LMP1-H is well on it's way. In the GT category - GTS / GT1 did it, GT2 / GTE are in the midst of doing it, GT3 will be next.

If you look around racing in general you will always see these patterns developing.

It's incredibly predictable. It's entirely down to manufacturers deciding it's worth loads of money, doing what they do and then deciding it doesn't make financial success. F1 is unique in the sense that unlike WEC for example, they have "manufacturers" that exist solely because of F1, or are tied to the sport so deeply they are not going anywhere at this point. It's what they do, it's a big part of who "they" are. (Ferrari, McLaren, Williams)

 

[methtical]

Let the engineers go buck nutty and have free reign over what they can do.
just say 'make sure they have v10 engines and crash test, have fun'

 

[Chris]

Costs are a non issue. Actually, let me correct that - costs should be a non issue. No, that isn't a boneheaded dream alternate reality as in everyone should be able to throw money at it, but rather cost saving doesn't exist and does not work.

Take a look at this article :
https://f1metrics.wordpress.com/2015/05/01/how-money-predicts-success-in-formula-1/

Specifically the section under "Recent Changes" about a third of the way down. There is a pretty interesting graph plotting the estimated budgets since the late 90s up through 2014 and for the most part, it's pretty level when adjusted for inflation. And don't there is pretty much no in season testing now but there are more races now than ever, which increases the budget even if the team isn't using it for development.

Marussia / Manor were / are no worse off today than Minardi of yesteryear. Budget wise, Mercedes of today is Honda of yesterday - only successful.

It's the same thing in the WEC - it's always "cheap" until it becomes "the thing" and then it dies because of "costs". Group C did it. 90s GT1 did it. LMP900 did it. LMP1-H is well on it's way. In the GT category - GTS / GT1 did it, GT2 / GTE are in the midst of doing it, GT3 will be next.

If you look around racing in general you will always see these patterns developing.

It's incredibly predictable. It's entirely down to manufacturers deciding it's worth loads of money, doing what they do and then deciding it doesn't make financial success. F1 is unique in the sense that unlike WEC for example, they have "manufacturers" that exist solely because of F1, or are tied to the sport so deeply they are not going anywhere at this point. It's what they do, it's a big part of who "they" are. (Ferrari, McLaren, Williams)

Cost saving or an expenditure budget is never going to work because it's impossible to police. However the premise behind cost saving measures are primarily in place to help the those teams that are struggling financially to remain competitive. But F1 has always been a spending war.

A large amount of the time it works in the way you'd expect as teams pour in colossal amounts of money to achieve as little as half a tenth of a second per lap. But letting the teams have free reign on expenditure doesn't necessarily result in success as you need the right people involved just as much as you need the money, if not more so.

For example Toyota: they had one of the largest budgets in F1 history (~$700 million per annum), were running two 100% scale wind tunnels 24/7 and they got literally nothing in return as their F1 project failed miserably. You can also look at Ferrari from 2011 to 2014. I'd say that in terms of their success:expenditure ratio, they were the worst team on the grid.

 

[Matt Orr]

However the premise behind cost saving measures are primarily in place to help the those teams that are struggling financially to remain competitive.

Which I would argue has had a detrimental effect on competition. By trying to save money, they've over-regulated the series and more or less put a cap on the lower teams whom otherwise might be more willing to get outside the box in hopes of achieving something better.

Look at Lotus in the 70s - from glory to trainwreck to glory once again. If something as revolutionary as ground effect was figured out to the same advantage Lotus had in the late 70s it'd be written out of the rule book today.

And it's not like Manor is any more likely to win or score points than Minardi was. They are just as far away, now they have tighter boxes to work in. It puts even more emphasis on each part being to the maximum now that it's harder to cover any deficiencies.

 

[Chris]

Which I would argue has had a detrimental effect on competition. By trying to save money, they've over-regulated the series and more or less put a cap on the lower teams whom otherwise might be more willing to get outside the box in hopes of achieving something better.

The slower teams are only capped by their inability to spend as much as the bigger teams. For example, CFD is substantially cheaper than wind tunnel testing. Manor can't afford a wind tunnel, so they use CFD instead. All that would need to happen is the rule makers ban wind tunnels and they'll have significantly reduced the costs involved in providing R&D for the cars, and it will enhance the level playing field.

Having said that, regardless of the measures put in place to try and reduce cost and give a fairer competition, the top teams will always find a way to spend as much as they possibly can to gain as much of an advantage as possible.

I don't think the technical regulations really play a massive role either as loosening the aero regulations would simply allow the big teams to spend more and widen the gap between themselves and the slower teams. It's a similar argument by those who complain about the fuel flow limit resulting in Mercedes dominance, when in actual fact if the fuel flow limit were increased, Mercedes would simply be that much faster than everyone else.

 

[Flammenjc]

https://www.budgetdirect.com.au/special-feature/f1-trickle-down-effect.html
Interesting read.

But how is that relevant to this discussion? F1 is being dumbed down, not advanced.

 

[Kjell Eilertsen]

But how is that relevant to this discussion? F1 is being dumbed down, not advanced.

It was highly relevant to the discussion on whether F1 technology is/should be relevant to road cars.

 

[discus]

Additional thoughts:

- Pit stops: OK granted its quite impressive to see a 2 sec pit stop.. but how much people do we have now around the car ? 23. That's crazy. Some guys are here just to hold the car... Indycar, they are 6... (1 per weel + 1 fuel + 1 airjack)
In F1 there is even one guy dedicated to the stop/release lights. During the last GP, in the Bottas/Button incident, it was shown that the guy was looking only at his own car nd released Bottas without looking at the cars coming down pit lane...
I don't mean we should have the same pit stop as in Indycar because I find them quite too old fashion but something in the middle to Indy and current F1 should be possible and would put back some drama and suspense.
I don't know if the F1 rule book states that the pit stop must be carried out by human beings only but they'd better be sure it's written because I am quite sure some teams have thought about automatizing it..... (F1 is a crazy world, isn't it ?)

- Star Wars... What ? what does this has to do with F1 ??
Well, history of F1 management is a bit like it.
A long time ago (the Concorde agreements in the 70s-80s), a former team manager got "elected" to the role of senator. He then became the supreme chancellor... and now with his apprentice (aka the former and the actual president of the federation) they rule the F1 galaxy. Unfortunately we are yet to see a rebel alliance or a young Jedi arise.


- Drivers... there is so much to say...
The "pay to drive" ones are killing it... (not their own fault, they are right to take the opportunity and it's the team fault). Real talents are denied the seat they clearly deserve whereas wreckers with big money are growing in numbers in the paddock. But most of them are not at the right level (and let's not talk about their ego...)

We need more the Hamilton-Rosberg duality. I like to see a show-off like Hamilton (although I don't like his behavior during the last 3 races). We need of the Jenson Button Gentleman style with his typical brit's sense of humor. Or the new Vettel (since he is at Ferrari) teasing the others during press conference and finally showing his talent at the wheel of a different car.. Or Kimi telling his engineer he knows what he's doing.
There are some real good ones (for example Romain Grosjean from the last 3 years, not from the beginning)
The others are mostly insignificant on the track as well as in the media, just repeating what they have been told to say, like robots.
Some should seriously thing about retirement... when I hear Alonso waiting for the pre-season tests to decide if he takes a sabbatical leave... it is anti sportive (although I can understand his frustration)...
I think Mark Weber was courageous enough to tell the truth that he was tired of F1 and moved away from it (maybe it would have been different if he would have won the title). Now he as a world title. Surely not as famous as F1 but I don't think he regrets his decision.
Some of the drivers looks so jaded by what they do...
Maybe it's also time that they understand that F1 is not the only spot for motor sport. If you love driving and racing, what's the point of being in a Sauber or a Manor 4"/lap behind the others ? You are not racing anybody and you pay for it....

There should be a real young driver academy. GP2 was intended to be that but when you seen the GP2 champion not getting a F1 seat, what's the point ?
Red Bull has one but it is a joke since they get rid of their drivers without mercy each time a new supposed talent arise.
Many teams have third drivers and sometimes a development driver. Some of them spend a lot of time in the simu but you never see them in the real car. I think, since some where suggesting a change on the weekend format, that the friday morning session should be reserved for third/development drivers only (and serious one, not the one who are paying for it like Palmer.... well in Lotus case, better to have Palmer than their "official" third driver...).

 

[Flammenjc]

It was highly relevant to the discussion on whether F1 technology is/should be relevant to road cars.

But F1 tech was developed from F1 to the road, to be relevant to road cars, it was never invented to be road relevant.

 

[Ben Lee]

F1 cars have more in common with aeroplanes than road cars. What was the last thing that road cars inherited from F1 cars? I know the uber hybrid sportscars have a kind of KERS system, but aside from that I can't recall much. Of course going back years I know things like disc brakes were first developed in racing, (I believe by Bentley @ Lemans).

 

[Jonas Bögemann]

The only reason we are actually talking here is that since over two decades, the FIA messed up the F1 in a way it's totally different from just two years ago.
I guess they just want to fit it into the imagination of my stupid generation...

 

[InsaneOzzie]

I think you're thinking of Max Mosely?

Cheers for that Chris........... Max Mosely?
yeah more than likely him, remembering names isn't one of my strong points.

To add to this ongoing F1 circus saga,
Ferrari wanted 30Mill Euro from Red Bull to lease "A"spec engines for 2016, to which
Christian Horner stated "was just simply a ridiculous sum of money to expect anyone to pay for leased engines".
It's pretty obvious by Ferrari's asking price that they knew Red Bull would laugh at it as ridiculous, and never do a deal.
If the power plants were non-hybrid, Red Bull wouldn't of been in that position, Mercedes wouldn't of dominated the past 2 seasons, and we would not of lost Lotus from the paddock.

These hybrid engines are a money pit, sure their great for the alleged climate problems with super low emissions, but is this engine design really necessary in F1, personally I don't think so.

I think the technology has become too advanced, and the costs to achieve this level of tech can only be afforded by the privileged few, being the manufacturers. They want to recover cost's by leasing engines, but these costs are exorbitant to the low end teams, it's also stifling the sports growth as new teams won't or can't afford it. It smacks of profiteering by the engine builders, whilst they manipulate the powers that be to make the rules & regs favorable to their end goal.

The FIA and FOM management need to be sacked and a new breed of management need to be ushered in, one that does not bow to the whims of the manufacturers, one that will take F1 back to were it is affordable for many, not just the privileged.

 

[Chris]

Personally I've got no problems with the current engines. They present more of a skillset challenge to the drivers in that they need much greater throttle control. They're also an engineering masterpiece. I mean seriously, they are the most fuel efficient engines in the world with a thermal efficiency of 40%... 40%!!! That is absolutely astonishing. No road car in the world can do that even just cruising, let alone being driven flatout at 15,000 rpm.

These things are simply incredible. Words cannot express just how stunningly amazing the engineering behind these engines are. People who say that the WEC is more technologically advanced have absolutely no clue.

Having said that. I am in absolute favour of them adding in the extra exhaust outlet for additional sound. Because they do need to be louder.

 

[fortyfivekev]

...These things are simply incredible. Words cannot express just how stunningly amazing the engineering behind these engines are. People who say that the WEC is more technologically advanced have absolutely no clue...

You are probably right about this but F1 teams today seem more concerned with protecting their secrets than presenting the sport as technically advanced. Your typical WEC news story might focus on the technology of the cars or the good racing while a typical F1 story is going to be about money or someone in the paddock having a fake "bust-up" (see Toto vs. Niki, Lewis vs. Nico, Kimi vs. Bottas) or the soap opera BS that is the RB engine saga.

Personally I think that is why race fans find the WEC more attractive right now and we can leave F1 to all the people who are actually interested in Lewis' latest haircut or tattoo

 

[Ben Lee]

Another pet gripe of mine with F1 today. What happened to the wheelspin?

Throttle nannying, ECU maps, torque managing. Get rid of it, all. Traction control is supposed to be banned, so why do we still have these things in F1? When was the last time you saw or heard a driver light up the rear wheels? The same can be applied to race starts. 20 years ago every race start there would be someone lighting up the rear wheels with plumes of blue smoke. Where is the wheelspin? Where is the skill?

 

[Philip Heck]

We had more wheelspin these last two seasons than during the 10 years before so what exactly is your problem here?

 

[discus]

.....
These things are simply incredible. Words cannot express just how stunningly amazing the engineering behind these engines are. People who say that the WEC is more technologically advanced have absolutely no clue.

The engine of the Porsche 919 is "similar" to the F1 engine. It's a 2L V4 turbo with MGU-K and H. The -H is a bit different from the F1. Big difference is that they are able to run flat out for more than 24h. I am curious to see a F1 engine after 24h of continuous running...
I'd say there are both the most technologically advanced in their respective category.
However I think the brilliant thing about the WEC is that the rule book is opened and each manufacturer was able to choose is own philosophy, is own design, is own architecture.
We have big diesel V6 4L turbo + flywheel (audi) vs 3.7L V8 N.A. petrol + super capacitor (Toyota) vs 2L V4 turbo + Battery pack (Porsche) and all this with in the end similar performance.
I think the critical error in F1 was to strictly define the rules for the engine architecture. They should have defined only some top level requirements (power output for the petrol engine, power output for the hybrid system, some dimension or weight constraint, etc) and left the manufacturer free to design it.

You are probably right about this but F1 teams today seem more concerned with protecting their secrets than presenting the sport as technically advanced. Your typical WEC news story might focus on the technology of the cars or the good racing while a typical F1 story is going to be about money or someone in the paddock having a fake "bust-up" (see Toto vs. Niki, Lewis vs. Nico, Kimi vs. Bottas) or the soap opera BS that is the RB engine saga.

Personally I think that is why race fans find the WEC more attractive right now and we can leave F1 to all the people who are actually interested in Lewis' latest haircut or tattoo

I fully agree with you. That's exactly why I am able to stay awake in the middle of the night to watch a WEC race where I have no problem falling asleep during a F1 GP whatever the time of the day.

 

[Ben Lee]

We had more wheelspin these last two seasons than during the 10 years before so what exactly is your problem here?

Hmm, ok, Is it possible you can show me video of a race start where the tyres light up with blue smoke from the last two years at all?