F1 is boring me to death!!!!

[David Morton]

Here is a summary of the FIA's statement today:

FIA announce rule changes for 2005 and 2006




Formula One engines will have to last two race weekends from next season, under changes announced by the FIA on Friday designed to slow cars down and improve safety.



From 2006, 2.4 litre V8s will replace the current V10s, though smaller teams will be able to continue with the old engines, subject to restrictions.

Other changes to come into force next season include revised bodywork designed to cut downforce, and new tyre regulations whereby each driver may use only one set of tyres to complete qualifying and the race.

The full text released by the FIA:

On June 30, 2004, the World Motor Sport Council voted unanimously to invoke Article 7.5 of the Concorde Agreement and give notice to the Formula One Technical Working Group (TWG) to propose measures to reduce the performance of the cars within two months. Notice was given on July 6, 2004.

When the TWG failed to produce proposals by September 6, 2004, the FIA Technical Department proposed three packages of measures to the TWG, in accordance with Article 7.5(c).

In summary, all three packages involved bodywork changes to reduce downforce, new tyre rules to require “harder” tyres and a reduction in engine capacity from 3.0 to 2.4 litres with eight cylinders. Of the three, Package 1 gave the most aerodynamic freedom but imposed maximum restrictions on the engines; Package 2 gave less aerodynamic freedom but slightly fewer engine restrictions; and Package 3 imposed further aerodynamic restrictions but gave the same technical freedom for the 2.4 litre V8 engine as the current 3.0 litre V10.

All the teams were prepared to agree the bodywork changes and tyre regulations contained in Package 2. However, opinions differed on the engines. The closest to the necessary 8 out of 10 votes was at the meeting of September 6, 2004, when the TWG voted 7 to 3 in favour of the Package 2 engine rules.

The TWG met most recently on October 15, 2004, but still failed to vote 8 to 2 in favour of any one of the three packages within the 45 days specified by Article 7.5. The World Motor Sport Council was therefore free to impose its own measures from October 21, 2004, to come into force no sooner than three months from publication.

On October 21, 2004, the WMSC decided to impose Package 2 and that those parts of it which apply to 2005 would come into force on March 1, 2005 and the remainder on January 1, 2006.

Package 2 consists of the following measures:

2005 (to come into force on March 1, 2005)

Bodywork
Changes to the bodywork (aerodynamics) to raise the front wing, bring the rear wing forward, reduce the diffuser height and cut back the bodywork in front of the rear wheels.

Reason: it is estimated that these changes will result in the loss of 20% or more downforce with minimal loss of drag.

Tyres
One set of tyres must complete qualifying and the race.

Reason: a harder tyre will reduce cornering speeds.

Engines
Each engine must last for two complete Events

Reason: a two-race engine will give less power than a one-race engine.

2006 (to come into force 1 January 2006)

Engines
The introduction of a 2.4 litre V8 engine together with a number of restrictions concerning design and permitted materials.

Reason: reducing capacity is a sure way to reduce power (as repeatedly requested by the TWG), while technical restrictions will limit the rate of power increase. It is estimated that power will drop to about 700 bhp compared to the 1000 bhp that existing engines will reach by 2006.

In order not to prejudice the smaller independent teams the existing 3.0 litre V10 engines may continue to be used in 2006 and 2007, subject to a restriction on revs to be determined by the FIA

Reason: having reduced engine power, we need an inexpensive but competitive engine for the smaller independent teams, including newcomers. A rev-limited 3 litre can be adjusted to be competitive with factory 2.4 litre units, but will inevitibly be far less costly.

The full text of the 2006 engine technical regulations is available on request. These regulations impose restrictions on engine development comparable to those already applicable to Formula One chassis. Such restrictions have by no means stifled technical development of the chassis, but they have prevented uncontrollable increases in performance. In a similar way the proposed engine restrictions will significantly slow the rate of increase of engine power output. Current freedoms have resulted in engines approaching 1000 bhp compared to the absolute maximum of 650 bhp promised when engine capacity was reduced from 3.5 litres to 3.0 litres in 1994/5 following the Imola fatalities.

Pinky and Perky rule OK.........
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif

 

[David Morton]

More info for those that have an interest :

LONDON (Reuters) - Turkey can expect a debut Formula One grand prix next year while a question mark hangs over Britain, France and San Marino.

Commercial supremo Bernie Ecclestone will submit his draft calendar to the International Automobile Federation (FIA)'s world motor sport council in Paris on Wednesday with some European races fighting for survival.

Turkey, building a circuit near Istanbul, is being billed as the next big thing after the arrival of state-of-the-art tracks in China and Bahrain this year.

Silverstone, Magny Cours and Imola are all at risk.
"There will be two or three races announced with asterisks on them," FIA president Max Mosley told reporters at the Japanese Grand Prix last weekend.
Although Ecclestone earmarked an unprecedented 19 dates earlier in the year, the calendar may not have that many races.
But however many rounds the draft contains, it could still be some months before the final shape of the championship is decided.
When Ecclestone issued his draft 2004 calendar in September 2003, there were asterisks against four races and Canada was missing altogether.
By mid-October, Canada was back in business but it took France until mid-January to do a deal over Magny-Cours.
That will give hope to Silverstone, which hosted the first Formula One grand prix in 1950 but whose owners have yet to secure the race's future.
IMOLA ANXIETY
The 'Concorde Agreement' which governs the sport envisages a 17-race calendar with anything extra requiring the agreement of the FIA and teams.
With the arrival of Turkey, which can expect to have an asterisk against it as all new circuits have to be approved by the governing body, Ecclestone must either shed two races or get the teams on side.
Silverstone could be one, although Mosley and the teams are adamant it must stay, while the axe is also hovering over Imola after Ecclestone said in January that this year's race would be the last there.
Although Ferrari and the Italian government have been trying to change his mind, Ferrari boss Jean Todt sounded fatalistic when asked about it last week.
"Imola doesn't belong to us. The Formula One calendar doesn't belong to us," he said in Japan. "Of course there are some grands prix that we do prefer, but we are talking about a world-wide championship.
"If we are talking about covering the whole world with new markets, then you must accept Grand Prix like China, like Bahrain and like Turkey. You cannot have an unlimited number of Grands Prix, you must accept to lose some in Europe."
Magny-Cours, struggling for funding to secure the race, hung on by the skin of its teeth last year after a deadline was pushed back and a contract finally agreed in January.
The race, in open countryside miles from any major city, is a home round for Renault but little loved by sponsors and teams. Olivier Panis, the only French driver in the sport this season, has also hung up his race helmet.

 

[David Morton]

And some more of interest to S.A.:www.grandprix.com

Formula 1 has long wanted to go back to Africa and the obvious choice for a race remains South Africa where racing interest and tradition remain high. In recent months a South African consortium has been trying to raise money for the construction of a Formula 1 standard race track near to Cape Town's international airport. This is being led by David Gant. Gant is a South African businessman with a colourful career which has included being chairman of the fruit company which exported Cape and Outspan products around the world; chairman of the Democratic Party of South Africa, the political party which is now the official opposition; and as a property developer and sports promoter of events such as The World Cup of Golf at the Erinvale Golf Club in Cape Town in 1996. His most recent work has been in sailing.

The Democratic Party has traditionally been strong in the Western Cape Province but is dwarfed by the African National Congress Party at a national level and so it will be interesting to see if Gant can sell the idea of a Grand Prix in South Africa to his political opponents.

One possible bone of contention is the fact that the government may be asked to waive its ban on tobacco advertising, although this should not be a problem as there is supposed to be no cigarette sponsorships after the end of 2006.

 

[David Morton]

I'm sure there will be another Grand Prix venue, probably in the Amazonian rain forest. F1 is generating so much editorial copy and the need for paper they will be cutting down all the rest of the rain forest so there will be a vacant site very soon for tilke to build another track. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

 

[Lynn Larsen]

JP, tell us how you really feel! LOL

Honestly neither NASCAR nor F1 do much for me. The only time I watch either is when the show on Discovery is a rerun and I just don't have a anything else to do; as when it's too cold and the grass stops growing.

Lynn

 

Good morning,

I get your points, but the race in Suzuka and Sao Paulo were mainly boring because of the poor TV coverage.

It's fine to see the leading car (Alonso), but when the action happens elswhere in the field those shots would be more promising.

Sato fiddling with his helmet for hours on end is not really important either...

Cheers,

Dominik

 

[David Morton]

Report this Sunday morning:
Bernie Ecclestone claims a South African Grand Prix will go ahead "within five years". Cape Town announced its intention to attract Formula One several weeks ago but doubts have persisted over the financing of the event.
But Ecclestone now appears to have confirmed a grand prix will return to South Africa in the near future, saying in Cape Town's Die Burger newspaper: "We are going to South Africa - it's not a question of if, it's only when."

He added: "There will be a South African Grand Prix hosted by Cape Town within five years."
Africa could find it hard to squeeze on to an increasingly overcrowded calendar, which next year sees 19 races for the first time in history, before Mexico returns in 2006.
That is likely to sound the death knell for some European grands prix, with tracks such as Silverstone, Magny-Cours and Imola under pressure.
South Africa was a traditional destination for Formula One, even during most of the Apartheid era, and still retains an affection for the sport.
A recent two-seater display by Minardi at Kyalami attracted around 60,000 fans while local drivers continue to impress on the international scene despite the difficulties caused by their weak currency.
Alan van der Merwe won last year's British Formula Three Championship to put him a step closer to following in the footsteps of South Africa's only world champion, Jody Scheckter.South Africa was a traditional destination for Formula One, even during most of the Apartheid era, and still retains an affection for the sport.
However Ecclestone has previously 'confirmed' races in countries such as India and Russia which have never taken place.

 

[David Morton]

MELBOURNE, Australia (AP) - The Australian Grand Prix posted a multimillion-dollar loss last year and continues to need subsidies from the Victorian state government to operate, according to the annual report of the event's corporation.

State Premier Steve Bracks said Wednesday the race at Albert Park lost 12.6 million Australian dollars.

The state government has had to advance 41.8 million Australian dollars to the Australian Grand Prix Corporation since 1999-2000 to cover the growing losses of the race, the annual report showed.

Losses have risen by 214 per cent during that time, while total revenue has increased by just 6.6 per cent.

Still Bracks said the event was worth the cost to taxpayers.

``It's great for our reputation as a state,'' said Bracks. ``It's helped with economic activity in hotels, which are full, in goods and services, which are purchased, in crews, which are coming here.''

Grand Prix Corporation chairman Ron Walker said the event continued to provide ``an outstanding return'' on the government's investment in the event.

He said it was estimated the Grand Prix had generated more than one billion Australian dollars in economic benefit for the state since 1996.

 

[Keith]

David, any inside skinny on the sale of Jaguar?? What happens to Champ car if Cosworth's new owners decide not to play ball in 2005? <font color="blue"> </font>

 

[David Morton]

Keith,
I do not have any information on either subject though I still think IMHO Red Bull (previous post Sept 19th) will close the deal on Jaguar eventually.
Dave M

 

[David Morton]

Ferrari has announced that it will not attend the scheduled meeting of Formula 1 team bosses at the Hilton Hotel at Heathrow on Tuesday 9th November claiming it has "previous commitments".
The meeting was arranged to discuss plans to cut costs, including the slashing of testing to just 10 days during the season. The proposal was signed at the Brazilian Grand Prix by all the teams, except Ferrari, who weren't invited to the meeting.

 

[Keith]

Well, we all know why that is - Ferrari are totally opposed to a testing ban/restriction and I'm told that that area is where much of the excessive costs are. Bless 'em.

 

[Bill Bayard]

The latest word says that keeping Silverstone on the F1 schedule, is all but a done deal.

Between Ferrari's uncooperative attitude about testing and Bernie's poor attitude about working WITH the teams, who is the bigger jerk?
The future of F1 is at stake, not just money or dominance!

 

[David Morton]

Reports of yesterdays meeting indicated that a Bloc vote could be used to force through changes in the decision-making process. With the exception of Ferrari, the nine team bosses behind the latest cost-cutting moves are set to use a bloc vote. Minardi boss Paul Stoddart believes teams are waking up to the fact they need to be less selfish
The radical change to Formula 1's much-criticised decision-making process, often a wast of effort because of the need for unanimity and has blocked much needed change in the past, can be achieved in early December.
At the meeting yesterday at Heathrow they agreed to look for ways to get rid of the need for unanimous approval for major rule changes because it was clearly damaging F1.
Some Teams clearly used self-interest over what was best for F1. Another meeting is planned for December.
In his speech last night to the Institute of Mechanical Engineers at the Universtiy of Warwick, Renault's Pat Symonds was optimistic without diclosing very much about the meeting, but he hinted that the 10 day limit on testing proposal would probably not now happen.

Dave M

 

[JBarryDavison]

David,
You are pretty close to F1 &amp; I'd value your opinion.
I have been madly keen on racing and racing cars all my life.
Sadly a view to which I suscribe, and one that seems to be prevalent is that although the techinical side is undoubtably impressive, the actual racing in F1 is totally boring and leaves us absolutely cold, due mainly to the inability of faster cars to overtake slower ones.
A ridiculous situation indeed.
Clearly the effect of the aero packages that work so well is that the air behind a car at racing speed is so disturbed that any other vehicle within (perhaps)40-50m gets badly unsettled due to its own aero package not being effective. This means NO OVERTAKING, and we have seen examples of cars which are many secs a lap quicker than the car in front being unable to pass.
Now, I don't know about these things, but would it not be a simple plan to REALLY remove, or restrict the over-body aero packages to a minimum, (ie. get rid of wings) and reinstate ground effect.
Might this not have the effect of keeping the performance up, improving straight line speed, and most importantly causing significantly less disruption to the handling of following (ie.hopefully now overtaking) cars ?
Any comments...I'd like to know why F1 stays relentlessly going down this ridiculous path....or is it perhaps that the wings give more valuable advertising space, and damn the racing !

Cheers,

Barry (What aerodynamics on a Morgan?) D.

 

[David Morton]

Barry,
You are correct in your calculations and Pat Symonds in his lecture last night outlined exactly what you say . In one race in 2002, he said there was only one overtaking manouevre in the whole race and that because somebody had made a bad tyre choice. IMHO I think the new rules package and cost lowering may go some way initially to enhance the show (note I have avoided calling it a sport) but team engineers will claw the advantages back again - they always have and that is what they are paid to do - so are the new rules a 'dumbing down' in F1. It may appear so initially but I think the usual service and pecking order will return quite quickly and it will still be the boring spectacle it has been these last 3 years and more viewers will turn to going to WH Smith Do-it -All, sitting on stools around a cans of dulux emulsion and watching it dry out.
Your posting talks about simple bans on aero packages -
If 2005 becomes the same as the preceding 3 years in terms of boredom I think they may well have to resort to smoething akin to your ideas
I wish they could all agree to a meeting where everybody attends as it was IMHO stupid to give credence to any rule changes unless Ferrari are told by the other nine to conform or are exluded from any points.
I'm sorry I don't know what the answer is but I know what I would like and thats a return to big fat rear tyres, steel and organic brake pads, and de-restricted engines of any size.
Dave M

 

[Keith]

Steel brakes David - that's the way to go! Cut huge costs and encourage overtaking. There is no way in God's earth anyone running carbon brakes can outbrake anyone else, that and reduced aero, get rid of the stupid tyre grooves and let 'em get 1khp out of the engines. (Does this sound a bit like the turbo era?)Then you'll see who's got the 'Grande Cojones' /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/ooo.gif

 

[David Morton]

PS - did you know that it takes several months to 'grow' a carbon disc and similarly to grow a pad. Also it's air cooled and with the operating temperature around 650c, most of the attrition (reduction in depth size) happens long after the braking has been done and energy stored and subsequently force fed with ram air -oxygen for cooling. No wonder thay start out some 50mm thick.
DM

 

[Keith]

equals COST right? By the way here's a clip of Schumachers Ferrari during testing a new cost- saving body shell made from compressed Crunchy Nut Cornflake packets.....

 

[David Morton]

RED BULL / JAGUAR
I believe a deal has been done and should be announced probably by Sunday at the latest. Big party being held in Milton Keynes and lots of Red Bull being quaffed - probably mixed with Stoly. Alles is nicht umzonst....
If I'm wrong, keep taking the tablets!