28 replies to this topic

[ViMaMo]

Allow at least 3 days of unlimited testing after Bahrain GP and another 3 days mid season.

[Sakae]

I don't know how many days or weeks teams would like to test, but I would like to see following:

- increase track testing significantly; perhaps triple what it is now on a time line teams like (beggin in Bahrein)
- devote each Thursdays (8 hrs) and Fridays (6 hrs) prior race to testing and FP - no other restrictions, just open track
- make racing tires available to teams in Sep in preceding year - allow one week testing of new vehicles after last race in Nov

Edited by Sakae, 18 May 2013 - 14:05.

[HuddersfieldTerrier1986]

I don't know how many days or weeks teams would like to test, but I would like to see following:

- increase track testing significantly; perhaps triple what it is now on a time line teams like (beggin in Bahrein)
- devote each Thursdays (8 hrs) and Fridays (6 hrs) prior race to testing and FP - no other restrictions, just open track
- make racing tires available to teams in Sep in preceding year - allow one week testing of new vehicles after last race in Nov

Various problems there.

1: What about back to back races, especially those which are a fair distance apart (either by road or plane). You're talking about basically just Monday/Tuesday/Wednesday before you're back on track, which could cause logistical problems.

2: Where do you propose to fit in the support races, especially given that at some tracks it's very much a full programme (F1/GP2/GP3/Porsche Supercup/possibly another series or 2 as well)?

3: Not as simple as making the following years tyres available in September of the previous year (plus only so much you can learn with new tyres on old cars)

4: The chances of every team having enough cars ready, crash tested, etc etc etc for a week of testing after the last race in November is basically nil.

Edited by HuddersfieldTerrier1986, 18 May 2013 - 16:36.

[gm914]

Didn't the teams vote against this? Like last week?

[Sakae]

Various problems there.

1: What about back to back races, especially those which are a fair distance apart (either by road or plane). You're talking about basically just Monday/Tuesday/Wednesday before you're back on track, which could cause logistical problems.

2: Where do you propose to fit in the support races, especially given that at some tracks it's very much a full programme (F1/GP2/GP3/Porsce Supercup/possibly another series or 2 as well)?

3: Not as simple as making the following years tyres available in September of the previous year (plus only so much you can learn with new tyres but old cars, same as there's only so much you can learn with old cars on new tyres)

4: The chances of every team having enough cars ready, crash tested, etc etc etc for a week of testing after the last race in November is basically nil.

My thoughts expressed in earlier post were written in slightly lighthearted manner, as this is merely an idle talk to kill the time. Thrust and more durable beliefs could be summed up:
1. Simulator cannot replace on track testing.
2. Tire compounds and construction can be whatever majority wants, but as it should be presented as known element of the vehicle system, not as a surprise in March, and totally in misalignment with other expensive development that went into it.
3. Testing in warm climate (like Bahrain) should begin earlier, and continue through the year as part of vehicle competitive development. Thursday seems better to me than Monday, and for races that are back to back - well, they would drop Thursday and test with FP on Fridays. Not a big deal.

People moaning about cost of track testing, but who will admit how much money went into (near) useless simulators, mistakes that are only discovered in first several races, mud attached to the brand of prestige companies, seasons lost (Mercedes 2012), corrective measures that never pan out, etc. All of this is not free, I am sure.

Edited by Sakae, 18 May 2013 - 16:56.

[SenorSjon]

Didn't the teams vote against this? Like last week?

All teams in favor for one thing? Uhm, that actually never happens.

The FIA should say: 20 days of testing allowed during the first and last GP of the season from 2015(?) onwards. They don't need the teams to agree when announced way ahead of time. It suprised me Todt didn't already do that.

[darkkis]

Nope... Team(s) with their own test track would gain tremendous advantage.

Edited by darkkis, 20 May 2013 - 13:42.

[BoschKurve]

Nope... Team(s) with their own test track would gain tremendous advantage.

You mean the team(s) that are already at the top of the field without testing?

Edited by BoschKurve, 20 May 2013 - 14:43.

[ViMaMo]

Nope... Team(s) with their own test track would gain tremendous advantage.

Didn't I mention unlimited testing for stipulated 3/6 days. And they can negate testing at home tracks by specifying certain tracks, now don't tell me freight costs would be advantageous to certain teams.

Edited by ViMaMo, 20 May 2013 - 14:53.

[Sakae]

Nope... Team(s) with their own test track would gain tremendous advantage.

That's last of their worries. If my memory serves me, in the past FiA designated specific testing tracks, and no one could test anywhere else.

[Atreiu]

Testing was dropped in a cost cutting effort but the teams are shortsighted and love to miss opportunities.

[Sakae]

Testing was dropped in a cost cutting effort but the teams are shortsighted and love to miss opportunities.

I call it false economy for years.

[olliek88]

I don't care, frankly. It'd be nice to be able to go to Silverstone/Jerez mid season for only a few bob but otherwise it has zero impact on me, the odd test for rookies (preferably under 26 or so) would be beneficial but otherwise its just an unnecessary cost, as the last few years with the ban have shown.

[fabr68]

That's last of their worries. If my memory serves me, in the past FiA designated specific testing tracks, and no one could test anywhere else.

Well that is a big problem.

Like the straight line testing, I would open up a limited number of test days and let the teams use those days as they please within the season. When you start mandating specific test tracks that is when it gets expensive. Let the teams test wherever they want. I am sure test tracks will compete and lower their costs in order to attract teams to test in their fascilities.

Edited by fabr68, 20 May 2013 - 16:16.

[Atreiu]

I call it false economy for years.

I'm not sold over it either. Simulators and their softwares don't come for free.

At least with testing you had the press, images and odd public in the stands watching.

I've said it some ten times on the BB, non-GP events should be reinstated as means to both test and promote F1.

[SealTheDiffuser]

No!
Why, for what reason? Cars and engines are nearly 100% reliable nowadays. Would only be benifitting $$$ teams. And with new engines 2014 and them more unregulated in 2015 would benefit mostly the "works" teams.
It is not surprising that Ferrari and MonteZozolo are crying the loudest for this.

[fabr68]

No!
Why, for what reason? Cars and engines are nearly 100% reliable nowadays. Would only be benifitting $$$ teams. And with new engines 2014 and them more unregulated in 2015 would benefit mostly the "works" teams.
It is not surprising that Ferrari and MonteZozolo are crying the loudest for this.

I think the young drivers looking to come to F1 one day are the ones with the biggest tears.

[BoschKurve]

I don't care, frankly. It'd be nice to be able to go to Silverstone/Jerez mid season for only a few bob but otherwise it has zero impact on me, the odd test for rookies (preferably under 26 or so) would be beneficial but otherwise its just an unnecessary cost, as the last few years with the ban have shown.

How is it an unnecessary cost...?

Developing a good simulator costs a lot of money and is no substitute for putting the car on the track to evaluate upgrades and the like. Everyone is obsessed with these computer simulations and development tools, yet you see teams getting things wrong all the time with them.

Not to mention, the drivers today do not get enough time in the cars due to all the limitations involved.

Be honest Ollie, have budgets even gone down with the ban on in-season testing? All of these bans have been applied to cut costs, yet I'm not seeing where there is much of a cost savings to even be had. If anything, F1 has become more cost-prohibitive than at any time previously because of the cost to refine aerodynamic improvements.

[noikeee]

A little bit of testing would be nice - we seem to have gone from billions of KMs to no testing at all, a happy medium would be better. See how long it took for a driver like Hulk to get used to F1, something's not right there. Some drivers will be burnt and not even given a chance before that many GPs. Besides, it screws over in-season development for various teams, how do you catch up if you start slowly?

I understand the need for cost cutting but there's other ways you can do that, apart from shutting off testing completely.

[Fastcake]

I'm not sold over it either. Simulators and their softwares don't come for free.

At least with testing you had the press, images and odd public in the stands watching.

I've said it some ten times on the BB, non-GP events should be reinstated as means to both test and promote F1.

It's the teams themselves who have largely wanted no testing. They seem to judge it as more cost-effective than track testing.

And non-GP events are never coming back. They were gone even before Bernie got full control.

Be honest Ollie, have budgets even gone down with the ban on in-season testing? All of these bans have been applied to cut costs, yet I'm not seeing where there is much of a cost savings to even be had. If anything, F1 has become more cost-prohibitive than at any time previously because of the cost to refine aerodynamic improvements.

Yes. You had teams like Toyota spending upwards of $400 million a year on F1, yet now the highest budgets are estimated in the $200 millions.

[SenorSjon]

On paper perhaps...

Engine development? Gone
Driver development? Gone

So that saves some costs. Only look at the Frijns or Da Costa situation to see what is happening now. Maldonado is the only 'new' winner since the test-ban of 2008. All the other winners had in season testing time in the past. And we all know that victory was granted to Frank Williams last year. Be it a special set of Pirelli's or whatever. I don't believe in coincidences.

[Mekola]

I'm not sure. I think it's ok in season testing, but...

[BoschKurve]

It's the teams themselves who have largely wanted no testing. They seem to judge it as more cost-effective than track testing.

And non-GP events are never coming back. They were gone even before Bernie got full control.



Yes. You had teams like Toyota spending upwards of $400 million a year on F1, yet now the highest budgets are estimated in the $200 millions.

Did Toyota ever win any championship?

There is no direct correlation with money spent and results in F1.

[BoschKurve]

On paper perhaps...

Engine development? Gone
Driver development? Gone

So that saves some costs. Only look at the Frijns or Da Costa situation to see what is happening now. Maldonado is the only 'new' winner since the test-ban of 2008. All the other winners had in season testing time in the past. And we all know that victory was granted to Frank Williams last year. Be it a special set of Pirelli's or whatever. I don't believe in coincidences.

What is left out regarding lack of engine development, is that Mario Illien said for what teams are spending a year currently on the engines, he could build 100 engines in 2000 for the same price.

It's another con job by the engine makers.

Edit: Couldn't agree more with that Williams victory in Spain. The deck was stacked in favor of Williams as a nice little 70th birthday gift to Frank. I'm surprised more people didn't see that for what it was.

Edited by BoschKurve, 20 May 2013 - 23:38.

[EthanM]

with gearbox and more importantly engine allocations being what they are (and will be next year) in season testing is not going to happen anytime soon. Yeah sure. Give them a couple of extra engines. Easy for Merc, Ferrari, McLaren, RedBull not so easy for midfield or back of the grid teams.

[Wingcommander]

They had in season testing last year and i dont remember the teams being too excited about it. Personally i dont miss it. I find more interesting that teams come to gp not fully knowing how their upgrades and setup might work. But i wouldnt mind if there was more free practise time during a gp weekend.

[EthanM]

They had in season testing last year and i dont remember the teams being too excited about it. Personally i dont miss it. I find more interesting that teams come to gp not fully knowing how their upgrades and setup might work. But i wouldnt mind if there was more free practise time during a gp weekend.

yeah because they went to Mugello a track that offered them no meaningful data cause the layout had nothing in common with any tracks they race on

[Fastcake]

Did Toyota ever win any championship?

There is no direct correlation with money spent and results in F1.

That's not related to what I said.

More money doesn't give you automatic success, but it sure as hell helps.

[William Hunt]

yes but only if it's for rookie drivers, otherwise no.