Jump to content


Photo
* * * - - 2 votes

2014 powertrain penalties


  • Please log in to reply
56 replies to this topic

#1 F1 Mike

F1 Mike
  • Member

  • 2,250 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 02 January 2014 - 02:39

Maybe I'm just being a bit thick here, but is it just me who is struggling with understanding exactly what is up with this?

I understand the maximum of 5 new bits thing, but it's the penalties that's getting me…. 

 

 

 

In 2014, the 'power unit' is divided into six separate modules, with a maximum of five examples of each permitted to be used.

 

These elements are the internal combustion engine, the motor generator unit-kinetic, the motor generator unit-heat, the energy store, the turbocharger and the control electronics

 

On the first occasion a sixth example of any of the six parts is used, it will trigger a 10-place penalty, although five-place penalties will be given for any subsequent use of a sixth element.

This pattern will continue for the seventh and any subsequent elements, with the first use earning a 10-place penalty and the subsequent ones five places

 

… Now, I've been watching f1 for many years. So are those in charge trying to get rid of the 'old' fans by confusing us?

Basically, once you break into your new box of spares, you will never be free of penalties even when you've been penalised already previously for changing the part? is this actually happening or am I understanding wrongly?


Edited by F1 Mike, 02 January 2014 - 02:40.


Advertisement

#2 Myrvold

Myrvold
  • Member

  • 15,887 posts
  • Joined: December 10

Posted 02 January 2014 - 02:46

It is pretty easy. Think of it as engines. 5 free engines. Then a penalty for the 6th, 7th, 8th etc. Logical for me at least



#3 F1 Mike

F1 Mike
  • Member

  • 2,250 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 02 January 2014 - 02:49

I know there are penalties after 5 components, but it's the way the penalties change between 10 & 5 places that seems odd to me


Edited by F1 Mike, 02 January 2014 - 02:50.


#4 Jovanotti

Jovanotti
  • Member

  • 8,255 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 02 January 2014 - 03:15

A 10-place penalty for the first component of the sixth engine and a 5-place penalty for every further component (of which there are six).

A 10-place penalty for the first component of the seventh engine and a 5-place penalty for every further component.

And so on. (Right?)

Still, way too complicated for the casual viewer, but that's been the problem with F1 for many years already.

Edited by Jovanotti, 02 January 2014 - 03:21.


#5 F1 Mike

F1 Mike
  • Member

  • 2,250 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 02 January 2014 - 03:35

riiiiight …. I think  :well:

 

I usually have no trouble understanding anything to do with F1 (ever)

 

another effort to alienate the hardcore fanbase!

 

I'm getting a bit fed up with all these penalties.

Imagine we get to the final races and the contenders for the championship are both being done by penalties? we haven't really seen it happen yet, but it will at some point, and the cries will be that we are robbed of a real fight.

 

enough


Edited by F1 Mike, 02 January 2014 - 03:42.


#6 Briz

Briz
  • Member

  • 453 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 02 January 2014 - 03:46

Change them all at once and you get at least a 35-place penalty, possibly more



#7 Exb

Exb
  • Member

  • 3,961 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 02 January 2014 - 10:36

I think I read somewhere that if the whole unit is changed then the car has to start the race from the pit lane. (Not sure where I read that or how reliable it was in the first place and don't have chance to look it up now but maybe someone else can confirm?)

Also I think grid penalties can carry over to more than 1 race, (so if they have a 10 place penalty but can only drop 5 places thaen the remaining 5 needs to be taken at the following race). (unless I have misunderstood the new rules which is quite possible).

It all seems quite confusing and towards the end of the season there will be so many penalties flying about qualifying positions and actual starting grids will look totally different, and how will they decide who gets the penalty first? I remember that odd Japanese qualifying from a couple of years ago (2009 or 2010???) where several drivers from the top 10 picked up 5 place grid penalties for setting fastest laps under a yellow flag but by the time they sorted out the grid some only ended up losing 2 spots due to the order they gave the penalties out.

#8 demet06

demet06
  • Member

  • 126 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 02 January 2014 - 18:44

After 6 races, they'll all be starting at the back of the grid.



#9 Crossmax

Crossmax
  • Member

  • 1,334 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 02 January 2014 - 18:52

Change them all at once and you get at least a 35-place penalty, possibly more

But somehow, Chilton would still manage to start last...



#10 study

study
  • Member

  • 2,452 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 02 January 2014 - 19:08

Penalty should be for rule infringements  or dangerous driving.

 

The reliability ruling should effect the team constructor, not the driver, its gone to far.

 

Maybe points deductions, driver errors, he gets points taken away, car reliability, the constructor gets points taken away but the driver is untouched.



#11 bonjon1979a

bonjon1979a
  • Member

  • 4,333 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 02 January 2014 - 20:50

It's going to be absolutely unfathomable. Come the middle of the European season the circus will well and truly be in town x

#12 MadYarpen

MadYarpen
  • Member

  • 4,763 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 02 January 2014 - 22:33

I've seen no concerns from Viry, Maranello or Brixworth regarding the reliability. I think they may surprise us.



#13 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 44,645 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 02 January 2014 - 23:48

I've seen no concerns from Viry, Maranello or Brixworth regarding the reliability. I think they may surprise us.

Viry have been reported as asking for the first test to be delayed as they are not ready. I'll bet they all have reliability concerns even though they may not have voiced them. KERS is still not 100% even after several years of use, IMHO the new electric components will cause more issues than the ICE, unfortunately if they do go wrong it will be race ending unlike KERS.



#14 MustangSally

MustangSally
  • Member

  • 1,151 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 03 January 2014 - 00:04

 

The reliability ruling should effect the team constructor, not the driver, its gone to far.

 

Too right, it's a nonsense. 

 

I am waiting for the caption on TV.

 

'The incident involving the failure of the Renault upper camshaft bleed valve will be investigated after the race'

 

Got to admit, though. They can't exactly give a drive through penalty for an engjne that's stopped dead somewhere on the circuit. 

 

I think this is where the new fuel limit reg comes in. With a bit of luck, all the cars will have run out petrol before the engines let go.



#15 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 17,121 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 03 January 2014 - 01:22

It would be much easier to say that you just have 5 - and your whole season comes to an end once you've used them all up.



#16 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 44,645 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 03 January 2014 - 01:37

It would be much easier to say that you just have 5 - and your whole season comes to an end once you've used them all up.

Yeah that is much easier and makes perfect sense.  :rolleyes:



#17 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 4,709 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 03 January 2014 - 11:28

riiiiight …. I think  :well:

 

I usually have no trouble understanding anything to do with F1 (ever)

 

another effort to alienate the hardcore fanbase!

 

I'm getting a bit fed up with all these penalties.

Imagine we get to the final races and the contenders for the championship are both being done by penalties? we haven't really seen it happen yet, but it will at some point, and the cries will be that we are robbed of a real fight.

 

enough

 

I think that's a little harsh. The penalties will almost certainly come into play for the first couple of years, admittedly, but these penalties are sufficiently severe that the manufacturers will do all they can to avoid them and, after a year or two, I'm sure things will settle down and we will revert to the position we have now, where everyone keeps to their allocation and nobody gets a penalty.

 

The fact that the casual viewer may not understand why a particular car has been penalised, or why the title contenders are starting halfway down the grid, is of no concern to me. As long as anybody who wishes to look into it more closely will be able to see that the rules have been applied consistently and fairly, that's surely enough? Anyone who isn't interested enough to look into the matter more closely will presumably be happy to take it on trust that the penalties have been applied correctly?

 

And I don't understand why having a race where the title contenders start 11th and 12th rather than 1st and 2nd is robbing anybody of a real fight? Just adds extra spice to the show, if you ask me, seeing the title contenders making their way through the field. The races are long and the fastest cars will still tend to finish at the front, grid penalty or not.

 

What concerns me more is people will complain they've been robbed of a fight if the two championship contenders both retire early on from a title-deciding race with engine trouble. Fans have become accustomed to that not happening.



#18 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 4,709 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 03 January 2014 - 11:42

 

The reliability ruling should effect the team constructor, not the driver, its gone to far.

 

 

What if an engine fails during a race? Do you want the stewards to award points to a driver based on where they imagine he would have finished had he been able to continue?

 

In my personal opinion, the notion that any attempt whatsoever should be made to factor out engine reliability from the allocation of WDC points is more ridiculous than anything Bernie Ecclestone has ever or would ever think of, including the gold medals and the chicane-cutting allowance. Your idea is a cheat's charter, for a start, and it rests on the false assumption that drivers don't benefit from engine changes.

 

If you allow cars to use a sixth engine with no grid penalty and just penalise them by docking WCC points, what's to stop one manufacturer tuning its engines for maximum performance, going through 3 engines every weekend, and finishing 1st and 2nd in the WDC? Most teams are more interested in the WDC than the WCC anyway, because that's what sponsors pay attention to. It's ludicrous. If you want the teams to keep to their 5-engine allocation, or at least to keep as close to it as possible, then you have to penalise the car, and this inevitably (and quite rightly) entails penalising the driver as well.



#19 SlickMick

SlickMick
  • Member

  • 555 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 06 January 2014 - 23:52

Can anyone absolutely confirm :

- the penalties are cumulative for any given race weekend, and

- unused penalties are carried over.

Thanks.



Advertisement

#20 syolase

syolase
  • Member

  • 225 posts
  • Joined: February 13

Posted 07 January 2014 - 00:23

Can anyone absolutely confirm :

- the penalties are cumulative for any given race weekend, and

- unused penalties are carried over.

Thanks.

You carry your penalty for the next race, but not the race after that. So if Chilton gets a 20 place penalty, he is not carrying that for the entire year.



#21 SlickMick

SlickMick
  • Member

  • 555 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 07 January 2014 - 01:22

Thanks Syolase but.....mmmmm. Apologies if I'm making a meal of this - it's the carry over bit I'm confused about (but might also have misunderstood the penalties too but hey ho). Just say.....

 

Race Weekend 8 :

Friday :  Component number 1 fails for the 6th time (10 places).

Saturday Morning : Component number 2 fails for the 6th time (5 places).

Saturday Qualifying > 12th

Saturday Afternoon Component number 3 fails for the 6th time (5 places)

Grid position : 20th (provided, miracle of miracles, nobody else has a penalty)

Carry over penalty : 12 places

 

Race weekend 9 :

Carried Over penalty 12 places 

Friday : Component Number 2 fails for the 7th time (10 places)

Saturday Qualifying > 12th

Saturday Afternoon Component number 3 fails for the 7th time (5 places)

Grid Position : 20th 

Carry over penalty : 19 places

 

Not saying this is a realistic scenario (but who's to know) - would just like to understand it.

 

 

EDIT:

AAAAAARGGGHHHHH - just re-read you're note - they're "carried" up to the next race (ie. the Sunday), having accumulated the penalties in the previous few days, after which they're wiped - right? Late Night!


Edited by SlickMick, 07 January 2014 - 01:34.


#22 syolase

syolase
  • Member

  • 225 posts
  • Joined: February 13

Posted 07 January 2014 - 03:58

AAAAAARGGGHHHHH - just re-read you're note - they're "carried" up to the next race (ie. the Sunday), having accumulated the penalties in the previous few days, after which they're wiped - right? Late Night!

 

I don't really know how will the accumulated penalties will work. For example i think it would be unfair if someone carries over a 1 grid penalty, then he gets a 10 at the current race, but it gets wiped for the next race. So i would guess they are additive for the actual race, but they managed separately from the wipe point of view.



#23 GSiebert

GSiebert
  • Member

  • 2,206 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 07 January 2014 - 08:35

This is way too simple, can't they get the rules a bit more complex and stupid ?



#24 Gorma

Gorma
  • Member

  • 2,713 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 07 January 2014 - 08:49

This is way too simple, can't they get the rules a bit more complex and stupid ?

Double penalties in the final race?



#25 Rinehart

Rinehart
  • Member

  • 15,144 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 07 January 2014 - 08:51

I know there are penalties after 5 components, but it's the way the penalties change between 10 & 5 places that seems odd to me

6 modules of engine, 5 of each can be used. When a 6th of any is used = 10 place penalty, when a 7th or more of any is used = 5 place penalty. 

 

Based on the expected unreliability of cars next year, I am expecting grids from about Monza onwards to be completely reshuffled post qualifying based on this. 



#26 Exb

Exb
  • Member

  • 3,961 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 07 January 2014 - 09:57

Rinehart, I'm not sure if that is correct, I read it to be that the first time a 6th part of any module is used it is a 10 place grid penalty. Next time a 6th part is required (from any of the other 5 modules) it is a 5 place drop. If a 7th part of any module is needed it is another 10 place grid drop.

#27 Ncedi

Ncedi
  • Member

  • 1,183 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 07 January 2014 - 10:27

Rinehart, I'm not sure if that is correct, I read it to be that the first time a 6th part of any module is used it is a 10 place grid penalty. Next time a 6th part is required (from any of the other 5 modules) it is a 5 place drop. If a 7th part of any module is needed it is another 10 place grid drop.

 

The way I read it, if you use a 6th turbo (for example) you get a 10 place penalty. If you use a 7th turbo (at any point) you will get another 10 place penatly regardless of whether other 6th components have been used. If any other 6th or 7th compenents areused subsequent to the first 10 place penalty for the turbos, you get a 5 place penalty. And so on...

 

Sorry edited to clarify


Edited by Ncedi, 07 January 2014 - 10:29.


#28 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 17,536 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 07 January 2014 - 10:42

W

 

Thanks Syolase but.....mmmmm. Apologies if I'm making a meal of this - it's the carry over bit I'm confused about (but might also have misunderstood the penalties too but hey ho). Just say.....

 

Race Weekend 8 :

Friday :  Component number 1 fails for the 6th time (10 places).

Saturday Morning : Component number 2 fails for the 6th time (5 places).

Saturday Qualifying > 12th

Saturday Afternoon Component number 3 fails for the 6th time (5 places)

Grid position : 20th (provided, miracle of miracles, nobody else has a penalty)

Carry over penalty : 12 places

 

Race weekend 9 :

Carried Over penalty 12 places 

Friday : Component Number 2 fails for the 7th time (10 places)

Saturday Qualifying > 12th

Saturday Afternoon Component number 3 fails for the 7th time (5 places)

Grid Position : 20th 

Carry over penalty : 19 places

 

Not saying this is a realistic scenario (but who's to know) - would just like to understand it.

 

 

EDIT:

AAAAAARGGGHHHHH - just re-read you're note - they're "carried" up to the next race (ie. the Sunday), having accumulated the penalties in the previous few days, after which they're wiped - right? Late Night!

 

We still have 22 cars for the time being. ;)

 

The old penalty adds up first, then you have your new penalty and you take the remains of your new penalty to the next race. In other words. It is next to useless to watch qualifying around the midpoint of the season. The order will be tossed up due to all the penalties involved.

 

I strongly dislike this. It seems you can barge others off track (all though, off track no longer excists these days) and get a few places penalty, whereas a failed 'power unit' can bring you to the back of the grid for 2 consecutive races. Not a nice prospect for a midfield team.



#29 alpinesmuggler

alpinesmuggler
  • Member

  • 219 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 07 January 2014 - 10:48

IANAL, and it really takes one nowadays to interpret the rules and regulations. However, here's how I see it:

 

(1) 6 modules per engine

(2) 5 examples of each module allowed without penalty

(3) First use of a #6 example of any module triggers a 10-place grid penalty

(4) Any further use of a #6 example of any module outside of (3) module triggers a 5-place penalty

(5) First use of a #7 example of any module triggers a 10-place grid penalty

(6) Any further use of a #7 example of any module outside of (5) module triggers a 5-place penalty

(7) Reiterate from #8 to #n

 

Example:

 

Five "internal combustion engine" modules fail and need to be supplemented with a 6th one: 10-place penalty.

If any of the other modules fail after that and need to be replaced by a 6th one, it will be a 5-place penalty.

However, if any module fails at #6, the #7 replacement will once again incur a 10-place penalty, with subsequent #7 changes on other modules incurring 5-place penalties.

 

Now, that rule is idiotic, especially in the first year of new power units. However, what bothers me (among others on this thread) the most is the lack of clarity regarding the cumulative effect of module changes. Does a team incur a cumulative penalty for every #6 change? Then the 35-place penalty, ridiculous as it sounds, might well come into play.

 

It is also unclear what happens if you run a #7 module with the attendant penalty, then swap in #6 for #5 of a different module. Do you get a penalty at all? After all, you've already moved on to a new iteration.


Edited by alpinesmuggler, 07 January 2014 - 10:51.


#30 Exb

Exb
  • Member

  • 3,961 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 07 January 2014 - 11:06

That's a nice summary alpine. As for the cumulative penalties for changing several parts, I believe that if a team changes the whole power unit they have to start the race from the pit lane, so at some point it becomes better (less costley) to change the whole thing rather than say 4 componants. I would also think using a 6th part (even if a 7th part has been used for something else) will still require a 5 place penalty.

It would maybe have been better for the first year of new engines to leave them with 8 for a season and bring it down to 5 for subsequent years, I think for casual fans it is going to be very confusing as starting grids will have no representation to the qualifying positions and keeping up with who has what penalty and how that effects the grid is going to be difficult even for avid fans.

#31 Boing 2

Boing 2
  • Member

  • 4,770 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 07 January 2014 - 11:07

Bearing in mind how bad reliability is going to be this year, there are going to be a lot of cars carrying a bag of penalties around with them, qually will take a while to sort out now.  :| 



#32 Fastcake

Fastcake
  • Member

  • 12,548 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 January 2014 - 11:30

If the engines are unreliable enough that the teams burn through their allocation by the mid-season, they'll just waive the rules and give everyone extra engines.

#33 Rinehart

Rinehart
  • Member

  • 15,144 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 07 January 2014 - 11:43

The way I read it, if you use a 6th turbo (for example) you get a 10 place penalty. If you use a 7th turbo (at any point) you will get another 10 place penatly regardless of whether other 6th components have been used. If any other 6th or 7th compenents areused subsequent to the first 10 place penalty for the turbos, you get a 5 place penalty. And so on...

 

Sorry edited to clarify

"On the first occasion a sixth example of any of the six parts is used, it will trigger a 10-place penalty, although five-place penalties will be given for any subsequent use of a sixth element".

 

I have decoded it that they are saying "Elements" are one of the 6 parts of the engine (A B C D E & F) you can use 5 of each without penalty. Here is is saying if you use a sixth one of any, say A, you get a 10 place penalty, 5 places thereafter for subsequent use of that 6th one, A.

 

"This pattern will continue (for the seventh) and any subsequent elements, with the first use earning a 10-place penalty and the subsequent ones five places".

 

Here I understand it is saying if the same thing subsequently happens with B C D E or F the same pattern will be used with the first use earning a 10 place penalty.

 

I agree its as clear as mud and I might be wrong, but that is how I arrived at my understanding. I'm on the fence as to if the first use of a 7th of any of the 6 elements gets a 10 place - would assume so.


Edited by Rinehart, 07 January 2014 - 11:56.


#34 Rinehart

Rinehart
  • Member

  • 15,144 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 07 January 2014 - 11:44

But somehow, Chilton would still manage to start last...

Well precisely if they are all taking penalties the penalties will have no effect.



#35 Boing 2

Boing 2
  • Member

  • 4,770 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 07 January 2014 - 14:00

"On the first occasion a sixth example of any of the six parts is used, it will trigger a 10-place penalty, although five-place penalties will be given for any subsequent use of a sixth element".

 

I have decoded it that they are saying "Elements" are one of the 6 parts of the engine (A B C D E & F) you can use 5 of each without penalty. Here is is saying if you use a sixth one of any, say A, you get a 10 place penalty, 5 places thereafter for subsequent use of that 6th one, A.

 

"This pattern will continue (for the seventh) and any subsequent elements, with the first use earning a 10-place penalty and the subsequent ones five places".

 

Here I understand it is saying if the same thing subsequently happens with B C D E or F the same pattern will be used with the first use earning a 10 place penalty.

 

I agree its as clear as mud and I might be wrong, but that is how I arrived at my understanding. I'm on the fence as to if the first use of a 7th of any of the 6 elements gets a 10 place - would assume so.

 

I read that as a 5 place penalty for any use of a fifth allocation of any other component rather than the continued use of a fifth component A.



#36 Jamiednm

Jamiednm
  • Member

  • 2,546 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 07 January 2014 - 14:15

These rules are too simple.  :up:

 

I can see the entire grid starting from the pit lane for one race because of the penalty/reliability chaos.



#37 Jon83

Jon83
  • Member

  • 5,341 posts
  • Joined: November 11

Posted 07 January 2014 - 15:05

If the engines are unreliable enough that the teams burn through their allocation by the mid-season, they'll just waive the rules and give everyone extra engines.

 

 

I can see that happening which is farcical in itself.

 

I think the whole thing though is a farce,

 

Such harsh penalties for engine failures etc when they only have 5 'free' engines, brand new, limited testing is just nonsense. Only in modern-F1!
 



#38 bonjon1979a

bonjon1979a
  • Member

  • 4,333 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 07 January 2014 - 16:43

They'll change the rules if it becomes clear after testing that it won't work. The fia aren't that stupid, are they? Oh hang on a minute...

#39 AlexS

AlexS
  • Member

  • 6,301 posts
  • Joined: September 03

Posted 07 January 2014 - 17:15

 

If the engines are unreliable enough that the teams burn through their allocation by the mid-season, they'll just waive the rules and give everyone extra engines.

 

 

That depends if there is some engine that have not that kind of problems. Or have them at substantial lower degree.



Advertisement

#40 alpinesmuggler

alpinesmuggler
  • Member

  • 219 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 07 January 2014 - 17:20

If the engines are unreliable enough that the teams burn through their allocation by the mid-season, they'll just waive the rules and give everyone extra engines.

That, I think, is exactly what's going to happen. What a silly rule.



#41 0Fritz

0Fritz
  • Member

  • 352 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 07 January 2014 - 18:28

Didnt mario Illien say a few years back he made 100 engines a year for the same budget as they currently make 16, and he did not understand why the FIA would leave engine allocation free, but a cap on the budget? Is such a thing realistic?

 

The current gearbox/engine change penalties already have skewed and ruined some potential great battles. With these new rules, that can only increase, with even more cries about 'boring' F1. The writing is on the wall.



#42 GSiebert

GSiebert
  • Member

  • 2,206 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 07 January 2014 - 18:35

Double penalties in the final race?

 

That's the spirit !



#43 Fastcake

Fastcake
  • Member

  • 12,548 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 January 2014 - 18:48

That depends if there is some engine that have not that kind of problems. Or have them at substantial lower degree.

 

I was insinuating only if all the engines would have reliability issues, which would make it in everyone's interest to agree to a waiver. Even in the unlikely scenario that the engines vary greatly in reliability, I would imagine there would still be a waiver done to prevent damage to the sport, which could include a manufacturer threatening to pull out.



#44 F1 Mike

F1 Mike
  • Member

  • 2,250 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 07 January 2014 - 20:33

you just have to briefly scan through this thread so far to see that it's gone too far.

 

we are enthusiasts in these forums, and there are loads of us with question marks above our heads.



#45 Shambolic

Shambolic
  • Member

  • 1,285 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 07 January 2014 - 21:44

Oh ffs.

 

First race on an engine, or complete power unit as they now are - No reward or penalty.

 

Each subsequent race on the same unit - 1 constructors point rewarded.

 

If there's still going to be a long life rule in place, then each engine after running out of allowed allocations - educt 5 points from the constructor.

 

It's simple, it rewards longevity more than penalising manufacturing error, and it doesn't need a phd to understand or explain it.

 

 

 



#46 Jamiednm

Jamiednm
  • Member

  • 2,546 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 07 January 2014 - 21:56

We sometimes forget that F1 is an engineering exercise as much as it is a sport. Being penalised for a lack of longevity or endurance in components is a perfectly reasonable thing to have and I don't think teams should be rewarded points just for longevity. Caterham could just trundle around at 50% pace, completely uncompetitive and just conserve their car. That would automatically place them above Marussia in the WCC, completely unfair.



#47 f1RacingForever

f1RacingForever
  • Member

  • 1,384 posts
  • Joined: October 13

Posted 08 January 2014 - 07:39

I am against powertrain penalties of any sort. If teams want to change part then let them. It's not fair that drivers be penalized for what you would consider bad luck.I understand the reason for penalties but when teams are spending 500 million per season, changing an alternator isn't going to bankrupt anyone. Introduce a hard spending cap and let teams spend it how they want. It's most fair.



#48 MP422

MP422
  • Member

  • 2,157 posts
  • Joined: November 11

Posted 08 January 2014 - 14:42

Penalty should be for rule infringements  or dangerous driving.

 

The reliability ruling should effect the team constructor, not the driver, its gone to far.

 

Maybe points deductions, driver errors, he gets points taken away, car reliability, the constructor gets points taken away but the driver is untouched.

 

I don't think so. That sounds crazy to me. You are not seeing the whole picture. You can exploit your one sided rule to help you win the WDC at the expense of the WCC points. Besides it has never been split.



#49 Exb

Exb
  • Member

  • 3,961 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 11 January 2014 - 15:36

I've had a slightly concerning thought about these engine penalties. It is a 10 place grid drop to replace any 1 of the 6 elements a 6th time(and if in future anymore of the elements need changing a 6th time there will be further 5 place grid penalties), so for the cars that don't qualify in the top 10 then the penalty will instantly put them at the back of the field and may also carry over to the next event so surely its worth it for the cars that know they won't qualify in the top 10 to change the entire power unit and start from the pit lane (also saving themselves the parade lap worth of fuel, which could come in useful in the race with fuel restricted to 100Kg). So are we likely to see lots of cars starting from the pit lane this year, if so are these cars going to even bother with qualifying once they know they are going to change the engine and start from the pit lane anyway, or am I missing something obvious so this won't happen?



Edit - ignore the point about saving the parade lap of fuel, its not included in the 100Kg limit (but it will still save on tyres and engine wear by missing qualifying so does still have some advantages)

Edited by Exb, 11 January 2014 - 22:35.


#50 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 17,121 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 11 January 2014 - 17:50

Maybe 10 place (or whatever) grid penalties should have to be applied in full. So, if you fall to the back of the grid and still have not fallen back the correct number of positions, the rest of the penalty carries over to the next race (or even the next season). So, if you volunteer to start from the pit lane, you've not had any of your penalty places applied, so the whole lot carries over to the next race.