Jump to content


Photo

London Grand Prix


  • Please log in to reply
203 replies to this topic

#1 JForce

JForce
  • Member

  • 13,840 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 07 July 2004 - 09:12

It seems like this is gathering steam, with the Mayor of London officially asking Bernie for the spot.

I've gone from "that will never happen" to "wow, maybe it will".

My question though is related to the track itself. Ive never been to London, but I wonder whether they could get a decent track through there. Wide enough? Any overtaking spots?

I just can't see a decent gp there. You're replacing Silverstone for gods sake?

Advertisement

#2 angst

angst
  • Member

  • 7,135 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 07 July 2004 - 09:54

Originally posted by JForce
It seems like this is gathering steam, with the Mayor of London officially asking Bernie for the spot.

I've gone from "that will never happen" to "wow, maybe it will".

My question though is related to the track itself. Ive never been to London, but I wonder whether they could get a decent track through there. Wide enough? Any overtaking spots?

I just can't see a decent gp there. You're replacing Silverstone for gods sake?


What!!!? Heresy I say. ;)

Why oh why oh why is anyone getting excited about a London Grand Prix. Yet again an example of 'style above content'. There won't be a race in London. It might look spectacular, having F1 cars hurtling through the streets, but it's so restricting in terms of what an F1 car can do and there will be even less chance of overtaking and racing than normal. We've got Monaco and that's enough street circuits thankyou very much.

#3 BRG

BRG
  • Member

  • 11,066 posts
  • Joined: September 99

Posted 07 July 2004 - 10:01

It's just a lot of PR fluff. It's linked to the London 2012 Olympics bid - another attempt to build up London's image to the IOC. Once the Olympic bid gets binned in favour of Paris, as will inevitably happen, the GP proposal will disappear like snow in the sun.

It is not practical without immense investment. The route that is proposed goes through Admiralty Arch - a nioce homage to Donington Park 1938 when the track ran under Starkey's Bridge, but the chance of that being alllowed today is less than zero - and there is no chance of removing the Arch. London is full of narrow streets and historic sites. It is not like a US city, with broad streets. The parkland roads might be feasible, as so would Park Lane, but the rest of the suggested route(s) are simply impractical unless you want another Monaco, but without the sun, boats and jewellery. And that's before we even start on the conservationsit and environnental lobbies.

Of course anything is possible with enough investment - but if that has not been forthcoming for Silverstone, why should it be for London? And I think Ken Livingstone will run a mile once he finds out exactly how much Bernie has in mind for the dubious right to stage the event.

Please, let's keep motor racing where is belongs - on proper race tracks, not Mickey Mouse temporary circcuits.

#4 Peter

Peter
  • Member

  • 1,392 posts
  • Joined: March 99

Posted 07 July 2004 - 10:05

It is never going to happen.

Closing the streets for one day was bad enough.

Ken Livingstone might dream of the idea, but the tradesmen of London would not tolerate such a loss of business.

None of the streets are capable of taking a full racing circuit, and there would be no room for spectators.

Of course, they could point out that there is no real possibility of overtaking in Monaco, so just having a two hour procession with the result determined by the time of a qualifying lap would solve any problems. Then they could do what they did yesterday and lay down a one car wide track.

Perhaps they could have a larger area where the cars could do "donuts" and award style poins instead of position points! Then maybe Nige could take part in the Jordan again :rotfl:

#5 Bart

Bart
  • Member

  • 4,150 posts
  • Joined: September 99

Posted 07 July 2004 - 10:16

Originally posted by angst
What!!!? Heresy I say. ;)

Why oh why oh why is anyone getting excited about a London Grand Prix. Yet again an example of 'style above content'. There won't be a race in London. It might look spectacular, having F1 cars hurtling through the streets, but it's so restricting in terms of what an F1 car can do and there will be even less chance of overtaking and racing than normal. We've got Monaco and that's enough street circuits thankyou very much.

We also have Albert Park in Melbourne.

Adelaide wasn't a bad street circuit, and I see nothing against such circuits per se. However, I agree that F1 cars are best run on circuits to which they are suited, and that means purpose-built courses, like Silverstone. It would be different if Britain didn't have an FIA-approved circuit, but it does. So let's forget poncy PR stunts and stick to racing.

#6 man

man
  • Member

  • 1,300 posts
  • Joined: October 01

Posted 07 July 2004 - 10:44

Livingstone has already talked to Bernie about the possibility and i'm sure he has some indication of the costs involved in organising a GP there, so for Ken to make such a confident statement that a GP could be ready in 2 years, I would take that as a positive sign.

Regarding circuit layout, I haven't seen any propsed plans yet but I should think that a circuit around/inside Hyde Park, Knightsbridge, Park Lane, Buckingham Palace would be the most efficient in terms of logistics.

No doubt, Ken Livingstone will be doing his sums, and if it appears to be ok, I would say the commercial interests of both parties (London and F1) would drive the whole project along at a fairly rapid rate.

Concerning the loss of business of hosting a three day event in central London, I wonder, would they possibly squeeze practice/qualifying/race into a more compact time frame i.e. 2 days instead of 3?

#7 mikedeering

mikedeering
  • Member

  • 3,521 posts
  • Joined: July 00

Posted 07 July 2004 - 11:29

BRG's analysis is spot on. London is desperate for the Olympics in 2012 and is coming up with all sorts of ways to show how great and capable it is at hosting events. A week or so ago it was that dire Olympic Torch concert at Pall Mall (funny, I don't recall such a fuss about the Olympic torch before this year). This week it is F1. Next week it will be something else. Livingstone and Co are just trying to sound positive - if they suggest London couldn't cope with a GP then what hope have they got with staging a huge event like the Olympics? Once London is beaten in the Olympic race (which it surely will do) all of this nonsense will go away. I would bet on it.

#8 ASD

ASD
  • Member

  • 1,182 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 07 July 2004 - 11:43

Originally posted by BRG
... another Monaco, but without the sun, boats and jewellery...


If Bernie can't get his yacht on the Serpentine, I'll be there with a rubber dinghy.

I suspect the London GP idea is another way to put pressure on Silverstone.

But hey, worth looking into. If the economics work for Monaco - putting up seating, building safety barriers, temporary facilities etc, then they could potentially wotk for London. I expect the crowd would be bigger - London's a major city. Didn't they have 350k to 1/2million for the Regent Street thing?

#9 mikedeering

mikedeering
  • Member

  • 3,521 posts
  • Joined: July 00

Posted 07 July 2004 - 11:50

Originally posted by ASD
Didn't they have 350k to 1/2million for the Regent Street thing?


Yeah, but that was free...! If Silverstone gave away tickets I suspect they may get more spectators!

#10 lustigson

lustigson
  • Member

  • 4,722 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 07 July 2004 - 12:09

Originally posted by man
Regarding circuit layout, I haven't seen any propsed plans yet but I should think that a circuit around/inside Hyde Park, Knightsbridge, Park Lane, Buckingham Palace would be the most efficient in terms of logistics.

How about this ? Or is this the layout they used yesterday?

#11 mikedeering

mikedeering
  • Member

  • 3,521 posts
  • Joined: July 00

Posted 07 July 2004 - 12:22

Originally posted by lustigson

How about this ? Or is this the layout they used yesterday?


That route would appear to involve going through Pall Mall! I think that may prove a problem!

Pall Mall

#12 lustigson

lustigson
  • Member

  • 4,722 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 07 July 2004 - 12:38

That would be a pretty sight. Three wide underneath the arches...;)

But seriously, that's ridiculous ofcourse. Weird, 'cause the map seems to be the BBC's work (check out londonf1.com ). Isn't there a way around the arches? I don't remember from one of my visits to London.

#13 BRG

BRG
  • Member

  • 11,066 posts
  • Joined: September 99

Posted 07 July 2004 - 13:46

Originally posted by lustigson
Isn't there a way around the arches?

None that would be any wider than the arches, unless you go a long way, right down to Parliament Square.

#14 BorderReiver

BorderReiver
  • Member

  • 9,935 posts
  • Joined: April 03

Posted 07 July 2004 - 13:53

*BorderReiver causally remarks that Edinburgh would be far better, as anyone who has played Project Gotham 2 would know*

Seriously, I don't think it would ever happen for several reasons;

It would be a nightmare to arrange and shutting down a city like London for a weekend of noise and mayhem isn't exactly going to be popular with people.

Secondly, the UK doesn't really have a tradition of city street Racing (anyone remember the "wonderful" Birmingham Super-Prix?), but we have some fantastic motorsport circuits (oh to see a Grand Prix at Oulton, never gonna happen obviously, or at Brands again), it wouldn't make any sense (especially to a goverment that is loathe to spend money on anything) to fork out the millions needed to create a temporary circuit in London when we have Silverstone, Brands, Donington, hell even Rockingham available.

It's a lovely idea, but I can't see it getting the final green light. . .

#15 man

man
  • Member

  • 1,300 posts
  • Joined: October 01

Posted 07 July 2004 - 14:00

With the backing of Westminster council according to reports, I now believe the possibility of a London GP as 50/50.

I think a London GP would gain the highest TV viewing figures ever for a GP. It is merely a question of 'is it financialy viable?' No point in speculating this, leave it to the experts, however, it must be emphasised that the amount of financial spin-offs that London could gain from hosting a GP are vast.

#16 BorderReiver

BorderReiver
  • Member

  • 9,935 posts
  • Joined: April 03

Posted 07 July 2004 - 14:02

Originally posted by man
With the backing of Westminster council according to reports, I now believe the possibility of a London GP as 50/50.

I think a London GP would gain the highest TV viewing figures ever for a GP. It is merely a question of 'is it financialy viable?' No point in speculating this, leave it to the experts, however, it must be emphasised that the amount of financial spin-offs that London could gain from hosting a GP are vast.


And the money lost to businesses by shutting down the city center for half a week?;)

I'm just not sure it is very viable. . .

#17 man

man
  • Member

  • 1,300 posts
  • Joined: October 01

Posted 07 July 2004 - 14:09

Originally posted by BorderReiver


And the money lost to businesses by shutting down the city center for half a week?;)

I'm just not sure it is very viable. . .


Indeed, that will clearly be taken into consideration before a decision is made, as will the various advertising, extra tourism, marketing opportunities etc. As I said, its futile but fun to speculate. Lets wait for the experts to do their sums.

In the end, money talks.

#18 BorderReiver

BorderReiver
  • Member

  • 9,935 posts
  • Joined: April 03

Posted 07 July 2004 - 14:16

Originally posted by man


Indeed, that will clearly be taken into consideration before a decision is made, as will the various advertising, extra tourism, marketing opportunities etc. As I said, its futile but fun to speculate. Lets wait for the experts to do their sums.

In the end, money talks.


It would be great though wouldn't it? :)

Incidentally, has anyone heard anymore about the Manchester Race Track that was mooted? For near the City Of Manchester Stadium

#19 BRG

BRG
  • Member

  • 11,066 posts
  • Joined: September 99

Posted 07 July 2004 - 16:23

Originally posted by man
however, it must be emphasised that the amount of financial spin-offs that London could gain from hosting a GP are vast.

No, they are not. In summer, London is already full of tourists and business visitors - the hotels are full and charge a kings' ransom for a room. All that would happen in the event of a GP is that one lot of visitors would be replaced by a different lot. Net gain zero. OK, there would be a lot of UK visitors but most of them would bring sandwiches from home...

Set against that is the massive cost of rebuilding half the route to make it suitable for racing, installing grandstands & toilets, fencing and tyrewalls etc etc, the promotional costs, and, biggest of all, the many millions that Bernie will cream off for himself as ever.

Incidentally, the same calculation has to be done for the 2012 Olympics bid, although they will only have the bribes to the IOC to worry about which will amount to far less than Bernie's rake-off. But neither make an iota of finacial sense and both will cost the London and British taxpayer a fortune.

Advertisement

#20 man

man
  • Member

  • 1,300 posts
  • Joined: October 01

Posted 08 July 2004 - 00:27

Originally posted by BRG
No, they are not. In summer, London is already full of tourists and business visitors - the hotels are full and charge a kings' ransom for a room. All that would happen in the event of a GP is that one lot of visitors would be replaced by a different lot. Net gain zero. OK, there would be a lot of UK visitors but most of them would bring sandwiches from home...

Set against that is the massive cost of rebuilding half the route to make it suitable for racing, installing grandstands & toilets, fencing and tyrewalls etc etc, the promotional costs, and, biggest of all, the many millions that Bernie will cream off for himself as ever.



I maintain my stance 'lets wait for the experts to do their sums'. However, just a comment regarding grandstands, toilets etc. Such costs will be absolutley insignificant when compared to the financial spin-offs that London could gain, not from the perspectve of attracting more visitors for the weekend of the GP which you imply, but from the fact that a London GP would in essence be a marketing tool for tourism ( and its by-products) on TV for hundreds of millions of people across the world. This factor is worth millions upon millions alone.

Why are countries desperate to host Olympics and World Cups? For the sake of pride? No. It's money, and money only.

I don't claim to have a viable financial plan for a London GP, therefore, I am forced to sit on the fence. But for somebody to claim a GP in London is viable or not without conducting extensive appropriate research seems, dare I say, narrow minded.
:|

#21 zac510

zac510
  • Member

  • 1,713 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 08 July 2004 - 01:22

I think another street circuit would be great!

The thing about Adelaide and Melbourne street circuits (to quote two I know) is that they run around and through parkland areas. Thus the impact on businesses is minimal because they only run adjacent to a few trees and a big patch of grass :) No one whole street full of business has to be closed down. In Adelaide I don't think more than 6 shopfronts would have closed while maybe a couple dozen offices had access difficulties.

#22 MrSlow

MrSlow
  • Member

  • 4,928 posts
  • Joined: April 02

Posted 08 July 2004 - 01:48

Sure sounds like a Mission Impossible. I have not been all over London, but form what I have seen there is not an inch to spare anywhere. A F1 race would require permanent changes along the entire track and with todays safety standards those changes would not be small. An optimistic idea and Bernie plays along, collecting consultant money :)

Would be fun though, and who knows, it might prove that there is so much money in it that they actually go for it. F1 would propably gain from it. Not F1 the Sport, but F1 the Circus.

#23 BRG

BRG
  • Member

  • 11,066 posts
  • Joined: September 99

Posted 08 July 2004 - 09:25

Originally posted by man
Why are countries desperate to host Olympics and World Cups? For the sake of pride? No. It's money, and money only.

IMO tt is solely for the sake of pride. Politicians LOVE these sort of events - lots of photo opportunities and a chance to play to the voters national pride by flag-waving - it is election campaigning subsidised by taxpayers. AFAIK, only the Los Angeles Olympics in 1984 made a profit. All the others lost money and their taxpayers had to cough up. Ask the residents of Montreal - they were paying an additional tax levy for a decade after their Olympic games.

The claims of massive financial benefits are always trotted out by the "experts" in whom you place such trust. But they are never quantified, never measured after the event, never proven. The only concrete evidence is the hole in the city or national exchequer afterwards that has to be met from increased taxation. I can reliably assure you that the "experts" will announce that a London GP will bring in £100 million of extra revenue a year. And I can equally reliably assure you that it will be a complete guess with no evidential basis whatsoever. And I can also reliably assure you that it will be WRONG.

If there is all this cash floating around to pay for a GP which will promote London as a tourist destination, it would be far better to cut out the middle-man (thank you and good night, Mr Ecclestone) and spend it directly on developing a lot more tourist hotel accomodation, and on improving public transport facilities to make a sustainable improvement to London as a holiday destination.

#24 karlth

karlth
  • Member

  • 16,203 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 08 July 2004 - 10:11

In most cases hosting a major sporting event like the world cup or the olympics makes it necessary to upgrade the cities infrastructure which is then subsidized by the event's revenue.

#25 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,153 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 08 July 2004 - 10:40

Originally posted by JForce
It seems like this is gathering steam, with the Mayor of London officially asking Bernie for the spot.

I've gone from "that will never happen" to "wow, maybe it will".

My question though is related to the track itself. Ive never been to London, but I wonder whether they could get a decent track through there. Wide enough? Any overtaking spots?

I just can't see a decent gp there. You're replacing Silverstone for gods sake?


Well, the strained relationship between Jackie S. and Bernie E. is not supportive of healthy climate to resolve anything soon. They don't seem to be even talking to each other. (I am referring to 2006 "deadline surprise").

#26 BorderReiver

BorderReiver
  • Member

  • 9,935 posts
  • Joined: April 03

Posted 08 July 2004 - 11:17

HERE is something that in my view is a little more feasable. I lived in Manchester for a long time and know the area they are planning to use well, and it would be a lot simpler than shutting down the middle of London.

The only downside is that Belle Vue Speedway would no longer be Manchester's premier motorsports venue :cry: alas!

#27 daSilvium

daSilvium
  • Member

  • 469 posts
  • Joined: March 00

Posted 08 July 2004 - 11:41

Originally posted by BRG
It's just a lot of PR fluff. It's linked to the London 2012 Olympics bid - another attempt to build up London's image to the IOC. Once the Olympic bid gets binned in favour of Paris, as will inevitably happen, the GP proposal will disappear like snow in the sun.



I agree with this.

It's never gonna happen, it's all politics and just Mr Stupid aka Ken Livingstone trying to associate himself with anything which looks like it's a popular idea. Livingstone once said a few years ago that (quote as near as i can remember) "I hate cars. I'd ban them all if i could."

It's all PR and political manoeuvering.

#28 perfectelise

perfectelise
  • Member

  • 244 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 11 December 2004 - 13:52

Looks like Bernie has fooled the London authorities aswell as the media:

"Plans for a London F1 race are still progressing, despite the fact that the British GP will be staying at Silverstone for the next five years. Bernie Ecclestone has told London Mayor Ken Livingstone that he “would sign a deal today”. The F1 supremo said the only stumbling block was financing the race. Livingstone has already carried out feasibility studies, which were approved by both the police and Westminster Council." [from ITV-F1]

#29 jonpollak

jonpollak
  • Member

  • 12,490 posts
  • Joined: March 00

Posted 11 December 2004 - 16:02

BRG on the money yet again
A PR attempt to validate the Olympic bid
http://news.bbc.co.u...one/4085959.stm
But....and it's a large J-Lo size Butt
There is more chance of London staging an F1 race than the Olympics!!!

Since my rose coloured specs have been superglued to the bridge of my nose for the last 25 years
I really want it to happen.....If only once
http://www.londonf1....edwards_big.jpg
http://www.londonf1....ehall_bandw.jpg

then back to a real circuit...
KNOCKHILL

D'oh

Jp

#30 SeanValen

SeanValen
  • Member

  • 16,933 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 11 December 2004 - 20:58

The Silverstone race will happen regardless.

As much as I know the track might be tame, be fasinating to see.


Perhaps it could be pretty cool, depending where they do it, this harks back to Project Gotham Racing 1 on the xbox, they had London type city routes, Trafagur Square, Picaddly, I remember some of the breaking points and turning in, I think it easily outdo the Monaco challenge depending they pick a good route, I see more space on the track then say Monaco's tighness, a better chance for overtaking.

#31 HBoss

HBoss
  • Member

  • 4,220 posts
  • Joined: August 03

Posted 11 December 2004 - 21:07

By the time London gets a chance, Schumacher will have retired, so they can perfectly have a street race in Lodon under the name of the European GP and maintain the British GP at Silverstone. With Schumacher gone, there would be no need of two races in Germany, IMO.

Hehe.

#32 SeanValen

SeanValen
  • Member

  • 16,933 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 11 December 2004 - 21:14

Originally posted by HBoss
By the time London gets a chance, Schumacher will have retired, so they can perfectly have a street race in Lodon under the name of the European GP and maintain the British GP at Silverstone. With Schumacher gone, there would be no need of two races in Germany, IMO.

Hehe.


I was gonna say they would use the European GP name for London in my last post, I just didn't include it, couldn't be bothered, I know see your post, and amused, except I didn't factor in the Schumi retiring thinking,I project a 2006 London GP,I think even with MS, two german races, well they've had it good enough, it maybe time to use that slot for two british races.

I don't know the politics of it, see what happens.

#33 alexcason

alexcason
  • Member

  • 143 posts
  • Joined: September 04

Posted 11 December 2004 - 21:25

I really don't think a grand prix in London is a good idea. Here's why:

a) It'll be boring because there'll be no overtaking.
b) The traffic problems will be beyond belief. Think three hour traffic jams and absolutely packed trains.
c) Where is everybody going to stay? You can bet hotels will triple their prices for that weekend. You could stay outside London but you'd be facing a 4 - 5 hour trip every morning.
d) It'll make the Grand Prix really inaccesable for the people in the North. Silverstone is roughly in the middle so is ideal for everyone in the country to get to.
e) I can't imagine the non f1 loving part of London being too impressed with the city being brought to a grinding halt.
f) The track will be the usual rubbish affair, no challening corners.

#34 Dudley

Dudley
  • Member

  • 9,245 posts
  • Joined: March 00

Posted 12 December 2004 - 00:13

That will never happen.

#35 nichola102

nichola102
  • Member

  • 365 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 12 December 2004 - 01:27

For supposed F1 fans, you're all very cynical.

For a start, Bernie intends to run a London GP ALONGSIDE Silverstone. Although officially, a country is only allowed to host one GP, both Germany and Italy host two under different guises.

Then there is the location. London IS a pretty big city and the plans, as they stand, are that the GP would be held in Hyde Park or Green Park. This already has the approval of the Metropolitan Police, The Mayor of London, the Prime Minister and Royal Parks (consent apparently given by The Queen). With this kind of weight behind it, I would assume it's pretty much on the cards.

As I'm sure you all know, Melbourne is a park circuit and the GP is held with little or no disruption to the rest of the city. Yes, the squirrel watchers like to have a moan, but they haven't managed to stop it so far.

Hyde Park already hosts several large events each year which neccessitates the full or partial closure of the park, and the milling about of very large crowds. As it is self-contained, they can pretty much do what they like once it's adequately fenced off. Admittedly, the circuit itself would be very basic but one suspects the whole thing is just for show. There would be plenty of room for all of the VIP's to land their helicopters and they would have the core of the park for a pretty impressive paddock.

I attended both the Rugby World Cup parade and the F1 display in Regent Street and can speak with knowledge about the sheer volume of the crowds there (500,000 - 1,000,000). I was wedged in very tightly at the lower end of Regent Street but, when I decided that six hours was long enough and I had seen Jenson go up and down, I decided to leave. It only took me a few minutes to get away from the crowds and into Trafalgar Square, where we walked without breaking stride to Charing Cross. At the Rugby parade, I was right in the middle of Trafalgar Square, but made it down to Parliment Square and into a taxi to the reception at a hotel on Hyde Park Corner before the England team did!! London is a big enough city for huge crowds to converge and disperse easily. It's not as if 100,000 people would all be stood at the same bus-stop the second the race has finished. People want to go for drinks, or food, or whatever, and it really is quite amazing how quickly people disappear.

As for the whole thing being a huge PR stunt to help out with the 2012 Olympic bid, surely you must understand that this is the very reason it WILL happen. GB needs to prove it has the resources to host these huge events. They way that I understand that it is being planned is to keep it contained in the park, thus causing minimum disruption to the rest of the city.

I have trouble believing the animosity I encounter when people talk about a London GP. We haven't even got a stadium these days, why begrudge us this excellent idea of bringing my favourite sport to our doorstep?? I understand that Silverstone is a well loved location on the calendar, and I am as chuffed as the next person that we will get to see it next season. But, for me, if the choice is between driving all the way up to Silverstone (where everyone IS going the same way) and waiting around on a windy, ill-equipped circuit until it's time for me to queue my way home, or falling out of bed, onto the tube and into the park, I know which one I would choose.

London rocks!!!!

#36 Georg_Kuyumji

Georg_Kuyumji
  • Member

  • 664 posts
  • Joined: September 04

Posted 12 December 2004 - 02:07

Very well said Nichola :up:

#37 SeanValen

SeanValen
  • Member

  • 16,933 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 12 December 2004 - 02:59

Originally posted by nichola102
But, for me, if the choice is between driving all the way up to Silverstone (where everyone IS going the same way) and waiting around on a windy, ill-equipped circuit until it's time for me to queue my way home, or falling out of bed, onto the tube and into the park, I know which one I would choose.

London rocks!!!!



I've lived in London all my life, as a f1 fan, as a londoner, it's perfect, but I understand other fans views, from a racing view point, we want to see plans, we want to see the corners, how big will the track be, what challenging corners can we expect, a place for overtaking, if they can improve upon Monaco, that'll be a start, we have little to go on, a map plan, circuit plan we hungar for.

There was a old London GP design in a thread a while back, maybe time to dig that up, as the route seemed interesting.

#38 A Wheel Nut

A Wheel Nut
  • Member

  • 4,739 posts
  • Joined: July 03

Posted 12 December 2004 - 03:22

Originally posted by BRG
Politicians LOVE these sort of events

I dunno, maybe its the remnants of alcohol in my system from last night, maybe its the raging hormones or perhaps its a combination of both, but for some reason I read "politicians" as "lesbians".

I'm not quite sure why lesbians LOVE Grand Prix racing on the streets of London, but I'd certainly be interested in finding out!

#39 VAR1016

VAR1016
  • Member

  • 2,825 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 12 December 2004 - 03:35

Ken Livingstone is a nasty (and I do know what I'm talking about) little shit.

He is a lefty car-hater. His Grand Prix ideas are probably solely due to his plans for self-aggrandisment. :down:

A plague on him and his plans. After all, this is the man who spent £50,000 of taxpayers' money on "babies against the bomb". The man is a hopeless idiot.

And yes, I live in London.

PdeRL

Advertisement

#40 Rob29

Rob29
  • Member

  • 3,090 posts
  • Joined: January 01

Posted 12 December 2004 - 09:05

Originally posted by VAR1016
Ken Livingstone is a nasty (and I do know what I'm talking about) little shit.

He is a lefty car-hater. His Grand Prix ideas are probably solely due to his plans for self-aggrandisment. :down:

A plague on him and his plans. After all, this is the man who spent £50,000 of taxpayers' money on "babies against the bomb". The man is a hopeless idiot.

And yes, I live in London.

PdeRL

For a different view;I lived in London for 50 years,and Ken's GLC gave me my first mortgage when no Building society would. He may have backed some strange ideas I do not support,but with traffic he is spot on. Cars are not needed in cities if proper public transport is provided. Maybe we have something in comon in that I hate road cars but love racing.

#41 nichola102

nichola102
  • Member

  • 365 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 12 December 2004 - 12:41

Originally posted by Rob29
For a different view;I lived in London for 50 years,and Ken's GLC gave me my first mortgage when no Building society would. He may have backed some strange ideas I do not support,but with traffic he is spot on. Cars are not needed in cities if proper public transport is provided. Maybe we have something in comon in that I hate road cars but love racing.


I'm with you there. Ken has some very strange ideas, but I too believe that it is pointless having cars in the city.

I travel often in London, usually with two small children in tow, and find I rarely have trouble getting from A to B and back.

Ken has some good ideas about the transport system, and I do believe that it will be improved to aid the Olympic bid. Even if it means extending the Congestion Charge zones and putting the fares up.

#42 FrankB

FrankB
  • Member

  • 2,597 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 12 December 2004 - 13:23

Originally posted by alexcason
I really don't think a grand prix in London is a good idea. Here's why:

a) It'll be boring because there'll be no overtaking.
b) The traffic problems will be beyond belief. Think three hour traffic jams and absolutely packed trains.
c) Where is everybody going to stay? You can bet hotels will triple their prices for that weekend. You could stay outside London but you'd be facing a 4 - 5 hour trip every morning.
d) It'll make the Grand Prix really inaccesable for the people in the North. Silverstone is roughly in the middle so is ideal for everyone in the country to get to.
e) I can't imagine the non f1 loving part of London being too impressed with the city being brought to a grinding halt.
f) The track will be the usual rubbish affair, no challening corners.



a) How do you know that there will be no overtaking?

b) London copes with a huge flow of commuters in and and out of the city on a daily basis. Given that commuter numbers are relatively low at the weekend when most people would be travelling to and from the GP, I can't see that their journies would be too difficult.

c) Everyone seems to find somewhere to stay for the British GP, and there are far fewer hotel rooms within 15 miles of Silverstone than there are within fifteen miles of the centre of London. As for hotels cashing in by raising their room rates, hotels everywhere have the opportunity to do that if there is a large event taking place close to them.

d) No one who lives on the British mainland is more than 700 miles from London. What proportion of the American, Australian or Chinese populations live within 700 miles of their "home" GP? Agreed, Silverstone is 70 miles closer for people travelling from the North of the country, but conversely it is 70 miles further for anyone travelling from the South East. Furthermore, as I understand it, if a London GP were to happen it would be in addition to Silverstone, not in place of it.

e) See my comments above about how London copes with its daily influx of commuters. Why should a GP in London cause any more disruption than say a cup final at Wembley, or an open air concert in Hyde Park. I know that people who live and work in Towcester aren't univerally pleased about the GP weekend, but they grumble and get on with their lives.

f) As with a) above - how do you know?

#43 Marcel Schot

Marcel Schot
  • Member

  • 5,459 posts
  • Joined: November 98

Posted 12 December 2004 - 14:36

Doesn't seem feasible at all. The location is too difficult. Through the parks? This would require some serious butchering of them, which I don't think they'll get away with. Oxford Street down on a Saturday? I can see the reaction from the shops there.

Besides, a Grand Prix would shut down a large area from at least Thursday until Monday, if not a lot longer. The costs this brings with it will be too huge to even consider a race in central London. You'd have to move into the outskirts of the city, which lack the landmarks that would make a London Grand Prix a real London Grand Prix. All in all, I don't think it's a particularly good idea even when it would be fantastic to see the cars blasting by the London Eye, Westminster, Buckingham Palace, etc.

#44 Rob29

Rob29
  • Member

  • 3,090 posts
  • Joined: January 01

Posted 12 December 2004 - 15:26

Originally posted by Marcel Schot
Doesn't seem feasible at all. The location is too difficult. Through the parks? This would require some serious butchering of them, which I don't think they'll get away with. Oxford Street down on a Saturday? I can see the reaction from the shops there.

Besides, a Grand Prix would shut down a large area from at least Thursday until Monday, if not a lot longer. The costs this brings with it will be too huge to even consider a race in central London. You'd have to move into the outskirts of the city, which lack the landmarks that would make a London Grand Prix a real London Grand Prix. All in all, I don't think it's a particularly good idea even when it would be fantastic to see the cars blasting by the London Eye, Westminster, Buckingham Palace, etc.

has worked well in many cities,with several new ones having dates for 2005. I doubt that they would race through Admiralty Arch-failing Hyde Park my suggestion would be Docklands where the still empty Dome could be used as the paddock?

#45 BorderReiver

BorderReiver
  • Member

  • 9,935 posts
  • Joined: April 03

Posted 12 December 2004 - 15:35

Originally posted by nichola102
For supposed F1 fans, you're all very cynical . . . . .


There is being a cynic and there is being a realist. All the event's you talk about were 1 day specials, do you have any idea how badly the economic's of the city will be screwed up by shutting down a portion of it for four days? The London Grand Prix wouln't come close to making a profit when you factor in the losses it would cause for other businesses who would lose that half week trading time. It just isn't economically viable. London is going to have a hard enough time finding the money to host the Olympics without trying to create a Grand Prix circuit as well. Just because everyone has said "yes" in theory doesn't mean it will occur in practise.

London rocks!!!!


It's amazing how the only people who thing that are the one's who have never lived anywhere else. . .;) Up here we call it "the tumor".

#46 SeanValen

SeanValen
  • Member

  • 16,933 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 12 December 2004 - 18:25

Originally posted by BorderReiver

London is going to have a hard enough time finding the money to host the Olympics without trying to create a Grand Prix circuit as well. Just because everyone has said "yes" in theory doesn't mean it will occur in practise.
.


Hey, a few words for you, The Millennium Dome.
The Govenment can waste cash how it wants, now I like the dome, but obivisouly there's wiser things to spend money on, if it happens, I can easily see the government running the London GP at a loss if needed be, they must want it pretty bad for image sake, then put the city on a higher playing field, a sort of a warm up in terms of arrangement for olympics.

It's another view to consider, we know the British Government spends reckless at times

#47 BorderReiver

BorderReiver
  • Member

  • 9,935 posts
  • Joined: April 03

Posted 12 December 2004 - 18:29

Originally posted by SeanValen


Hey, a few words for you, The Millennium Dome.


The Dome was bad enough, but the London GP has potential to be a worse scandal (though not as utterly useless of course). Bernie, money, loss for private business, etc etc etc.

#48 SeanValen

SeanValen
  • Member

  • 16,933 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 12 December 2004 - 18:47

Originally posted by BorderReiver


The Dome was bad enough, but the London GP has potential to be a worse scandal (though not as utterly useless of course). Bernie, money, loss for private business, etc etc etc.



I own no business, I'm not Bernie, it's not my money, it's their money, if they want to waste it so a f1 fan like me can enjoy London GP, fine by me, they've wasted money on dodgy machines for the British Army, which more then say covers 4 or 5 London GPS!!!

I'm not a violent person, I'm a peaceful person, better then spent the money on motorracing then train up soldiers to kill. The First act of a true hero is not to fight.
:smoking:

And does economics really matter, what about our fun? Most of London will be flooding, under water because of economics, that's all the government worries about, not about the environments, those polar ice caps will melt, and when I'm 60 or something, I will be able to take a boat out on the flooded areas that used to be the London GP, that's reality for you.



#49 Schuting Star

Schuting Star
  • Member

  • 5,139 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 12 December 2004 - 19:07

Originally posted by BorderReiver
It's amazing how the only people who thing that are the one's who have never lived anywhere else. . .;) Up here we call it "the tumor".

I've lived in other places and visited many thank you, and I still believe London is a wonderful place.

I don't however think it's a wonderful place for a GP. The brief period they ran just before Silverstone caused a lot of chaos and a great deal of bad feeling to those that worked in the area and had their route home disrupted and that was just for a few hours. As has already been pointed out the cost of effectively closing down parts of London would cost a small fortune and one we know wont be recouped. It may be feasible but I don't think it's a good idea.

#50 se7en_24

se7en_24
  • Member

  • 14,088 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 12 December 2004 - 20:15

Originally posted by BorderReiver


The Dome was bad enough, but the London GP has potential to be a worse scandal (though not as utterly useless of course). Bernie, money, loss for private business, etc etc etc.

Shall we talk about the Scottish parliament building now? :D