We all like to moan about the powers that be in F1, especially me! Sometimes it seems so obvious to us that new rules are a bad Idea or that they have missed something that they should have added to the rules. So if you were the FIA What new rules would you like to introduce and which rules would you scrap?
I have a few Ideas that I think would be good. (I already know nobody will agree with me, but thats the whole point! Each to there own)
What New F1 Rules would you introduce?
Started by
bigticker
, Feb 12 2010 16:28
136 replies to this topic
Advertisement
#2
Gbain
-
- 195 posts
- Joined: January 10
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 16:38
Oh boy, now this is a thread me likes!!
A penalty 10 positions down the grid for obstructing other drivers during a qualifications. No more parking on race track!!! Any red flag should automatically annul the session. Remember the circus last year in Japan? It was a real joke and not a funny one.
A penalty 10 positions down the grid for obstructing other drivers during a qualifications. No more parking on race track!!! Any red flag should automatically annul the session. Remember the circus last year in Japan? It was a real joke and not a funny one.
#3
beute
-
- 1,357 posts
- Joined: October 09
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 16:38
car widht back to 2 meters,
undo engine freeze.
qualifyings without stupid handicaps for the top10
oh and assassinate the guy who had that brilliant idea with that green stripes for the soft tires.
undo engine freeze.
qualifyings without stupid handicaps for the top10
oh and assassinate the guy who had that brilliant idea with that green stripes for the soft tires.
Edited by beute, 12 February 2010 - 16:39.
#4
bigticker
-
- 50 posts
- Joined: February 10
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 16:42
What I would really like to see is a massively unlimited formula. A few basic rules, Engine Size, Rear Wheel Drive, Wheel and Tyre Sizes, Maximum Car Width, length and hieght. Then let them build some serious race cars, subject them to the mother of all crash tests and then let them race! The fastest Car/Driver combination wins, just as it should be, No Messing! But I know that will never happen and it would not really be practical these days, however if we are just tweaking the current formula to improve it then...
My first rule Idea...
We all want more overtaking, but I hate regulations that limit the inventiveness of the engineers in the teams. It is generaly acknowledged that high downforce cars are hard to follow, therefore hard to overtake, so more mechanical grip and less downforce is better for overtaking. So instead of limiting the size and number of wing elements as they have in the past, which eventually the engineers overcome and sill generate high downforce levels, I think they should actually limit the maximum amount of downforce the car can produce. So the FIA create a maximum number of Newtons of downforce that the car can generate in a wind tunnel at a specific speed (say 100N at 100mph, I made these values up, I am not suggesting these values) That would be measured with all wings on maximum settings. Then the teams would have to develop the car to be as aerodynamicaly efficient as possible whilst only generating this level of downforce. They could then tweak the wings to adjust the balance as long as the overall level does not exclude the limit.
This would guarantee that downforce levels were controlled but the teams would be rewarded for improving the aero packages by the increased top speed and fuel economy. This could also be acomponied by wider tyres to generate more mechanical grip. This would surely generate better overtaking without "Dumbing Down" The Sport.
My first rule Idea...
We all want more overtaking, but I hate regulations that limit the inventiveness of the engineers in the teams. It is generaly acknowledged that high downforce cars are hard to follow, therefore hard to overtake, so more mechanical grip and less downforce is better for overtaking. So instead of limiting the size and number of wing elements as they have in the past, which eventually the engineers overcome and sill generate high downforce levels, I think they should actually limit the maximum amount of downforce the car can produce. So the FIA create a maximum number of Newtons of downforce that the car can generate in a wind tunnel at a specific speed (say 100N at 100mph, I made these values up, I am not suggesting these values) That would be measured with all wings on maximum settings. Then the teams would have to develop the car to be as aerodynamicaly efficient as possible whilst only generating this level of downforce. They could then tweak the wings to adjust the balance as long as the overall level does not exclude the limit.
This would guarantee that downforce levels were controlled but the teams would be rewarded for improving the aero packages by the increased top speed and fuel economy. This could also be acomponied by wider tyres to generate more mechanical grip. This would surely generate better overtaking without "Dumbing Down" The Sport.
Edited by bigticker, 12 February 2010 - 16:57.
#5
undersquare
-
- 18,929 posts
- Joined: November 07
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 16:42
Halve the number of car rules.
Start with engine cover width (
) and carry on from there.
Start with engine cover width (
) and carry on from there.
#6
bigticker
-
- 50 posts
- Joined: February 10
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 16:50
car widht back to 2 meters,
undo engine freeze.
qualifyings without stupid handicaps for the top10
oh and assassinate the guy who had that brilliant idea with that green stripes for the soft tires.
I agree strongly with all of these rules. Especially the qualifying, let them use the fastest tyres, its qualifying! The FIA are always trying to slow down the fastest cars/drivers, whats the point surely we want the fastest guys to win! In fact I'd scrap all the tyre Rules, what the hell do we force them to drive with the wrong compound for half the race, its F1, everything should be optimum at all times and lets see who is really the fastest. I hate Gimicky rules intended to mix things up for the casual TV viewer. If they want beter racing with more overtaking then they need to fundamentally change the formula not just make them use innapropriate tyres for the session!
#7
Dragonfly
-
- 4,496 posts
- Joined: July 04
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 16:51
There's a crying need not to introduce new rules, but on the contrary - scrape most of the stupid petty rules and sub-rules which try to control every micro detail. Make the rule book short, simple and clear. And give the sport some freedom to compete in all aspects which make F1.
#8
Hypnotise
-
- 1,245 posts
- Joined: May 09
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 16:52
Ban Hermann Tillke for life
#9
cheapracer
-
- 10,388 posts
- Joined: May 07
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 17:10
Mine is fairly simple.
Cars pretty much as they have been for the last 10 years with some view to aesthetic shape but allow full width rear wing and front wing to a certain size and totally FLAT BOTTOMS from the tip of the nose to the furtherest rear with a verticle flat plate say 800 x 200 mm at the very rear for both slipstreaming and sponsor space.
Engines would be 4 litre, 2 valves and 10,000 rpm limited with 10 cylinder limit. Big torque is required to overcome the tyres traction abilities to bring back more driver emphisis (and sliding) for the fans.
those who mention the rules need to look to NASCAR and generally how Americans run things - if it's 'iffy, take it and piss off out of here with it and don't come back next race if you still have it.
The Double Diffuser bullshit wouldn't have gotten past the first 5 minutes in the US scene - Brawn, Toyota and Williams cars would have been put on their trailers and sent home.
Cars pretty much as they have been for the last 10 years with some view to aesthetic shape but allow full width rear wing and front wing to a certain size and totally FLAT BOTTOMS from the tip of the nose to the furtherest rear with a verticle flat plate say 800 x 200 mm at the very rear for both slipstreaming and sponsor space.
Engines would be 4 litre, 2 valves and 10,000 rpm limited with 10 cylinder limit. Big torque is required to overcome the tyres traction abilities to bring back more driver emphisis (and sliding) for the fans.
those who mention the rules need to look to NASCAR and generally how Americans run things - if it's 'iffy, take it and piss off out of here with it and don't come back next race if you still have it.
The Double Diffuser bullshit wouldn't have gotten past the first 5 minutes in the US scene - Brawn, Toyota and Williams cars would have been put on their trailers and sent home.
Edited by cheapracer, 12 February 2010 - 17:13.
#10
Tenmantaylor
-
- 19,204 posts
- Joined: July 01
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 17:13
Taken from Top Gear Annual: Give driver who delivers best post race anecdote a point. Might liven up those dull, dull PCs.
#11
Just waiting
-
- 868 posts
- Joined: March 09
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 17:35
Get rid of all wings. Period.
the front wings have turned into a joke as to how many little ones can we fit into the allotted space.
Wings are a giant driver's aid, even more so then traction control. And no diffusers, just flat bottom boats for all.
Without wings, fast corners go back to requiring real skill rather than downforce.
That would be the start.
And two sprint races rather than one, just like World Superbikes. Reverse starting order for second race. Winner of race one must start from back of pack, etc
the front wings have turned into a joke as to how many little ones can we fit into the allotted space.
Wings are a giant driver's aid, even more so then traction control. And no diffusers, just flat bottom boats for all.
Without wings, fast corners go back to requiring real skill rather than downforce.
That would be the start.
And two sprint races rather than one, just like World Superbikes. Reverse starting order for second race. Winner of race one must start from back of pack, etc
Edited by Just waiting, 12 February 2010 - 17:36.
#12
r4mses
-
- 2,430 posts
- Joined: April 09
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 17:39
give teams a certain amount of energy to complete a race distance and allow them to use the energy carrier they want - petrol, gas, hydrogen, electricity, anti-matter, ... 
and allow them to recover as much of the lost energy as they can - when braking, motor heat, ...
and allow them to recover as much of the lost energy as they can - when braking, motor heat, ...
#13
Lazarus II
-
- 4,527 posts
- Joined: July 04
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 17:46
I'd have a new rule rescinding all the rules.
#14
bonneville
-
- 382 posts
- Joined: November 09
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 18:09
Technical
No front wing
Steel brakes
Backup cars allowed (one per driver)
Sporting
No tyre rule (allows for no stop race)
20 lap qualifying races (no points, front row locked in a-la-Gatorade Duel) with 13 drivers per race (odd placed after qual in first race, even placed qual times in second race).
Timetable
Friday
1000-1300 Three hour trials.
1400 Superpole (one lap per driver, top two clinch pole and outside front row)
Saturday
1000-1300 Three hour trials.
1400 Qualifying race #1 - 20 laps or 30 minutes with drivers placed 2-4-6-8-10-12-14-16-18-20-22-24-26 in Superpole.
1500 Qualifying race #2 - 20 laps or 30 minutes with drivers placed 1-3-5-7-9-11-13-15-17-19-21-23-24 in Superpole.
Sunday
1400 Race
No front wing
Steel brakes
Backup cars allowed (one per driver)
Sporting
No tyre rule (allows for no stop race)
20 lap qualifying races (no points, front row locked in a-la-Gatorade Duel) with 13 drivers per race (odd placed after qual in first race, even placed qual times in second race).
Timetable
Friday
1000-1300 Three hour trials.
1400 Superpole (one lap per driver, top two clinch pole and outside front row)
Saturday
1000-1300 Three hour trials.
1400 Qualifying race #1 - 20 laps or 30 minutes with drivers placed 2-4-6-8-10-12-14-16-18-20-22-24-26 in Superpole.
1500 Qualifying race #2 - 20 laps or 30 minutes with drivers placed 1-3-5-7-9-11-13-15-17-19-21-23-24 in Superpole.
Sunday
1400 Race
Edited by bonneville, 12 February 2010 - 18:10.
#15
ExFlagMan
-
- 5,732 posts
- Joined: January 10
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 18:13
As a well known Northern England race observer once said whilst watching Willie Green in action - F1 should be anything goes - provided it can be fitted in the envelope of a Maserati 250F bodywork - including the ride height and tyre profiles 
#16
Simon Says
-
- 2,163 posts
- Joined: September 09
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 18:17
1. No need to start the race on qualifying tyres from Q3.
2. Put a limit on the downforce levels F1 cars are allowed to generate
3. Back to normal front wings instead of snow plows.
4. Allow selling of parts & cars to other teams to make F1 more financially attractive for big and small teams
5. Drivers are not allowed to apply full engine power when going off-road.
6. Allow testing, teams can manage their own costs.
2. Put a limit on the downforce levels F1 cars are allowed to generate
3. Back to normal front wings instead of snow plows.
4. Allow selling of parts & cars to other teams to make F1 more financially attractive for big and small teams
5. Drivers are not allowed to apply full engine power when going off-road.
6. Allow testing, teams can manage their own costs.
#17
Hairpin
-
- 4,468 posts
- Joined: September 09
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 18:18
Give them a certain amount of FiA energy and let them do what they want, recover as much as they want and build the engine in any way they want. When the cars goes too fast, reduce the amount of energy. Revisit the choice of energy every third year.
Aero regs is difficult, but should include that important aerodynamic parts are is single solid units with maximum, or minimum areas. Angle of attack might be regulated too.
I want to see cars that looks completely different from each other and I do not mean just the color.
Aero regs is difficult, but should include that important aerodynamic parts are is single solid units with maximum, or minimum areas. Angle of attack might be regulated too.
I want to see cars that looks completely different from each other and I do not mean just the color.
#18
lukestanton91
-
- 295 posts
- Joined: February 10
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 18:21
Technical
No front wing
Steel brakes
Backup cars allowed (one per driver)
Sporting
No tyre rule (allows for no stop race)
20 lap qualifying races (no points, front row locked in a-la-Gatorade Duel) with 13 drivers per race (odd placed after qual in first race, even placed qual times in second race).
Timetable
Friday
1000-1300 Three hour trials.
1400 Superpole (one lap per driver, top two clinch pole and outside front row)
Saturday
1000-1300 Three hour trials.
1400 Qualifying race #1 - 20 laps or 30 minutes with drivers placed 2-4-6-8-10-12-14-16-18-20-22-24-26 in Superpole.
1500 Qualifying race #2 - 20 laps or 30 minutes with drivers placed 1-3-5-7-9-11-13-15-17-19-21-23-24 in Superpole.
Sunday
1400 Race
#19
stevvy1986
-
- 3,168 posts
- Joined: October 07
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 18:26
Any red flag should automatically annul the session.
Eh? Meaning what exactly? Once we have a red flag, that part of quali (be it Q1/Q2/Q3) is over and they move to the next session? Even if no times have been set?
Advertisement
#20
stevvy1986
-
- 3,168 posts
- Joined: October 07
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 18:31
Timetable
Friday
1000-1300 Three hour trials.
1400 Superpole (one lap per driver, top two clinch pole and outside front row)
Saturday
1000-1300 Three hour trials.
1400 Qualifying race #1 - 20 laps or 30 minutes with drivers placed 2-4-6-8-10-12-14-16-18-20-22-24-26 in Superpole.
1500 Qualifying race #2 - 20 laps or 30 minutes with drivers placed 1-3-5-7-9-11-13-15-17-19-21-23-24 in Superpole. I think you mean 23-25
Sunday
1400 Race
Out of curiousity though, how exactly would you determine where you start in the main race? Would qualifying race 1 determine the order for the even numbered gridslots in the main race, and qualifying race 2 determine the order for the odd numbered gridslots for the main race? Also, do you award points for Superpole and the qualifying races? Or just the main race on a Sunday?
#21
Nustang70
-
- 2,446 posts
- Joined: July 01
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 18:44
Technical
No front wing
Steel brakes
Backup cars allowed (one per driver)
Sporting
No tyre rule (allows for no stop race)
20 lap qualifying races (no points, front row locked in a-la-Gatorade Duel) with 13 drivers per race (odd placed after qual in first race, even placed qual times in second race).
Timetable
Friday
1000-1300 Three hour trials.
1400 Superpole (one lap per driver, top two clinch pole and outside front row)
Saturday
1000-1300 Three hour trials.
1400 Qualifying race #1 - 20 laps or 30 minutes with drivers placed 2-4-6-8-10-12-14-16-18-20-22-24-26 in Superpole.
1500 Qualifying race #2 - 20 laps or 30 minutes with drivers placed 1-3-5-7-9-11-13-15-17-19-21-23-24 in Superpole.
Sunday
1400 Race
I like this.
bigticker's suggestion that the FIA set a limit to maximum downforce generated for each car is interesting.
JustWaiting's "ban all wings" sounds pretty good too. It seems to me that wing-generated downforce has been developed ad naseum. I want to see F1 at the forefront of a different sort of technology.
#22
mclarensmps
-
- 9,279 posts
- Joined: February 02
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 18:53
No engine restrictions.
No tyre rules.
No wings.
Bring back hotlap, low fuel qualifying.
No need to start the race on qualifying tyres.
No tyre rules.
No wings.
Bring back hotlap, low fuel qualifying.
No need to start the race on qualifying tyres.
#23
H0R
-
- 4,592 posts
- Joined: March 08
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 19:11
I'd ban combustion engines entirely.
#24
TecnoRacing
-
- 1,866 posts
- Joined: September 01
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 19:19
Return to wide track...
Limitations on onboard electronics and telemetry
Return to full h-pattern manual gearbox...no fly-by-wire stuff
Dump the engine freeze...2.0l NA engines - any amount of cylinders - no rev limit...
Everyone much fit a round steering wheel, which has to be clothed in leather/suede
Limitations on onboard electronics and telemetry
Return to full h-pattern manual gearbox...no fly-by-wire stuff
Dump the engine freeze...2.0l NA engines - any amount of cylinders - no rev limit...
Everyone much fit a round steering wheel, which has to be clothed in leather/suede
Edited by fer312t, 12 February 2010 - 19:19.
#25
Sammyosammy
-
- 1,501 posts
- Joined: November 09
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 19:36
Ban Hermann Tillke for life
TOUCHÉ !!!
#26
Gbain
-
- 195 posts
- Joined: January 10
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 19:38
Eh? Meaning what exactly? Once we have a red flag, that part of quali (be it Q1/Q2/Q3) is over and they move to the next session? Even if no times have been set?
No, they should run it again. Without the wise-guy who caused the red flag.
#27
Hairpin
-
- 4,468 posts
- Joined: September 09
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 19:39
List your top ten tracks and I am sure at least one Tilke track would be there, unless you deliberately leave them out after checking if his name is on it.TOUCHÉ !!!
#28
stevvy1986
-
- 3,168 posts
- Joined: October 07
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 21:15
No, they should run it again. Without the wise-guy who caused the red flag.
Why should they though? They'd only end up wasting a load more tyres, and those are being reduced this season anyway, and it seems pointless getting 19mins30 into Q1, a red flag, and then start again from 0. Also, what if a driver himself doesn't cause a red flag? For example (and I know this is an extreme situation, but for arguments sake) what if they red flag it because of someone coming onto the track, or an advertising hoarding falling onto the track (eg Brazil in.........2000?) You can hardly punish anyone then, so why bother starting from 0 again, when you're not throwing someone out?
#29
bigticker
-
- 50 posts
- Joined: February 10
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 22:23
After some abuse I got on another thread I thouht I was the only one who hated these tyre/quali rules for the top 10 but it seems lots of people agree.
Personaly I am glad KERS is being boycotted this year but if we had to have it then I would change the Kers rules as to me they make no sense. If you can only boost by 80hp for a pre set time period, 6 seconds I think per lap then where is the advantage in making it more efficient, once you have achieved the 80hp for 6 seconds then any more energy you manage recover is wated. (I suppose you can develop smaller, lighter units to achieve the same ends but that is boring!)
So my rules would be either an 80HP boost with no time limit, 6 seconds with no power limit, or better still a full Hybrid system where the car recovers as much energy as possible under breaking then feeds the power back in automatically under maximum throttle for as long as the power is available, increasing acceleration and/or conserving fuel. To my mind that would be far more relevent to road cars than the current KERS systems. I think KERS was more about introducing a gimicky overtake button than it was about genuine development of new technology.
Personaly I am glad KERS is being boycotted this year but if we had to have it then I would change the Kers rules as to me they make no sense. If you can only boost by 80hp for a pre set time period, 6 seconds I think per lap then where is the advantage in making it more efficient, once you have achieved the 80hp for 6 seconds then any more energy you manage recover is wated. (I suppose you can develop smaller, lighter units to achieve the same ends but that is boring!)
So my rules would be either an 80HP boost with no time limit, 6 seconds with no power limit, or better still a full Hybrid system where the car recovers as much energy as possible under breaking then feeds the power back in automatically under maximum throttle for as long as the power is available, increasing acceleration and/or conserving fuel. To my mind that would be far more relevent to road cars than the current KERS systems. I think KERS was more about introducing a gimicky overtake button than it was about genuine development of new technology.
#30
bigticker
-
- 50 posts
- Joined: February 10
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 22:34
As were all imagining redesigning the sport....
FOTA are currently doing a survey about F1 and what its fans want. I am not sure that it will make any difference but I enjoyed filling it out as it is as close as we will get to having our say about the rules and regs. I got the impression by the way the questions are worded that FOTA will be hoping to use it to try to change the FIA's trend of slowing down cars, limiting the inovation, cost cutting, dumbing down the sport, insisting on globalising it at the expense of tradition and all the other things that they all nearly fell out over last year.
www.Igf1racingsurvey.com.
You only have til monday to fill it in, takes about 5-10 mins.
Give it a go!
FOTA are currently doing a survey about F1 and what its fans want. I am not sure that it will make any difference but I enjoyed filling it out as it is as close as we will get to having our say about the rules and regs. I got the impression by the way the questions are worded that FOTA will be hoping to use it to try to change the FIA's trend of slowing down cars, limiting the inovation, cost cutting, dumbing down the sport, insisting on globalising it at the expense of tradition and all the other things that they all nearly fell out over last year.
www.Igf1racingsurvey.com.
You only have til monday to fill it in, takes about 5-10 mins.
Give it a go!
#31
schuey100
-
- 655 posts
- Joined: September 04
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 22:41
I would change two things. Firstly I would allow the teams to break one single rule in terms of the design of the car so they would be allowed to do anything with a certain par of the car. This would lead to innovation and I think a lot of very clever ideas and different kinds of cars. Maybe Brawn would have chosen the DD last year, this year maybe another team might have chosen to do something really radical
Second I would reduce the amount of fuel that teams are given and make them find a way of getting to the end of the race. I think drivers could really come into their own, driving really intelligently to conserve fuel. You could then also totaly unfreeze the engines and we'd have teams going for major fuel efficiency.
Second I would reduce the amount of fuel that teams are given and make them find a way of getting to the end of the race. I think drivers could really come into their own, driving really intelligently to conserve fuel. You could then also totaly unfreeze the engines and we'd have teams going for major fuel efficiency.
#32
ray b
-
- 2,969 posts
- Joined: January 01
Member
Posted 12 February 2010 - 22:42
ban and bulldoze the chicanes
race tracks should be fast
ban all wings and other downforce tricks
and make cars shaped to allow drafting ie 67 cigar shaped
as gas motors have been developed to the max
lets switch fuel
to natural gas or hydrogen
make teams sell cars and or motors to private entrants
end the secret BS teck make inspections open and tv/photos of every part
two day open Q sessions like the old days
and let anyone with a car try to Q like the old days
race tracks should be fast
ban all wings and other downforce tricks
and make cars shaped to allow drafting ie 67 cigar shaped
as gas motors have been developed to the max
lets switch fuel
to natural gas or hydrogen
make teams sell cars and or motors to private entrants
end the secret BS teck make inspections open and tv/photos of every part
two day open Q sessions like the old days
and let anyone with a car try to Q like the old days
#33
ryan86
-
- 1,100 posts
- Joined: July 09
Member
Posted 13 February 2010 - 00:00
Why should they though? They'd only end up wasting a load more tyres, and those are being reduced this season anyway, and it seems pointless getting 19mins30 into Q1, a red flag, and then start again from 0. Also, what if a driver himself doesn't cause a red flag? For example (and I know this is an extreme situation, but for arguments sake) what if they red flag it because of someone coming onto the track, or an advertising hoarding falling onto the track (eg Brazil in.........2000?) You can hardly punish anyone then, so why bother starting from 0 again, when you're not throwing someone out?
Also it seems slightly open to abuse - though after the Piquet incident, I'd hope no one was stupid enough to try it.
However, one thing I would change is the grid penalties. If you are given a grid-penalty, you move back x places regardless. To simplify, everyone is given their grid penalties at the same time and then all unpenalised drivers move up. Not the completely farcicial situation we saw last year in Suzuka.
#34
Deeq
-
- 11,384 posts
- Joined: November 02
Member
Posted 13 February 2010 - 01:46
Rule(s)
1) No new rules for a 5 year period [5 year moratorium on creating or amending existing rules]
2) Revise and streamline the rule book...scrap 1/2 of the existing rules AFTER the 5year moratorium period, discuss in the meantime which rules are redundant!
....and corrected...;)
1) No new rules for a 5 year period [5 year moratorium on creating or amending existing rules]
2) Revise and streamline the rule book...scrap 1/2 of the existing rules AFTER the 5year moratorium period, discuss in the meantime which rules are redundant!
Halve the number of
carrules.
Start with engine cover width (
....and corrected...;)
#35
wepmob2000
-
- 709 posts
- Joined: October 08
Member
Posted 13 February 2010 - 04:02
My new rules would be.......
1)Ban pitwall-car radio to put racing strategy back in the hands of the driver.
2)FIA designed standard low downforce wings for all cars - to preserve advertising space and make the cars look cool, but not do anything much beyond that....
3)Full manual gearbox/clutch, a large part of the skill of driving fast has been lost through semi-automatic gearboxes.
4)Allow full ground effects once more.
1)Ban pitwall-car radio to put racing strategy back in the hands of the driver.
2)FIA designed standard low downforce wings for all cars - to preserve advertising space and make the cars look cool, but not do anything much beyond that....
3)Full manual gearbox/clutch, a large part of the skill of driving fast has been lost through semi-automatic gearboxes.
4)Allow full ground effects once more.
#36
Andrew Hope
-
- 7,911 posts
- Joined: October 09
Member
Posted 13 February 2010 - 05:23
Ban any car with more or less than six wheels.
#37
bonneville
-
- 382 posts
- Joined: November 09
Member
Posted 13 February 2010 - 09:31
Out of curiousity though, how exactly would you determine where you start in the main race? Would qualifying race 1 determine the order for the even numbered gridslots in the main race, and qualifying race 2 determine the order for the odd numbered gridslots for the main race? Also, do you award points for Superpole and the qualifying races? Or just the main race on a Sunday?
Grid lineup:
Top two at superpole determines front row
Qual race 1 determines the order for the odd (3-5-7-etc.) numbered gridslots in the main race
Qual race 2 determines the order for the even (4-6-8-etc.) numbered gridslots for the main race
Points:
superpole: none (obvious advantage towards qual race and main event for top two is enough)
qual races: 3 to 1st, 2 to 2nd, 1 to 3rd.
main event: 2010 F1 rules.
Edited by bonneville, 13 February 2010 - 09:33.
#38
Gbain
-
- 195 posts
- Joined: January 10
Member
Posted 13 February 2010 - 09:49
Also it seems slightly open to abuse - though after the Piquet incident, I'd hope no one was stupid enough to try it.
However, one thing I would change is the grid penalties. If you are given a grid-penalty, you move back x places regardless. To simplify, everyone is given their grid penalties at the same time and then all unpenalised drivers move up. Not the completely farcicial situation we saw last year in Suzuka.
Yes, I see your point. So repeating a session wasn't such a good idea after all
. It seems the best thing would be total change of qualifications. But anyway I would still punish a driver causing the red flag.
#39
jeze
-
- 2,973 posts
- Joined: September 08
Member
Posted 13 February 2010 - 10:04
I would reintroduce the 2008 aerodynamic regulations, mix them with slicks and V12's. Surely, that would be awesome.
Advertisement
#40
Uwe
-
- 707 posts
- Joined: June 00
Member
Posted 13 February 2010 - 10:27
3 litre engines, normally aspirated, valve springs from steel (no pneumatic valves), no engine freeze, no rpm limit.
#41
CaptnMark
-
- 1,026 posts
- Joined: March 99
Member
Posted 13 February 2010 - 10:40
Serial hybrid required + qualifying laps must be done purely on battery power.
#42
BlackCat
-
- 949 posts
- Joined: February 00
Member
Posted 13 February 2010 - 10:58
ban any kind of video/TV coverage for few years, so giving the sport some time to sort itself out and clean away all "entertainment" elements.
#43
greenblood
-
- 153 posts
- Joined: November 09
Member
Posted 13 February 2010 - 11:36
How about just, "no new rules"?
Image you watch football once or twice a year. You switch on a game, and the commentator's busy explaining that this season's rule changes are that it's 5 points for a win, that goals scored from outside the penalty area count double, the players have to play each half in different types of boots, each team has to be short-handed for at least 15 minutes to increase the chance of a goal, that goalies must be under 5'8" tall, each player can make no more than two tackles per match and that this season there's only 10 players per team rather than 11 to cut wage bills. Then, an hour after the match, you hear that the FA has ruled out two of the goals and the other team won. You'd never watch football again! That's what F1 must seem like to casual viewers.
No more new rules!
Image you watch football once or twice a year. You switch on a game, and the commentator's busy explaining that this season's rule changes are that it's 5 points for a win, that goals scored from outside the penalty area count double, the players have to play each half in different types of boots, each team has to be short-handed for at least 15 minutes to increase the chance of a goal, that goalies must be under 5'8" tall, each player can make no more than two tackles per match and that this season there's only 10 players per team rather than 11 to cut wage bills. Then, an hour after the match, you hear that the FA has ruled out two of the goals and the other team won. You'd never watch football again! That's what F1 must seem like to casual viewers.
No more new rules!
#44
stevvy1986
-
- 3,168 posts
- Joined: October 07
Member
Posted 13 February 2010 - 11:39
Grid lineup:
Top two at superpole determines front row
Qual race 1 determines the order for the odd (3-5-7-etc.) numbered gridslots in the main race
Qual race 2 determines the order for the even (4-6-8-etc.) numbered gridslots for the main race
Points:
superpole: none (obvious advantage towards qual race and main event for top two is enough)
qual races: 3 to 1st, 2 to 2nd, 1 to 3rd.
main event: 2010 F1 rules.
Ah ok, no problem
That reads to me as meaning the top 2 in the Superpole session don't race in the quali races, as their positions are already decided. Seems decent enough though.
#45
stevvy1986
-
- 3,168 posts
- Joined: October 07
Member
Posted 13 February 2010 - 11:42
1)Ban pitwall-car radio to put racing strategy back in the hands of the driver.
The only thing I'd say there is there would likely be some situations where the pitwall would have to talk to the driver (eg warning them that a car or debris is in a dangerous position and where it is on track, rather than the driver coming round a blind corner seeing yellow flags, slowing down, but having no idea what's there, or where it is on the track, and so maybe not having enough time to react. That'd mainly apply if it was coming out of a blind corner though). Also what about informing them of penalties?
#46
robracer
-
- 1,028 posts
- Joined: November 09
Member
Posted 13 February 2010 - 11:43
Scrap qualifying, grid order done randomly by taking car numbers from a hat.
#47
Gbain
-
- 195 posts
- Joined: January 10
Member
Posted 13 February 2010 - 12:37
Image you watch football once or twice a year. You switch on a game, and the commentator's busy explaining that this season's rule changes are that it's 5 points for a win, that goals scored from outside the penalty area count double, the players have to play each half in different types of boots, each team has to be short-handed for at least 15 minutes to increase the chance of a goal, that goalies must be under 5'8" tall, each player can make no more than two tackles per match and that this season there's only 10 players per team rather than 11 to cut wage bills. Then, an hour after the match, you hear that the FA has ruled out two of the goals and the other team won.
Now that’s the essence of F1 implied in everyday life. I love it.
#48
Just waiting
-
- 868 posts
- Joined: March 09
Member
Posted 13 February 2010 - 15:39
Technical
No front wing
Steel brakes
Backup cars allowed (one per driver)
Sporting
No tyre rule (allows for no stop race)
20 lap qualifying races (no points, front row locked in a-la-Gatorade Duel) with 13 drivers per race (odd placed after qual in first race, even placed qual times in second race).
Timetable
Friday
1000-1300 Three hour trials.
1400 Superpole (one lap per driver, top two clinch pole and outside front row)
Saturday
1000-1300 Three hour trials.
1400 Qualifying race #1 - 20 laps or 30 minutes with drivers placed 2-4-6-8-10-12-14-16-18-20-22-24-26 in Superpole.
1500 Qualifying race #2 - 20 laps or 30 minutes with drivers placed 1-3-5-7-9-11-13-15-17-19-21-23-24 in Superpole.
Sunday
1400 Race
I could dig it, but something need be done about back wings and the diffusers.....
#49
Dunc
-
- 952 posts
- Joined: October 07
Member
Posted 13 February 2010 - 15:41
Let teams experiment with technology and aerodynamics more frrely. Think what ground effect or active ride could be like if modern engineers got the chance to play with them.
On a less serious note - give the drivers an extra point if they manage to say something interesting in a press conference or display something like a personality at some point in the season. Mark Webber would be a candidate for WDC if this was introduced.
On a less serious note - give the drivers an extra point if they manage to say something interesting in a press conference or display something like a personality at some point in the season. Mark Webber would be a candidate for WDC if this was introduced.
#50
bonneville
-
- 382 posts
- Joined: November 09
Member
Posted 13 February 2010 - 17:35
Ah ok, no problem
I mean the top 2 qualifiers would race in qual race but would only be interested in points. They could afford a DNF in the qual race and still start on the front row in the main event - just like the Datyona 500 top two qualifiers run in the Gatorade Duels, but do not risk losing their top row spots.
