207 replies to this topic

[Tsarwash]

Much of the discussion in the Halo thread has boiled down to people suggesting that an open cockpit is crucial to F1. As the mods have said, that is OT, so I suggest this thread to discuss which elements of F1 are in the DNA of the sport and need to be retained over all other aspects ? 

 

Some say that what makes F1 F1 is open wheel, single seater, 'open' formula. Some say it is open cockpits, and if you enclose the driver, then the sport is no longer the one it used to be. I'm interested in opinions why people think that way. At what point would it just be yet another from of racing indistinguishable from all the others ? Why is open wheels important, but not open cockpit ? Does the halo really fundamentally alter the essence of the sport as we know it ? Or is it the start of a slippery slope ? And didn't we already start down this path in 94 anyway ? 

[CountDooku]

Open wheel, open cockpit, single seater. Non spec cars that are the fastest circuit racers on the planet.

 

You change that formula and it is no longer F1.

[Ross Stonefeld]

Formula 1 cars have even had fenders.

[Marklar]

Open wheel should be obvious, given that F1 is officially defined as a open wheel sport.

 

The other two elements are a difficult matter and I think it is individually different. I've asked someone when I was younger what Formula 1 means, why it is called Formula 1. And he told me that it includes some elements (open wheel, open cockpit, single seater) and this is the one and only formula for this sport and that's what set my picture of an F1 car. That's why for me it would be difficult to swallow if F1 is ending up with closed cockpits (especially if it is a half-baked BS solution, if it would be a real improvement I could probably accept it). I can understand that this is difficult to understand though.

Edited by Marklar, 10 March 2016 - 15:09.

[RainyAfterlifeDaylight]

Formula1 is defined by the rules. Rules are not stable and have been changed from the beginning of Formula1. Changes all the time happen. We need another change and it is the introduction of head protection for drivers in open cockpit cars.

 

If someone insists that Formula1 has been open cockpit since the start. Ok, BUT it will be closed cockpit from the next season. Why? To improve safety.

 

Safety First 

[RacingXO]

Formula1 is defined by the rules. Rules are not stable and have been changed from the beginning of Formula1. Changes all the time happen. We need another change and it is the introduction of head protection for drivers in open cockpit cars.

 

If someone insists that Formula1 has been open cockpit since the start. Ok, BUT it will be closed cockpit from the next season. Why? To improve safety.

 

Safety First 

 

Well...if it changes is does NOT define F1 :rotfl:Btw F1 is very very safe as is...

Edited by RacingXO, 10 March 2016 - 15:18.

[Okyo]

It's just the fact that people don't like change. It's not about what the sport is, or what characteristics define it, it's just people not liking the visual aspect of something they aren't used to.

The DNA of the sport is the technological race with the best drivers on the planet driving those cutting edge machines. The very word 'formula', means a set of rules, regulations on which the teams race creating their cars.

I'll get some flame for this line, but hiding behind the statement, that these head protections are not in the 'DNA' of the sport is childish and scapegoating. It has nothing to do with racing (drivers and engineers) which is what Formula 1 is and always will be.

Get over yourselves. 

[RacingXO]

It's just the fact that people don't like change.

 

Nope, but it's a fact that you can't read minds

[RacingXO]

Open wheels, open cockpit, single seat and the fastest cars ;o)

[sopa]

Some say that what makes F1 F1 is open wheel, single seater, 'open' formula. Some say it is open cockpits, and if you enclose the driver, then the sport is no longer the one it used to be. 

 

F1 and other series like that are called "open-wheel racing". So "open wheels" is the key ingredient for the discipline, which includes F1. I don't see, what is the big fuss about open cockpits. They may be open or closed, but it is nowhere near as important or defining as "open wheels". That is if we are talking about defining factors in car appearance to define a category.

[Okyo]

Nope, but it's a fact that you can't read minds

Yeah, i can't. But i know why i don't like them and i've noticed that most of the comments from fans and some drivers are all about the looks. If the design looked cool or were made somewhat hardly noticable, i doubt this whole thing would blow up like it does now.

Edited by Okyo, 10 March 2016 - 15:26.

[FullThrottleF1]

It is about the looks.

[cokata]

The only reason F1 cars were open-wheelers and open cockpit to begin with is that before carbon fibre was invented that would have saved a lot of weight, so it was the fastest configuration, and it has stuck on since then. Now with much better materials and much higher avg speeds (aero matters more) a closed wheel / closed cockpit car is quicker

Edited by cokata, 10 March 2016 - 15:27.

[CountDooku]

Formula1 is defined by the rules. Rules are not stable and have been changed from the beginning of Formula1. Changes all the time happen. We need another change and it is the introduction of head protection for drivers in open cockpit cars.

 

If someone insists that Formula1 has been open cockpit since the start. Ok, BUT it will be closed cockpit from the next season. Why? To improve safety.

 

Safety First 

 

F1 is defined by the rules? If the FIA created a rule that said F1 "cars" must race on 2 wheels and you started to see teams called Aprilla, Ducati, Yamaha and KTM submit entries, would it still be F1?

 

After all Formula1 is defined by the rules. Rules are not stable...

[RacingXO]

Yeah, i can't. But i know why i don't like them and i've noticed that most of the comments from fans and some drivers are all about the looks. 

 

And a lot of other arguments as well

 

Not liking the looks just mean that from a subjective standpoint, some people do not like the look.     

 

The part about not liking change is in your own head only                                                      

Edited by RacingXO, 10 March 2016 - 15:30.

[RainyAfterlifeDaylight]

Look. closed wheel Formula1 car   

 

Photo by http://www.emercedesbenz.com/

[Okyo]

And a lot of other arguments as well

 

Not liking the looks just mean that from a subjective standpoint, some people does not like the look.     

 

The part about not liking change is in your own head only                                                      

Not liking the change in how it looks. Have to spell it out what i'm talking about? If you think that this is not the main issue responsible for the majority of this whole situation we have, you're blind. 

[RacingXO]

Not liking the change in how it looks. Have to spell it out what i'm talking about? If you think that this is not the main issue responsible for the majority of this whole situation we have, you're blind. 

 

Well it's two different things you are talking about........EOS

[ANF]

Open cockpit 1

Open cockpit 2

Not much has changed, so they have the same DNA obviously.

[Okyo]

Though a trend is obvious. The driver is getting more and more hidden.

[quaint]

Open cockpit 1

Open cockpit 2

Not much has changed, so they have the same DNA obviously.

 
Yeah, you can't like totally see the driver anymore, might as well put him inside, doesn't literally change anything.



You can hardly even tell that one group of cars have closed cockpits and the other doesn't.

[Okyo]

Well it's two different things you are talking about........EOS

Same thing. That's why i made the last comment, to clarify it for you.

[cokata]

P1 cars look great

[Buttoneer]

F1 and other series like that are called "open-wheel racing". So "open wheels" is the key ingredient for the discipline, which includes F1. I don't see, what is the big fuss about open cockpits. They may be open or closed, but it is nowhere near as important or defining as "open wheels". That is if we are talking about defining factors in car appearance to define a category.

Broadly agree. There are a range of racing series which are referred to as 'single-seater' or 'open wheeled' and not 'open cockpit'. That doesn't alter the fact that some people think that these go hand-in-hand with an open cockpit because that's the way it's always been, or that they may express a preference, but it seems to me that fundamentally the way a driver goes about racing would not change whether he were sitting under a canopy, or astride it like a bike. What matters is that you have exposed wheels which means you can't expect to come out of any given clash without damage, and influences how you go racing.

F1 'DNA' has changed over the years anyway, because I have always been attracted by the engineering excellence and potential for novelty with prototypes, and this element is become less a part of the modern sport with so many spec parts. Nevertheless this would still top my list. Canopy or open cockpit is a long way down.

[Seanspeed]

I like being able to see the drivers.

[RacingXO]

Same thing. That's why i made the last comment, to clarify it for you.

 

Ok, so I have to explain......

 

You: It's just the fact that people don't like change.

Me: Nope it's a fact that some people do not like that particular look or change if you will

 

The same people might like other changes ie faster cars, wider tires, V10 engines, no fuel limits, no grid penalties for next race etc. - SO.....it's not a fact that people don't like changes

 

I'll leave it to you, if you feel the need to say more about this. I'm not...

Edited by RacingXO, 10 March 2016 - 15:53.

[muramasa]

F1 is about progressive, aggressive non stop development, independent manufacturers.

 

Open cockpit? It just happens to be. Just like "F-duct or DDD ≠F1", open cockpit ≠ F1.

Likewise carbon fibre is not equal F1. They use carbon fibre because that's the most suitable material. If material better than carbon fibre is invented, they would go for that material. Same for open cockpit. if closed cockpit is better or they come up with good closed cockpit solution, F1 would go for it.

 

F1 is about progressive, not about nostalgia\conservative.

[CountDooku]

In WEC, the stars are the cars. In F1, the stars are the drivers.

 

It's not surprising given the drivers are hidden in LMP1 and no one knows who they are.

[ANF]

Yeah, you can't like totally see the driver anymore, might as well put him inside, doesn't literally change anything.

I can totally see part of the full-face helmet and on that a pitch-dark visor, and then I see the right hand at twelve o'clock. But very rarely do I look at the hands to see where the driver is turning.

[cokata]

In WEC, the stars are the cars. In F1, the stars are the drivers.

 

It's not surprising given the drivers are hidden in LMP1 and no one knows who they are.

Or it has to do with the fact that each car has 3 drivers. But it might be that  you cant see a helmet 

Edited by cokata, 10 March 2016 - 15:57.

[Okyo]

Ok, so I have to explain......

 

You: It's just the fact that people don't like change.

Me: Nope it's a fact that some people do not like that particular look or change if you will

 

The same people might like other changes ie faster cars, wider tires, V10 engines, no fuel limits, no grid penalties for next race etc. - SO.....it's not a fact that people don't like changes

 

I'll leave it to you, if you feel the need to say more about this. I'm not...

That's what happens when you cherry pick a sentence, while completely ignoring the one next to it. From the very start, i was talking about a change in looks, as the second sentence of my original comment made it clear. And of course, i'm not talking about every single person, that's silly. 

One way or the other, seems pointless for us to dig deeper.

Have a good day  

Edited by Okyo, 10 March 2016 - 16:05.

[Rinehart]

In terms of the car, F1 is a sport of engineering innovation. Clearly the cars are not supposed to stay looking the same, or the element of innovation could not exist. Then F1 would have no mechanism to keep itself at the top of the motorsport ladder.

 

The looks of the cars are always defined by the best performance solution the rules allow, not by a mythical interpretation of what is an F1 car.

 

Rules constantly change for various reasons (cost, speed and safety control mainly) and consequently therefore F1 is ALWAYS in a state of evolution.

 

Anybody who argues that an F1 car must be this or that or the other, are basically arbitrarily choosing a point in time of their preference.

 

The only valid argument would be the spec of an F1 car at the first race and even then do we trace roots back to the first Grand Prix or the first F1 race? Bit of a problem either way as they weren't all the same but common features included engines AT THE FRONT and no seatbelts. Surely anyone arguing that F1 cars should be open wheel, open cockpit based on origin, should also be arguing for front engines if they are to be consistent? And what do we do about the lack of wings, the driver changes, the phases of history that included covered wheels and anything from 4 to 16 cylinder engines...

 

I can't see how F1 can exist as a sport of engineering innovation AND fixed on certain engineering principles unless it wants to look incredibly daft (even by modern standards) in 50 years time.

 

Its got to move with the times. Surely. 

[SwedeForceOne]

F1 for me is/should be:

 

No.1 (and most important) the fastest circuit racing series and by a margin.

2.  Open wheels 

3. Innovative and tech friendly (though a balance must be struck between tech development and viewer experience of "the show")

4. Cars being driven ( at least partially during a race) on the edge where you can clearly see that they going all-in. This was something that I enjoyed in earlier eras but I rarely see it nowadays due to restrictions being total AIDS for the show.

 

Could think of more stuff but well.. Oh, and I don't think open cockpit is defining of F1 anymore, since they started to hide the drivers to the point that you no longer see them it doesnt really matter if totally covered (canopy) or not.

[Rinehart]

By the way, great thread Tsarwash, I reckon this could be a big enough bun fight to keep us amused until FP1, Melbourne. 

[Ellios]

Open cockpits, open wheels, fat sticky tyres, massive V12's or screaming V10's, catch fencing, big balls . . .

 

 

 

[CountDooku]

By the way, great thread Tsarwash, I reckon this could be a big enough bun fight to keep us amused until FP1, Melbourne. 

 

I've already exhausted myself from the Halo & head protection threads.

[Nonesuch]

Some say that what makes F1 F1 is open wheel, single seater, 'open' formula. Some say it is open cockpits, and if you enclose the driver, then the sport is no longer the one it used to be. I'm interested in opinions why people think that way.

 
Over the last 20 years I've always heard and read F1 and similar categories described as 'open-wheel single-seaters'.
 
Open-cockpit never factored into it; perhaps because it's pointless to specify this since there are - to my knowledge - no major closed-cockpit open-wheel single-seater racing series.
 

Why is open wheels important, but not open cockpit ? Does the halo really fundamentally alter the essence of the sport as we know it?

 

Open wheels are important because they have a profound effect on the overall shape of the car. The long nose, the side-pods, the wings that stand out from the car.

 

I don't think the Halo would 'fundamentally alter the essence of the sport' - if anything it fits in with F1's preference for the most simple and half-baked solution to serious problems.

[RacingXO]

Have a good day  

 ... you too 

Edited by RacingXO, 10 March 2016 - 16:24.

[YoungGun]

I like being able to see the drivers.

 

 

Advances in technologies make that more possible today than days gone by. So I can appreciate your point.

[Pontlieue]

In WEC, the stars are the cars. In F1, the stars are the drivers.

 

It's not surprising given the drivers are hidden in LMP1 and no one knows who they are.

You're aware that sportscars have switched back and forth between closed and open cockpits over past few decades? Less than ten years ago, the majority of LMP cars were open-cockpit. Endurance racing is a team sport, as is F1, but F1 fans like to have the illusion that the driver matters most.

[Seanspeed]

Endurance racing is a team sport, as is F1, but F1 fans like to have the illusion that the driver matters most.

*Some* F1 fans.  Wouldn't generalize here.  

 

Both are team sports, but I think it's entirely true to say that endurance racing is a lot more about the car and team than F1 is.  F1 is also where the best drivers tend to be, whereas endurance racing is where drivers go who cant make it to(or in) F1.  So all in all, I think it's quite fair that drivers get more attention than in WEC.   

[johnmhinds]

The "DNA of the sport" arguments never stand up very well because the core appeal of the sport is different to different people.

 

And the "tradition" arguments make very little sense, Grand Prix cars have had some of most varied designs in all of motor racing, sticking a canopy or roll cage over the driver would just be another one of dozens of style variations F1 has been though.

[cokata]

Nothing can be worse visually than what they did to the cars with 09 rules. Still by far the ugliest open wheelers around, with the peak of ugliness coming with the dildo noses in 2014

[7MGTEsup]

Is it currently illegal to have a closed cockpit? If there is an aero advantage I'm surprised no one has run a closed cockpit thus far.

[Buttoneer]

*Some* F1 fans.  Wouldn't generalize here.  
 
Both are team sports, but I think it's entirely true to say that endurance racing is a lot more about the car and team than F1 is.  F1 is also where the best drivers tend to be, whereas endurance racing is where drivers go who cant make it to(or in) F1.  So all in all, I think it's quite fair that drivers get more attention than in WEC.

Arguably you could have put any two non-rookie F1 drivers in last years Mercedes and one of them will have been WDC. So in that respect, I think the drivers can be overrated in terms of what they bring to the party. However, although you could stick any two drivers in them, only one can be WDC, and then you do start to see their individual quality when you compare the two.

So I can see how some people can think it's about the drivers, and others about the cars, and everyone be sort-of right even though it's definitely all about the cars

[Seanspeed]

Nothing can be worse visually than what they did to the cars with 09 rules. Still by far the ugliest open wheelers around

[Group B]

Formula1 is defined by the rules. Rules are not stable and have been changed from the beginning of Formula1. Changes all the time happen. We need another change and it is the introduction of head protection for drivers in open cockpit cars.

 

If someone insists that Formula1 has been open cockpit since the start. Ok, BUT it will be closed cockpit from the next season. Why? To improve safety.

 

Safety First 

 

WHY do we NEED another change? F1 is safer than it's ever been, head injuries are rare, head deaths extremely rare. You talk as though there's been a recent raft of decapitations, or some new element has materialsed that greatly increases the chances of head injuries compared to 5 or 10 years ago. 

 

Life isn't all about fluffy bunnies and happy endings, there is an element of danger in everything we do, right down to taking a dump, and if you ever did mangage to legislate every last iota of risk out of life then frankly it would be so bland you'd have an huge rise in suicides anyway.

Edited by Group B, 10 March 2016 - 17:31.

[Seanspeed]

Arguably you could have put any two non-rookie F1 drivers in last years Mercedes and one of them will have been WDC. So in that respect, I think the drivers can be overrated in terms of what they bring to the party. However, although you could stick any two drivers in them, only one can be WDC, and then you do start to see their individual quality when you compare the two.

So I can see how some people can think it's about the drivers, and others about the cars, and everyone be sort-of right even though it's definitely all about the cars

If a car is dominant enough, sure.  But the gaps between cars *usually* isn't that big in F1.  And drivers do make more of a difference than they do in WEC on average.  

 

I agree their role is sometimes overrated by some, but in reality, it's still a true observation to say they matter more in F1 and I think that means they deservedly get more attention, especially being the hotshots of the open wheel world. 

Edited by Seanspeed, 10 March 2016 - 17:17.

[cokata]

That is very messy, but still not as ugly. I will never get used to the horrible tall and narrow rear wings.

[Seanspeed]

That is very messy, but still not as ugly. I will never get used to the horrible tall and narrow rear wings.

Fair enough.  That IndyCar is an abomination if you ask me.  It's like somebody brought an open wheel racer on Pimp My Ride. 

 

The FW/RW proportion of the 09 changes I got used to pretty quickly, on the other hand.  And I'd say we've had some pretty great looking F1 cars during this period.  

Edited by Seanspeed, 10 March 2016 - 17:22.