Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Ross Brawn announces new technical regulations for 2021 [split]


  • Please log in to reply
402 replies to this topic

#301 ANF

ANF
  • Member

  • 10,718 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 04 November 2019 - 19:41

where are the rules posted?

https://www.fia.com/...-f1-regulations

Advertisement

#302 Baddoer

Baddoer
  • Member

  • 2,288 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 04 November 2019 - 20:37

I guess this is where Ross Brown has been all that time.



#303 Celloman

Celloman
  • Member

  • 909 posts
  • Joined: October 05

Posted 04 November 2019 - 23:52

Wheelbase is limited to 3,600 mm.

Interesting, didn't know this. Just a bit of a joke that they went with 3600 mm when current cars according to several sources average around 3650 mm. Looks like yet another decision that was compromised to make everyone happy.



#304 THEWALL

THEWALL
  • Member

  • 2,162 posts
  • Joined: November 15

Posted 05 November 2019 - 01:20

There's an interesting 30 minute piece with Pat Symonds on the new regs on F1TV. Their initial plan was to go back to narrower front wings but decided against that because their main objective was to minimise the wake the cars leave behind and they quickly found out that exposing the tire even more by narrowing the wing caused even more turbulence so they stuck with the wide front wings. 

Ahh, wanted to check it out today but it's subscription only of course. 



#305 suggerla

suggerla
  • Member

  • 186 posts
  • Joined: May 16

Posted 05 November 2019 - 08:32

Interesting, didn't know this. Just a bit of a joke that they went with 3600 mm when current cars according to several sources average around 3650 mm. Looks like yet another decision that was compromised to make everyone happy.

 

Wheelbase of 2019 cars (source)

 

Red Bull RB15     3619 mm
Haas VF-19     3621 mm
Williams FW42     3644 mm
McLaren MCL34     3648 mm
Ferrari SF90     3653 mm
Racing Point      3664 mm
Renault R.S.19     3672 mm
Toro Rosso      3693 mm
Alfa Romeo C38     3697 mm
Mercedes W10     3698 mm

 

The 2021 cars will be shorter, but not by much. Still too long imo.


Edited by suggerla, 05 November 2019 - 08:32.


#306 JeePee

JeePee
  • Member

  • 3,139 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 05 November 2019 - 09:07

3600mm? pfffff

 

The Ferrari F2004 had a wheelbase of 3050mm.



#307 Kalmake

Kalmake
  • Member

  • 3,579 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 05 November 2019 - 09:27

Reportedly the aim was 3400mm. Teams must have pushed back.



#308 screamingV16

screamingV16
  • Member

  • 1,363 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 05 November 2019 - 09:37

Anyone expecting enormous changes in 2021 is going to be mahoosively disappointed. As I predicted several years ago, most changes have been heavily diluted down by the teams or outright rejected. The teams will be spending next year clawing back what they can. Ah well, at least we have the excitement of teams having to occasionally run some other driver in FP :lol:  ... plus ca change



#309 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 21,113 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 05 November 2019 - 10:09

Anyone expecting enormous changes in 2021 is going to be mahoosively disappointed. As I predicted several years ago, most changes have been heavily diluted down by the teams or outright rejected. The teams will be spending next year clawing back what they can. Ah well, at least we have the excitement of teams having to occasionally run some other driver in FP :lol: ... plus ca change


The changes are set now, and they are pretty massive. There’s no more chance for them to be diluted.

#310 screamingV16

screamingV16
  • Member

  • 1,363 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 05 November 2019 - 10:27

The changes are set now, and they are pretty massive. There’s no more chance for them to be diluted.

 

Yeah we've heard that all before, the dilution has already occurred. Still got front wide wings, fundamentally same engines regs, still got long wheelbase, the top teams will find ways around the cost cap, as will the designers in terms of clawing back the much hyped loss of downforce. Will be great if cars can follow each other closer, but I'm not convinced and neither is the FIA by the look of it hence the retention of DRS.



#311 statman

statman
  • Member

  • 5,028 posts
  • Joined: December 15

Posted 05 November 2019 - 11:37

Always funny how people see different things. On the one hand people are angry with so many standardized parts and and the many new restrictions, and on the other hand we have people (above) that say Formula 1 caved to the teams and nothing will change

 

:drunk:



#312 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 21,113 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 05 November 2019 - 11:45

Yeah we've heard that all before, the dilution has already occurred. Still got front wide wings, fundamentally same engines regs, still got long wheelbase, the top teams will find ways around the cost cap, as will the designers in terms of clawing back the much hyped loss of downforce. Will be great if cars can follow each other closer, but I'm not convinced and neither is the FIA by the look of it hence the retention of DRS.


The wide front wings are to improve the airflow over and around the car. This is been referenced in the thread a couple of times. It’s a feature to improve the racing and it’s good that they’re like that.

Nobody ever put forward a realistic alternative to the current engines so there’s no surprise that they’ve stayed.

The wheelbase hasn’t been a problem at all, but at least they’ve put a limit to stop further growth.

As for the rest, that’s just your idea of what might happen. I don’t know how the teams might try to get around the budget caps. But the aero rules look robust enough. They will claw back downforce, but that’s not a problem. It’s the way downforce is generated that is.

#313 Roadhouse

Roadhouse
  • Member

  • 577 posts
  • Joined: August 16

Posted 05 November 2019 - 12:36

Was just thinking...

 

DRS make more overtakes possible, but the overtakes themselves are boring and straightforward. Drivers rely on them because there's usually no point risking an overtake on other parts of the track.

Could an extra battery possibly solve this problem? A battery which can only be used when within X secs of your opponent. Or perhaps being allowed to exceed the maximum fuel rate? This way overtaking will be less predictable. 

 

Or a combination of both, so DRS to close the gap and something else to actually overtake.

 

I'm not a fan of artificial racing, but also not a fan of boring racing with commentators pretending DRS overtakes are exciting.



#314 Risil

Risil
  • Administrator

  • 29,329 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 05 November 2019 - 12:40

Agree. I'm not totally sure why F1 didn't go down the push-to-pass route in 2014 when the turbos came in and they had the ability to play around with boost levels as well as energy storage and deployment. Perhaps there was enough change to be dealing with. There was no mention of tyre design in the announcement but surely that's going to have a major effect on how races play out in 2021.


#315 Roadhouse

Roadhouse
  • Member

  • 577 posts
  • Joined: August 16

Posted 05 November 2019 - 12:55

Imagine the pressure this puts on defenders, knowing you'll have to be on your toes for an entire lap and not just when leading up to DRS (detection) zones. We'll see a bigger variety in lines, switchbacks will become far more viable. It also puts more control in driver's hands, instead of simply getting close and slamming the DRS button.

 

 

edit: New restrictions against replacing brake parts could also enhance racing. Braking zones are too short at the moment.


Edited by Roadhouse, 05 November 2019 - 13:21.


#316 w1Y

w1Y
  • Member

  • 4,611 posts
  • Joined: March 16

Posted 05 November 2019 - 14:56

Is it possible now to change the points system to allow all places to have points. Whats the arguement not to do this.

#317 Cornholio

Cornholio
  • Member

  • 525 posts
  • Joined: March 16

Posted 05 November 2019 - 16:06

Is it possible now to change the points system to allow all places to have points. Whats the arguement not to do this.

 

Well it's a matter of opinion as always, but my own personal argument against it is that I've always felt whatever points system used, a single point should be some sort of achievement - realistically achievable for anyone in the field on a good day, but not just a given for turning up (or finishing). With points for all you don't get stories like Bianchi in Monaco 2014, or Webber scoring Minardi's first points in years on his debut

 

It's one of the few things I think F1 has consistently got mostly right down the years. Points for the top 6 in the days of more attrition, later expanded to 8 as reliability generally improved, and top 10 in modern times, all did/do achieve the above fairly well.


Edited by Cornholio, 05 November 2019 - 16:07.


#318 Kalmake

Kalmake
  • Member

  • 3,579 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 05 November 2019 - 16:22

It could expand to about 12-14 scored and points for just turning up would still be very rare. That would also give an excuse to reduce 1st to 2nd points gap to keep WDC undecided longer.



#319 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 21,113 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 05 November 2019 - 16:34

Why does this discussion always leave out the middle ground of points for all finishers and just jump straight to points for just showing up?



Advertisement

#320 Roadhouse

Roadhouse
  • Member

  • 577 posts
  • Joined: August 16

Posted 05 November 2019 - 16:38

Is it possible now to change the points system to allow all places to have points. Whats the arguement not to do this.

 

Bit double for me...

 

The current system makes fights around 10th place worth it. If everybody gets points there's no point (hehe) in risking everything for an overtake.

At the same time I hate it how a constructor can perform horribly for an entire season, but can beat other backmarkers by being extremely lucky in a chaotic race like Hockenheim. That's a bit too random imho.



#321 Risil

Risil
  • Administrator

  • 29,329 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 05 November 2019 - 16:38

The more points paying positions the more complicated your system has to be. At least if you want each position to be differentiated.
 
I'm not uninterested in F1 but I don't think I could confidently say how many points each position is worth currently.


#322 V8 Fireworks

V8 Fireworks
  • Member

  • 10,824 posts
  • Joined: June 06

Posted 05 November 2019 - 16:46

 

The more points paying positions the more complicated your system has to be. At least if you want each position to be differentiated.
 
I'm not uninterested in F1 but I don't think I could confidently say how many points each position is worth currently.

 

 

The old 10-6-4-3-2-1 was easy to remember.  :up:

 

Whereas, I can't remember the current system either... 25-18-??-??-??-??-??-??-2-1  :confused:



#323 V8 Fireworks

V8 Fireworks
  • Member

  • 10,824 posts
  • Joined: June 06

Posted 05 November 2019 - 16:48

 

The more points paying positions the more complicated your system has to be. At least if you want each position to be differentiated.

 

In V8 Supercars, at one point it was something along the lines of 40-38-36-34-32-30-... down to 2 points for last place if you are classified.

 

The problem with this system though is the penalty for having a DNF is very large, and the reward for winning is minimal.  In fact, in 2006 the V8 Supercars champion won the series without winning a single race IIRC.


Edited by V8 Fireworks, 05 November 2019 - 16:48.


#324 V8 Fireworks

V8 Fireworks
  • Member

  • 10,824 posts
  • Joined: June 06

Posted 05 November 2019 - 16:50

Low nose, ground effect. I won’t even bother to search how many times I said that. When I gave a **** about it.

 

Change takes time.  :up:

 

The Bee Gees & Peter Frampton -- Getting Better (Beatles cover)

 

"It's getting better...

A little better..

All the time"


Edited by V8 Fireworks, 05 November 2019 - 16:51.


#325 Risil

Risil
  • Administrator

  • 29,329 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 05 November 2019 - 16:54

Change takes time.  :up:
 
The Bee Gees & Peter Frampton -- Getting Better (Beatles cover)
 
"It's getting better...
A little better..
All the time"

 

(Can't get no worse!)



#326 gillesfan76

gillesfan76
  • Member

  • 3,859 posts
  • Joined: July 16

Posted 05 November 2019 - 17:01

Disappointed that the overall size of the cars hasn't come down by much. Visually the concept looked noticeably smaller but I guess just an illusion. One of the things that made the US GP exciting was the width of the track allowed different lines. We need smaller cars, tyres that don't drop off after being pushed for a couple of laps, and tyres that don't leave graining marbles everywhere offline forcing drivers to drive almost single file such is the grip difference off line.



#327 djparky

djparky
  • Member

  • 1,116 posts
  • Joined: May 12

Posted 05 November 2019 - 17:09

I wonder how this ground effect aero approach will work on circuits as bumpy as we saw this weekend in Austin? I do worry of resurfacing of the former issues of randomly losing ground effect grip leads to cars flying off the track.


Indy Car has ground effects and runs quite happily on bumpy tracks...dont see cars flying off the track...

#328 TheGoldenStoffel

TheGoldenStoffel
  • Member

  • 549 posts
  • Joined: November 18

Posted 05 November 2019 - 17:59

Ahh, wanted to check it out today but it's subscription only of course. 

 

Which is a shame because I think it's actually quite interesting for all fans to know why some decisions were made with the new regulations.

 

For example the switch to 18 inch rims. Pat Symonds explains that it wasn't because of the aesthetics or it being more "modern" but actually because they are much easier to model. There is a lot of flex in the current sidewalls and in CFD you can only run one model at the time. To accurately model the tyre you would have to do a lot of runs to model each and every way a tyre can flex. Obviously, the bigger teams throw more money and personnel at the problem and their tyre models end up being a lot better than those of smaller teams. By eliminating a lot of this flex modelling the tyres accurately becomes a lot easier for smaller teams.



#329 Neno

Neno
  • Member

  • 1,794 posts
  • Joined: May 16

Posted 05 November 2019 - 18:11

Anyone expecting enormous changes in 2021 is going to be mahoosively disappointed. As I predicted several years ago, most changes have been heavily diluted down by the teams or outright rejected. The teams will be spending next year clawing back what they can. Ah well, at least we have the excitement of teams having to occasionally run some other driver in FP :lol:  ... plus ca change

this. i am already dissapointed about 3600 mm wheelbase. I can already tell cars will be too long and with new front wing design to wide also. they will look more similar to current ones than anything else. 


Edited by Neno, 05 November 2019 - 18:12.


#330 Cornholio

Cornholio
  • Member

  • 525 posts
  • Joined: March 16

Posted 06 November 2019 - 01:13

Why does this discussion always leave out the middle ground of points for all finishers and just jump straight to points for just showing up?


Because honestly in this modern era of ultra reliability those two things aren't all that different. There's hardly any DNQs anymore and zero DNPQs, and without analaysing the numbers in depth it honestly wouldn't surprise me if on average a car/driver could be expected to see the flag in about 70-80% of the races it contests in a season.

#331 richardprice

richardprice
  • Member

  • 72 posts
  • Joined: June 19

Posted 06 November 2019 - 03:52

Is it possible now to change the points system to allow all places to have points. Whats the arguement not to do this.

 

This season, Williams has taken the bottom two spots of finishers 7 times in 19 races so far - other than the German GP (which had a large number of retirements from top teams so can be considered a bit of an outlier - that said, Williams finished the race and those retirees didn't...), the highest place a Williams car finished in was 14th.  That doesn't deserve points, it deserves nothing.



#332 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 21,113 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 06 November 2019 - 06:53

This season, Williams has taken the bottom two spots of finishers 7 times in 19 races so far - other than the German GP (which had a large number of retirements from top teams so can be considered a bit of an outlier - that said, Williams finished the race and those retirees didn't...), the highest place a Williams car finished in was 14th. That doesn't deserve points, it deserves nothing.


That’s if you consider points to be prizes. If you consider them a measurement device then it serves no purpose to arbitrarily cut them off at only the top half of the field.

#333 richardprice

richardprice
  • Member

  • 72 posts
  • Joined: June 19

Posted 06 November 2019 - 09:11

That’s if you consider points to be prizes. If you consider them a measurement device then it serves no purpose to arbitrarily cut them off at only the top half of the field.


Not necessarily - points also directly translate into additional prize fund share, so if you aren’t good enough to get points, you remain at your base contracted share. So yes, there’s a good reason to “arbitrarily” cut them off.

It does make me laugh about how certain teams moan about the top teams expenditures, and thus we now have a cost cap to “even the grid” - that cost cap isn’t going to help Williams et al, it might marginally help McLaren, Racing Point and Renault, but it will won’t help the bottom teams at all, so why bother with points for them? The current points system serves a need, and it serves it well in my book.

#334 Roadhouse

Roadhouse
  • Member

  • 577 posts
  • Joined: August 16

Posted 06 November 2019 - 09:50

When it comes to points, you'd want the top half to get rewarded. Thing is though, we basically have 2 separate classes (3 if you count Williams).

So only 7-10th place are usually up for grabs. That's 4 point scoring places for 14 drivers (12 if you discount Williams).

 

It would be more motivational if you'd get points until 12th place, or 13th to be exact, but I'm sure that doesn't sit well with some.

A more realistic cut off point should also give more racing lower down the field, because why bother when 10th place is out of reach? It's not like you're getting extra screen time.



#335 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 21,113 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 06 November 2019 - 10:01

Not necessarily - points also directly translate into additional prize fund share, so if you aren’t good enough to get points, you remain at your base contracted share. So yes, there’s a good reason to “arbitrarily” cut them off.

It does make me laugh about how certain teams moan about the top teams expenditures, and thus we now have a cost cap to “even the grid” - that cost cap isn’t going to help Williams et al, it might marginally help McLaren, Racing Point and Renault, but it will won’t help the bottom teams at all, so why bother with points for them? The current points system serves a need, and it serves it well in my book.

 

So you're happy with a points system that has no power to differentiate between anyone finishing in the second half of the field, whether they finish 11th, half a second behind tenth place, or 20th and 3 laps down?

 

Any points system can directly translate into the prize fund share, and if the points system is a more accurate reflection of the pecking order, the prize money will be handed out more fairly.



#336 RA2

RA2
  • Member

  • 1,321 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 06 November 2019 - 10:03

There are 4 works teams and Mclaren, if they all come good next season there is a chance that they would finish top 10 in every race. This is all the more likely with the lottery of Q2 tyres being used for start of race for the top 10 gone.

 

In such a scenario with 10 cars not scoring points in 19 races what if in one of the races 1 of these cars scores a point like Kubica did this year. Does Williams deserve P6 in the constructors when they could have finished last in all other races? 

 

I think it is fair to give points to all finisher even if it is in fractions.

 

10th - 1 point

11th - 9/10 point

12th - 4/5 point

13th - 3/4 point

14th - 2/3 point

15th - 1/2 point

16th - 2/5 point

17th - 1/3 point

18th - 1/4 point

19th - 1/5 point

20th - 1/10 point

 

At least then we will stop glorifying 10th place points finishers 


Edited by RA2, 06 November 2019 - 10:10.


#337 Kalmake

Kalmake
  • Member

  • 3,579 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 06 November 2019 - 10:05

Not necessarily - points also directly translate into additional prize fund share, so if you aren’t good enough to get points, you remain at your base contracted share. So yes, there’s a good reason to “arbitrarily” cut them off.

It does make me laugh about how certain teams moan about the top teams expenditures, and thus we now have a cost cap to “even the grid” - that cost cap isn’t going to help Williams et al, it might marginally help McLaren, Racing Point and Renault, but it will won’t help the bottom teams at all, so why bother with points for them? The current points system serves a need, and it serves it well in my book.

What additional prize? I'm pretty sure it's just WCC placement these days.



#338 TheFish

TheFish
  • Member

  • 645 posts
  • Joined: October 14

Posted 06 November 2019 - 10:12

Always funny how people see different things. On the one hand people are angry with so many standardized parts and and the many new restrictions, and on the other hand we have people (above) that say Formula 1 caved to the teams and nothing will change

 

:drunk:

 

Always the sign of a good compromise!



#339 loki

loki
  • Member

  • 6,098 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 07 November 2019 - 02:36

What additional prize? I'm pretty sure it's just WCC placement these days.

The would be correct.  Paid on final place not points alone.  

 

Here’s the 2018 run down.   https://www.racefans...-2018-revealed/



Advertisement

#340 FPV GTHO

FPV GTHO
  • Member

  • 2,374 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 07 November 2019 - 04:10

I believe a couple of years ago, it was Caterham, Marussia and HRT fighting over 13th place to get ahead of the others in the WCC

#341 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 21,113 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 07 November 2019 - 08:23

I think it is fair to give points to all finisher even if it is in fractions.

10th - 1 point
11th - 9/10 point
12th - 4/5 point
13th - 3/4 point
14th - 2/3 point
15th - 1/2 point
16th - 2/5 point
17th - 1/3 point
18th - 1/4 point
19th - 1/5 point
20th - 1/10


A good start. Now if we just multiply all the points by 10 we’ll have something more sensible.

#342 Anderis

Anderis
  • Member

  • 4,075 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 07 November 2019 - 10:22

Is it possible now to change the points system to allow all places to have points. Whats the arguement not to do this.

My argument not to do this is that the bottom places of WCC would be decided to a big extent by reliability and ability to finish the race without much trouble, while I think, for the benefit of the show, it would be better if the bottom teams were encouraged to take risks and not settle for safely finishing 13th or 14th every race, because it might give them a couple of $ million more from TV money. This could become even more of an issue if we ever get to see more than 10 teams.



#343 RA2

RA2
  • Member

  • 1,321 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 07 November 2019 - 11:24

A good start. Now if we just multiply all the points by 10 we’ll have something more sensible.


No full points would make it look like they achieved a lot

Edited by RA2, 07 November 2019 - 11:24.


#344 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 21,113 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 07 November 2019 - 11:27

No full points would make it look like they achieved a lot


Fractions of points is just unnecessarily cumbersome.

#345 Sterzo

Sterzo
  • Member

  • 1,619 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 07 November 2019 - 15:49

Fractions of points is just unnecessarily cumbersome.

I do not think I could survive the interview with a tearful young driver, dedicating his tenth of a point to his sponsor.



#346 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 21,113 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 07 November 2019 - 16:22

I do not think I could survive the interview with a tearful young driver, dedicating his tenth of a point to his sponsor.

 

It's the 1954 British Grand Prix all over again. Jean Behra's 1/7th of a point that year must have felt amazing.



#347 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 10,945 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 07 November 2019 - 18:36

The old 10-6-4-3-2-1 was easy to remember. :up:

Whereas, I can't remember the current system either... 25-18-??-??-??-??-??-??-2-1 :confused:


Then you watch MotoGP and it is different again!

#348 Boing Ball

Boing Ball
  • Member

  • 311 posts
  • Joined: July 00

Posted 07 November 2019 - 18:42

Is there anything in the rules about changing the weight distribution, which apparently contributes to the length of the cars?



#349 Kalmake

Kalmake
  • Member

  • 3,579 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 07 November 2019 - 20:36

Is there anything in the rules about changing the weight distribution, which apparently contributes to the length of the cars?

Slight shift rearwards.

 

Allowed bias range

now: 53.5 - 54.5%

2021: 54.5 - 56%

 

I would say car length and tyre sizes contribute to what the bias has to be, not the other way round. Those changed so the bias will too.



#350 richardprice

richardprice
  • Member

  • 72 posts
  • Joined: June 19

Posted 07 November 2019 - 20:50

What additional prize? I'm pretty sure it's just WCC placement these days.

 

Fair enough, I misremembered (was thinking back to Marussia wetting themselves for scoring a single point at Monaco a few years back).

 

But my point (no pun intended) stands - at some point (again, no pun intended) you are awarding points for participation rather than achievement.  Bookending the pack is not an achievement and it should not be rewarded - keeping a cut off means teams have something to fight for to gain something, rather than gaining points simply through reliability and other people having incidents above you in the order.