35 replies to this topic

[Primo]

As I remember, it was introduced mainly to prevent the teams from basically using a different car in qualifying than in the race. A hotter, short life engine, for instance. 

But Parc fermé took away an important aspect of the game - the possibility to really optimize the car for qualifying and then switch it to be optimized for the race. We did not know if the car that was fastest in qualifying would also be the fastest in the race since some got their optimization wrong for either the Q or the race. Or for both. 

All that is needed is, in my opinion, a rule that you cannot change any parts (other than to same specification) between Q and race. Let them tweak the setup! Let us be surprised! 

[KWSN - DSM]

As I remember, it was introduced mainly to prevent the teams from basically using a different car in qualifying than in the race. A hotter, short life engine, for instance. 

But Parc fermé took away an important aspect of the game - the possibility to really optimize the car for qualifying and then switch it to be optimized for the race. We did not know if the car that was fastest in qualifying would also be the fastest in the race since some got their optimization wrong for either the Q or the race. Or for both. 

All that is needed is, in my opinion, a rule that you cannot change any parts (other than to same specification) between Q and race. Let them tweak the setup! Let us be surprised! 

 

I am good with that.

[Grippy]

I don't see a problem with adjusting settings (but no parts changes), especially wet qually to dry race or vice versa.

[danmills]

It would make some races more exciting. At least part of them. Haas doing glory runs at Austin only to drop back on Sunday.

[Cornholio]

I remember seeing an interview with Mosley about this - he basically said that he required unanimity from the teams to implement some things like banning qualifying-specific cars and so on, in that environment he couldn't get it, so he invoked an existing rule that gave the FIA the right to impound the cars in parc ferme at any point in the weekend, to effectively ban qualifying cars by brute force by exercising that right between the end of qualifying and start of the race.

 

In the current environment - with a cost cap, limits on engine and gearbox usage and mechanisms for monitoring them, I think it absolutely could, and even should, be reviewed.

[PayasYouRace]

It really isn’t needed. The technical rules in place for parts eliminate the reason for its introduction. Perhaps keep it overnight to stop all nighters from the mechanics, but even that might not be needed.

[Clatter]

It really isn’t needed. The technical rules in place for parts eliminate the reason for its introduction. Perhaps keep it overnight to stop all nighters from the mechanics, but even that might not be needed.

 

I think the current rules for working overnight should stay in place. It's only really necessary on fairly rare occasions. The days of qualifying only parts are gone, and broken parts are allowed to be changed without penalty, so the only real thing it's stopping is setup changes.

[F1 Mike]

Yeah I think we'd all enjoy a much better show without parc fermé

[SenorSjon]

It should have been gone when the budget cap became reality. And even before that, we have limited resources of everything.

 

It makes things needlessly complicated and the horrible Sprint format suffers even more if teams can't adjust the car to what they have learned in the Sprint Race.

[Clatter]

Yeah I think we'd all enjoy a much better show without parc fermé

 

That could go in many directions. Worse case is that it would increase the gap between teams. I would expect the bigger teams to gain more from being able to change their setups.

[ANF]

Scrapping the parc fermé rules would basically double the workload for engineers and simulator drivers, wouldn't it?

[Primo]

Scrapping the parc fermé rules would basically double the workload for engineers and simulator drivers, wouldn't it?

Not really, at least not for the engineers since there's no testing in between. Just change to the new settings and that's it. 

[balmybaldwin]

Scrapping the parc fermé rules would basically double the workload for engineers and simulator drivers, wouldn't it?

I think it would mean less work.  Yes they would need to define 2 seperate set-ups, but they won't have to do all the faffing and simulation to find the best compromise as they do now.  I'm pretty sure the bulk of the simulation work is in this area

[Anderis]

I think it should be scrapped. I think it will increase unpredictability if the teams are allowed to change setup between qualifying and race. I would even be in favour of bringing back the warm-up session but I don't think it's going to happen as the tendency is to reduce the number of FPS and testing to a minimum in modern F1. Why not move one FPS from before Q, to between Q and race, though? I think it could aid in adding pace variation between Q and race, which would only be good for the spectacle.

Just have a time window during which the mechanics are allowed to work on the car so that they are not overworked.

 

I think FIA is really too late on investigating which rules are more or less redundant with the budget cap in place and could be dropped to improve some aspects of the competition.

[LolaB0860]

No.

[Clatter]

Scrapping the parc fermé rules would basically double the workload for engineers and simulator drivers, wouldn't it?

 

I doubt it. The sim drivers probably work through all the permutations anyway. The engineers won't be rebuilding the cars as the would have done pre Parc ferme, unless there is a major issue, it would just be setup changes.

[1player]

The only question these days is.. who stands to gain/lose if we remove parc fermé? Williams and Haas lose the chance to tune for qualifying, and have mediocre race pace, while larger teams might be able to optimise for excellent qualifying and race setups.

 

Eh, honestly I'm not sure what would be the actual benefit of removing it.

 

EDIT: also consider that people who benefit from parc fermé are engineer themselves, so they don't have to work like mad after qualifying to retune a car, and can enjoy a few hours of rest. Unless the driver destroyed the car and they have an all-nighter ahead. Fewer work for engineers is not a bad idea these days when they have 200 race/season to attend to.

Edited by 1player, 06 October 2023 - 16:34.

[Disgrace]

It needs to go if we're ever to get wet races again.

[pdac]

I'd scrap qualifying instead. Just line everyone up in reverse championship order and have done with it.

[Primo]

 

Eh, honestly I'm not sure what would be the actual benefit of removing it.

 

It is F1, the pinnacle of motorsports, and they are not allowed to change a setup that they know is wrong. That is just club level silliness.

[krea]

Let the mechanics see their hotel beds okay

[MikeTekRacing]

Not sure why u guys want parc ferme scrapped.
The way the rule is now forces teams to compromise setups or gamble a good qualy or a good race setup.

That leads to unpredictable grids or race results. You get cars racing on Sunday.

If you let them optimize for both you’re sorting them even better so less action. Why would you want that?

[Primo]

That leads to unpredictable grids or race results. 
 

It does?
Even if it did - don't you think that F1 deserves cars that are setup as good as they can be? 

I'm not a fan artificial mechanisms to "spice up" the results and fine tuning the car until it stands on the starting line for the race is in the DNA of racing.

[1player]

Rules might be artificial, or might be the few things that enable competition. Remains to be seen which of these is parc fermé. I doubt that removing it would create more exciting racing, and any rule can be seen as artificial. Why do we need one necessary pit stop, or weight limits?

I don't want to derail the thread, so what concrete benefit do you see to removing it, apart from having shed one "artificial" rule? The way I see it, it would enable teams to erase setup mistakes, and to copy setup ideas (if it makes any sense) from competitors after the fact, thus removing a chaotic variable that would create interesting Sundays.

EDIT: a bit like old sprint races, in fact. If you messed the qualifying, you still had a chance to fix it during the sprint, making Sunday more boring than it had a right to be.

Edited by 1player, 07 October 2023 - 08:11.

[pdac]

I'm not sure it's necessary for the reasons that it was introduced, but it's something that has to be taken into consideration, like a lot of other rules and regulations.

 

One could seriously ask the question why are there regulations on most things. If you think about it, the task is to drive the circuit the required number of times in as fast a time as possible. Obviously, everyone needs to be safe, so it's important to have regulations to try to ensure that. But, otherwise, what has regulating the exact type of power unit got to do with it? What has regulating the exact type of tyres got to do with it? What has the regulating the type of fuel got to do with it? etc. etc.

[PayasYouRace]

I'd scrap qualifying instead. Just line everyone up in reverse championship order and have done with it.

Let’s do like the new Forza Motorsport. Let each driver choose their starting spot, and give bonus points for the more positions they make up during the race. So if winning from pole is 25 points, winning from 20th is 45 points, or something. Have a random draw for the order they choose.

[pdac]

Let’s do like the new Forza Motorsport. Let each driver choose their starting spot, and give bonus points for the more positions they make up during the race. So if winning from pole is 25 points, winning from 20th is 45 points, or something. Have a random draw for the order they choose.

 

I don't like anything to be random. Obviously the very first choice has to have some level of randomness to it. But after that it's better to go with history. In this case, I'd prefer any randomness be limited to the first race of the season.

 

I guess one way to resolve the random aspect of your suggestion would be to just use the time at which the bid was made. Another idea, along my lines (following WCC order after the first race) would be that each team bids to be the first to choose, with the money taken off of their season budget cap.

Edited by pdac, 07 October 2023 - 09:18.

[goldenboy]

Stupid rule.

[MikeTekRacing]

It does?
Even if it did - don't you think that F1 deserves cars that are setup as good as they can be?

I'm not a fan artificial mechanisms to "spice up" the results and fine tuning the car until it stands on the starting line for the race is in the DNA of racing.

Yes it does. Ferrari and Haas optimize qualy pretty often. They pay a price

Nothing artificial about it

[Primo]

Yes it does. Ferrari and Haas optimize qualy pretty often. They pay a price

 

And so do we.

[AustinF1]

As I remember, it was introduced mainly to prevent the teams from basically using a different car in qualifying than in the race. A hotter, short life engine, for instance. 

But Parc fermé took away an important aspect of the game - the possibility to really optimize the car for qualifying and then switch it to be optimized for the race. We did not know if the car that was fastest in qualifying would also be the fastest in the race since some got their optimization wrong for either the Q or the race. Or for both. 

All that is needed is, in my opinion, a rule that you cannot change any parts (other than to same specification) between Q and race. Let them tweak the setup! Let us be surprised! 

This. And starting Parc Ferme on Friday of Sprint Weekends is beyond idiotic.

 

Here's the best format imho for a Sprint Weekend (if we absolutely must have 'em):

 

Fri: FP1, then Sprint Qualifying

Sat: Sprint Race, then GP Qualifying

Sun: GP

Parc Ferme re-opens after the Sprint Race.

Edited by AustinF1, 08 October 2023 - 01:31.

[Gravelngrass]

Not being able to adjust a race car to suit the conditions is the most idiotic thing someone could come up with as it goes against everything auto racing is supposed to be. Obviously a result of desperation to try to artificially spice up races, it should never have been implemented and should be eliminated immediately. 

[cjm321190]

As I remember, it was introduced mainly to prevent the teams from basically using a different car in qualifying than in the race. A hotter, short life engine, for instance.

But Parc fermé took away an important aspect of the game - the possibility to really optimize the car for qualifying and then switch it to be optimized for the race. We did not know if the car that was fastest in qualifying would also be the fastest in the race since some got their optimization wrong for either the Q or the race. Or for both.

All that is needed is, in my opinion, a rule that you cannot change any parts (other than to same specification) between Q and race. Let them tweak the setup! Let us be surprised!

This also solves the wet race day conundrum. But that would be to easy for F1, tag on a quick out fast in lap only to make sure all is well sunday morning.

[Myrvold]

Not being able to adjust a race car to suit the conditions is the most idiotic thing someone could come up with as it goes against everything auto racing is supposed to be.

 

Is it not supposed to be the fastest in a certain condition at a specific track under equal ruleset?

[Gravelngrass]

Is it not supposed to be the fastest in a certain condition at a specific track under equal ruleset?

Sorry, don’t understand your question.

[PilgrimsDrop]

As I remember, it was introduced mainly to prevent the teams from basically using a different car in qualifying than in the race. A hotter, short life engine, for instance. 

But Parc fermé took away an important aspect of the game - the possibility to really optimize the car for qualifying and then switch it to be optimized for the race. We did not know if the car that was fastest in qualifying would also be the fastest in the race since some got their optimization wrong for either the Q or the race. Or for both. 

All that is needed is, in my opinion, a rule that you cannot change any parts (other than to same specification) between Q and race. Let them tweak the setup! Let us be surprised! 

 

I like this a lot!!

Especially in the context of a sprint weekend where there is minimal time to adjust the simulator suggested setups providing a somewhat less exciting race, for us as spectators, since the strengths of the various car/driver combos are already revealed to a large extent. The only thing remaining is how good are the various teams tire wear but... that is well known anyway after a race or 2.

As for rain setups and what not... not really necessary anymore with the modern cars as the changes are minimal.

The only reason for keeping some sort of controlled access is the regulation regarding time on track for mechanics etc. That should remain with the availability of jokers as it is now... (I think there still are anyways  )