2011 "Eco-Friendly F1"

[Sureboss]

But then you're beginning to stifle F1's ability to make advances in aerodynamics, something F1 has always been strong in.

They could still use test tracks, no reason why they couldn't use something like a drag strip, old airport runways. It'd still be better and use less energy than wind tunnels.

 

[GT4 genius]

Good point, seemily McLaren tested at an airfield earlier this year.

PS If any of you are interested theres a F1 06 time trial competition going on in the PS2 forums. Have a look!

 

[ExigeEvan]

They could still use test tracks, no reason why they couldn't use something like a drag strip, old airport runways. It'd still be better and use less energy than wind tunnels.

Not really.

Short term, yes wind tunnels are probably not powered by renewable or C02 friendly sources, however, in the long term that will become more likely.

Plus, you can't actually study the flow of the air over the car when not in a wind tunnel. You can't put smoke into the air stream and study how it flows over the car. You'd simply be relying on top speed testing and the opinion from the driver, which would also mean much, much more testing from the drivers.

 

[GT4 genius]

what about the use of bio-fuels they'd have to make sure that there not derived from food products, because in many countries foods often more expensive and scarce than oil.

 

[Sureboss]

And how many hundredths of a second does blowing smoke over a car gain?

 

[GT4 genius]

I have to disagree with sureshot, Formula 1 has to be continuously developing every part of the car otherwise it will not be the top class of motorsport. Which is also why i hate the sticking to one type of engine for a few years rule!

 

[ExigeEvan]

And how many hundredths of a second does blowing smoke over a car gain?

I think it can be measured in seconds rather than hundredths.

For example, today Hamilton took a bit of damage to his fronts spoiler due to the tyre puncture. This caused understeer.

Now, if Hamilton had complained that there was understeer in testing do you think the engineers would just make slap on an extra winglet here and there, send him out and say do you think this is better or worse. Repeat that maybe a hundred times in just one test session untill you get it perfect. In the mean time you'll need more tyres manufactured, burn more fuel, wear out another engine and exhaust the driver.

Instead, they'd take the parts into a wind tunnel and select maybe one or two. All the time using smoke to study the flow of the air over the part checking for excessive drag and turbulence that may effect other parts of the aerodynamic package. Then it'll be a matter of just a dozen or so test laps for the driver to adapt and tack advantage of the changes.

Wind tunnels are at this moment in time vital for aerodynamics and development. Fact.

 

[Blake]

CFD is all theory, anyway. No matter how much testing teams do with CFD (and they do a hell of a lot of it), you always need the wind tunnel to test manufactured pieces (the few items that look promising) to see if the results correlate in the real world. Aerodynamics isn’t a completely understood science, the testing that is required to take advantage of it’s potential is immense.

 

[Sureboss]

I actually don't think F1 should become eco-friendly because it defies the point of F1 and because the impact it has is miniscule. I was putting the point forward that if F1 is to become eco-friendly, wind tunnels either have to go or be made more economical.

Wind Tunnels use a lot of energy and when they are on sometimes 24/7 they are a massive burden on F1s 'green' status.

Another thing F1 could do is to arrange the season so we don't double back on ourselves and of course stop flying out celebrities no one has heard of.

 

[Flerbizky]

Considering one 747 flight from London to NY uses as much fuel as an entire F1 season - I don't see the need for F1 to be "Eco Friendly"...

 

[ExigeEvan]

I actually don't think F1 should become eco-friendly because it defies the point of F1 and because the impact it has is miniscule. I was putting the point forward that if F1 is to become eco-friendly, wind tunnels either have to go or be made more economical.

Wind Tunnels use a lot of energy and when they are on sometimes 24/7 they are a massive burden on F1s 'green' status.

Another thing F1 could do is to arrange the season so we don't double back on ourselves and of course stop flying out celebrities no one has heard of.

That's a fair point, especially when looking at the calendar. Why are the 2 North American races in the middle of the European season for example.

Considering one 747 flight from London to NY uses as much fuel as an entire F1 season - I don't see the need for F1 to be "Eco Friendly"...

And that's the attitude that saved the world!

 

[Flerbizky]

And that's the attitude that saved the world!

Considering one 747 flight from London to NY uses as much fuel as an entire F1 season - I don't see the need for F1 to be "Eco Friendly"...

Not quite no - But look at how many London to NY (and vice versa) flights there are, a 3% saving in fuel pr. flight would make sooooo much more difference to Global Warming (which is something Gore invented - IMO) than canning F1 entirely !...

Gotta look at the big picture - F1 or no F1 or "Eco Friendly" F1 - Makes no difference whatsoever..

 

[ExigeEvan]

I suppose I should go back to leaving my TV/Hi-fi/DVD player on standby cause China just keeps making new power station anyway....

 

[Flerbizky]

I suppose I should go back to leaving my TV/Hi-fi/DVD player on standby cause China just keeps making new power station anyway....

That's one way of putting it - But it's not what I'm getting at.. Trust me, I'm trying to do my part in trying to save power.

But a circus like F1 makes so little difference, that it's a silly place to start making the earth greener. The overall impact that F1, and motor racing in general has, is so little, that we shouldn't bother... Start with the planes as I said earlier... Get china to build eco-friendlier powerplants etc. etc... There's so many places that could make a difference - F1 not being one of them....

 

[GT4 genius]

However, as was mentioned earlier in the tread, F1 is a innovative sport and many things that are developed for the cars often filter down, afer a few years, to our road cars. So if F1 developes the use of bio-fuels even futher or introduces the possibilities of Hydrogen power, or fuel cells, to the wider public and as a direct result the whole motoring industry becomes more efficeint surely it'll save more than just a few Atlantic flights of carbon!

 

[Muzaffar]

That's one way of putting it - But it's not what I'm getting at.. Trust me, I'm trying to do my part in trying to save power.

But a circus like F1 makes so little difference, that it's a silly place to start making the earth greener. The overall impact that F1, and motor racing in general has, is so little, that we shouldn't bother... Start with the planes as I said earlier... Get china to build eco-friendlier powerplants etc. etc... There's so many places that could make a difference - F1 not being one of them....

Well you hit the nail on the head there. I mean motor sport has little to do with the environment but the amount of cars on the road need to be decreased! I mean all road cars make a big contribution to global warming, more than anything else! So maybe car manufacturers should spend more money on building eco-friendly cars instead of developing cars for motor sports.....

I think this eco-friendly F1 is 🤬 I mean its the least pollutive motor sport out there and yet they want to make it cleaner? The hybrid/diesel engines are okay but just don't make it anymore boring that it is.....

 

[Pupik]

I don't think it will take the cars down to 400bhp. The BMW turbocharged F1 engine in the Brabham in the '80s was 1.5 litres and 4 cylinders and it made over 1000bhp in qualifying trim.

The 1000hp engines were at unlimited pressures (usually 4.5+ bar pressure), so 400hp could be theoretically maintained at something like 1.0 bar and a turbo inlet duct size restrictions.

A lot of races were cut short and/or canceled in 1974-75 due to oil shortages, but once the impact of auto racing was measured against the oil supply, it turned out to be proverbial drop in the oil barrel.

 

[Alfaholic]

The 1000hp engines were at unlimited pressures (usually 4.5+ bar pressure), so 400hp could be theoretically maintained at something like 1.0 bar and a turbo inlet duct size restrictions.

Probable, but the thread opening post says no rev or boost restrictions. Doesn't mention inlet duct size though.

About the regulated underbody trays. Does that mean the FIA supply a standard undertray? If so, how do they accomodate different wheelbases? Would the teams have to work around that? Will the wheelbase be restricted as well? Will the underbody be made by the FIA to the team's dimensions?

 

[GT4 genius]

No one knows yet the plans are still just under development.
Is it not true though that there is less turbulance left behind a car due to areodynamics under the car than them above the car.
I am not sure but if this was true would it nt be better to develope the undertray rather than complicated parts that move when the fia want them to on the top of the car.

 

[Danoff]

Just to set the record straight. Formula 1 cars are not just supposed to be the most technologically advanced or forward thinking cars, they're supposed to represent the pinnacle of auto-racing. These are supposed to be the fastest cars out there, and that's honestly why I watch.

If there were faster cars going around a road track in a different racing venue I'd watch that instead.

Edit: If I wanted to watch the fastest eco-friendly cars in the world, I'd watch that solar-powered car race in Australia (I seem to remember something like that going on).

 

[GT4 genius]

Formula 1 is the pinacle of motor sport, that can never change, even the annoying interferring, very nice people , at the fia can never change that, Bernie wont let them!

 

[Metar]

Edit: If I wanted to watch the fastest eco-friendly cars in the world, I'd watch that solar-powered car race in Australia (I seem to remember something like that going on).

They're actually pretty cool to watch

But you hit the nail on the head. Or something like that, I'm not too good with such things. F1 cars may not overtake much - and honestly, changing that would only do good for the sport. But part of the magic is watching a car cornering at twice the normal speed, then speeding off with amazing acceleration - and who cares if it leaves some smoke behind. At the last Turkey race, I noticed something - the second the cars started revving up the engines for the countdown, the air above became unclear and hot - obviously, that was pollution from the exhausts. But that's part of it. If you keep cars as amazing to watch as it is now, then go ahead - but they should never "slow down" F1 too much. F1 is pretty much the only series where watching a hotlap is actually interesting - simply because they're such amazing machines. If they become slow as your average LMP or Champcar, why shouldn't I watch those instead?

 

[GT4 genius]

As i said earlier the lap times in 2011 will be kept simmilar to those in 2009

 

[rovens]

I think that the best way to make F1 more eco-friendly is to rearrange the race order to limit the amount of travel required, if a 747 flight gives out as much CO2 as a whole season of racing then organise the races into an order that requires less flights back and forth.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

I think F1 is just as much about being the fastest as overcoming regulations that are set by the FIA. There is no reason that the cars can't be fast and somewhat economical at the same time. Just because it brings the fastest circuit racing, doesn't mean that the cars can pollute all they want.

 

[peterjford]

This focus on the emissions from the race cars is almost laughable, but I guess its the cars and the drivers that get the attention, so if they (the cars) are 'greener' then it might get more fans to be 'greener'. I would bet that the emissions of 24 vehicle driven by fans to the event is greater than that of the race cars for the whole race week. And of course:

I think that the best way to make F1 more eco-friendly is to rearrange the race order to limit the amount of travel required, if a 747 flight gives out as much CO2 as a whole season of racing then organise the races into an order that requires less flights back and forth.

 

[Stevisiov]

This focus on the emissions from the race cars is almost laughable, but I guess its the cars and the drivers that get the attention, so if they (the cars) are 'greener' then it might get more fans to be 'greener'. I would bet that the emissions of 24 vehicle driven by fans to the event is greater than that of the race cars for the whole race week. And of course:

No its to improve green technolgies, F1 is cutting edge technology many things that appear in cars today have been born from racing, and that is their hope for this one, for manufacturers to improve the current biofuel technology so it can be implamented on road cars of the future.

 

[GT4 genius]

No its to improve green technolgies, F1 is cutting edge technology many things that appear in cars today have been born from racing, and that is their hope for this one, for manufacturers to improve the current biofuel technology so it can be implamented on road cars of the future.

Hear, Hear!!!!

 

[GT4 genius]

This idea of using bio-fuels is rediculous, prices in the EU are already going through the roof for related goods, eg pasta has gone up 27% in the last year, and we dont use that much bio-fuel, yet.

 

[superberkut]

Well, who knows? F1 as a series ran from 1962-1965 on 1.5L engines, so it may just work. It produced some 'fast' and innovative cars, such as the Honda RA272 (not exactly innovative, but food for thought) and the Lotus 25.

*doubtful*

All that nonsense about aerodynamics, though...

The idea of rearranging travel is an excellent idea, as well as experimenting with 'lesser' formulas.

In my opinion, there should be a neutral option for this poll, expressing both sides of the matter.

(Response to earlier posts, no opinion on biofuels)