F1s going Green....

[Sureboss]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/6668701.stm

Four wheel drive?

Engines to last 5 races?

And probably the bit I hate the most, boost functions to help overtaking

If you want to help go greener get rid of aerodynamic tunnels, they use an unbelievable ammount of power (Autosport article).

 

[Appie]

Formula 1 could run V6 engines in 2011
18 May 2007

Max Mosley has proposed a new engine rule for 2011 where Formula 1 would see their 2.4-litre V8 engines being exchanged for eco-friendly 2.2-litre turbocharged V6 engines running on biofuel. The engines could develop around 770 horsepower, which is about 100 horsepower less than F1's current engines.
Click here

If all goes as Mosley plans there will also be a restriction to the number of revs. The limit would be set at 10,000rpm, down from 19,000rpm, which would make Formula 1 must quieter than the current cars. The engines would have to last for five Grand Prix weekends, instead of the current two.

Speaking with F1 Racing magazine Mosley said: "We are in active discussions with the major manufacturers to ensure that, in future, research and development relevant only to formula one will be discouraged, whereas that which has relevance to road-car development will be encouraged. We understand that such an approach has broad support from the competing manufacturers and we will work closely with them to ensure that, in particular, the new environmentally relevant technologies that many of them are developing are made our priority."

Mosley furthermore said: "Whilst aiming to achieve these goals we will ensure that the sporting spectacle of F1 remains the same or is even improved by the new developments."

Mosley and Burkhard Göschel, chairman of the formula one manufacturers' advisory commission, submitted the proposals to the manufacturers in Formula 1.

Link

Edit: Already a thread about this

 

[Small_Fryz]

get rid of traction and stabilty control.

The best drivers should stand out not the best computers.

 

[daan]

Edit: Already a thread about this

Merged

 

[ExigeEvan]

I think the bio-fuels, and maybe even emissions standards would be good. The rest seems a step in the wrong direction.

 

[Appie]

Thnx Daan

Ontopic: Its a shame though. F1 should be the peak of Autosport and not a wannabee A1

 

[Blake]

I think Max is just throwing out any ideas he can just to see how hard the teams will fight against radical change, and then maybe by them fighting hard against the stupid stuff (identical bodywork, four-wheel-drive, etc.) they’ll be willing to just let the new engine rules go through because they’re not such radical changes (compared to identical bodywork and four-wheel-drive).

get rid of traction and stabilty control.

That happens next season.

 

[Jay]

Want Eco-friendly F1 cars?

Stop drivers taking private jets to and from races, that alone will reduce emissions just as much probably more than making Eco-friendly F1 cars.

 

[MagpieRacer]

Its weird, get rid of TC and stability control next season...then bring it back...why?

 

[Philly]

None of those three things in Sureshot's post seem to be good ideas. Four-wheel-drive would probably make the cars faster, and that seems to be counter-productive to the FIA's current efforts.

Longer lasting engines can't be good. 5 races would rob too much speed to keep the sport what it is, many, many teams would probably have huge issues with this, not to mention poor old Kimi.

Boost functions? WTF? The idea is to promote overtaking, not blowing-past-on-a-straight, like I do in GT4. Wouldn't it be boring to watch a race where every pass occurs on a straight? Then drivers probably would counter-boost and get going just as fast as the guy trying to pass. I though makign the cars have cleaner wakes would be a better idea. Indy (or something) has the boost feature, though. Anybody know how it affects their races?

 

[Blake]

Four-wheel-drive would probably make the cars faster, and that seems to be counter-productive to the FIA's current efforts.

And would make the racing probably more boring as rear traction will rarely be an issue, even in the wet.

Longer lasting engines can't be good. 5 races would rob too much speed to keep the sport what it is

They will be 2.2 litre turbocharged V6 engines with a 10,000rpm rev limit. The FIA are aiming for about 770bhp with those specs which is pretty much what we have now.

My big question is whether or not there will be a boost limit. If not, it would make for some very exciting racing. However, by the sounds of this power-boost idea they’ll be limiting the boost.

 

[Sureboss]

My Dad made a fair point about the boost idea, as he said we kind of have it now. In the sense that teams can up the revs on the cars. Though obviously this idea of a 'boost' is different to that.

 

[ExigeEvan]

Want Eco-friendly F1 cars?

Stop drivers taking private jets to and from races, that alone will reduce emissions just as much probably more than making Eco-friendly F1 cars.

So keep all the races in Europe? That way all the drivers can travel by train to their destinations.

Great idea!

 

[Metar]

Wait. So instead of teams battling for development, we'll get the same cars on every team? And instead of high-revving V8s we'll get low-revving Turbocharged V6s (which isn't that bad) on Biofuel (which damages the environment just as much)? And instead of Rwd monsters squabbling for traction in the wet, we'll get 4WD monsters doing perfect launches without a problem? And instead of reduced aero-grip and increased mechanical (which is the way to truly promote overtaking) they'll put in a boost-feature?

Seriously. Some increased ground-effects, cleaner wakes, ditching traction-control (which they're doing), and returning to stickier tyres is a much, much more efficient way of returning to competitive overtaking. If they need to reduce consumption, nobody's stopping them from reducing the size of the engines and bringing back turbos, and perhaps even with a gas-per-weekend limit (A la Group C). Actually, if they need to make F1 become more roadcar-similar, why did they ditch active suspensions? Why did they ditch CVTs? I reckon CVTs really aren't the way to go, but Active Suspensions are appearing in a lot of cars now. Same with speed-relative aerodynamics...
Biofuel harms the environment just as much as regular petrol, if not more.... Boost-buttons won't help at all - if you really want to keep your position during that straight, you'll fire yours too. Benefit = 0.

 

[Scaff]

Here's a few snippets that may be of interest...

Until the end of 2010, Formula 1 engines are 'functionally stabilised', with only minor changes being allowed from the engines that will race this year. They are naturally aspirated, 2.4-litre V8s, currently with a rev limit of 19,000rpm, and they must weigh at least 95kg. They already produce in excess of 750bhp.
The 2007 cars themselves are very similar to the 2006 machines, the key change being the exclusive use of Bridgestone tyres. In 2008 cars will become significantly wider, up from a maximum of 1800mm to a minimum of 1950mm (rising again to 1980mm in 2009), with a maximum width of 2000mm. The minimum total weight of the car (including driver) falls from the current 600kg to 550kg in 2008, and then rises again to 605kg in 2009.The two main changes already approved for 2009 are the imposition of a maximum downforce limit of 12,500N and the introduction of Kinetic Energy Recovery Systems (KERS). KERS, as currently defined, can only be connected to the rear wheels, and must deliver no more than 400kJ per lap at no more than 60kW (80bhp), which effectively means a burst (or bursts) of extra acceleration totalling less than seven seconds per lap. The braking power of a KERS is also restricted to a maximum of 60kW. While the 60kW limit on extra accelerative power may be prudent and sensible during the first season of a new technology, the other limitations seem to run counter to Formula 1's new focus on fuel efficiency and relevance to road vehicles. Even if these limits remain in force for 2009, it would seem sensible to remove, or at least raise d them for 2010.

Source - http://www.racecar-engineering.com/content/feature_02.htm


Good piece on Bio-fuel
http://www.racecar-engineering.com/images/features/16_5_6/racing_green.pdf

Most of the info posted on the BBC article is 'up for discussion', which is normally Max Mosley's language, for I want to throw a cat among the pigeons and see what happens.

Racecar Engineering has had a number of pieces on future F1 technology over the last six months, if I get a chance I will scan a few and put them up (which may take a while).


Regards

Scaff

 

[Jay]

So keep all the races in Europe? That way all the drivers can travel by train to their destinations.

Great idea!

Hehe, Nope I talking about private jets, you know like the ones Kimi can't be bothered hanging around when he retired from a race so he wants to go home straight away.

Australians already might have to run a night race to suit you Europeans ...

My big question is whether or not there will be a boost limit. If not, it would make for some very exciting racing. However, by the sounds of this power-boost idea they’ll be limiting the boost.

They would have to limit boost, if they want to control power.

 

[rovens]

I hate the 'push to pas idea'. I like Clarksons, idea for promoting overtaking. Pay the drivers only £25000 a year, then pay them a million pounds per point or per overtake.

 

[Blake]

My Dad made a fair point about the boost idea, as he said we kind of have it now. In the sense that teams can up the revs on the cars. Though obviously this idea of a 'boost' is different to that.

With the 19,000rpm rev limit that we have this year the idea of raising the revs to overtake is not really possible. I notice that on on-board shots most cars are going up to 19,000rpm for a good period of the race, so it’s not like last season when teams would turn down the revs after 10 or 15 laps.

They would have to limit boost, if they want to control power.

Indeed; the teams will have standard ECUs anyway, so it’s too easy for the FIA to control stuff like that.

 

[Omnis]

I hate the 'push to pas idea'. I like Clarksons, idea for promoting overtaking. Pay the drivers only £25000 a year, then pay them a million pounds per point or per overtake.

That wouldn't work because nobody would show up for qualifying.

 

[Metar]

That wouldn't work because nobody would show up for qualifying.

Egg-sactly. Even if you pay the winners extra - what about those who qualified 5th, juuust behind the top teams? They can only be overtaken, not the other way...