FIA bans radio chat about car and driver performance in F1

  • Thread starter Thread starter Wardez
  • 89 comments
  • 4,651 views
Not sure if this has been said before, but I do think banning some of this might or might not be meant to save face in this era of the painfully apparent "racing" becoming "driving to a delta". I do think it might be nice not to rub it in when that's what it looks like, and we also won't have to hear "slow down, I'm not going to tell you again" and that kind of crap.

Wardez
Not allowed

- Informing a driver about his own performance in sectors and where he can improve
Click to expand...

One way this is unfavorable comes to mind, way back when Fisi drove for Renault, I seem to recall radio saying "Giancarlo, you lose a HUGE amount of time in the middle sector, it is a massive, massive amount of time - one second." I agree with cutting the minute micro-managing in each corner though, "Lewis is braking later than you in turn 11", that kind of thing.
 
Am I the only one that seems to think a unnecessary change like this will just make things more complicated? (In a series that's already overcomplicated)

Also, I don't really find the radio chatter annoying. Sorry if people can't stand hearing a driver told to go faster, but I don't mind. I don't see why its such a big deal, especially when almost every racing series also has massive amounts of radio chatter. Seriously, who's idea was this? I can't recall this issue being made a huge deal by the fans or drivers.
 
People just think it's amatuerish when a driver is asking how they are supposed to do their job and I think a few of the SkySportsF1 drivers disliked it as well, of course it isn't and they are just trying to extract every bit of performance.
 
FormulaKimball
One way this is unfavorable comes to mind, way back when Fisi drove for Renault, I seem to recall radio saying "Giancarlo, you lose a HUGE amount of time in the middle sector, it is a massive, massive amount of time - one second." I agree with cutting the minute micro-managing in each corner though, "Lewis is braking later than you in turn 11", that kind of thing.
Click to expand...
If it's in qualifying, why not save it until the driver pits?
 
This is a silly idea. Is the FIA going for the record amount of silly ideas introduced in a season? This is even less enforceable than no team orders was.

If they don't like radio chatter, cut off all radio contact with the car. Telemetry can be stored onboard and downloaded when in the pits. Information can be conveyed via flags or the pit board. Strategies can be formed before the race, or the driver can make up his own mind as he goes.

It'd probably go a long way towards shaking up the racing, something they at least say they're after. The radio messages are cute to have on the TV, but they're by no means necessary.
 
Imari
If they don't like radio chatter, cut off all radio contact with the car. Telemetry can be stored onboard and downloaded when in the pits. Information can be conveyed via flags or the pit board. Strategies can be formed before the race, or the driver can make up his own mind as he goes.
Click to expand...
Maybe that could have been done once upon a time, but cars are now so complex that they can't be driven without support from the pits. The FIA just wants drivers to actually drive, rather than be told what to do.
 
prisonermonkeys
Maybe that could have been done once upon a time, but cars are now so complex that they can't be driven without support from the pits. The FIA just wants drivers to actually drive, rather than be told what to do.
Click to expand...

I don't know about can't be driven, but certainly they can't be driven as well without pit support. But that's sort of the point, no? Radios do break sometimes, and the cars don't seem to just stop working, it's just that the driver can't be notified if there is a problem (except via pit boards or flags).

Even if they are undriveable without pit support, I assume that they could make them driveable without pit support if they wanted. It would just mean that the rule change couldn't be pushed through mid-season. Which is fine, I rather think changing rules mid-season is a crock anyway.
 
That's idiotic. It's part of the reason I like NASCAR more than other series; less stupidity.
 
JMoney689
That's idiotic. It's part of the reason I like NASCAR more than other series; less stupidity.
Click to expand...
I think it was a stupid idea for NASCAR to implement the chase for the cup (2006-2013), chase for the cup 2.0 (2014-), green-white-checkards, reducing engine power for next season, allowing drivers to wreck others without getting penalized, ban F1 style telemetry, fly back and forth between the regions of the us (Daytona Beach, Florida to Phoenix, Arizona ; Bristol to Auto club to Martinsville). NASCAR gets the award for most stupidity.
 
Great, someone just had to bring NASCAR into this.

Can we just agree that both sanctioning bodies had made beyond stupid decisions and move the hell on?
 
ukfan758
I think it was a stupid idea for NASCAR to implement the chase for the cup (2006-2013), chase for the cup 2.0 (2014-), green-white-checkards, reducing engine power for next season, allowing drivers to wreck others without getting penalized, ban F1 style telemetry, fly back and forth between the regions of the us (Daytona Beach, Florida to Phoenix, Arizona ; Bristol to Auto club to Martinsville). NASCAR gets the award for most stupidity.
Click to expand...

You clearly have no understanding of NASCAR. You didn't even mention the COT, which is the only stupid decision they've made in recent years.
 
ukfan758
I think it was a stupid idea for NASCAR to implement the chase for the cup (2006-2013), chase for the cup 2.0 (2014-), green-white-checkards, reducing engine power for next season, allowing drivers to wreck others without getting penalized, ban F1 style telemetry, fly back and forth between the regions of the us (Daytona Beach, Florida to Phoenix, Arizona ; Bristol to Auto club to Martinsville). NASCAR gets the award for most stupidity.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say they get the award of most stupid, I'd have given that to the way Indy Car was being run before the regulation switch a couple years ago. I put NASCAR and F1 in the same pot to be honest on levels of business model stupidity driving the actual sports action on track.

However, this (radio ban) to me is a bit questionable I don't see the cause of banning it other than to increase driver responsibility(which is good), but if that was the case then why did the same group (FIA) need to over-complicate things to begin with? You don't tell a group of engineers to build the most complicated power units around next to that of Le Mans which I'd argue are more so, and then tell those same engineers "by the way you only get to use 5 crucial parts before you get hit hard with penalties...oh and the year after we're going to decrease it". And then let's not get into the fuel flow issues as well which would require engineers since the drop of the season to constantly suggest to drivers what settings at what time need to be done so the delta could be met.

Further more why did they think this was a priority rather than axing the double points which in reasoning is counter to this move, or the little show gimmicks for next year like plank sparklers...

Also FIA has said that cryptic messages are a violation of the ban.
 
LMSCorvetteGT2
Further more why did they think this was a priority rather than axing the double points which in reasoning is counter to this move, or the little show gimmicks for next year like plank sparklers...
Click to expand...
When it comes to double points, the question we have to ask "who benefits?" - and the answer is "the broadcasters". I've suspected for a while now that broadcasters have been putting pressure on FOM and the FIA to do something because the championship is being wrapped up three or four races from the end of the season, and people are tuning out, but the broadcasters are still paying for it.
 
This rule would make sense if they were driving simple go-karts instead of the most complicated racing machines in the world. Also, someone telling you what to do and actually doing it are two separate things. Otherwise, all of us would be racing in F1.

If the FIA really wants the sport to be more about driver skill, there are far better approaches than this silliness. 👎
 
JMoney689
You clearly have no understanding of NASCAR. You didn't even mention the COT, which is the only stupid decision they've made in recent years.
Click to expand...
Introducing the Gen 5 cars wasn't stupid, that was done to advance safety. If it weren't for that, I don't think Michael McDowel would have survived his horrifying crash at Texas in 2008 nor do I think Elliot Sadler would have survived his Pocono crash or they would have been seriously injured. What WAS stupid was introducing the boat load of gimmicks to the sport since 2003. I'm done with this nascar debate.
 
ukfan758
Introducing the Gen 5 cars wasn't stupid, that was done to advance safety. If it weren't for that, I don't think Michael McDowel would have survived his horrifying crash at Texas in 2008 nor do I think Elliot Sadler would have survived his Pocono crash or they would have been seriously injured. What WAS stupid was introducing the boat load of gimmicks to the sport since 2003. I'm done with this nascar debate.
Click to expand...

Suit yourself.
 
prisonermonkeys
If it's in qualifying, why not save it until the driver pits?
Click to expand...

That wasn't in qually though, I think it was during the race - that's what makes it funny, along with the tone when the guy said "lose a HUUUUUUGE amount of time, it is a massive, massive amount" LOL
 
what would be better is if we didnt have to hear every single radio message, F1 seems to be the only series that allows everyone to hear all the radio talk.
 
Legro
I think that these requlations are way too complicated. Just bann all radio chat or don't bann it at all.
Click to expand...

100% agree. This regulation is stupid and just another way of raising suspicion levels and add another full set of "grey areas" around regulatory issues. If anything they should ban radio transmissions entirely or limit them to safety warnings. Or allow them all, whatever.
 
The pit stops will probably end up being half hour long, while the driver and team go through a inrace briefing about where to save time and what to do.
 
All this means is that the over-radio descriptions are going to be more cryptic:

"The rooster is in the hayloft" (brake a little later before the hairpin)
"Pea Sherman Forty-two Wallaby Lane" (5th place is catching up two-tenths per lap)
"I nominated my DJ for President" (your teammate is faster than you)
"Ta key in oh yay" (breakdance on your car after victory)
"Go really fast, pass everyone, complete all the laps, and please don't crash into anyone" (Standard Caterham Prayer)
 
A drive through penalty for any stupid or not easily understandable radio message?
 
Engineer:
If I start my phrase with "OK (name of driver), push hard now" that means you should adjust the PU settings to setting 21A.
If I just say "(name of driver) push hard now" that'll mean 22A.
If I say "push push push" just use 32BB and pray the car doesn't explode.
We won't use "Hammer time" because it's been used before and Charlie might get suspicious.

Driver: Ok. If I say "I can't push harder without destroying the tyres" that'll mean I need info on optimum brake balance and BBW settings. How will you tell me that?"

Engineer: Easy.
If I say "copy that, do your best" that means one tick forward.
If I say "absolute best" that's two ticks forward.
If, however, I say "Don't worry about that" that means you shouldn't change anything.
If I say "OK" that's one tick rearward
If I say "OK, Understood" that's 2.
 
I was thinking the same thing.

"Your pit window is in two laps"
"You can pit in two laps"
"Optimum window in two laps"
"Pit in two"
"Come into the pits in two laps"
"We'll be ready for you in two laps"

That's six different messages about race strategy you can code into those sentences.

Just like the "Team Orders" ban, there's little you can do to get around a sufficiently obscure code except to ban communication altogether.
 
There's just one small problem - sooner or later, "pit in two" is going to stop meaning "use setting number two" and start meaning "pit in two".
 

Latest Posts

Back