How can we fix F1?

[kikie]

We can't, money is too important in F1. Maybe it is even the most important thing. As long this won't change, F1 won't change.

 

[Clutchman83]

I may repeat what others have said because I'm too lazy to read everything, so keep that in mind. Call it my democratic right to vote.

AERO - Allow Ground effects. Hell if they want to limit downforce, or costs just issue a standard undertray. Allow wings, but make them standardized and low downforce, I don't care if they are a zero camber zero degree piece of carbon fiber good for nothin but drag. A formula 1 car just wouldn't look right without wings.

TIRES - I don't care what they look like or what compound they are, change them at least once during the race. The pit crew needs to be part of the equation and pit strategy is a cool part of racing IMHO.

PAY - Somebody had the idea of paying the drivers a piddly average yearly salary with bonuses for fast laps and passing. THAT IS THE BEST IDEA EVER!!!!!!! I wholeheartedly agree and I will follow you to the end of the world simply because you proposed that. If that were the case, we'd be seeing racing like last sunday every race, even with the current rules!!

ENGINES - I like the displacement staying the same. Keep it at, say 1.5 litre for turbo w/ boost limit, 3.0 litre for NA. I think forced induction is big time on the street, and it needs to be in F1. No Cylinder configuration restrictions or valvetrain restrictions. Allow teams to change 1 engine a weekend with no penalties. After that, you go to the back of the field if you blow another. Qualifying engine must be used for race. Traction control eliminated through the use of standardized engine management software. FIA controls the software for each individual engine, but engineers for each team are allowed to work on settings within the software under FIA supervision and recommend added features pending approval.

QUALIFYING - Old 1 hour format, way more fun to watch, and sudden freak rainstorms wouldn't cause JPM to attempt stupid passes on washed up former champs.

Thats about it for now, theres probably about a million more things to be fixed, like getting Bernie Ecclestones ass out of the head honcho seat, but we all know that won't happen till hes too old to remember his name.

 

[katana87]

Well yes some of it has been during pit stops, but there has been some races where there has been overtaking on the track like the Belgian GP and Japan yesterday.

Out of all the ones that i saw Japan was the best, to me it had the most intensity in it, and what a great overtake by alonso, left MS in the dust . too bad montoya had to crash though hope Mclarane get ahead

 

[Drift260Z]

oh yea, I have some more revisions.


Replace Bernie Ecclestone with Jackie Stewart, and replace Max Mosley with Niki Lauda. me and kylehnat(I thinkt it was) discussed it last night. Jackie Stewart is a former world champ, former team owner, and still is involved in F1 somehow. he has a love for the sport that Bernie doesn't have and would make decisions for the well-being of the sport, not the revenue. and Niki Lauda is all of the above 'cept a team owner. even in his day, he worked so hard for the saftey of the sport and also has a love not just for F1, but for racing in general which is why I think he should be head of the FIA instead of just F1. I am serious about these two reccomendations. or maybe Paul Stoddart in place of Max Mosely, haha.




rock.

 

[Famine]

PAY - Somebody had the idea of paying the drivers a piddly average yearly salary with bonuses for fast laps and passing. THAT IS THE BEST IDEA EVER!!!!!!! I wholeheartedly agree and I will follow you to the end of the world simply because you proposed that. If that were the case, we'd be seeing racing like last sunday every race, even with the current rules!!

ENGINES - I like the displacement staying the same. Keep it at, say 1.5 litre for turbo w/ boost limit, 3.0 litre for NA. I think forced induction is big time on the street, and it needs to be in F1.

F1 has always been leading technological advance, not following it. They anticipate what WILL be on the street, not imitate what IS on the street.

F1 tried turbos, got 800hp/litre from them and moved on. Now they play with short-stroke, high-revving Vees - and more recently have been working on getting them reliable. At Brazil, there were NO retirements - many cars having already covered a full race distance (and 2 sets of qualifying sessions. And 2 sets of practice sessions) once already.

300hp/litre Nasp V10s, covering ~500 miles without hitch at 90%+ (16000-19000rpm). Imagine that kind of technology filtering down to road cars...

 

[Danoff]

Lots and lots of regulations need to be eliminated. Engine changing should be able to be done at will without penalty - even during a race if possible. Tires should be whatever the teams want.

There are a few regulations that make sense. Car should fit in grid space. Car must have an internal combustion engine. Car must have a human driver. Car must not fly.

These kinds of rules make sense - aside from that everything should be fair game.

I'd like to see longer races actually, with more cars... perhaps allowing each manufacturer another car in the race would help (I don't like the idea of letting them have the shotgun approach - putting 50 cars in the race etc. etc.).

But this is all somewhat beside the point. The REAL thing that could put F1 back on the map...

dare I say it.


See I don't want to give this away.

I might want to use it to make money someday. I mean this is a brilliant idea that is certain to generate someone a ton of cash.

But will it be me that gets it? Probably not. I don't have the resources or the guts to put this in play....


So I might as well just spill the beans. Let everyone in on the brilliance - if not for any other reason that to increase the odds of me getting to see this in action.

Ok.

I guess I'll tell you.


Lean close. I'll whisper it.



closer.








closer.





ok. here it is.






In order for forumula 1 to get back on the map they have to...




make a new track that....



has an upsidown segment.





Seriously. That's what they should do. On a straightaway they need to have an unsidown portion so that all of the cars doing 180 mph down the straight can go completely inverted and drive upsidown. EVERYONE and their mother would tune in to see that. You'd see sponsorship out the wazzo!!! I don't just mean a loop either, I mean upsidown for a good ways down the straight. Maybe they could put sand or something soft under there in case someone turned to hard and lost speed and grip and came unstuck.

Ok there it is. I can't believe I just let that gem out on the internet. There go my millions.

 

[pSI civic]

longer races is a great idea why the hell didnt i say that. 305km is short. how about a race that is 450km. thats much better.

now to make a serious argument of of a silly idea... the upside down race track. sure the cars make anough downforce to drive upside down. 3 times the weight of the car is great. BUT, there are six problems.

1. drivers would no be able to take such a sudden switch during the race. lets say they are driving along at 180mph. by suddenly being inverted at say 4G'S ever lap this would lead to the drivers getting sick and losing focus.

2. the track would have to be made similar to a freeway which would lead to it being very heavy and hard to maintain. it could be easy to see it falling if improper care is given.

3. by being contructed like a freeway there would be supporting beams on either side. if a car had engine failure a tire failure or did not have the right speed entiring they could run into bringing the car to a complete stop. as they say, its not the speed that kills its the sudden stop that does.

4. if the car does not run into one of the support beams but has a similar failure no sand in the world is soft enough to stop the car from becoming a snow blow and burring the car and driver under it. the car would fall right on top of the drivers head so it would be hard to protect againts a 200mph fall and drag on the head. the roll bar just couldnt take it.

5. since f1 cars are the only cars in the world that can drive upside down, the track would never be used by any other cars to race. if it were to be used an extra straight would have to be made and there isnt space for that.

6. to put it simply, there just isnt enough space for the transition from flat to upside down. the track leading up to the flip would have to be very long and gradualy increase its banking. we cant have that long of track in the space we can use.

now on to the idea of not paying the drivers near as much. why one earth would they drive in f1 if they hardly get paid anything to do so? they put there life in danger every time they go out there. no one on earth would do that for a small amount of money a year when there are other series out there like the irl or champ car that would pay more. even nascar pays more then the figure that was said.

 

[Clutchman83]

Well, okay, pay them more than 90'000 a year, but set the bonuses up so that anybody can earn them and they would be substantial. I love the idea, but we all know it will never come true because the FIA doesn't handle driver pay, and they certainly can't go handing out billions in driver bonuses every year to make it worth it anyways. So yeah, I know its a silly idea, but it would be so cool if it worked!

As for the engines, forgive me if I am wrong but arent the 3.0 litre V-10 engines the only displacement and cylinder config, and atmospheric aspiration the only induction method allowed under the rules? Yes those engines have been refined like crazy, but I would call that a necessity of the sport rather than leading technology into the future. What would be really cool is if they allowed small turbines that eliminated the gearbox, but kept the size down so that piston engines could be competetive. On that thought, the turbine would probably be the prefferred engine due to simplicity and reliability, so maybe it wouldn't be such a good idea. I don't know, it would be something to hear screaming piston engines mixed with wicked turbo hiss, and the roar of a turbine all come streaking down the track at once.

 

[pSI civic]

the turbine idea was used in the 70s a little bit. its a worthless idea really. turbines use twice the fuel of piston engines and since f1 races on road courses and not high speed ovals the turbine could never get to its peak so it would never be as fast as the piston engines.

NOW I HAVE A GREAT IDEA.

make the drivers get out of the car during the pit and help with the pit work. be it changing tires or refueling.

 

[kensei]

longer races is a great idea why the hell didnt i say that. 305km is short. how about a race that is 450km. thats much better.

now to make a serious argument of of a silly idea... the upside down race track. sure the cars make anough downforce to drive upside down. 3 times the weight of the car is great. BUT, there are six problems.

1. drivers would no be able to take such a sudden switch during the race. lets say they are driving along at 180mph. by suddenly being inverted at say 4G'S ever lap this would lead to the drivers getting sick and losing focus.

2. the track would have to be made similar to a freeway which would lead to it being very heavy and hard to maintain. it could be easy to see it falling if improper care is given.

3. by being contructed like a freeway there would be supporting beams on either side. if a car had engine failure a tire failure or did not have the right speed entiring they could run into bringing the car to a complete stop. as they say, its not the speed that kills its the sudden stop that does.

4. if the car does not run into one of the support beams but has a similar failure no sand in the world is soft enough to stop the car from becoming a snow blow and burring the car and driver under it. the car would fall right on top of the drivers head so it would be hard to protect againts a 200mph fall and drag on the head. the roll bar just couldnt take it.

5. since f1 cars are the only cars in the world that can drive upside down, the track would never be used by any other cars to race. if it were to be used an extra straight would have to be made and there isnt space for that.

6. to put it simply, there just isnt enough space for the transition from flat to upside down. the track leading up to the flip would have to be very long and gradualy increase its banking. we cant have that long of track in the space we can use.

now on to the idea of not paying the drivers near as much. why one earth would they drive in f1 if they hardly get paid anything to do so? they put there life in danger every time they go out there. no one on earth would do that for a small amount of money a year when there are other series out there like the irl or champ car that would pay more. even nascar pays more then the figure that was said.

 

[Danoff]

longer races is a great idea why the hell didnt i say that. 305km is short. how about a race that is 450km. thats much better.

now to make a serious argument of of a silly idea... the upside down race track. sure the cars make anough downforce to drive upside down. 3 times the weight of the car is great. BUT, there are six problems.

1. drivers would no be able to take such a sudden switch during the race. lets say they are driving along at 180mph. by suddenly being inverted at say 4G'S ever lap this would lead to the drivers getting sick and losing focus.

I assume you've made all the necessary calculations. Mind showing them to me?

2. the track would have to be made similar to a freeway which would lead to it being very heavy and hard to maintain. it could be easy to see it falling if improper care is given.

Again, you've drawn up plans for the construction? I don't see why support beams are necessary, especially given suspension bridge construction. I wonder if Duke has any civil engineering background.

3. by being contructed like a freeway there would be supporting beams on either side. if a car had engine failure a tire failure or did not have the right speed entiring they could run into bringing the car to a complete stop. as they say, its not the speed that kills its the sudden stop that does.

Above.

4. if the car does not run into one of the support beams but has a similar failure no sand in the world is soft enough to stop the car from becoming a snow blow and burring the car and driver under it. the car would fall right on top of the drivers head so it would be hard to protect againts a 200mph fall and drag on the head. the roll bar just couldnt take it.

I'm sure we can think of something.

5. since f1 cars are the only cars in the world that can drive upside down, the track would never be used by any other cars to race. if it were to be used an extra straight would have to be made and there isnt space for that.

We'd create a bypass that didn't go upsidown for other races... You know, it's almost as though you're not trying to figure out how to make this work.

6. to put it simply, there just isnt enough space for the transition from flat to upside down. the track leading up to the flip would have to be very long and gradualy increase its banking. we cant have that long of track in the space we can use.

Again, calculations?

 

[High-Test]

hmm... Bring back the old Spa,

Bring back the entire Nurburgring, (not just nordschliefe)

Bring back the DF series. Or, reincarnate the DF series.

Ground Effects!!!!! Those are by far the coolest cars ever in F1!

Get rid of Bernie. Seriously. The way he handled the USGP was dispicible.

I'm all for installing Jackie Stewart and Niki Lauda in place of Bernie and Max.

 

[kensei]

hmm... Bring back the old Spa,

Bring back the entire Nurburgring, (not just nordschliefe)

Bring back the DF series. Or, reincarnate the DF series.

Ground Effects!!!!! Those are by far the coolest cars ever in F1!

Get rid of Bernie. Seriously. The way he handled the USGP was dispicible.

I'm all for installing Jackie Stewart and Niki Lauda in place of Bernie and Max.

 

[Famine]

now on to the idea of not paying the drivers near as much. why one earth would they drive in f1 if they hardly get paid anything to do so? they put there life in danger every time they go out there. no one on earth would do that for a small amount of money a year when there are other series out there like the irl or champ car that would pay more. even nascar pays more then the figure that was said.

Really? Let us take Michael Schumacher as an example. He gets paid ~£25 million a year by Ferrari, with another £40 million in sponsorships - so you'd have to ignore the fact that his salary is dwarfed by his endorsements to start with. So he gets ~£25 million a year whether he finishes first in the Drivers' Championship or plum last (like in 1997).

Some cynics may well point to Jacques Villeneuve's colossal salary and comparative lack of pace and ambition (and ability) to see why this isn't good for the sport.

Now, let us invoke my new salary regimen:

Pay the drivers £50,000 a year, with a £250,000 bonus for every pass for position they make (on someone not on their team) and a £500,000 bonus per point.

So, Schumacher's wage is:

Salary: £50,000
Pass bonus: (unknown right now)
Points bonus: 62 x £500,000 = £31 million
Total: £31,050,000

Compared to his current salary of £25,000,000. And that's without his bonus for passing people AND in a crap season for him. And even if you ignore the £5 million he'd have earned for 10 points at Indianapolis, he'd be still more than a million up without that pass bonus.


Incentive enough?


Let's go one step further - take 1997. Schumacher had 78 points when he deliberately slammed Villeneuve off the track. He was disqualified and stripped of all his points. That's a £39 million hit he just took. Would he do it again, knowing that there's half his annual salary on the table? Would you risk half your annual salary?

So you can see it's also a safety issue too. Drivers want to overtake to get cash - but they don't want to take TOO many risks, in case they lose it. On the current salaries, drivers get too complacent - the Cobbler got his full salary in 1997, despite no return for the team...

 

[James2097]

I'd always wanted an upside down track down the straight. Its hardly a unique idea for people with imaginations and an interest in motorsport...

Who cares about whether its really possible, its the dreamers that eventually invent the future. I want full on Wipeout style AG-racing, but thats really not gonna happen anytime soon!

I'd seriously let them do anything they want, as long as each team doesn't kill more than a driver a year.

 

[kensei]

now on to the idea of not paying the drivers near as much. why one earth would they drive in f1 if they hardly get paid anything to do so? they put there life in danger every time they go out there. no one on earth would do that for a small amount of money a year when there are other series out there like the irl or champ car that would pay more. even nascar pays more then the figure that was said.

Wait wait....Famine nailed the point home but wait...

F1 drivers don't get paid well compared to NASCAR or Chump Car drivers? hahahahahahaah. Dude, what are you smoking? Unless you are a big name in NASCAR you are making peanuts, even at the nextel cup level. Your mid to back of the pack nextel cup driver (jsut driver, not the team) is making $100,000 a year if that after expenses and what-not. Busch and regional series drivers are lucky if they even break even during the season. Hell, Jeff Gordon or Jr. ONLY make about $6-10 million a year (sans sponsor deals). Your average F1 driver makes about that. Schumi, Kimi and Ralf make triple that. As I remember from F1 Magazine's Driver salary chart from a few issues back, the lowest paid driver is either de la Rosa or Massa...coming in around $500,000 per year. Any non star in NASCAR would love to make that.

Chump car...hahahaha. Those guys are lucky if they even get a car to race money is so tight over there.

IRL...again unless you are Wheldon, Dixon or Kanaan you are making peanuts.

F1 drivers are currently the most well paid drivers in motorsport...maybe even close to the top of athletes in general (as a whole)

What are you smoking?

----

EDIT: I went and dug up the F1 driver salary post I made last month, I rock I know....

According to the August issue of F1 racing, driver's salaries are as follows (in USD);

MS $35million (+ another $40 in endorsements and such)
Ralf S $25million (scary what a last name gets ya.)
Kimi $22million (Plus $1mill per victory capped at 2)
JPM $15million (Plus $1mill per victory capped at 2)
Trulli $10million
Rubens $10million
Fisi $9million
Alonso $9million
Button $8million
Webber $4million
Massa $2.5million
Wurz $2.5million
Sato $2million
JV $2million
DC $1.5million (plus points bonuses)
Heidfeld $1million
de la Rosa $500,000

The rest are between $350,000 and $0 (pay drivers)

So that is half the grid over $8million US as a base salary (sans endorsements)....pretty much the top end for Jr and Jeff Gordon per season in NASCAR, the USA's richest motorsport. The rest of the grid STILL make more than you average NASCAR, Chump car, IRL, dirt track driver...even the F1 driver's slumming it at $350,000 per year...

Just because you say it doesn't make it true.

 

[Omnis]

What do WRC drivers get paid, again? I once heard Carlos Sainz was the most paid athlete in Spain a while ago.


...I'm sure that's not the case anymore.

 

[Blake]

1. drivers would no be able to take such a sudden switch during the race. lets say they are driving along at 180mph. by suddenly being inverted at say 4G'S ever lap this would lead to the drivers getting sick and losing focus.

Any proof?

2. the track would have to be made similar to a freeway which would lead to it being very heavy and hard to maintain. it could be easy to see it falling if improper care is given.

3. by being contructed like a freeway there would be supporting beams on either side. if a car had engine failure a tire failure or did not have the right speed entiring they could run into bringing the car to a complete stop. as they say, its not the speed that kills its the sudden stop that does.

Why would it have to be contructed like this? Hell, even if it was, when was the last time you saw a freeway fall down?

4. if the car does not run into one of the support beams but has a similar failure no sand in the world is soft enough to stop the car from becoming a snow blow and burring the car and driver under it. the car would fall right on top of the drivers head so it would be hard to protect againts a 200mph fall and drag on the head. the roll bar just couldnt take it.

The roll structures can support a load of 50,000 newtons laterally, 60,000 newtons longitudinally in a rearward direction and 90,000 newtons vertically. The roll structurs are designed to be able to be able to take falls like that. F1 cars are designed to be as safe as anything possibly can be at 200MPH.

5. since f1 cars are the only cars in the world that can drive upside down, the track would never be used by any other cars to race. if it were to be used an extra straight would have to be made and there isnt space for that.

I believe even Champ Cars generate enough downforce to do that. Anyway, as danoff said, you could have a bi-pass for other types of motorsport.

]6. to put it simply, there just isnt enough space for the transition from flat to upside down. the track leading up to the flip would have to be very long and gradualy increase its banking. we cant have that long of track in the space we can use.

Err, what danoff said…

Blake

 

[pSI civic]

so what are you guys going to do then? make a way for dirt to float so you can lay track down on it? seriously what is the track going to be on guys? and what, you think humans can keep focus for say, 60 laps when they keep doing barrel rolls? how fast do you think they could make the switch? at 200mph everything goes by so fast one mistake and there you go.

 

[qwazy|06]

i think formula 1 could use an indy500 calibur
event.

in the middle of their calender, they should head
over to le mans, hit up la sarthe for a semi-enduro.
60+ laps or somethin' that's above and beyond
normal race distances that truly tests the reliability
of a car and the endurance of a driver.

this could possibly even allow reserve drivers and
testers to get in on the fun.

by having an enduro in the calender, you could switch
drivers mid-way or however they want. lots of players
will get at least a little race experience that seems to
be so oh-so valuable in f1. de la rosa and wurz could
both be 2nd drivers and get stints, zonta, davidson,
all those guys and it'll even give some of the young
drivers in all the formula renaults and **** the shots
they could benefit from.

 

[pSI civic]

f1 has monoco has their big event.

now if they took out those wussy little chicanes on la sarthe that idea might hold more water.

 

[Blake]

so what are you guys going to do then? make a way for dirt to float so you can lay track down on it? seriously what is the track going to be on guys? and what, you think humans can keep focus for say, 60 laps when they keep doing barrel rolls? how fast do you think they could make the switch? at 200mph everything goes by so fast one mistake and there you go.

Have you ever seen a pipe? If not I’ll even make a little demonstration for you:



Simple, easy. Of course the diameter would need to be wide enough so that F1 cars can do the roll without the cars being too unstable, but that's easy enough. At the bottom, there would be sand, or foam, or something soft that the cars would have to avoid so that they can go fast, but something that will be soft enough to cushion much of the impact if a car becomes unstable and leaves the survace of the pipe.

Also, designers complain enough about the 20 seconds of full throttle that cars must do at Indy, imagine if they had to do 6km of full throttle…

And with Monaco, I think it would be good if they made the race 300km instead of the 260km it is now.

Blake

 

[pSI civic]

so how are the fans going to see the cars in the pipe? there would be no point in seeing it live as you couldnt see it. i guess you could drill small holes for cameras in the sides of it but its not live. there would have to be a rule in place to keep the drivers from driving near the bottom as well. when you get right down to it, who on earth has the balls to drive a car upside down at those speeds?

so no one liked the idea of making the driver help with pit work huh. i thought that was a good idea.

 

[Blake]

Make the non-tar pits of the pipe out of clear perspex or something…

And the idea of the driver getting out to help with pit-work is stupid. The drivers take 5 seconds to get out of the cars, and about 20 to get in and be properly secured etc. It makes no sense…

Blake

 

[pSI civic]

fine then heres an idea. lets mount machine guns on the nose anti-tank rockets on the rear wing and saw blades on the wheels. wouldnt that be nice. there would be lots of passing then.

talk about a stupid idea.

 

[Omnis]

Upside down track is stupid. However, someone needs to make tracks with tons of inclines and declines. Maybe like a front straight that goes straight uphill, and the winding, curvy, banked downhill turns.

I don't want to say touge-inspired, but it'd be similar anyway. It would make for some creative passing opportunities, and the uphill straight would test the car's power and aero.

 

[pSI civic]

you've just described spa. the old nurburgring as well.

 

[Blake]

Upside down track is stupid.

Yeah, but wouldn't it be amazing?

And to your other idea, I agree. Something like Bathurst (I wish!).

Blake

 

[Omnis]

No, I haven't.

Know why? Because they're not EXTREMEEEEEEEE enough!

edit: That was in reference to civic's comments.

 

[pSI civic]

so having it rain on half of spa with sato driving isnt extream enough for ya.