How would you change F1?

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

But the problem is that if you place explosive charges in the safety cell, they're right next to the driver.

Just like a pilot has them right next to themselves. That is the idea behind a canopy is similar to that of a fighter jet.

 

[Seismica]

But the problem is that if you place explosive charges in the safety cell, they're right next to the driver. And since they would have to be powerful enough to free the canopy from the cockpit, there's a risk that they would blow the driver's head off.

They can be designed in such a way so that they only explode in a particular direction, it isn't that difficult. Claymore mines work on the same principle, as does the armour on modern on tanks (Explode away from the tank on impact to counter the explosive that hit it).

However, when this activates on a jet fighter it flies off, carried away by the wind as the jet is moving at high speed. When an F1 car sets on fire it is usually almost stationary. It could obstruct the driver getting out still, or it could hit him on the way back down etc.

Also as they do not have ejector seats then there is a chance it could set off accidentally, either by the driver if it is driver controlled, or by a faulty heat sensor.

There would be so many teething problems and costs involved for very little gain (Other than aerodynamically).

 

[Northstar]

Just like a pilot has them right next to themselves. That is the idea behind a canopy is similar to that of a fighter jet.

1) Jet fighter cockpits are much larger than an F1 car's cockpit.

2) The canopy is carried away much faster as planes travel faster than F1 cars, they also have ejection seats which launch about a millisecond later carrying the pilot away from the explosion.

3) Jet fighters aren't made of 100% carbon fiber like F1 cars, I don't think they would hold up to an explosion very well.

4) The canopy could very well go flying into the stands, that wouldn't be good. To prevent that from happening they would have to go the Harrier route and have plastic explosives in the glass to make it shatter which would only put the driver in more harm.

 

[Ardius]

^Thats a Hawk, not a Harrier.

 

[Northstar]

^Thats a Hawk, not a Harrier.

I'll admit I have 0 knowledge of aircraft other than very basic things.

 

[Sick Cylinder]

Tired Tyres said it all on page one of this thread - the answer to Formula 1's problems is to increase the length of braking distances as it is under braking that virtually all overtaking used to occur. The easiest way to achieve that is to reduce grip. Also if you reduce grip and drag by abolishing wings you greatly increase the difference bewteen the speed on the straight and the speed round the corners, further increasing braking distances and increasing overtaking opportunities. By getting rid of the wings you don't have bits breaking off the cars leaving debris on the track and disrupting the racing.

For anyone who hasn't watched F1 for enough decades to remember when there used to be real over taking, remember the best races - they were always on a damp track when grip was significantly reduced.

Another useful benefit of reducing downforce, grip and increasing braking distances is that the cars travel much more slowly round the corners and it is the corners where drivers are much more likely to crash and the slower the speed the less the danger.

re engines - if they have to be relevant to modern cars make them turbo diesels.

Please abolish the pitstops - completely unneccessary - and unfortunately an artificial creation to guarantee sponsors a specific amount of TV time - there is an agreement that cars must be shown while stationery in the pits for a set amount of time.

 

[Northstar]

Please abolish the pitstops - completely unneccessary - and unfortunately an artificial creation to guarantee sponsors a specific amount of TV time - there is an agreement that cars must be shown while stationery in the pits for a set amount of time.

Link?

Most teams only spend about 10 seconds a race in the pits so I doubt there is an agreement saying that.

I personally like pit stops(as well as 2 compounds) as it brings strategy to the race.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

They can be designed in such a way so that they only explode in a particular direction, it isn't that difficult. Claymore mines work on the same principle, as does the armour on modern on tanks (Explode away from the tank on impact to counter the explosive that hit it).

It's still too dangerous - damage to the affected parts could change the direction of the blast.

I don't know why people are so keen on the idea of canopies.

 

[IceMan PJN]

Lots of power, not enough grip and no downforce in any meaningful sense. Make the cars hard to drive.

Add to that a clutch pedal and a stick shift and no pitstops and I would be happy.

So, essentially we're wanting to fix a sport that's been the premier of automotive technology by making it more primitive.

Here come the most expensive Amish buggies on Earth!

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

So, essentially we're wanting to fix a sport that's been the premier of automotive technology by making it more primitive.

Here come the most expensive Amish buggies on Earth!

Yeah from the looks of it you have it right, especially when some of us post more ambitious things. Then again that's why I've shifted more time toward Sport Car series than F1 as of last year.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

It's still too dangerous - damage to the affected parts could change the direction of the blast.

I don't know why people are so keen on the idea of canopies.

Truth is I have to agree it could work especially since carbon fiber can stand up to a small blast charge. However the cars are at a stand still when fires occur the canopy would have to have some kind of angled or side blow out to make it work correctly. The car would virtually never be moving when the detachment takes place so I can see why it's not a good idea. However, I tend to bring it up just to get under those who say "it would destroy open wheel racing" or my personal favorite "leave closed top cars too Sport Car racing".

Anyways that is that then.

 

[TheCracker]

I understand all this I'm just saying it would make more excitement, cost caps could also be placed. People treat F1 like it is the uncontrollable cost monster, then how does sport car racing work. How can I see a V12 and I4 turbo go head to head? There are ways to do it and F1 can aline themselves with that and not act like the Elitist motorsport. It's not impossible and we know this. Merc is well known for their V8s too. There is alot of Tech that can be used and learned for any engine that could trickle down and make things better for each format. It doesn't have to be limited.

Sports car racing works because the engines are road car based. The engines have already been developed to an extent.

Throwing engine regs open to different formats will just escalate costs. Ferrari develop a V12. Merc a V8, Cosworth a V10, Renault a Turbo four and VW/Audi join as an engine supplier with a twin turbo W6. They all produce approx 750bhp. All spend hundreds of millions on development, but two seasons down the line it becomes obvious that one format has many advantages over the others and the car it powers is running away with championships. So the rest drop what they've done and either spend hundreds of millions more on a new engine, which copies the successful one's format, or they cut their loses and drop out altogether. That's what will happen. It's happened many times before.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Sports car racing works because the engines are road car based. The engines have already been developed to an extent.

Throwing engine regs open to different formats will just escalate costs. Ferrari develop a V12. Merc a V8, Cosworth a V10, Renault a Turbo four and VW/Audi join as an engine supplier with a twin turbo W6. They all produce approx 750bhp. All spend hundreds of millions on development, but two seasons down the line it becomes obvious that one format has many advantages over the others and the car it powers is running away with championships. So the rest drop what they've done and either spend hundreds of millions more on a new engine, which copies the successful one's format, or they cut their loses and drop out altogether. That's what will happen. It's happened many times before.

Yes and that is how things evolve, look I'm just throwing an idea out there and I'm more happy to see turbo engines coming back, but the rules are getting cut more and more each year and teams are complaining. Now teams are much to blaim cause the attribute innovation to cheating. Double Decker Diffuser...that must surely not be fair, it was fair for a season but the FIA ruled it out for next season. Also these are big manufactures that spend millions on engine development in the first place for their road cars to begin with so doing so for a sport to gain trickle down effects and possibly other customers (small teams) isn't going to hurt them. The small teams would only have to do what they do now, and that is find a engine provider (cosworth, pure, etc.)

It's not an impossibility and it is also plausible to make it happen, what makes things worse is when innovation is made and the regs cut down on it next season, then teams must work that much harder and spend money a bit much more just so they can figure out a way to be fast or just as fast as the season prior, much less faster.

I see where you're coming from and I agree, but you and I both know that certain teams would welcome such a open regulation, especially seeing that teams have experience with this (at least all engine providers that is) and probably would still go the simplest of routes because of what history shows.

 

[TheCracker]

Yes and that is how things evolve, look I'm just throwing an idea out there and I'm more happy to see turbo engines coming back, but the rules are getting cut more and more each year and teams are complaining. Now teams are much to blaim cause the attribute innovation to cheating. Double Decker Diffuser...that must surely not be fair, it was fair for a season but the FIA ruled it out for next season. Also these are big manufactures that spend millions on engine development in the first place for their road cars to begin with so doing so for a sport to gain trickle down effects and possibly other customers (small teams) isn't going to hurt them. The small teams would only have to do what they do now, and that is find a engine provider (cosworth, pure, etc.)

It's not an impossibility and it is also plausible to make it happen, what makes things worse is when innovation is made and the regs cut down on it next season, then teams must work that much harder and spend money a bit much more just so they can figure out a way to be fast or just as fast as the season prior, much less faster.

I see where you're coming from and I agree, but you and I both know that certain teams would welcome such a open regulation, especially seeing that teams have experience with this (at least all engine providers that is) and probably would still go the simplest of routes because of what history shows.

Like i said, it's the engine manufacturers who asked for the regulations in the first place. They don't want to be spending billions, but they do want the prestige that comes with being associated with F1. But they also want those engines to be relevant and they want to appear to be increasingly environmentally sensitive.

F1 has always been about innovation and teams who find loop holes fully expect those loop holes to be closed for the following season. It's all part of the game.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Like i said, it's the engine manufacturers who asked for the regulations in the first place. They don't want to be spending billions, but they do want the prestige that comes with being associated with F1. But they also want those engines to be relevant and they want to appear to be increasingly environmentally sensitive.

F1 has always been about innovation and teams who find loop holes fully expect those loop holes to be closed for the following season. It's all part of the game.

It's not that I don't agree with you, cause you make solid points, that's just the way I see it. I think the nostalgia with new age technology would be great to go around the track and especially the different areo packages that would be needed for bigger engine sizes and what not. I find it interesting regardless of the real world matters.