Formula 1 The Formula 1 calendar development thread

Discussion in 'Motorsport' started by prisonermonkeys, Jul 20, 2010.

  1. prisonermonkeys

    prisonermonkeys Premium

    Messages:
    33,155
    Location:
    Peru
    There is, however, a much smaller difference between a country that just stoned a woman to death last month for being raped and a country that has a policy of indefinitely locking up asylum seekers in an offshore detention centre, denying them access to adequate medical care or legal representation and essentially keeping them in legal limbo as a means of deterring other asylum seekers; in short, the policy amounts to creating a situation where people consciously choose to stay in an environment where they are faced with the threat of persecution, torture and rape because that's a better future for them than seeking asylum.

    And the country with that policy is Australia.
     
    JonoStan96 and Roger the Horse like this.
  2. Ex_Driver

    Ex_Driver

    Messages:
    201
    They can leave that detention centre at any time, and either return to their home nation or go to another nation which is more open to them. Such as Germany, France, Sweden. They allow asylum seekers in with open arms.
     
  3. prisonermonkeys

    prisonermonkeys Premium

    Messages:
    33,155
    Location:
    Peru
    No, they can't. Once they're in the system, they can't be released until their claims are processed - which takes a very long time to happen. If they choose to be released, they give up any future claim to asylum and are released into a community that doesn't want them and where they face the ongoing threat of violence.
     
    Roger the Horse likes this.
  4. Ex_Driver

    Ex_Driver

    Messages:
    201
    Alright, I was wrong on that. But they DO know that they will be detained, possibly for years when they show up. Not only from just basic research, but they are told as such the minute they make landfall. Anyone without a valid visa will be detained until they can be processed. Even a cursory bit of research would tell them that before they left. Asylum seekers don't generally just throw a dart at a globe and pick whatever country it hits for asylum.
    And none of that invalidates my point that they could go to any EU nation freely and openly. With the three I listed being the most popular.

    And regardless, detaining illegal immigrants in less than perfect conditions is not comparable to throwing homosexuals off of rooftops, forcing immigrants and vacationers into slavery, cutting off people's hands for theft, and giving the death penalty to women who venture outside without being completely covered and chaperoned by a man. All of which being completely legal.
     
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2016
  5. TenEightyOne

    TenEightyOne Premium

    Messages:
    18,837

    Quoted in the Immigration thread where it belongs...
     
  6. RX-7_FD3S

    RX-7_FD3S

    Messages:
    2,718
    Location:
    Switzerland
    That would kill Zolder tho, as it's close to amsterdam too (1h from AMS airport). Took me 2h from Amsterdam central to go to Zolder with my bike.
     
  7. DesertPenguin09

    DesertPenguin09 (Banned)

    Messages:
    7,398
    Location:
    United States
  8. twitcher

    twitcher

    Messages:
    5,951
  9. prisonermonkeys

    prisonermonkeys Premium

    Messages:
    33,155
    Location:
    Peru
    That's the tungsten embeddrd in the asphalt.
     
  10. Dennisch

    Dennisch Premium

    Messages:
    26,496
    Location:
    Netherlands
    BrainsBush and catamount39 like this.
  11. Ex_Driver

    Ex_Driver

    Messages:
    201
  12. prisonermonkeys

    prisonermonkeys Premium

    Messages:
    33,155
    Location:
    Peru
    Hi, welcome to Monday's headlines.
     
    TenEightyOne likes this.
  13. shoemaker

    shoemaker

    Messages:
    623
    Location:
    England
    I was too young to remember it but it is great to have it back, it is always good to alternatives to Silverstone which gets ever more expensive.Would have preferred Imola though. Can't really complain, the more races in Europe the better.
     
  14. Ex_Driver

    Ex_Driver

    Messages:
    201
    Today's news, tomorrow's news, yesterday's news, you're missing the point.
    THE FRENCH GP IS BACK
     
  15. TenEightyOne

    TenEightyOne Premium

    Messages:
    18,837
    I think it's you who's missing something... possibly the previous posts ;)

    And possibly not affordable after 2019, the organisers are saying :(
     
    shoemaker likes this.
  16. twitcher

    twitcher

    Messages:
    5,951
  17. prisonermonkeys

    prisonermonkeys Premium

    Messages:
    33,155
    Location:
    Peru
    I have heard rumours that Imola is still interested in a race, replacing Germany and adoptingthe European Grand Prix name.
     
    twitcher likes this.
  18. Ex_Driver

    Ex_Driver

    Messages:
    201
  19. shoemaker

    shoemaker

    Messages:
    623
    Location:
    England
    I never thought of that, I have read in several places that the Baku organisers want it to be named after the country so it would free up the name 'European gp'. There is hope still but I think we need to wait for liberty media to come in and make the decision, after all, they have promised to lower the circuit hosting fee's.
     
  20. prisonermonkeys

    prisonermonkeys Premium

    Messages:
    33,155
    Location:
    Peru
    But they originally wanted the race to be the European Grand Prix because they're trying to join the EU - it's why they enter EuroVision and hosted the Pan-European Games.

    It probably not something Liberty Media have the power to influence - they haven't completed the take-over of the sport just yet.
     
    shoemaker likes this.
  21. twitcher

    twitcher

    Messages:
    5,951
    If you're reffering to Indy, what do you mean by "only Americans show up"? And why would that necessarily be a bad thing at a USGP? Is it bad if only Japanese show up to the Japanese GP (even though that isn't true, same as the USGP). The years that F1 was at Indy saw some of the best attendance for any GP, anywhere, ever.

    And if Michelin had brought proper tires, the 2005 debacle wouldn't have been an issue.

    There's hundreds of reasons why F1 wouldn't go to Daytona, but the two you gave are near the very bottom of that list.
     
    RazorSharkz likes this.
  22. daan

    daan Moderator

    Messages:
    32,892
    Location:
    Scotland
    Paul Ricard was awesome. The High tech test track sucks.
     
    JonoStan96 likes this.
  23. prisonermonkeys

    prisonermonkeys Premium

    Messages:
    33,155
    Location:
    Peru
    I think he's talking about the days when the Indy 500 was part of the World Championship, but none of the regular drivers in the championship competed in it.
     
  24. Ex_Driver

    Ex_Driver

    Messages:
    201
    First reference was to the time when the Indy 500 was part of the F1 world championship. The 1950s. Because the purse was small and no points were offered, the vast majority of the time the European teams saw no reason to show up. Meanwhile, the American teams saw no reason to travel to Europe when they're only conceded with going left. Are you legitimately asking why it's a bad thing if only 1 nation is represented on the grid? Why would any non-American bother to watch when there's no home driver to cheer for? Have you learnt nothing by the lack of success for IndyCar and NASCAR outside of the USA?

    And the Indy GP of the early 2000s was an all around nightmare. Good attendance because it was the first US GP in a decade, but the circuit layout was lousy and the 2005 USGP. That's all that needs to be said.

    F1 cars and tyres simply aren't designed to stay at 15,000rpms with little change, and repeatedly take left hand turns only at 220+ miles an hour. It's a very specialised sport, oval racing. That's why IndyCars aren't that great on road courses but can't be touched on ovals, whilst F1 cars are practically unbearable on road courses but would flounder on an oval.
     
  25. twitcher

    twitcher

    Messages:
    5,951
    Right, because worrying about drivers/teams of certain nationalities not showing up to non-championship of the FIA F1 World Championship is an issue plaguing F1 in 2016..... Another point to add to your list of "non-issues". Your arguement against an F1 race at Daytona is that you think only Haas and Alex Rossi would show up? :lol: :lol: :lol:

    Indy circuit wasn't great, I'll give you that. But we're talking Daytona, not Indy. Just because both feature banked corners doesn't mean the circuits are mirrors of each other.

    2005 was a debacle yes...but not for Bridgestone. They brought proper tires, they had no issues. If the whole field was on Bridgestone, or if Michellin had brought proper tires, then there would have been no issue. Using Michelin's incompetence as an excuse to not hold an F1 race on an oval circuit is a pretty lame excuse.

    As to your third point, you realize I'm talking about the Roval at Daytona, not the Super Speedway. On the road course, the full throttle section is no any significantly longer than La Source -> Le Combe, or the front straight at Monza, or Mexico.

    As for "they can't handle the banking"...please. F1 is full of some of the most brilliant engineers on earth. If Daytona is on the schedule, they will figure out a way to make an F1 car go around Daytona. This idea that "it can't be done" is bollocks. I just linked a video of 3 or 4 generations of F1 cars all driving on the banking...they can figure something out.

    But what am I talking about. Vive La France and all that jazz, hurray for having F1 on another generic, flat, parking lot :rolleyes:
     
  26. Ex_Driver

    Ex_Driver

    Messages:
    201
    No, I'm using 50s F1 as an example from the past of how oval racing has been tried before and did not work. That's the only time F1 raced at an oval, and thus is the only example could be given. Wasn't aware I'd have to explain to you what an 'example' is.

    'Michelin incompetence', yes one of the top tyre companies in the world is incompetent. The reason only a handful of cars raced in 2005 is because the majority of the field was on Michelin tyres. And the reason for that was until Indy, it was the superior tyre to be on.
    Yes they can 'handle the banking', with specific tyres and custom suspension geometry and aero packages, like what IndyCar does. If you hadn't realised, F1 does not do that. They use the same 6 compounds of tyres at every Grands Prix. They use the same suspension setup just with separate tuning for each circuit for each GP. They use the same basic aero setup for each GP, just with slightly wider or thinner front and rear wings within the rules. Are you seriously proposing they should design an entirely new chassis for one circuit? That's the only laughable suggestion in this discussion.

    The road course at Daytona still uses the banking, in which speeds of upwards of 200 miles an hour can theoretically easily be achieved in them by an F1 car. Rendering that point moot.

    'Flat boring generic car park' the hypocrisy is so strong I can taste it. You are aware that oval racing especially at Daytona is 'floor it, turn left occasionally'? And the road course at Daytona is completely flat and consists only of two 180° hairpins, a flat-out left kink, a 90° left, and a chicane, right? Wanna talk about boring, THAT is boring.

    But oh yes, let's have a race at Daytona anyway because 'MURICA #1 or whatever.
     
  27. prisonermonkeys

    prisonermonkeys Premium

    Messages:
    33,155
    Location:
    Peru
    Do you really think that it's a relevant comparison to draw, given that the sport has radically evolved in the past half century?
     
    Kingofweasles and Northstar like this.
  28. Ex_Driver

    Ex_Driver

    Messages:
    201
    Of course, but I was using it to specifically point out how F1 has tried oval courses before and no one liked it. That's why they never went back. And I was wording it as a joke anyway. What's-his-name took it as a serious offence and started trying to prove how F1 -should- return to ovals, without providing any reasons why.
     
  29. prisonermonkeys

    prisonermonkeys Premium

    Messages:
    33,155
    Location:
    Peru
    As I just pointed out, the sport has radically evolved since then, so the comparison that you drew was invalid.

    You could have fooled me. And everyone else, or so it would seem.
     
  30. twitcher

    twitcher

    Messages:
    5,951
    Omg you actually thought I was proposing for F1 to race on the Super Speedway >.< :lol:

    Show me ONE single thing that I said that gives any indication that I was making any type of arguement that F1 should make a return to oval racing.

    And serious Offense? Please, don't flatter yourself lol. I just can't stand when someone proposes an idea (for fun mostly), and someone else comes along and starts trying to poke holes in the idea...especially when the holes you are attempting to poke are based on non issues.

    You've said "ovals didn't work in the 50s" and "Michellin screwed up,"....you have failed to provide any type of logical arguement as to why F1 could/should not return to Daytona.....and your entire arguement has been based on using the Super Speedway. You're basically having a convo with yourself at this point.