What rules would you change/add in 2010?

[Crashbroke23]

In the next few years, radical rule changes are to come to F1. We've already know about the new car rules, sort of. Now come the major cost-cutting rules.
What rules, cost-cutting or not, would you add or change?

The major change in 2010 is how the Drivers Championship is won. But we all agree that the the most wins win idea is sort of dumb. My idea is to keep the current rules the same, just more drivers will score points since 3 more teams are coming to F1 in 2010. The new points setup is....

12-10-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1

Another rule for points is that the best in each of the three Qualifying sessions all get a point, no matter what happens in the race. And the driver that gets the fastest lap during the race also gets a bonus points.

The second rule change is for telling which driver in each team is which.
The rule change is that the second driver for each team uses a inverted livery of the first driver's car. For Example; Jenson Button would use the current livery for his Brawn GP car since he is the #1 driver for the team. Rubens Barrichello would use a inverted livery (what is white is now yellow, and what is yellow is now white,) since he is the #2 driver. It would make F1 more a feast for the eyes and easier for normal fans of F1 to know who is who. Sort of like what Corvette Racing is doing with their C6.R's this year;

The Budget Cap must be talked about too.
The Budget Cap for teams will be 125 million Pounds. This includes electronics (Excluding KERS), aerodynamics, transmissions, and suspensions.
The Cap amount will decrease by 5 million pounds for 2011, then decrease by 10 million pounds a year until 2016, where a team will decide what will happen next with the Cap.
Its fairly reasonable, its roughly what the Force uses, and 4x less than what Ferrari uses.



Change rules Away!

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Flavio Briatore will not be allowed within five hundred miles of a Grand Prix on pain of death.

 

[Peter]

Give the cars their downforce back. F1's are too slow now compared to how they were when they had over 1000hp and sxtreme downforce numbers. People want speed and overtaking. The FIA is cutting down on speed to increase overtaking, to make it more exiting. But i still prefer to watch the 2004 F1 races than any modern races.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

If you want to watch a procession, go down to Manhattan on Thanksgiving. Or Sydney for the Mardi Gras.








On a more serious note, I'd award weight penalties to the cars based on the previous round the way SuperGT does.

 

[Peter]

bring back traction control as optional, but it must be disabled in the wet conditions, because it would slow down the cars too much.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

What?

 

[Peter]

i guess i didn't say it right, i heard the guys from speed channel talikng about it during the race in china. just ignore it if you dont understand because i dont either. got rid of it so that there are alot less whats

 

[prisonermonkeys]

You can't be serious about the traction control, either.

 

[Peter]

I believe the FIA has taken away too much, the drivers deserve at least 1 driving aid.

 

[waggles]

Then the TC earns the money for the driver?

Allow more than 7 gears. 8 shorter gears would be more fun.

And 1 standard steering wheel for all teams, with a big LCD screen showing current position etc. like in the pit lane, but on a smaller scale.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I believe the FIA has taken away too much, the drivers deserve at least 1 driving aid.

Um, with traction control, the driver basically puts his foot down and the electronics to the rest. Since Formula One drivers are supposedly the best drivers in the world, don't you think they should actually drive the car? Because with traction control, any idiot could do it. It's so much more satisfying watching a race and knowing that the drivers are actually doing something. Otherwise they might as well play videogames to see who is World Champion.

 

[Tired Tyres]

Q3 Qualifying to become one shot qualifying with low fuel and sticky tyres. Q1 and Q2 to stay as they are now.

Single element flat plane front and rear wings like they used to use at Hockenheim when it had proper straights.

Clutch pedal and stick shift gears.

Freedom for teams to choose what tyres they want to use without the requirement to change them to a different compound.

Fuel tank that can hold 150KG of fuel. That is enough for a non stop run on the hardest tyres. No one will use it unless it's raining or your starting at the back but the option should exist.

Outlaw all diffusers, get rid of the barge boards and any other aero device.

The FIA to realise that it is important that tracks go up and down as well as left and right.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

The FIA to realise that it is important that tracks go up and down as well as left and right.

The FIA and Tilke have no control over that. Tilke has to do the best he can with what he's given to work with; the tract of land set aside for a circuit is not decided by either him or any of the oter Powers That Be. It's decided by the circuit owners, who buy what they can and pass it on to Tilke. If you've seen the YouTube video of him disussing the circuit design process, you'll see he actually worked out elevations are the key to challenging circuits a long time ago. But if he gets a plot of land that is as flat as a billiards table, then he has to work with what he's been given.

 

[PeterJB]

I want Turbo's back!

 

[Famine]

All stewarding decisions made outside the race plus 30 minute window affect the following race.

 

[NapoleonMikey]

The FIA and Tilke have no control over that. Tilke has to do the best he can with what he's given to work with; the tract of land set aside for a circuit is not decided by either him or any of the oter Powers That Be. It's decided by the circuit owners, who buy what they can and pass it on to Tilke. If you've seen the YouTube video of him disussing the circuit design process, you'll see he actually worked out elevations are the key to challenging circuits a long time ago. But if he gets a plot of land that is as flat as a billiards table, then he has to work with what he's been given.

but then again if there paying millions to build a track you would think they would be willing to ship in some dirt to add some elevation to the track if even a differences of 15 feet from high point to low point.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

but then again if there paying millions to build a track you would think they would be willing to ship in some dirt to add some elevation to the track if even a differences of 15 feet from high point to low point.

Do you have any idea how difficult and costly it is to build a hill for the sake of running a road over it? And I'm not talking about a road that could be used to host a Grand Prix, but just a simple two-lane blacktop? Firstly, no sane engineer is actually going to do that. He - or she - will go over a hill if they have, around a hill if they can, or dig the thing out if they're forced to. If you're building a hill simply for aesthetic purposes, you don't just drop a few cubic tons of dirt down and come back a month later. Hills need stability, otherwise they're just going to wash away at the first downpour that comes its way. And if you're building a road on it, all the drainage has to be done properly, which is an even costlier exercise, to prevent the same outcome. Granted, a Formula One circuit does not have to deal with the weight loads you'd expect of an airport runway, but the FIA specifies that the road has to be a certain minimum width which just means the problem is going to be compounded: the wider the road, the more surface area and drainage you're going to need, which means your hill has to get bigger and bigger. But bigger hills need more surface area and drainage to prevent it washing away, so you're just going to burn through money.

 

[NapoleonMikey]

Do you have any idea how difficult and costly it is to build a hill for the sake of running a road over it? And I'm not talking about a road that could be used to host a Grand Prix, but just a simple two-lane blacktop?

just a simple one for 2 lane? well i see them build them all the time for highways out here in florida and those are 6 lane and they manage to get them done in a fairly short time. and there higher there about the elevation change im thinking about if not a little higher. but as for cost no clue seeing as i dont work for city planning. but if your building a multimillion dollar crcuit im sure price isnt that big of an issue.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Believe me when I say it gets expensive. I'm the son of a civil engineer, and having spent an entire year studying the development of a subdivision - at a guess I'd say it occupies about the same amount of space as the Nurburgring GP circuit - I've seen where the money goes. You've got labour, materials, contractors, machinery and a reserve in case you go over budget to name a few, and you've got to have it all done by your deadline. It's not a case of coming in and saying "Okay, we want to build a Formula One circuit and include an artificial hill"; you need to balance it all like a finely-planned military operation because you're going to be commanding an army of workers.

Building an artificial hill sounds like a good idea on paper, but I just asked my dad whether it would be possible or even feasible. He didn't think it was a particularly good idea unless it was absolutely necessary.

 

[NapoleonMikey]

but it is doable as seen in the case of tracks like Daytona. the entire banks are man made. they didnt have to ship any extra dirt to the site they just dug a giant lake into the middle of the circuit. proving that it is possible to do if needed or desired.

 

[waggles]

For those who decide to go into the budget cap, no weight restriction.

Or 500kg min.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

I would take off the tire restrictions, which are the two compounds per race and restricting the compounds used.

 

[Peter]

Super Softs only in Q1 and Q2 and Hards in Q3. Make first place hardest to get.

 

[Metar]

bring back traction control as optional, but it must be disabled in the wet conditions, because it would slow down the cars too much.

TC never slows F1 cars down - F1-grade traction control systems are fine-tuned to drive just at the edge... It's only on a road-car that they actually slow you down.

Allow more than 7 gears. 8 shorter gears would be more fun.

8 gears wouldn't bring a benefit as great as CVTs, if unlimited gears were allowed. Improved efficiency, driveability, acceleration...

Um, with traction control, the driver basically puts his foot down and the electronics to the rest. Since Formula One drivers are supposedly the best drivers in the world, don't you think they should actually drive the car? Because with traction control, any idiot could do it. It's so much more satisfying watching a race and knowing that the drivers are actually doing something. Otherwise they might as well play videogames to see who is World Champion.

I disagree. F1-grade TC systems still keep the car on the absolute edge, and it still takes massive skill to keep them pointed the right way, with proper heat in the tyres and brakes. You can't "floor and forget it", because their TC systems only keep them at the point of most traction - not the point of easiest driving - and that point is when the tyre is slightly slipping. I'll look for the traction-chart afterwards: Optimal traction is achieved at slight spin, and when you're trying to accelerate forwards, that quite limits your the remains of your "traction-pie" left for cornering.

Plus, they already have an "aid" they didn't have last year, in the form of a KERS-sensitive valve that adjusts rear brake-pressures to account for KERS charging.

Q3 Qualifying to become one shot qualifying with low fuel and sticky tyres. Q1 and Q2 to stay as they are now.

That's set in the 2010 regulations anyway. No need to add that.

Single element flat plane front and rear wings like they used to use at Hockenheim when it had proper straights.

Clutch pedal and stick shift gears.

Outlaw all diffusers, get rid of the barge boards and any other aero device.

Woo! Lets put them on Crossplys and drum-brakes while we're at it! Who needs progress?

Fuel tank that can hold 150KG of fuel. That is enough for a non stop run on the hardest tyres. No one will use it unless it's raining or your starting at the back but the option should exist.

First off, it's not enough. A modern F1 car uses around 170kg, if not more, during a single race. Second, 2010 update: Refueling is banned anyway, and was planned to be banned ever since November 2008 (it was just finalized now).

The FIA and Tilke have no control over that. Tilke has to do the best he can with what he's given to work with; the tract of land set aside for a circuit is not decided by either him or any of the oter Powers That Be. It's decided by the circuit owners, who buy what they can and pass it on to Tilke. If you've seen the YouTube video of him disussing the circuit design process, you'll see he actually worked out elevations are the key to challenging circuits a long time ago. But if he gets a plot of land that is as flat as a billiards table, then he has to work with what he's been given.

Wrong way around. FIA and Tilke are the ones that have the power to demand conditions. They demand the relatively flat areas.

Plus, what's stopping them from making a bridge? Or smallish gravel-hills? I've seen them make such hills for small-scale projects that never came close to the budgets an F1 track has...

All stewarding decisions made outside the race plus 30 minute window affect the following race.

👍

Better yet, I'd want every decision not taken before the podium-ceremony to affect the next race - other than special cases such as Interlagos 2003

For those who decide to go into the budget cap, no weight restriction.

Or 500kg min.

Terribly unsafe. One of the lightest of the current crop, the Renault R29, weighs 480kg - so with a driver, no KERS and no ballast, it would way 50kg over your proposed limit. That'll mean no team will use KERS, nor ballast, nor drivers. There's a reason why the weight was increased for 2010.

I would take off the tire restrictions, which are the two compounds per race and restricting the compounds used.

I fully support this idea. Four dry compounds and two wets seems like enough, but allow teams to choose freely!

Super Softs only in Q1 and Q2 and Hards in Q3. Make first place hardest to get.

Wait, what? Why? Everyone who's in Q3 already had his times deleted - being slower than a Q2 time won't relegate you to 12th or something. Driving on Hards isn't harder than driving a Supersoft compound.

 

[chrisbroughton]

Bring back multiple tyre manufacturers - shift some of the cost of car improvement away from the teams - costs could be cut this way.

Although I agree any tire manufacturer would be stupid to sign up to that in the current economic climate.

 

[Metar]

It wouldn't shift the costs away, it would simply add costs - also to the teams, who would have to test and build their cars specifically for that tyre.

 

[Mt. Lynx]

How about no changes at all? Stability for gods sake!

 

[PeterJB]

I want moving aerodynamic parts. Bring on ground effect!

 

[Peter]

No more downforce or power or price restrictions. Let the teams go crazy and turn F1 into the craziest motorsport on the planet.

 

[Robin]

Depends on how realistic you want the changes to be.

I personally would...

1. Bring back all the aero parts.
2. Field 3 cars per team.
3. Not cap budgets.
4. Bring back V10 or V12's and allow more power.

I really want this sport to progress technologically and not be held back, This is ment to be the fastest motorsport on the planet. Decades from now it should end up being a kind of 'wipeout' affair. Yes the racing has been great this season but it was also good back in the days where costs and technological development were unlimited.

Robin.