Monaco Summit 5/4

[dando]

Apologies if this is a repeat. I couldn't find a thread on the proposed rules change discussion tomorrow in Monaco.

Linky (http://sports.espn.go.com/rpm/news/story?id=1794450)


Objectives (as set out by the FIA):

* To improve the racing spectacle without introducing artificial rules.

* To put a greater emphasis on driver skills by finally eliminating electronic driver aids.

* To reduce the cost of operating a front-running Formula One team.

* To reduce very substantially the cost of operating a smaller competitive Formula One team.

* To encourage new teams to enter Formula One.

* To encourage a full grid of 24 cars.

Proposals:

* Engines reduced from 3.0 liter V10 to 2.4 liter V8

* Engines to last for two races each with penalty for unscheduled changes

* Standard electronic control unit (ECU)

* Manual gearboxes and clutches

* Ban on power steering systems

* Chassis weight limits reduced by at least 50 kilos to eliminate need for ballast.

* Front tire width reduced and rear increased.

* No spare car allowed during entire event.

* Cars to be held under 'parc ferme' conditions (under FIA scrutiny) throughout the event.

* One tire supplier only.

* Drastic restriction of private testing, limited by mileage rather than number of days.

* New qualifying system to be discussed.

* No tire changes during race, excepting punctures.

* Constructors' points could be awarded to maximum of four cars per constructor to encourage major teams to supply others with cars and information.

* No restriction on the sale, loan or exchange of chassis and components between teams and new entrants.


Those are some serious changes, but most of them will never see the light of day (IMHO).

-Kevin

[Lizzerd]

Yes, it is a repeat, discussed here (http://www.offcamber.net/forums/showthread.php?t=4162) , but that's cool...

* Standard electronic control unit (ECU)
Uh huh... try to enforce that one...

* One tire supplier only.
I don't like this one. Eliminate competition?

* No tire changes during race, excepting punctures.
Don't like this either... Will require a harder compound, right? Softer/more grip = better passing opportunities, right?

* New qualifying system to be discussed.
Good... back to open track, max laps please?

* Constructors' points could be awarded to maximum of four cars per constructor to encourage major teams to supply others with cars and information.
So... the constructors of the customer cars get their points? Big budget = customer cars = constructors title?

[Cam]

* One tire supplier only.
I don't like this one. Eliminate competition?

* No tire changes during race, excepting punctures.
Don't like this either... Will require a harder compound, right? Softer/more grip = better passing opportunities, right?

Yes that is BS. Why not go back to the glory days and ban refuelling. Thats when the racing was the best. Start on a full load and go. Wear your tyres out in the process, "Sorry your problem" Moseley has this all backwards.

Replacing him with Motezumelo isn't going to help either. :thumdown:

[Methanolandbrats]

They overlooked the key point of discussion: a choice between shooting Max or lethal injection. There's nothing wrong with F1. Did everybody wring their hands and piss in the wind when McLaren was kicking the crap out of everyone years ago? There is a yearly ebb and flow to excellence. Now these morons want to turn F1 into some *****ty high-tech spec series. Almost every racing series worth a **** has been destroyed in the last ten years. Might as well **** up this one too.

[bdogg187]

The only change F1 needs to make is take the emphasis off Aero. Id rather see Wingless cars that only use ground effects to make downforce. Moto GP doesnt need silly rules to provide good racing, and you know why, because there are no driver aids, and there is no wings on the bikes.

[ilferrari]

* No tire changes during race, excepting punctures.

wtf?? Why not just ban refuelling? Choosing compounds and conserving your tires should be one of the skills of a racing driver. I agree there should be a way of keeping the grip of the tires down but every one of Max's measures for doing so over the years have been backward.

[Chaos]

I'm for having only one tire company. I do not see the benefit more than one company brings, other than having some cars and teams not able to win at all because of crappy tires. Remember the 2 years before Goodyear pulled out of ChampCar?

Tire competition brings softer compounds which create more marbles which eliminates some racing lines because of all the marbles. This isnt a case as much in F1 as in ChampCar, but it's still an issue to be considered.

[oddlycalm]

I know, why not 1.5 L sidevalve engines that are naturally aspirated, metal tube chassis, drum brakes with a 12" max diameter and lever actuator outside of the cockpit, hard skinny tires, and a rule that the driver must drive the car to the event from the team shop...? :gomer: :shakehead

Engine reliability, whether one or two race weekends, really doesn't accomplish anything. The best engine suppliers will still be spending a fortune, just on different aspects of the engine.

Allowing multiple teams to contribute points to a constructors championship simply mandates that only a very small number of very large companies with very deep pockets will contest the constructors title.

The real money is spent on aerodynamics, and a full scale wind tunnel is part of the price of admission for any realistic F1 effort. Unless they have a magic plan to address that issue, they are mostly wasting their time.

[eiregosod]

the F1 teams will figure how to try to link their engine test rig, aero wind tunnel, 7 post shock simulator, if they link all this up then the concept of on-track testing is ancient

As for standardised ECU, well I beleive they will submit to that.

[Cam]

Uh Oh! Done (http://www.itv-f1.com/news/news_story/20938) deal! :saywhat:

[mueber]

Those who are currently the most successful will demand the status quo, but cost control is essential to the long-term health of any auto racing series. Some of these ideas are quite good, and it makes sense to implement them now, while the series is strong, rather than when it is late, or too late.

[bdogg187]

Push to pass cant be far behind. :rolleyes:

[RichK]

I really like the standard brakes part. That should improve the racing by quite a bit IF they get away from exotic, six-months-to-build brake components.

The lack of a backup car seems really dumb.