Motors The Bit-Tech F1 2016 Thread - Season Complete

If you let designers and drivers use rocket engines someone would.

The formula has to and (almost always has historically) artificially limit peak power for safety reasons. Today's F1 is no exception. Without the fuel flow limit you have the potential to dump a load of fuel into the engine for a short period as a push-to-pass system without compromising overall fuel consumption too much. The engines really aren't close to their theoretical limits currently, so unchecked this could easily end up in an arms race with ridiculous tops speeds and speed differentials.

Upping speeds by increasing fuel limits is fine (and is actually going to happen) but removing the thing limiting peak power altogether just isn't going to happen.

 

That's the whole point!

Massive peak power, not enough fuel and tyres to use it all for all the time. Current regs have no room for driver skill or clever strategy, the car can only use X amount of fuel for lap even at 'full' output and that usually means the cars don't need all 100kg for the race, that's really boring.

 

I must admit part of me wants teams just to be given a brief and/or some clearly defined cans and can'ts and be told - 'other than that... go nuts...'

 

If you have the current car with the same average speeds with a button the wheel that gives them brief blast of unregulated power that matches what the engines are theoretically capable of for short periods (maybe 400-500hp extra when optimised?) you probably get driver deaths.

The F in F1 stands for formula which is a set of regulations. If you want unregulated peak power and unpredictable, uneven top speeds that exceed the level of protection available to the driver if something goes wrong then you're watching the wrong sport.
Even from the early days (and the dark days of regular fatalities) the peak power of engines has almost always been fairly strictly controlled through regulations especially in the race; Usually though capacity, rpm or boost pressure limits: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formula_One_engines

 

You are coming up with a deliberately ridiculous scenario there.

Also, the 1000bhp 3Litre V10s didn't have a single driver death in ten years, the 'slower' cars resulted in the first driver fatality for two decades. Fatalities are caused by a combination of factors that usually start with poor circuit design and/or poor safety practices, being the two prime causes of Bianchi's death.

I am talking about unregulated fuel flow at all times, not some silly KERS like button. It's up to the driver to control it and the teams to figure out how to make that 100kg of fuel last a whole race and to make that enormous power not immediately shred the tyres. F1 has plenty of things besides peak power output that limit a car's performance.

 

I would contend that if you have unlimited fuel flow at all times but limited total fuel in a race scenario you would organically end up with something akin to a cross between KERS and DRS being used. It would make sense to use very high fuel flow for brief period to attack or defend on straights to gain track position and then save fuel elsewhere. I think if you wanted to avoid some silly KERS like button you'd have to regulate against it, which is kinda contrary to the plan.

Regarding safety, the danger comes from the potential for using fuel flow regulation in this way. The problem is the unpredictable sudden bursts of power and according speed differentials, not a general increase in performance. Essentially unregulated push-to-pass. It's something that is typically considered dangerous in motorsport and this is actually why the fuel flow limit exists.

F1 is going to get faster and more powerful in the next few years anyway, along with more durable quicker tyres, but I doubt the fuel flow limit is going anywhere.

 

Except it isn't push to pass if the other guy also has it. DRS is the only true push to pass tech in F1 at the moment.

The vast majority of on-track battles have dueling drivers using KERS more or less the same way. The attacker deploys to catch up, the defender deploys to keep away. The defender uses it to pull away at corner exit, the attacker uses it to stay in touch with the car ahead. It's only when one car is behind on harvesting or energy storage that KERS becomes push to pass (see: McLaren Honda).

In every other scenario, KERS (or) a brief burst of IC power via unregulated fuel flow is simply a tool that can (a) be matched by the other guy, negating its advantage, and (b) makes for interesting strategy because of the effects on fuel and tyres.

I really don't see a downside to peak IC power combined with an overall fuel limit. They're already running cars well below the 100kg limit because of the fuel flow limits. A peak power change would mix things up in terms of race strats and starting fuel loads, which would be great, IMO.

 

Mercedes may get some tv time this weekend as Hamilton will start dead last. Nico gets his free win, wonder who will be p2 p3.

Could be fun to watch this one.

Mercedes have the best fuel usage on the grid acording to most teams, Its why in a race they tend to vanish when starting from Pole. As they can start on less fuel. There's even rumours gone around before that there Friday race pace is on the same fuel they start the gp with.

Merc also have the best IC part.

People are expecting a big grid shake up next season but I am not sure we will see anything but another walk by Mercedes.

The unrestricted engine development will surely mean they gain some time. People are expecting Ferrari and Honda to make gains not so sure myself. Maybe the year after but I feel 2017 will come too soon for both of those engine makers to have resolved everything.

I'd be happier to see some closer racing not so sure we will see it though.

 

Yawn who wants to see races decided by rules.

These rules need to go, it has nothing to do with racing at all.

 

If anything the engine limit does shake things up with demotions. I do miss the 90s where cars often broke down on the last lap but that was equally frustrating.
Hamilton should easily make top 10 and if he gets the strategy right could make the top 4. Rosberg should easily get the win but the recent dig at hamilton over safety reeks of desperation (also press can ask a question and a simple answer in jest can gain more attention it deserves). Rosberg gets penalty or goes out defending from a great start from Vettel and Riccardo after the pressure causes him to forget to steer and he go straight on taking out Verstappen who is driving round the outside of the corner overtaking everyone.

 

The fact of the matter is that they are trying to make the racing more interesting by throwing in rules.

I don't want the race for top spot top be decided because someone used more engines than someone else it should be purely about the drivers skill and not down to luck regarding equipment.

I watched only half the races last year because it was so boring, ideally give everyone the same car and then we will have the best racing ever but it's never going to happen.

F1 and its fans need to wake up.

 

I do agree the sport is over regulated and poorly thought out but having Ferrari qualify first cause they had a suicide all or nothing qualifying engine or a team win the championship cause they can change their engine every race is actually less exciting. As you day it should be the best driver, not who can throw the most money at everything

 

With no rules how far clear do you think Redbull / merc would be? They have some crazy ideas, Anyone who has played any racing game has some idea of them.

One of the gran turismos had a car designed by redbull. It could do most tracks in under a minute. Stuck to the road no matter speed.

Fan Aero car. 1200-1400bhp.

Redbull said in theory the tech is there to make the car in real life.

F1 is heading towards a decision, Be the best tech series, Or best race series. The two do not really go together.

 

I think the two can, but only if there is a wholesale move away from aero being the crucial performance factor.

It would be interesting to see where F1 went if the FIA produced a standardised (and very low tech) front wing, rear wing and diffuser, then let the teams go nuts on the engine, brakes and drive trains.

I bet within five years the car wold be close to or faster than now for lap time, but with lower speed in those medium speed corners where aero kills the racing right now.

 

Looking forward to Spa-Francorchamps this year, I'll be watching trackside.

Shame it looks like it will be a dry race - so probably quite boring. Hopefully Hamilton starting at the back will provide some excitement!

 

Nico has a great chance to pull away this weekend, but for some reason I think he'll cock it up and end up behind the Redbulls lucky to get third.

 

I'd be surprised if Red Bull get ahead on a track like Spa. Anywhere else and I'd be nodding in agreement.

 

Yeah, maybe at a track more reliant on aero - most of Spa favours engine power.

I'm looking forward to Hamilton attempting an overtake through Eau Rouge - could be spectacular.

 

Jesus, Gutierrez is either a mobile chicane or just plain frikkin dangerous!

What happened to him? He looked like he had some promise at one point.

 

Grojean reminded him he's nothing but a pay driver in reality. I wonder how much the year in Ferrari reserce hurt him? The fact he hasn't scored when Haas looked strong says to me he won't now other teams are ahead in development. I honestly can't see him being there next year tho his sponsorship is probably paying for Grosjean