Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Sakae

2018 F1 season - discussion

375 posts in this topic


3 hours ago, Publius Cornelius Scipio said:

they were close in power to a Formula Junior, nevertheless they were still dangerous, the problem was not only power, those cars were dangerous because the driver had no protection whatsoever, they were prone to sudden catastrophic failures, the drivers were sitting in a bathtub full of highly flammable aviation fuel (am I correct in remembering that they used aviation fuel? I might be mistaken on this, anyway). So a lot of drivers were killed, but a lot of drivers died during that era in junior formulae despite the fact that they had "slow" (in relative terms, of course) cars. Just the other day I was reading a facebook page about Geki Russo and he died in an horrible crash that killed 3 drivers despite it being a F3 race

Yea, when I was in Italy a couple of years ago I did get to walk Monza. Stopped for a while at the corner where Wolfgang von Trips crashed.

Some 20+ years after A.J. Foyt first ran Indy, someone interviewed him and discussed how many of the driver that started on the grid with him at Indy were gone. It was 13 out of 33, 11 from racing accidents (33%). The era was simply dangerous, and more than a quarter of the professional drivers did not survive their career (interesting enough, a similar statistic for military aviators during the 50s-70s).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Publius Cornelius Scipio said:

1956 - 1960 9 (Castellotti, Andrews, O'Connor, Musso, Collins, Lewis-Evans, Unser, Cortner, Schell, Bristow, Stacey)

1961 - 1965 6 (Summers, Cabianca, von Trips, Rodriguez, Hocking, de Beaufort)

1966 - 1970 8 (Taylor, Bandini, Anderson, Schlesser, Mitter, Brain, Courage, Rindt) 

This list includes Indy as well as non championship races and testing. 

Not enough data points to establish statistical significance, but one could argue that the reduced power saved 2 or 3 lives or reduced the danger by 25 to 33%. I believe there is only one Indy driver among the 23 listed (and Indy Car did not follow the F1 regulations).

Thanks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ruslan said:

Not enough data points to establish statistical significance, but one could argue that the reduced power saved 2 or 3 lives or reduced the danger by 25 to 33%. I believe there is only one Indy driver among the 23 listed (and Indy Car did not follow the F1 regulations).

Thanks. 

Obviously we should check what the major players said at the time but maybe they quite simply realised that cars build with scaffolding couldn't carry a bit V8 at the back, back in 1961 the technology for mopnocoque chassis wasn't there, maybe they knew that they couldn't achieve enough body stiffness, I don't know it's just a speculation. Also the tyres that they had in 1961 were not even remotely similar to what could be produced only a few years after that, if we think how different a car from 1961 is to a car from 1971 it's nearly unbelievable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Sakae said:

6 April 2018, 12:21 (CEST)

FORMULA 1 UNVEILS BLUEPRINT FOR THE FUTURE

It is too soon to comment (intelligently) on this proposal. What is obvious that compromises were made along-way.

7 April 2018, 07:02 (CEST)  -  Negotiate this to some meaningful end behind closed door merely in two months is going to be difficult, and doing it in rush might end up with another "token" system. People may have different experiences, but I am yet to see - with all due respect to members of this forum - accountants and lawyers to move fast on anything. Two months for such impactful decision is fast IMO, unless a lot of strategies were worked out beforehand, and now it all have to be tabled and negotiated.

Edited by Sakae

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Faster than F1 around Spa - Porsche LMP1 car stuns!

A headline worth of soul searching for F1, or mere irritant-blip on otherwise blue skies of F1 heaven? 

Quote

919 Hybrid Evo ran a fantastic 1m41.7s lap around Spa Francorchamps, with works driver Neel Jani

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Porsche name/badge ISN`T in F1.
But the holding company IS.
It is STILL too early in the turbo era.
Porsche really are not aimed at the hybrid market.
F1 will only raise brand awareness,  everybody is ALREADY aware of the Porsche brand
thanks to the 911.!!

Edited by lipstick79

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/10/2018 at 3:39 PM, radical-one said:

Perhaps Porsche should join F1 

Quote

VW brand chief Herbert Diess as the group's new chief executive, replacing Matthias Müller in what's believed to be a broader management overhaul aimed at boosting efficiency.

I am not sure whether this will affect their position on potential entry in and membership of the F1. The list Brawn circulated will give probably potential entrants (such as VW) a pause. 

 

11 April 2018, 18:26 (CEST) - Headlines in Germany

Me: Goodbye Mr. F1

Quote

VW turns to Diess, the uncompromising cost cutter

 

Edited by Sakae

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 April 2018, 12:24 (CEST)

Quote

said Arrivabene, referring to the engine rules for 2021: "Concerning the engine, we, Mercedes, Renault and Honda sent a letter a month ago explaining in detail our position".

I read this as all four are on the same page regarding PU, united. For me that's news, and confirmation about Renault's and Honda's intent.

Edited by Sakae

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, it may not be all that significant. As I understand it, Liberty did offer a new set of engine rules for 2021. I assume those accounted for the opinions of Ferrari, Mercedes, Renault and Honda. It may not be exactly what they wanted as Liberty has an interest in drawing other engine manufacturers into the series, something that current engine manufacturers may not care about. Still, I have heard no indications that Renault or Honda, or the teams running those engines, have any major objections to what Liberty is proposing for 2021.

This weekend I gather SM will be in China, so if there is a major issue between Ferrari and Liberty, I gather we will hear about it. Have yet to hear that anyone else other than Mercedes has a problem with the new regulations.

 

 

Edited by Ruslan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 April 2018, 22:18 (CEST) - Responses from teams is due next month, if I am not mistaken. 

I can imagine that teams have to evaluate various scenarios (game theory), then - in no particular sequence - engineers will have to provide cost assessments of new operations and evaluate comparative analyses of alternatives, then you need assessments from financial people, lawyers, input from internal and external stakeholders, run consultations with allies (the other three)...

This all might need time to respond and move from wishy-washy rhetoric and very vague piece of paper to legal text that can be brought to the table. Sure, I think this is only framework for now, but still, I am surprised over having merely two months to do all of this. It is however enough time to say thanks, but no thanks.

Edited by Sakae

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sakae said:

13 April 2018, 22:18 (CEST) - Responses from teams is due next month, if I am not mistaken. 

I can imagine that teams have to evaluate various scenarios (game theory), then - in no particular sequence - engineers will have to provide cost assessments of new operations and evaluate comparative analyses of alternatives, then you need assessments from financial people, lawyers, input from internal and external stakeholders, run consultations with allies (the other three)...

This all might need time to respond and move from wishy-washy rhetoric and very vague piece of paper to legal text that can be brought to the table. Sure, I think this is only framework for now, but still, I am surprised over having merely two months to do all of this. It is however enough time to say thanks, but no thanks.

Well, I gather the deadline is to resolve the engine rules for 2021 by the end of May.....and address everything else in detail later.

That probably works against Ferrari's interests, as they are working this piece by piece. It means that if Ferrari is really going to quit.....it kind of needs to make that very clear by the end of May, if not now. I would not be surprised if we have a pretty clear indication of what the mood is after this weekend. I suspect they will compromise, with Liberty getting most of what it wants.

Anyhow, six weeks is a very short time to sort out the engine regulations for 2021, so I would not be surprised if that gets delayed some. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like they are closing the oil burning in qualifying loophole. Don't know how much that helped, but judging by the amount of blue smoke generated at times by Ferraris, they were ones that benefited from this loophole.

Does this mean the Mercedes are going to now have the edge in qualifying?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Ruslan said:

Looks like they are closing the oil burning in qualifying loophole. Don't know how much that helped, but judging by the amount of blue smoke generated at times by Ferraris, they were ones that benefited from this loophole.

Does this mean the Mercedes are going to now have the edge in qualifying?

It's the Mercedes who was authorized to burn oil in the combustion chambers, not Ferrari, last year this thing was debated quite at lenght

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ruslan said:

Looks like they are closing the oil burning in qualifying loophole. Don't know how much that helped, but judging by the amount of blue smoke generated at times by Ferraris, they were ones that benefited from this loophole.

Does this mean the Mercedes are going to now have the edge in qualifying?

 

3 hours ago, Publius Cornelius Scipio said:

It's the Mercedes who was authorized to burn oil in the combustion chambers, not Ferrari, last year this thing was debated quite at lenght

Correct, that is exactly why they are smoking oil out of the vents next to the taillights... the result of excess oil directed out. Quite clever actually... It's not just for qualifying btw

Edited by BradSpeedMan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Publius Cornelius Scipio said:

It's the Mercedes who was authorized to burn oil in the combustion chambers, not Ferrari, last year this thing was debated quite at lenght

If it was authorized last year...why are they changing the rules now? I gather that one of the explanation for Mercedes "party mode" was they were burning more oil, but I not sure anyone actually established what "party mode" really was. On the other hand, we were seeing huge amounts of blue smoke coming out the Ferrari garages at one point this year. I just sort of assumed they were working on something using lots of oil, as they seemed to have suddenly gotten an edge of speed lately.

So, Mercedes will be slower than Ferrari in qualifying at Barcelona?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.gptoday.com/full_story/view/636245/FIA_closes_oil_burn_qualifying_loophole/

2 hours ago, BradSpeedMan said:

Is this a credible source of the posted information? Based on my (past) investigation I have some serious reservations.

 

Ferrari has been recently one of the most scrutinized teams due to pressure applied upon FiA by rival teams, and was declared "not illegal".

Then this:

http://www.gptoday.com/full_story/view/636245/FIA_closes_oil_burn_qualifying_loophole/

 

Edited by Sakae

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Ruslan said:

So, Mercedes will be slower than Ferrari in qualifying at Barcelona?

 

Yea, according to the F1 news feed, it is Ferrari that is in danger of losing some speed by this rule correction: Cheat doubts still hang over 2018 Ferrari

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sakae said:

Is this a credible source of the posted information? Based on my (past) investigation I have some serious reservations.

This is from the standard F1 news feed that most websites use (purchase?). For example, our old site Grandprix.com used this web service. The site GPguide.com which I quoted in response, used the exact same set of stories but always list them in reverse order of the grandprix.com stories. This website also uses all these stories, but add pictures, etc. They also have a few other stories from other sources. I have no idea of the original source of the news feed, but clearly a lot (most...maybe almost all) F1 websites are using this daily newsfeed, sort of like an AP of Formula One. As to credibility? I have no idea.

It does state at the end of the article: ""One possibility is that former Ferrari engine boss Lorenzo Sassi, who has been working for Mercedes since April, has been talking," Schmidt added."

Edited by Ruslan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0