The Problem with Formula 1 in 2015

"Filip Lewicki" (fil-lewicki) 01/26/2016 at 18:16 • Filed to: None

0

13

With the 2015 Formula 1 World Championship at an end, and the world champion crowned three races before the end of the season, it is safe to say that Mercedes AMG Petronas ran away with the championship. That is a major problem, and is doesn’t look like steps are being taken to solve it.

Photo: Mercedes-Benz

The most commonly cited issue with a single team dominating the season is dwindling spectator attention. While yearly average attendance at races this year is !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , that may not be the biggest problem right now. Competition is crucial to developing technology at the bleeding edge, and technological development has always been the driving factor behind racing, well before the marketing teams got a hold of it.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

If competition drives development, then one team running away with the championship each year jeopardizes manufacturer involvement, since there is less to be gained from staying in the sport. This recent lack of competition severely reduces the trickle down effect manufacturers are used to seeing. It is true that we no longer see technology filter directly from F1 to road use, but information, data, and the principles learned certainly still do.

Photo: F1 Fanatic

Most notably these days, aerodynamic development and maximizing power unit efficiency are the key areas where Formula 1 is playing a major role. Ever since the Lotus 49B showed up sporting wings, the name or the game has been maximizing downforce (or reducing lift) while minimizing the drag penalty incurred. It’s not hard then to draw similarities between optimizing the aerodynamics of an F1 car for speed, and optimizing the aero on road cars for zero-lift and low drag - the principles are the same.

While we can all bemoan the loss of the mighty V-10 era from a spectator perspective, it is hard not to see the benefit of having turbocharging back at the highest level of motorsport. Especially with the fuel-flow limits being imposed, every power unit supplier is being forced to address power unit efficiency over outright power. With turbocharging now becoming the norm for road cars, this produces mountains of data on how to build fuel-efficient yet incredibly energy-dense engines and hybrid drivetrains.

Photo: Autosport

The issue is that current testing restrictions are stymying development in these fields. Teams are so restricted right now, that if a clear leader emerges, all the rest of the field can do is wait it out and hope to improve during the off season. We have seen this happen with Mercedes this year, and Red Bull Racing before them. This is clearly an issue, and that is even before we mention how the lack of seat time days is affecting the rookie performance of future F1-hopefuls working as test drivers.

A solution is easy to find though; all we have to do is look at the 2016 FIA MotoGP rule book. To put it simply, well performing teams - those that are regularly on the podium or scoring points - have a set amount of fuel to use per race, a certain number of power units they can use per season, and all engine development is frozen. Underperforming teams - those that haven’t scored points, or a certain number of podium finishes or wins - get some concessions in the form of more fuel per race, more power units per season, and crucially, unlimited engine development. Now, keep in mind, this is a very basic summary of this rule. For a more detailed explanation, check out this article: !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

This is a rule F1 should adapt. This can keep the current testing schedule the way it is, so off-season spending is somewhat curbed, as it is now. Crucially though, this would allow struggling teams to catch up during the season, not only making the competition closer and more relevant, but also more exciting for spectators. An added bonus here would be that since some development would have to take place away from the race weekends, test drivers would also get more seat time, thus reducing the risk of rookie drivers being huge liabilities.

Then, at a certain number of points earned or podium positions won, those concessions for a team would be eliminated, development would be frozen, and that team would be under the same rule set as the front runners.

Imagine, instead of Mercedes running away with the title, and everyone complaining about the dud of a Honda power unit McLaren was stuck with, McLaren Honda could actually work on significant changes throughout the year. As they get more and more competitive and start challenging for wins, that development gets frozen, and they go back to the standard 100kg fuel allocation. Not only would this make for a more exciting season, the off season work would start at a higher benchmark, which would then push the technological envelope even more the next season.

Finally, we may see Alonso happy.

Photo: Agence France-Presse

RX > Filip Lewicki 01/26/2016 at 18:48

0

How to fix F1, less downforce, more power. Make the cars harder to drive.

Also, I dont know how, but make these damn things less reliable. Back when we had V10s/V12s they used to break. A lot. Unreliability was the biggest wild card. Maybe larger, more powerful engines could fix that. Coupled with less downforce and less grippy tires could keep the speeds down.

Id also like to see a proper manual transmission, with 3 pedals and an H gate. I bet even Hamilton misses a shift once a race. And dont give me blah blah but the crappy paddle shifts faster. I dont care, they’ve done a million things to slow these cars down. V12 is faster than a V6, why V6? to slow them down.

gin-san - shitpost specialist > Filip Lewicki 01/26/2016 at 18:53

0

The technical freedom needs to come back, tires need to be more durable, and DRS will have to go. I think hybrids are here to stay.

However, I’ve always thought about this Moto GP approach and how some sort of two-tier system can work without actually producing two-tier racing. I’ve wondered about the ability to give lower teams a bit more technical freedom: higher teams (generally richer ones) are able to put a lot of money towards optimizing within the confines of the rules, lower teams just try to keep up. If lower teams had some additional freedoms in design, it would spur more creative use of a much lower amount of funds. There are many flaws to this, but I’m not going to go into much further detail, but I think this could be refined into something that works.

The other idea I’ve had is giving more generalized rules; i.e. use whatever engine you want as long as it meets the fuel usage requirements which are standard across ALL engine types. Specify maximum number of elements per wing and on the body, minimum heights/widths for safety and let them loose. I’m not so sure how the WEC Balance of Performance works but it seems to work well - it’s something along these lines that I want back in F1.

However, this is still an oversimplification of the problem - there’s the FIA to deal with, politics, profit distribution, and all sorts of nonsense besides the racing that makes a lot of this impossible anyway.

Besides keeping the engines and the race/qualifying formats (which I think are fine the way they are) they need to throw out the existing car design rules and start from scratch again.

JR1 > Filip Lewicki 01/26/2016 at 21:54

1

I agree technical freedom seems to be a pretty big issue. But I think this year has been the most entertaining in a few years

Archer>Picard > RX 01/28/2016 at 13:33

0

Here is some hard truth for you: proper manual transmissions are terrible and no one actually likes them. They just say they like them to look cool or hip with it.

RX > Archer>Picard 01/28/2016 at 14:25

0

I like them. And they are much more enjoyable to drive. But whether or not people like them in their cars or not is irrelevant. I would like these cars to be harder to drive, and a manual is harder to drive. And people are full of crap that they want F1 tech in their cars. If that was the case they would want tires that need to stay above a certain termerature. Imagine that gotta scrub heat into your tires if you arent above a certain speed. Or maybe people want an engine that idles at 10,000 RPMs. Should make stop and go traffic interesting. It’s F1 tech so people want it right?

RX > Archer>Picard 01/28/2016 at 14:40

1

I’d say that the crappy paddle cars are horrible and no true enthusiast likes them. Rich idiots who don’t actually enjoy driving their cars, just keeping them in their garage and bragging about them like the paddles. Why do they like them? Because they cost more. When they ordered their car they saw an $18k option and knew they had to have it, I mean it costs a lot so it must be good right? Could have been a whale penis covered steering wheel and they would have bought it. Also it’s theoretically an eye blink faster, doesnt mean you can feel those millisesonds, or enjoy driving the car more, but you can’t brag about something when your neighbor has better bragging rights.

But they when the cars are a few years old and the rich idiots moved onto something newer, the enthusiasts get them, and what does that do to prices? The manual is worth more! In some cases a lot more. Check Ferrari F430 prices manual vs F1, the manual is worth twice as much.

Wish upon a Stig > Filip Lewicki 01/29/2016 at 09:38

0

I like that idea, but you, me, and everybody here knows Bernie isn’t going to allow that to happen. Even if they just implemented the rule that higher ranking teams get less PU’s than the lower teams would help a bit.

I say they let them take one of last years car and test with that, but they can’t use next year parts on the car. They will still be able to pull usable data from the car. And still be able to design for next years car.

DDATX > Archer>Picard 01/29/2016 at 12:47

0

I agree that a proper gearbox makes driving fun and raises the level of difficulty, but I fail to see how anyone will care from a spectator perspective. "Oh

F1fan > Filip Lewicki 02/01/2016 at 08:50

0

I think I read in Autosport that in-season development will be allowed in 2016.

Filip Lewicki > F1fan 02/01/2016 at 14:29

0

That’s definitely huge news! Do you have a link to that story?

Filip Lewicki > JR1 02/01/2016 at 14:32

1

It’s been a pretty good season for sure, but arguably the best seasons in F1 have been when in-season testing was allowed, and every team was scrapping with the one in front for any advantage possible.

I realize this means spending will go up, but in a small way that is partially offset by the fuel limits and no tire wars. On the other hand, F1 has always been expensive, so you have to pay to play.

F1fan > Filip Lewicki 02/02/2016 at 07:58

0

I can’t find it online but it’s in the January 7, 2016 issue of Autosport. Now that I look at it again it may only pertain to engine development. Should be good for McLaren-Honda though.

F1fan > Filip Lewicki 02/02/2016 at 08:00

0

Here’s a different article.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.ph…