Ferrari Mailing List: Re: How to fix Formula 1

[Pat Scopelliti (pscopell]

Excellent comments.  My point in the aero area was to move the grip balance from aero back to mechanical.  This allows drafting to work better.

 

As for the brakes.. the intent is to lengthen the braking zone which should enhance the racing show (and lower costs).

 

As for the exotic engine materials.. all they do is increase cost and virtually o one in the stands has any idea of the components or benefits.

 

A lot of my comments are tuned towards the so-called golden age (1970s) when the drivers mattered more than the wind tunnel.

 

Pat

 

Pat Scopelliti

pscopell [at] stny.rr.com

From: Ferrari [mailto:ferrari-bounces+pscopell=stny.rr.com [at] ferrarilist.com] On Behalf Of Rick via Ferrari
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2014 8:33 AM
To: Pat Scopelliti
Cc: The FerrariList
Subject: Re: [Ferrari] How to fix Formula 1

 

Hi All,

 

Here's my two cents thrown in around Pat's...

 

> It is time to reset the technology saw-tooth curve.  That curve has

> complexity on the Y axis and time on the X axis.  As time goes on

>  things get more and more complex until a breaking point is reached.

 

Entropy, and chaos theory - and correct.

 

> Then everything gets simplified, to resume a slow complexity climb

> again.

Yep. Nature's reset button...like a huge meteorite into the Yucatan! Perhaps that's what is metaphorically needed.

> Aerodynamics:
>
> DRS banned

 

Agreed, or the use simply relegated to the driver's choice.

> Widen the cars back to 200 cm

 

Agreed.

> Mandate flat bottoms (no diffusers)
>
> Mandate exhaust straight out back with last foot of pipe parallel to

> ground
>
> Front wing: One plane with defined endplates
>
> Rear wing: Up to two wings allowed, each one plane with endplates
>
> No winglets

 

Disagree. Let innovation flourish. Build 'em any way one pleases.

> Suspension and brakes:
>
> All moving suspension pieces must be metal (no carbon fiber)
>
> Brakes discs must be metal (no carbon fiber), brake pads

> cannot be carbon fiber

Disagree. Let innovation rule. 

> Front tires: slick, 16 inch width 
>
> Rear tires: slick, 21 inch width

Agree, or any other mutually agreed upon standard BUT allow multiple suppliers. One supplier dictating tire choice is stupid.

> Engines:
>
> Pump gasoline

 

Probably agree.

> Turbos banned
>
> KERS or ERS or whatever is banned

 

Disagree. Let them run what they build.

> No fuel flow limit

 

Agree. Fuel flow limitations are 'greenwashing'.

> No refueling

Disagree. Let them run light, if desired. Pit cycle time offsets it.

> 3.0 liter

 

Disagree. Build and run any displacement desired. Larger displacement engines are heavier, thus offsetting the added torque.

> 8, 10 or 12 cylinders

 

Agreed...or 7 if they can make it work!

> No rev limit

 

Agree.

> No development freeze

 

Agree.

> Limit eight race and qualifying engines per season
>
> Limit eight practice engines

 

Disagree. Build as many as they please. Let them change engines mid-race if they think they can do it!

> Standard engine ECU

 

Disagree. Don't stifle innovation. 

> Limit on exotic materials (e.g. exhaust pipes must be iron-based not

> some cupro-nickel exotic that results in $25000 exhaust pipes)

 

Disagree.

> And the term ?power unit? will be banned

Agree. Silly phrase for greenwashing.

> All current driver safety components remain

 

Agree, except for Charlie's remote control automated safety car speed limiter. I'm just waiting for the rear end collisions that's going to cause!

> Car chassis must be carbon fiber

Disagree. Unobtainium also allowed as long as it passes the safety tests.

> Pit stops:
>
> During routine pit stop only eight workers allowed to work on a

> car (one at each wheel, one at each end to lift/lower car, one at each

> end to adjust wings and help moving old tires out of harm?s way)

Disagree. Let the crew be any size needed for minimum pit time.

> Teams can enter up to three cars, but only the top two will score points

>(the third cars will be eliminated from points calculations)

 

Interesting. I can't disagree.

> Points awarded:
>
> 24, 15, 9, 6, 4, 3, 2, 1

 

Sure, why not?

> 1 point for pole

Don't care either way. Under this scheme, a driver who earned a pole for every race would receive almost the same point equivalent of one race win.

> Testing:
>
> Two days of testing allowed whenever there are at least two weeks

> between races.

Agree, and any other time too. Testing improves the breed and other teams copy.

> Esthetics:
>
>Numbers must be clearly visible from 50 feet distance
>
> Veteran teams will return to historical numbers, other teams will be

> granted pairs that they will keep as long as they partake in Formula 1,

> since no one gives a damn about driver #15 or even knows who he

> or she is.

 

Don't care either way but then again, I don't know (or care) the numbers of any of the cars.

> Sporting regulations:
>
> Workers can push-start a stalled car back into the race when safe

Agreed.

> Financials:
> 

> All teams must share in the revenue  F1 generates (There will be some

> prize money, but not such that the worst teams get crippled).

 

Agreed.

 

Fine post Pat, and it represents considerable thought.  Don't take my comments negatively.  I'm just sharing my thought about the 'sport', just as you have done. What we all agree upon is that something must be done or this institution will die. And despite Bernie's short-term-profit position (He is in his 80s, remember. All he has is 'short term'.), I believe the younger generations need to be courted or the sport will die as we do! I doubt if Bernie cares.

 

-rick

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone