Future F1 Regulations (Ideas)

[mx_tifoso]

Why not have something like this? I think the performance then was right what we would need today.

More width = more drag
Wide tires = more mechanical grip + more drag
High 3-element rear wing without beam wing = downforce more or less equal to today + more drag + more slipstream
Wide frontwing with only two elements = downforce more or less equal to today
low nose = less downforce from the underbody + better safety and visibility
underfloor + diffusor of today (unblown) = downforce less than to today with low nose

... and it looks better than today´s cars

Because if a car were designed to those regs with modern knowledge it would not look like that, and would go significantly quicker.

Good point Beelsebob, and adding to that is the fact that "more drag" is the anithesis of the future in racing and production automobiles.

[thearmofbarlow]

No indeed they did not have that technology 35 years ago. Outside of the fact that filter will get filled with the debris reducing the effect of the fan.


Might also need a device that makes sure the debris will be thrown into another dimension

No filters or dimensional vortices needed. It's a fan, you can exhaust it wherever you want. You could also run a system off the turbo. Regulations for tracks are much more stringent than they were in the late 70's. Some of those tracks were held together with spit and duct tape with little to no upkeep in some areas. The improvement in track structure alone should allow a rethink of a "fan car". Couple that with the introduction of various energy recovery methods and you'll find it goes along with the new focus on efficiency.

[Nando]

No wings or a more extreme version of a Monza spec package.
Spec floor fitted with a fan of some sorts to suck the car down. Spec floor i think being necessary to keep it from going mental.
Designed to produce slightly less downforce then today´s cars
And more horsepower, around 900-1000hp.

So more straight line speed, less corner speed, longer braking, great possibilities to stay behind another driver in and out of corners etc.

Same speed as today in general but fast in different areas and less aero-dependent = fantastic racing.


Oh and no DRS crap.

[flynfrog]

1. A fan to create downforce? Remembered what happened with the fan car? The thing sucked all kinds of things from the surface, great to have all these rocks and marbles thrown at you in the slipstream.
2. A fan driven by the engine increasing fuel consumption? Are you actually following current things in the world? Not only on rules basis but also on political and ethical basis that is just a stupid idea.

Sorry, but NO.

Lets clear this up. There is NO fan! The system i described uses the exhaust of the turbines to generate downforce, there is no air being sucked from under the floor. And the exit points upwards so no debris could be 'fired' at other cars. Remember the huge loss of drag by removing wings i described? That will offset the extra fuel consumption to some extent. Now imagine the air for the turbine flows over the radiators first, smaller rads = less drag = better fuel efficiency. Most importantly, by shifting the primary method of downforce generation away from wings, the cars will slipstream properly and not lose grip when following closely.

To clarify the automatic tire deflation thing (i really should have explained this properly ): the tire could have a small explosive in it which detonates when the upright separates from the chassis. If a tire was incorrectly fitted and fell off, the driver might have time to trigger a secondary explosive from the cockpit, not great but otherwise removing tires in a pitstop could also result in potentially dangerous detonation. (if anyone can see a good way around this problem please post it)

you do realize that a turbine engine is basically a big fan right?


The fan car was no worse at throwing debris than big sticky slick tires are. Or the current diffusers watch the cars in the rain.

[thearmofbarlow]

The fan car was no worse at throwing debris than big sticky slick tires are. Or the current diffusers watch the cars in the rain.

Or Rubens Barichello, for that matter. *rimshot* Thank you, I'll be here all week. Tip your waitress...

[MIKEY_!]

getting back to the turbine theory... it doesn't take air from under the floor, so maybe it could take in air through the radiator system. If it was sucking air across the radiators they could be smaller as well as not throwing up much debris, causing less drag.
@Nando: I'd say Monza style wings would be the way to go, negate any lift the body might create at very high speed and retain some of the look of an F1 car (also leaves good space for advertising)

[bhallg2k]

Barring a complete regulation rewrite - which I favor - I think an easy move for F1 would be to make the front wings a bit more narrow and eliminate the neutral central section. The precise width of the front wing could be determined by how much front-end downforce F1 wants to retain.

Yes, the neutral central section was formulated to decrease a car's sensitivity to the "dirty air" associated with closely following another car and thus improve overtaking. But, teams are now using that neutral section to feed as much air as possible under the nose to be routed to the rear of the car to make downforce at the diffuser. So, instead of a car losing front-end grip when in the wake of another, it loses grip everywhere.

As an added benefit, such a rule change would make the cars look better by reducing the proportion gap between the front and rear wings. It would also effectively erase the need for "broken noses," as high noses would no longer be all that beneficial to performance.

(Full disclosure: I don't really put a lot of stock into the notion that "dirty air" is bad for racing. Overtaking has always been difficult and will always be dependent upon performance differences between cars more than any other factor. But, if a non-existent problem absolutely must be solved, it's best to do so simply and elegantly.)

[flynfrog]

getting back to the turbine theory... it doesn't take air from under the floor, so maybe it could take in air through the radiator system. If it was sucking air across the radiators they could be smaller as well as not throwing up much debris, causing less drag.
@Nando: I'd say Monza style wings would be the way to go, negate any lift the body might create at very high speed and retain some of the look of an F1 car (also leaves good space for advertising)

turbine engines dont need radiators

[MIKEY_!]

the turbo v6 will

[Agerasia]

If following in dirty air is a problem then why not enable the neutral section to become downforce generating when within a second of the car in front?
Simples, I win the prize

[bhallg2k]

A veritable Drag Addition System?

[Nando]

If following in dirty air is a problem then why not enable the neutral section to become downforce generating when within a second of the car in front?
Simples, I win the prize

What should it get it´s downforce from? The car infront produces dirty air like nothing else.
Sure the wider front wing helped a little but its still so far off the target it´s not even funny.

Reduce the bad wake or air is the real issue.

[oT v1]

mounted machine guns that can only be operated within 1 second of the car infront

(but seriously - deregulation on hybrid energy boosts, KERS should be used when available IMO, not just an overtaking aid, this would push development on hybrid/'green' solutions)

[Jersey Tom]

I like the way Le Mans series (I think?) is going with very open engine rules but very strict fuel usage limitation.

That in F1 would be very cool. Or more open development in general with capped spending. Though you do have to draw a line somewhere... have some bounds so a new team can enter and make a reasonable stab at it.

[bhallg2k]

The ACO positively nailed it with the new Le Mans regulations. I'd love to see that in F1, too.

I don't agree with cost caps, though. Oddly enough, Frank Williams agree with me.