F1 circuits the root of all evil? *Updated with #4*

[Scotracer]

Indeed it's not that Herman isn't competant at designing tracks it's the fact he is one man with one imagination. There's no way he could come up with completely original designs for every circuit. That's why I propose that a race in a new country (or a new track in an existing one) should be designed by a architect from that country. Give it a bit of national importance.

[richard_leeds]

Character is related to age, patina, and layers of history. Some of the new cicuits will acquire character as they get adjusted and tweaked over the years. At the moment they are a litte too new and clinical. Hopefully some ground settlement will start to have an effect in a few years on the tracks on reclaimed/improved land. Then they'll have "characater".

I have to admit that Bahrain with it's cuttings through the desert sandstone appeals to me, it conjours an image of the the driver out in the wildernsss just like the European forest tracks.

I like the circuit in China (the racing is usually eventful) but all those empty grandstands is embarsessing. They'd be better to have some open countryside.

I used to think the "newness" and the unfortunate designer having to fill a blank sheet of paper was the problem, but then Valencia came along. I've never been so bored. Even the bumpy swing bridge fails to spice things up. Apalling sight lines for the cameras. Relatively few fans. Compare it to the street circuits of Montreal, Melbourne and Monaco. (and Spa with its infamous bus stop!).

As for driving across a car park, that is literally the case in Melbourne (look at the left end of the lake, below the football pitch). You could still see the car park markings in the race this year and I recall a few cars had problems at that bit of the track. What we need is more car parks! (and bus stops).

[tommylommykins]

Although I've never ever raced in real life, I do consider myself an inverterate racing gamer: I do notice a big difference in games in layout and feel between newer and older tracks... To me, newer tracks seem to be almost entirely constructed of constant radius corners followed by long straights. The straights are also generally long enough that you can position yourself for the next corner long before the end of each one; there tend to be few difficult corner complexes, either caused by having many corners strung one after the other or interesting gradient changes... These tracks tend to be boring to drive on, not special.

I would imagine some similar things appear in camera footage: Cars going in straight lines is less fun than cars dancing around and being thrown about. Why is one of F1's most iconic images that of a car going through eau rouge? It can't be fun of the driving experience in itself, because that is not really portrayed through images. I don't think it's the tenseness of overtaking moves either, since that would otherwise be known as suicide there. Instead, in my opinion, it's just the sheer eye-candy of seeing a car dancing about from side to side with sparks flying while going over a steep hill.

Perhaps the increasing use of CAD systems has some sort of a negative effect on how tracks are designed... They might encourage designers to sit in front of computer screens, drawing perfect, constant radius curves on the screen, chuckling to themselves about their perfectness, instead of studying the ground and seeing how (if at all possible) they could ameliorate the design by taking advantage of the shape. Barcelona for me would perhaps be an example... Although it is built on hilly terrain, the track itself appears quite flat, quite smooth.. On the other hand, although I do not know 'how' it was 'designed', Zandvoort, which was built in a notoriously flat country has a lot more local and significant variations in height of the track itself, which really provides an enjoyable challenge for me in racing games...

perhaps also the desire to define what is a 'corner' and what isn't in modern tracks is also contributory. Looking at maps of older tracks such as the Nurburgring, Donington Park and Zandvoort, it's hard to tell the difference between what is a corner, a kink or just a slight bend. In modern tracks, you have a choice of a corner of X radius and so many degrees in length, or a deadly straight... Less variety.

[modbaraban]

Agreed. Also, how can he add elevation change? He builds his tracks in a place he's given. If it is flat like Keira Knightley, what you gonna do? A fake hills?

Suddenly the 'silicon valley' aquired double meaning.

And why there's no A1-ring in the Tilke-designed track list?

Looks like it was made before the generic_F1_track_layout.tiff appeared.

I almost fully agree with the original post. Although there are exceptions. Turkey proved that modern tilkedromes can be good, as well as Sileverstone proves that flat circuits can be just as magic as Keira Knightley mentioned above.

[Scotracer]

Silverstone is the exception to the rule because it is almost completely made up of fast corners. For crying out loud, the drivers don't even brake in Sector 1!

[modbaraban]

For crying out loud, the drivers don't even brake in Sector 1!

Don't they brake a little before Chapel?! (to load the front)

[Conceptual]

I had a thought about this yesterday after installing the MoTeC telemetry software and the rFactor plugin that allows you to use it for sim racing.

What I found was that EVERY SINGLE TRACK that we went to (Toronto, Monte Carlo, Indianapolis and Monza) ends up with an asymetrical setup.

Now, the logic that I followed on this was that during testing, "setting up" the car is literally tuning the car to the track. That leaves the competitiors on track with compromised balance, and sometimes inconsistant behavior.

My question is this. Is it possible to specifically design a circuit that is "setup neutral". My view is that if a track allows for a perfectly symetrical setup, would that help the track bug? I can see alot more consistancy, ease of setup, confidence and overtaking attempts if the track has a neutral bias.

Does anyone have an informed comment on this? Would the tracks all be boring? What is needed to maintain a symetrical setup, and what specific track characteristics determine the need to setup asymetric?

As always, thanks for any enlightenment!

[Conceptual]

Agreed. Also, how can he add elevation change? He builds his tracks in a place he's given. If it is flat like Keira Knightley, what you gonna do? A fake hills?

Suddenly the 'silicon valley' aquired double meaning.

And why there's no A1-ring in the Tilke-designed track list?

Looks like it was made before the generic_F1_track_layout.tiff appeared.

I almost fully agree with the original post. Although there are exceptions. Turkey proved that modern tilkedromes can be good, as well as Sileverstone proves that flat circuits can be just as magic as Keira Knightley mentioned above.

I always thought Tilke's track layouts were just modified clip-art assets!

Especially Abu Dhabi!

[mx_tifoso]

As far as circuits with a natural landscape and elevation go, the San Luis circuit in Argentina is amazing. IIRC they have labeled it the Spa of South America. Unfortunately it is extremely long and doesn't fit the current F1 requirements, and it too is in the middle of nowhere (practically). The remote location is the main reason Magny-Cours got axed, so I can't see San Luis as a probable candidate just for that single reason.

I agree with the defense of Tilke; he may design mediocre circuits, but an artist can only work with what he is handed (parameters).

[Jersey Tom]

Mid-Ohio, VIR, Circuit de Charade...

Elevation changes are cool.

[xpensive]

Good grief JT, you bring back memories buried long time ago. Bridgehamton, the Glen, or St Jovite, where cars were allowed to flip over at times.

[Jersey Tom]

Barber Motorsport Park has some wicked elevation and camber changes as well, and some tricky blind sections.

[xpensive]

I can remember way back in 1993, when I lived in Montreal, some friends from Sweden came by to see the race.

They insisted on walking the entire stretch the days before, took best part of the day that, just to get a feel for the possible elevations at Isle Notre Dame.

[andartop]

I agree with the defense of Tilke; he may design mediocre circuits, but an artist can only work with what he is handed (parameters).

No, that would be an industrial designer. An artist can use the same limiting tools and parameters and create a work of art!

Nothing personal against Tilke, but most of his tracks ARE generic. And even if they were "works of art", I'd still never forgive him for what he did to Hockenheim. Please don't tell me he was ASKED to do it: he still should have refused to commit the crime!

[WhiteBlue]

I'd still never forgive him for what he did to Hockenheim. Please don't tell me he was ASKED to do it: he still should have refused to commit the crime!

Nobody wanted to shorten Hockenheim. It was a requirement by FOM to keep the GP. So off they went to do it. Once Bernie had set his mind to it a refusal by Tilke would have been the last thing that would have stopped it.