2016-2017 chassis and engine rules (proposed)

Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
Manoah2u
Manoah2u
61
Joined: 24 Feb 2013, 14:07

Re: 2016-2017 chassis and engine rules (proposed)

Post

mclaren111 wrote:Make Friday an unlimited Test Day at every Grand Prix [-o< [-o< [-o<
yeah it would help a whopping lot if they'd just add half an hour or a complete hour to the practice sessions and allow
full unlimited testing.
"Explain the ending to F1 in football terms"
"Hamilton was beating Verstappen 7-0, then the ref decided F%$& rules, next goal wins
while also sending off 4 Hamilton players to make it more interesting"

ESPImperium
ESPImperium
64
Joined: 06 Apr 2008, 00:08
Location: Glasgow, Scotland

Re: 2016-2017 chassis and engine rules (proposed)

Post

Weekend Timings for 14 weekends:

Friday:
0800: Porsche Supercup Practice (40 Mins)
0900: Formula 1 FP1 (1 Hour) Test/Development drivers in the cars, Pirelli experimental rubber given to 4 teams at every race for this session only.
1020: GP2 Practice (40 Mins)
1100: GP3 Practice (40 Mins)
1200: Formula 1 FP2 (1 Hour)
1320: Porsche Supercup Qualifying (30 Mins)
1410: GP2 Qualifying 1 (30 Mins)
1500: Formula 1 FP3 (1 Hour)
1630: GP3 Qualifying 1 (30 Mins)
1700 DAY END

1900: F1 Rocks event (2 bands/artists) ENDS: 2200

Saturday:
0820: GP3 Qualifying 2 (30 Mins)
0900: GP2 Qualifying 2 (30 Mins)
1000: Formula 1 Qualifying Warm Up (40 Mins)
1100: Porsche Supercup Race 1 (45 mins or 40% of F1 race distance)
1215: Demonstration Event (20 Mins)
1300: Formula 1 Qualifying RACE (1 Hour)*
1330: GP2 Race 1 - Grid from GP2 Quali 1 Used (60 min time or 70% of F1 Race Distance)
1500: GP3 Race 1 - Grid from GP2 Quali 2 Used (45 min time of 50% of F1 Race Distance)
1600: Day End

1900: F1 Rocks event (2 bands/artists) ENDS: 2200

Sunday:
0900: GP3 Race 2 - Grid from GP3 Quali 2 Used (40 min time or 25% of F1 Race Distance)
1000: GP2 Race 2 - Grid from GP2 Quali 2 Used (45 min time or 35% of F1 Race Distance)
1115: Porsche Supercup Race 2 (35 mins or 25% of F1 race distance)
1210: Demonstration Event (10 Mins)
1230: Track Parrade
1320: Track Opens
1340: Track Closes
1400: Formula 1 RACE

* Qualifying RACE:
- Drivers must complete a minimum 12 laps with 75 Kilos of fuel in first 20 mins, Fuel must be put in car before session and a FIA seal placed over the fuel filler cover
- After the 20 minute marker is reached, any driver not out on track is left in the garage.
- From 20 mins on, every two minutes a driver is pulled in, even if on a faster lap if he is the slowest at that point.
- The last 5 drivers on the track then be able to bolt on a set of quail tyres to set a single super pole in the last 6 minutes
- Session is rolling, no stops between sessions.

Basically, Qualifying is a balls to the wall, drive like you mean it hour where the consistently fast prevail.

Lots of seat time available across all the Formula. And time for Developing drivers will be allocated by regulation.

User avatar
mclaren111
277
Joined: 06 Apr 2014, 10:49
Location: Shithole - South Africa

Re: 2016-2017 chassis and engine rules (proposed)

Post

Let's make it the Thursday then - they are already there :D

Or, every second race meeting. This will give them more time to review and prepare parts etc.

User avatar
Racer X
8
Joined: 21 Apr 2013, 19:04

Re: 2016-2017 chassis and engine rules (proposed)

Post

Will the Manufacturers have to give current spec engines any time soon I heard they were talking about that but what became of it'?
RedBull Racing Checo//PEREZ

User avatar
FW17
168
Joined: 06 Jan 2010, 10:56

Re: 2016-2017 chassis and engine rules (proposed)

Post

Image


Loved this, if only the author made the rear end plate smaller............

User avatar
TAG
20
Joined: 09 Dec 2014, 16:18
Location: in a good place

Re: 2016-2017 chassis and engine rules (proposed)

Post

Trying to get some type of bearings on what's going on from an engine perspective for 2017. January 15th is the date the proposals from the teams is expected by the FiA since Ferrari vetoed the alternate engine idea. The regulation for what the cars will look like from an aerodynamic standpoint is pretty much set. What's going to be in the back of those cars is completely up in the air. Given the fact that they have a year to implement anything that's decided, it can't be too drastic or else there's not a chance of it happening. 2018 is the realistic target.
Autoweek To make the alternative engine happen, Todt and Ecclestone had to get it through the F1 Commission, where they, the teams and other interested parties -- elected promoters and sponsors -- have a vote. The numbers suggested that opposition from the teams would nix it.

Undaunted, the FIA recently issued a “call for expressions of interest,” the first stage of a tender process. This would at least prove that there were potential sources of the alternative engine. Four companies replied, namely Ilmor, Mecachrome (the GP2 supplier), AER (GP3 and Indy Lights) and RML Group.

This information was relayed at yesterday's F1 Commission meeting, where after a debate and to no one's great surprise, the idea of an alternative engine was not passed.

Instead, the manufacturers have agreed to a compromise and tackle the key issues that the alternative engine was supposed to address by coming up with their own ideas – but the FIA has stressed that the alternative is being kept in reserve, just in case.

Regarding the vote, the FIA noted today, “The meetings acknowledged the four credible Expressions of Interest made for the manufacture and supply of a less-expensive alternative customer engine.

“The F1 Commission voted not to pursue this option at this stage -- however, it may be reassessed after the power unit manufacturers have presented their proposal to the Strategy Group.”

They have to submit a proposal by Jan. 15, with the first meetings on the subject taking place in Abu Dhabi this week. The FIA has outlined the issues that the proposal has to consider: “The parties involved have agreed on a course to address several key areas relating to Power Unit supply in Formula One. These areas are:

-- Guarantee of the supply of power units to teams
-- The need to lower the cost of power units to customer teams
-- Simplification of the technical specification of the power units
-- Improved noise


“The manufacturers, in conjunction with the FIA, will present a proposal by Jan. 15 that will seek to provide solutions to the above concerns.

“The proposal will include the establishment of a minimum number of teams that a manufacturer must supply, ensuring that all teams will have access to a power unit.

“Measures will also be put forward to reduce the cost of the supply of hybrid power units for customer teams, as well as improving their noise.

“All stakeholders agreed that the developments will aim for the 2017 season at the earliest, and 2018 at the latest. The first meeting between the FIA and the power unit manufacturers on this topic will be held this week at the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix.”

Is this whole alternative engine saga just a ploy to wrestle power back from the manufacturers, by scaring them into submission with the threat of a cheaper but competitive engine that could make them look silly?

That's certainly one way to interpret this saga. If it works, and the manufacturers lower their prices to customers and make it easier for a team like Red Bull to secure a supply, then that can only be a good thing. Do we really want an F1 where teams are running to completely different rules? Most sensible people would say no.

The situation remains in a state of flux, and as noted, the FIA is keeping the alternative engine plan on the back burner just in case the manufacturers don't play ball. The potential suppliers, all of whom applied in good faith, will have to wait and see if one of them is actually needed, or if they have all been wasting their time. It will be fascinating to see how it all pans out.
Here's a pretty slick clip released by Mercedes showing side by side 2015/2017 chassis and aerodynamic changes.

माकडाच्या हाती कोलीत

scarbs
scarbs
393
Joined: 08 Oct 2003, 09:47
Location: Hertfordshire, UK

Re: 2016-2017 chassis and engine rules (proposed)

Post

That's not a Merc clip. The rules are not yet fixed, changes were agreed just before xmas, it will be late Jan before the rules are fully agreed.
Last edited by scarbs on 04 Jan 2016, 22:58, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Thunder
Moderator
Joined: 06 Feb 2013, 09:50
Location: Germany

Re: 2016-2017 chassis and engine rules (proposed)

Post

That's the Clip from Piola done for AMuS.
turbof1 wrote: YOU SHALL NOT......STALLLLL!!!
#aerogollum

User avatar
TAG
20
Joined: 09 Dec 2014, 16:18
Location: in a good place

Re: 2016-2017 chassis and engine rules (proposed)

Post

The clip was shared by Mercedes a few weeks ago. The short answer is that everything is still pretty much up in the air.
माकडाच्या हाती कोलीत

User avatar
Hail22
144
Joined: 08 Feb 2012, 07:22

Re: 2016-2017 chassis and engine rules (proposed)

Post

Formula 1.com has posted an article going into more detail about the future vision for 2017:

https://www.formula1.com/content/fom-we ... style.html

Image

Image

Image

Image
If someone said to me that you can have three wishes, my first would have been to get into racing, my second to be in Formula 1, my third to drive for Ferrari.

Gilles Villeneuve

Sevach
Sevach
1049
Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 17:00

Re: 2016-2017 chassis and engine rules (proposed)

Post

One thing i don't understand, the wide floor with the sidepods staying the same, it's so weird.

User avatar
djos
113
Joined: 19 May 2006, 06:09
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: 2016-2017 chassis and engine rules (proposed)

Post

The wider rear tires and bigger rear diffuser certainly look a lot better, Im not sold on the rear wing tho. It would have been better if they just made this years RW wider imo.
"In downforce we trust"

Sevach
Sevach
1049
Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 17:00

Re: 2016-2017 chassis and engine rules (proposed)

Post

From the front or back the RW is totally fine, from a lateral angle it's a bit weird but i think it's easy to get used to.

User avatar
djos
113
Joined: 19 May 2006, 06:09
Location: Melbourne, Australia

2016-2017 chassis and engine rules (proposed)

Post

If you look at the early 90's cars, their rear wings were the same height as today's but much wider, looks fantastic imo and that's what I was hoping for a return to.
"In downforce we trust"

User avatar
F1NAC
164
Joined: 31 Mar 2013, 22:35

Re: 2016-2017 chassis and engine rules (proposed)

Post

Those bargeboards are huge