In-season testing return?

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.
andrew
0
Joined: 16 Feb 2010, 15:08
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland - WhiteBlue Country (not the region)

Re: In-season testing return?

Post

Just_a_fan wrote:
andrew wrote:
And before you accuse me of being a Ferrari fan, I am not.
Good job really; judging by your defence of them at every turn I'd hate to think what your posts would be like if you were a fan... :wink: :lol:
I don't defend Ferrari at every turn but try to be objective. It is possible to not be a fan of a team but still see things from the other side of the fence.

TzeiTzei
5
Joined: 09 Mar 2011, 21:19

Re: In-season testing return?

Post

Which would be better: to have a couple testing days before or after the GP weekend? Having the testing before could affect the results in quali/race. Having it on monday/tuesday would help some teams understand why they were slow. I guess i'd prefer testing after the race.

This weekend atleast Virgin were struggling with their upgrades. FP1 was wet, and after that there was little time to evaluate the new bits and find the reason behind their poor pace. As a fan of the "new teams", i'd like to see them do well. With more track time they would be able to get the maximum out of their cars and get a little closer to the established teams.

I don't see this as a reaction to the poor pace of Ferrari. It's just that currently the testing ban makes it very difficult for every team to get their cars working. F1 is about technical development, and a crucial part of that development is to get the cars on track to find out what works and what doesn't.

As for giving the young drivers some track time, i'd let the teams to choose. Either they drive at fridays in FP1, or they do the testing days. Something like that.

IMO it would be good to have a two day test around the start of the european season, and maybe another test after the summer break.

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

Re: In-season testing return?

Post

Thats just too senceable for F1.

But if there were 6 of the European races where all teams had to test one young driver in one car would work ideally best.

As for an engine, id make a rule that teams are limited to 5 test engines a season. that would allow for enough milage for 4 for pre season, 1 for on season testing and 1 for post season testing as well.

Giving that a engine has a useable life of 1,500km to 1,700km, and the most pre season test distance in the past 2 years was Ferrari with just over 7,300km. 2010s average was 4,677.175km and 2011s average was 5,011.569km. So 3 engines doing arround 6,000km and 6,800km a pre season.

And im sure that with one engine for 6-single day tests on season, if we asume that a driver can do arround 400km a day, that would mean each team could do 2,400 a season in on season testing. From my 2008 on season testing figures.

Post season testing, going on season testing from 2010 drivers were doing arround 400km a day, and there is only 4 days testing for this. Whitch would mean a figure of 1,600km. Meaning one engine would be able for this.

If Test engines were limited as well to this, it could work, with my comments earlier in this thread:

Pre Season: 15 days (4 days dual car, 19 days effective with this) - 5 Engines (7,500km to 8,500km roughly achiveable)
On Season: 8 days (all European events, excluding Monaco) - 2 engines (3,000 to 3,400km achiveable)
Post Season: 4 days (2 days young guys, 2 days race driver testing) - 1 engine (1,500 - 1,700 KM achiveable) [This test would take part at venue of last GP for logistical reasons]

That means teams would have 8 test engines per season, whitch would be easily monitored.

And to make it equally difficult, make each race driver only take part in 7 pre season days as well, meaning more young guys would have a chance there as well.

i70q7m7ghw
49
Joined: 12 Mar 2006, 00:27
Location: ...

Re: In-season testing return?

Post

Why not just let them use any old engine in testing? It is testing after all...

I would like to see a few FIA defined test dates at specified locations. So you could perhaps have a Barcelona test the week before the race, to save on transport costs etc. a Monza test the week before etc. etc.

Everyone can turn up, if you don't you miss out, simple as.

You could ban the race drivers from taking part? If you wanted to make sure the teams had to use test drivers, young drivers etc.

If the problem we are trying to solve here is running for young drivers and reserve drivers then personally I would like to see the return of the third car. Banning it was a complete farce, no real money was saved. Every team still brings all the components for the third car to the race, they just don't build it anymore. Personally I think the rule in 2004 that allowed teams except the top teams to run a third car was fantastic.

Giblet
5
Joined: 19 Mar 2007, 01:47
Location: Canada

Re: In-season testing return?

Post

People seem to forget that cost cutting needed to be done, but now the world is improving so can the sport.

Getting rid of in season testing was a great way to temporarily bring down costs but it has served it's purpose and run it's course. New drivers need seat time. New teams need development time.
Before I do anything I ask myself “Would an idiot do that?” And if the answer is yes, I do not do that thing. - Dwight Schrute

donskar
2
Joined: 03 Feb 2007, 16:41
Location: Cardboard box, end of Boulevard of Broken Dreams
Contact:

Re: In-season testing return?

Post

Just_a_fan wrote:Who is going to pay for the small teams to go testing? Testing is expensive and I doubt that the guys at the back of the grid will able to afford to do much if any serious work - assuming they can get new bits to the tests in the first place.

The change will help the front runners more than the tail end guys so we'll see the performance differential across the grid increase. If the 107% rule remains we may see teams fail to qualify...
You conveniently overlook the fact that ALL teams are supposed to be budget limited. How they spend the budget is up to them. Are you saying that some teams are not even able to raise the budget allowed?
Enzo Ferrari was a great man. But he was not a good man. -- Phil Hill

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

Re: In-season testing return?

Post

The last year the 3rd car was used was 2007, but the last year it was activly used was 2006, andthe 2 drivers that id go for for a good distance number is Neel Jani (STR-Cosworth) and Anthony Davidson (Honda) who both did 4,100km for Jani and 4,500km in FP1 and FP2.

The problem is, how, just how do you police the engine rules on theese cars???

Hence, i think have a testing allocation per team is the only way to work.

It also means that with teams testing the day after every European race, exept Monaco, they can get a better handle on things. However, what id like to see isthe amount of cars a team can put out on track in test sessions allocated as if a team has won a GP in the last 2 or 3 years, they are only allowed to have one car testing for in season tests, and for theams that havnt won a GP in that same period they can have both cars out.

This would tighten the grid up no end i feel. The smaller teams would have more time on track, and more time to advance over the front runners.

Its hard to see what can be done, and how to do it, both with the engine rules being the way they are, and how to do it in a commercially viabale way as a single test day is rumored to cost €450,000.

Just_a_fan
591
Joined: 31 Jan 2010, 20:37

Re: In-season testing return?

Post

donskar wrote:
Just_a_fan wrote:Who is going to pay for the small teams to go testing? Testing is expensive and I doubt that the guys at the back of the grid will able to afford to do much if any serious work - assuming they can get new bits to the tests in the first place.

The change will help the front runners more than the tail end guys so we'll see the performance differential across the grid increase. If the 107% rule remains we may see teams fail to qualify...
You conveniently overlook the fact that ALL teams are supposed to be budget limited. How they spend the budget is up to them. Are you saying that some teams are not even able to raise the budget allowed?
I'm not conveniently overlooking anything; the poorer teams are probably nowhere near the budget limit because that was set to be challenging to the big teams. HRT spend around c.$35m where Ferrari spend c.$200m. I doubt HRT would be able to find an additional few million just like that in order to do several additional fly-away tests unless they get a lot of help from the FIA e.g. subsidised transport costs.
If you are more fortunate than others, build a larger table not a taller fence.

Giblet
5
Joined: 19 Mar 2007, 01:47
Location: Canada

Re: In-season testing return?

Post

They need a car that is a test mule. Same chassis, but it could have it's own set of allowed engines for the year. Fly it to each race. Allow a third car to run on Fridays, just like it used to be. Those Fridays were absolutely key to Vettel's career, and it's unfair that others should have to learn on track in front of the cameras.

The end problem is this: Testing takes resources away from the race team, so this is why most teams had a separate test and race team. So if we allow some testing in the year, the already overworked teams will be stretched even thinner.

At least if the testing was done at the races, each race/test could be 'wrapped' in the resources of shipping and manpower, it would be busier weekends for the teams, but it will be equal for everyone.

It would have to work around the forced shutdown mid season as well. No point in having a test after two weeks of factory downtime.
Before I do anything I ask myself “Would an idiot do that?” And if the answer is yes, I do not do that thing. - Dwight Schrute

User avatar
Steven
Owner
Joined: 19 Aug 2002, 18:32
Location: Belgium
Contact:

Re: In-season testing return?

Post

What is interesting is that I have not seen Todt pushing for more testing days. I wonder how he is going to suggest this to the teams, but his hesitation on it and willingness to get an agreement from the teams makes it look to me like he wants to cut down winter testing and move some of these days into the season. I'm not sure though, but I get that impression.

If the latter would be the case, then I think it's a bad idea.

I also agree with Giblet that instead of allowing more testing days they'd be better off to extend the running during race weekends, perhaps even the Thursday before or the monday after the race, and this only at some European events to cut down on travelling costs.

Richard
Moderator
Joined: 15 Apr 2009, 14:41
Location: UK

Re: In-season testing return?

Post

Agree, simply run a test session on Mon after the race, only allow drivers who have not raced that season for that team.

They could even things up for the small teams by allowing additional test distance according to the WCC points scored. A team with no points could be allowed an extra 40 laps, while one with half the points of the WCC is allowed 20 etc.

nae
nae
0
Joined: 29 Mar 2006, 00:56

Re: In-season testing return?

Post

I thought to myself the other day that any car that finished out the points could then test on a Monday.

that would make a tactic available to perhaps trade points for testing time for the mid range teams.

just a thought
..?

andrew
0
Joined: 16 Feb 2010, 15:08
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland - WhiteBlue Country (not the region)

Re: In-season testing return?

Post

Perhaps they could adopt the system used in MotoGP where teams can stay on at a track after selected races to test for 1 day.

Seeing as all the teams are already at the track there is a cost saving striaght away.

donskar
2
Joined: 03 Feb 2007, 16:41
Location: Cardboard box, end of Boulevard of Broken Dreams
Contact:

Re: In-season testing return?

Post

Just_a_fan wrote:
donskar wrote:
Just_a_fan wrote:Who is going to pay for the small teams to go testing? Testing is expensive and I doubt that the guys at the back of the grid will able to afford to do much if any serious work - assuming they can get new bits to the tests in the first place.

The change will help the front runners more than the tail end guys so we'll see the performance differential across the grid increase. If the 107% rule remains we may see teams fail to qualify...
You conveniently overlook the fact that ALL teams are supposed to be budget limited. How they spend the budget is up to them. Are you saying that some teams are not even able to raise the budget allowed?
I'm not conveniently overlooking anything; the poorer teams are probably nowhere near the budget limit because that was set to be challenging to the big teams. HRT spend around c.$35m where Ferrari spend c.$200m. I doubt HRT would be able to find an additional few million just like that in order to do several additional fly-away tests unless they get a lot of help from the FIA e.g. subsidised transport costs.
So just what are you suggesting? Must F1 be "dumbed down" to the lowest denominator? Teams like McL, for example, have earned massive sponsorship through years of effort -- and success. It's ridiculous that they can not enjoy the fruits of their labors. Or should the F1 budget be set at the level of what can be raised by the least successful team? A bit awkward, no?
Enzo Ferrari was a great man. But he was not a good man. -- Phil Hill

i70q7m7ghw
49
Joined: 12 Mar 2006, 00:27
Location: ...

Re: In-season testing return?

Post

ESPImperium wrote: The problem is, how, just how do you police the engine rules on theese cars???

Hence, i think have a testing allocation per team is the only way to work.

It also means that with teams testing the day after every European race, exept Monaco, they can get a better handle on things. However, what id like to see isthe amount of cars a team can put out on track in test sessions allocated as if a team has won a GP in the last 2 or 3 years, they are only allowed to have one car testing for in season tests, and for theams that havnt won a GP in that same period they can have both cars out.

This would tighten the grid up no end i feel. The smaller teams would have more time on track, and more time to advance over the front runners.

Its hard to see what can be done, and how to do it, both with the engine rules being the way they are, and how to do it in a commercially viabale way as a single test day is rumored to cost €450,000.
Why do you have to 'police' a third car engine? It will never race so it doesn't really matter. If a race driver wants to use the new car because he wrecked his then it has to have an engine from his season allocation installed.

The way I see it race weekend engines get put in a cupboard, and only used for race weekends, period. Anything outside of a race weekend and they can use any engine they like. What benefit would a team get from slapping a new engine in the car every single day of the test? None, if anything they will try to run the engines for as long as they can because they need to understand a high milage engine as much as a low milage engine.

I think you over complicating the whole engine thing, the regulations regarding race weekends stand, teams must make engines last. In testing, they will have to test this, so they aren't going to go mad spending money on new engines.

A restriction based on "when you last won a race" is silly, it would penalise those that won a race based on adverse conditions, like a wet race with a high retirement rate. Previous years championship position is the only way it can be done, just like how they restricted the third car.

The third car must come back, it's just crazy not having it. All of the components are there, they always bring the reserve driver, let the guy get some running!