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.
WhiteBlue wrote:Only a physical downforce limit online controlled by the SECU or a restrictive fuel budget will finally force the teams to build cars which comply with the downforce and drag limits and will allow proper side by side racing.
But what about FIA banning Group C prototypes (with fuel flow limits) and putting forward of unified 3,5L formula instead? It was made clearly to lure more manu's into F1.
FIA does what it suits.
This is F1 and not sports car racing. F1 has its own set of rules with the concord agreement and the RRA. Sports cars don't have that and it appears to me that the ACO rules are more important there anyway.
Fact is, rules are approved by FIA, and it won't approve rules that they don't like.
again, more BS, the FIA have pretty much rubberstamped everything the teams have collectively put forward, unfortunatly. They are constantly telling the teams to slow the cars but yet they accepted the moveable rear wing which will undoubtably increase (straightline)speeds(although the overall rules package may ultimately slow them down... for now)
I personally dont consider the FIA or FOTA to be totally good or evil, but the amount of mis-information(anti-FIA specifically) put out on these boards must be balance with some reality
The main problem is that the teams have to much money and staff invested in developing more downforce and aero ideas to ever accept a reduction of at least 50 percent in downforce happily.
This is where we need someone like MM with the strength of character to force the issue.
It looks like next year will be a joke with the rules coming in.
The whole circus is becoming a benefit for model aeroplane designers.
This thread confuses me. Is this supposed to be a criticism of the teams' technical proposals? If so, why are WB and Islam digging back 15 years to possibly the last time until this year that both the teams and the FIA successfully worked together to solve a problem? Is it supposed to be a criticism of the adjustable wings? Again, if so, why is the fact that the FIA supported the idea 15 years ago being used as evidence that the teams don't know what they're doing?
As for what happened 15 years ago, the FIA asked the teams to come up with proposals to slow the cars, and they did. And quite successfully until the tire war raised the grip levels above what they were previously. Fans might not have liked it, but that's what Mosley wanted, so that's what the teams gave him. Or are we saying that reducing the grip of the tires - reducing the contact patch - didn't help? Because it did. Or are we saying that reducing grip hurt overtaking? Well, you'd better tell Bridgestone, because they seem convinced that it helps.
And what about the aero? Even though the article WB cherry-picked from is biased (keep in mind here that this article is from Joe Saward's web site, written at a time when he was following Mosley around like a lost puppy), it says quite clearly that the teams decided to reduce the car width (including the wings) which reduced downforce. Maybe there was a better solution, but the problem of getting them to agree wasn't with the teams, but rather the structure of the concorde agreement, which gave - thanks to the FIA - veto power to Ferrari, which made any decision from the group nearly impossible.
OK, so let's play devil's advocate and say that what happened back then was a cock-up. Now we have FOTA, and an organization with majority rule that doesn't give disproportionate power to the manufacturers, and because of that they're able to pass the very rules that they were unable to agree upon 15 years ago. Once again, I'm confused as to why we're complaining about that - what's the point you guys are trying to make?
I'm just joking of course - please don't bother working up a twelve-paragraph rationalization.
I'm just joking of course - please don't bother working up a twelve-paragraph rationalization.
It is obvious that you are confused. As Islam pointed out the truth is very simple. It has always been the teams who made the rules with tiny exceptions and the issue of curbing excessive performance which is the duty of the FiA. Hence your above attempt to spread your confusion to the minds of other readers here is not having much chance.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best ..............................organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)
autogyro wrote:FOTA is still very much controlled by the big manufacturer teams but if you do not wish to know the reasons why ask?
There is only ONE true manufacturer team now in F1. Merc can basically be discounted as they just bought into various parts so as to become a "manufacturer team". Are you saying that Ferrari,(even with Merc) are controlling FOTA?? That would be news to all the other teams! All the teams drew up the latest raft of changes, voted unanimously for them, and asked FIA to endorse, which they did.
Don't forget McLaren. They have always had a manufacturer attitude and with the MP4-12C coming up for sale next year they are increasingly taking that view. So that makes it Ferrari, Mercedes and McLaren. Occasionally Renault is also remembering that they advertising for a manufacturers who makes their engines.
Personally I do not think that the manufacturers do rule FOTA these days. The independent teams won the tyre debate against the manufacturers who favored Michelin. But it is certainly a question of the issue on the agenda. If it is power trains the manufacturers can still mobilize some votes of their customers, not against explicit interests but in questions that do not touch their primary goals like cost containment.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best ..............................organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)
autogyro wrote:FOTA is still very much controlled by the big manufacturer teams but if you do not wish to know the reasons why ask?
It makes sense to think that they would still have influence over their customer teams - BUT, everything they've done to date goes against that. Tires, KERS, Blown Wings, etc - all things that are against the interests of the manufacturers.
I'm just joking of course - please don't bother working up a twelve-paragraph rationalization.
It is obvious that you are confused. As Islam pointed out the truth is very simple. It has always been the teams who made the rules with tiny exceptions and the issue of curbing excessive performance which is the duty of the FiA. Hence your above attempt to spread your confusion to the minds of other readers here is not having much chance.
And the fact that you've got to dig back 15 years for evidence doesn't make you question your theory in the least? You're out on a thin limb, dude.
Pup, think for a moment. The basic mechanisms of the Concord agreement have not changed. The teams were in a power position when the concord was written and it was written to protect their interests. The rule change mechanisms have changed very little with the extensions of the original concord agreement. Hence the balance of power is still as it was.
The achievements of the 2008-2009 interregnum are relatively small. The FiA have finally found a way of introducing new teams which the teams have to support. That is pretty much all they have achieved plus the RRA which is now supported by the small teams and will not go away.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best ..............................organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)
I just think it's funny that in the seven or so years that I've known you, all you've ever talked about was the teams' inability to make decisions and how the FIA always has to step in and set the rules in their stead. Yet today, you've decided that the teams were making the rules all along, and only because you don't want to admit how obvious it is that FOTA has finally kicked the FIA president out of the process.
I mean, how much more evidence do you need than Todt's sheepish withdrawal from his puffed-up stance on the tire issue?
Time to wake up and admit the inevitable - the FIA/FOTA was is over; the teams won; and worst of all, they're actually governing well.
Pup wrote:I just think it's funny that in the seven or so years that I've known you, all you've ever talked about was the teams' inability to make decisions and how the FIA always has to step in and set the rules in their stead. Yet today, you've decided that the teams were making the rules all along, and only because you don't want to admit how obvious it is that FOTA has finally kicked the FIA president out of the process.
I mean, how much more evidence do you need than Todt's sheepish withdrawal from his puffed-up stance on the tire issue?
Time to wake up and admit the inevitable - the FIA/FOTA was is over; the teams won; and worst of all, they're actually governing well.
FOTA has never kicked any President out of the FIA, Max was retiring anyway.
It suits the teams to give the impression that the FIA make up the regulations, that way they can justify any commercial changes that come up. The FIA does make the final decision but it is little more than a rubber stamp these days.
F1 today is nothing like it would be if the FIA had the control it should have.
The present model aeroplane formula is solely to panda to the car manufacturers.
Pup, your loaded language is not going to convince anybody of the quality of your points. Sure, the teams are now working better together than they did some years ago. The simple reason is that they speculate to get a better deal in 2012 when the Concord runs out. So they only need a limited period of discipline to get a very big price. Only the jury is still out how long this will last. The past FOTA performance on unity has had some positive aspects (like agreeing the RRA). But it hasn't been achieved without some major head banging from the FiA presidency.
Unfortunately the teams are still incapable of resolving some of the big issues like balancing safety and performance gains. This is particularly evident in aerodynamics where desperate ideas like movable front wings and proximity wings are tried toying with symptoms rather than addressing the real issues.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best ..............................organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)
