F1 Tech should create an seasonal innovation award!

[Lurk]

Agreed with Mikey to roll out what has been previously done, unless it is a big refinement. E.g. TR sidepods are just like F92A one's.
But EBD (re)introduced by RBR are different from what Renault did in the 80's because it didn't exit in the diffuser but outside, and off throttle EBD is a huge step too. So it worths to have a look at it.

And top teams must not be excluded. Otherwise, what about U-sidepods, mass dumper or F-Duct?

[BreezyRacer]

Agreed with Mikey to roll out what has been previously done, unless it is a big refinement. E.g. TR sidepods are just like F92A one's.
But EBD (re)introduced by RBR are different from what Renault did in the 80's because it didn't exit in the diffuser but outside, and off throttle EBD is a huge step too. So it worths to have a look at it.

And top teams must not be excluded. Otherwise, what about U-sidepods, mass dumper or F-Duct?

Since winning cars prove themselves to be successful, even if only a single race, they can be argued to be successful. The point is to reward those that take a brave risk in innovation and fail.

[MIKEY_!]

To test how well this would work lets ask: So in previous years who would have got this prize?

For this test we'll say if a car has won a race it is excluded from the results.

[Lurk]

Since winning cars prove themselves to be successful, even if only a single race, they can be argued to be successful. The point is to reward those that take a brave risk in innovation and fail.

But I don't understand why reward only those who take a risk and fail and not all the people who take a risk?

For example, if (and it's a big 'if') McLaren kept their octopus or whatever it is a miraculously managed to make it work and dominated the entire season with that. Should this risk - which would have been obviously a huge one - not have been reward?
Or should Ligier JS43 and Jordan EJ13 be not eligible since they win a race because of apocalyptic weather?

[BreezyRacer]

Since winning cars prove themselves to be successful, even if only a single race, they can be argued to be successful. The point is to reward those that take a brave risk in innovation and fail.

But I don't understand why reward only those who take a risk and fail and not all the people who take a risk?

For example, if (and it's a big 'if') McLaren kept their octopus or whatever it is a miraculously managed to make it work and dominated the entire season with that. Should this risk - which would have been obviously a huge one - not have been reward?
Or should Ligier JS43 and Jordan EJ13 be not eligible since they win a race because of apocalyptic weather?

The idea is that then we celebrate the same set of winners as the world championship. So an award like that would be somewhat redundant and meaningless.

[Lurk]

Ok so it is to reward a non top team, more than a non-winning team - even if this year they are the same - or the overall best innovation?
Why not? Maybe the title could be changed then...

[BreezyRacer]

To test how well this would work lets ask: So in previous years who would have got this prize?

For this test we'll say if a car has won a race it is excluded from the results.

That's a really good question Mikey. I'm not a historian and though I've followed F1 ardently since the mid eighties I would have to study it to be able to answer conclusively. Take last year as an example off the top of my head .. The Merc spiked roll bar and dual inlets would be a contender. It had to take a lot of courage to begin with that design because it was unproven and pretty much irreversible.

Tack-ons like wings, are pretty easily tested and swapped out so not a big risk in trying new ideas there.

This year the Williams transmission and the Renault FEE are good candidates .. Maybe the Torro Roso sidepods too.

[gridwalker]

If you are looking for examples of what would have been former winners, then the 1990 Tyrrell 019 is a prime example of why this award is both a great idea and why it will be impossible to judge.

As the first modern raised-nose design (or "anhedral wing" as they called it at the time) the 019 was certainly innovative and never won a race. Would we have voted it in as innovation of the year? Probably not ... although this design shaped the concept used by every car on the grid today, it was 5 years before this feature became widespread and looked likely to become a historic curiosity as low nosed cars swept to the 1990/91/92/93 titles.

It was only when Benetton captured the 94 title that the grandee teams considered the concept seriously ... Tyrrell's idea wasn't just innovation of the year; it was the innovation of the duodecade, but who was to know at the time?

If we were in a position to judge these things, we'd be part of the great F1 travelling circus too.

[BreezyRacer]

Gridwalker

You bring up a good point .. maybe we shouldn't limit it to just one innovation a year. Where's the harm in recognizing any bold innovation that required a real design commitment to carry it out.

For instance this year the F1Technical Courageous Failed Innovation Award is issued to .. we could send emails to the teams and congratulate them and ask for commentary about the innovation itself. I bet someone would respond.

I guess the name needs work .. any ideas out there?

[MIKEY_!]

To test how well this would work lets ask: So in previous years who would have got this prize?

2009 for example (assuming winners are excluded):
RBR, Brawn, Mclaren and Ferrari are out. Who's left?
I guess Williams or Toyota because they came up with a trick diffuser as well (i think). Any thoughts guys?