Re: FIA wants to ban qualifying modes in 2021
Posted: 13 Aug 2020, 15:14
To an extent. The point of my previous post was to indicate / check that there were certain negative SOC modes that only make sense in qualy / (the last lap of the race?) and ponder if these are the sort of things that make the majority of the difference.stevesingo wrote: ↑13 Aug 2020, 14:49It is obvious to all who watch F1 that there is a plethora of PU modes available. Q mode, Overtake, various strategies for fuel consumption/power balance, safety car, VSC on and on. How on earth are the FiA going to distinguish which modes are permissible? Banning our Q mode? OK. We have a new mode called max power and is available at any time during the event, it is not a Q only mode though. No siree.
Very good point. The Mercedes powered teams sit 1st, 5th and 10th in the constructors standings. (Granted RP could be 3rd without points deducted, but their performance this season is more chassis related than engine related) It's about much more than just the engine as to how a team fares.Big Tea wrote: ↑13 Aug 2020, 15:11But there are 3 teams running this engine (soon 4) and they are not places 1-2-3. In fact one of the teams is right down the blunt end. I think far too much emphasis is put on Merc having the best engine. I agree it is the best engine and the best package, but there is far more to them being the dominant team because they were when Ferrari had the best engine.basti313 wrote: ↑13 Aug 2020, 13:31Well, the problem is that every racing series needs some sort of BOP. In Formula 1 the BOP in the past were frequent rule changes and restrictions to top inventions. Examples are the double dif, blown dif, FRIC and F-Duct. They could have fun for one or two seasons, then this was restricted and the field was leveled again.El Scorchio wrote: ↑13 Aug 2020, 12:56
So silly. It's like telling Usain Bolt he needs to run the 100 metres in flip flops just to give the others a chance.
Yet again it's punishing innovation and encouraging mediocrity. Why bother pushing to be the best when you can just whinge until someone slaps down a handicap on your competitor?
Things like this could really make engine manufacturers think genuinely 'Why am i bothering to spend this money in this sport if they aren't letting me show what my product is capable of?'
Having one engine far ahead of the rest is something which works for some years, but could put F1 into the grave if the same dominance is taken to the new rules in 2022. To me it is clear that you can say goodbye to engine manufacturers like Renault or Honda, maybe even Ferrari if there is no chance in winning after 22 and with the new rules leveling aero the engine becomes even more a differentiation. Then the Black Mercedes can run against the Pink, Orange and White Mercedes...
But I think the proposal is nonsense. We know that Mercedes can run higher modes for longer time than the others. So restricting the modes will hurt the others and favor Mercedes. The worst would be to restrict it to maybe two modes like race and harvesting, which would put a big difference in HP on the engines. Yes, one can say Merc did a better job, but this will be just a nonsense competition in the end.
I think that a general HP limit would be better. Highest mode = 1000BHP or similar. Then Merc can still profit from its good development by running this mode longer and on the other side we do not see the current downsides with a strong qualifying benefit and missing overtakes.
It is being used as an excuse by other teams
Exactly the point I was going to make next.henry wrote: ↑13 Aug 2020, 15:17In the end the team that has something in hand will have something hand no matter how they tinker. Race pace is almost exclusively tyre limited, if they have to use one PU mode for both qualy and Race the best teams will write a more sophisticated mode that recognises when a driver isn’t pushing and drops output, and system stress, accordingly.
If they go in the direction of regulating this like Parc ferme then I imagine such automatic changes would be seen as not allowed using similar argumentation used to punish Renault for the automatic brake bias adjustment.Mudflap wrote: ↑13 Aug 2020, 15:38Exactly the point I was going to make next.henry wrote: ↑13 Aug 2020, 15:17In the end the team that has something in hand will have something hand no matter how they tinker. Race pace is almost exclusively tyre limited, if they have to use one PU mode for both qualy and Race the best teams will write a more sophisticated mode that recognises when a driver isn’t pushing and drops output, and system stress, accordingly.
They would have to define what constitutes an engine map in order to define what a change in engine map is.
What is stopping a team from creating a mode that recognizes a slow qualy outlap and then triggers a qualy map on the last corner before the finish line ? We already know they use GPS data to control harvest and deployment behaviour.
That is not really a strong line of argumentation if one team has just suddenly come on the grid (RP) with a car so akin the works team it could have been a clone. Then what use does talking about a total package still have. In fact, the works team has had place 1 and 2 every race so far and place 3 and 4 are very much up for grabs by the customer team that has a works team akin car as was shown by a reserve driver stepping in and putting it there after 2 weekends. Williams have (which I feel to their merit) tried to keep designing their own car to some extent. A car that f.e. in Hungary was on P3 at the beginning of stint 2 in Q2. Engine does very much. Team 4 (McLaren) will also be a the pointy end of the grid next year with that Merc qualy mode. They have been coming closer every year on their on merit already.Big Tea wrote: ↑13 Aug 2020, 15:11But there are 3 teams running this engine (soon 4) and they are not places 1-2-3. In fact one of the teams is right down the blunt end. I think far too much emphasis is put on Merc having the best engine. I agree it is the best engine and the best package, but there is far more to them being the dominant team because they were when Ferrari had the best engine.basti313 wrote: ↑13 Aug 2020, 13:31Well, the problem is that every racing series needs some sort of BOP. In Formula 1 the BOP in the past were frequent rule changes and restrictions to top inventions. Examples are the double dif, blown dif, FRIC and F-Duct. They could have fun for one or two seasons, then this was restricted and the field was leveled again.El Scorchio wrote: ↑13 Aug 2020, 12:56
So silly. It's like telling Usain Bolt he needs to run the 100 metres in flip flops just to give the others a chance.
Yet again it's punishing innovation and encouraging mediocrity. Why bother pushing to be the best when you can just whinge until someone slaps down a handicap on your competitor?
Things like this could really make engine manufacturers think genuinely 'Why am i bothering to spend this money in this sport if they aren't letting me show what my product is capable of?'
Having one engine far ahead of the rest is something which works for some years, but could put F1 into the grave if the same dominance is taken to the new rules in 2022. To me it is clear that you can say goodbye to engine manufacturers like Renault or Honda, maybe even Ferrari if there is no chance in winning after 22 and with the new rules leveling aero the engine becomes even more a differentiation. Then the Black Mercedes can run against the Pink, Orange and White Mercedes...
But I think the proposal is nonsense. We know that Mercedes can run higher modes for longer time than the others. So restricting the modes will hurt the others and favor Mercedes. The worst would be to restrict it to maybe two modes like race and harvesting, which would put a big difference in HP on the engines. Yes, one can say Merc did a better job, but this will be just a nonsense competition in the end.
I think that a general HP limit would be better. Highest mode = 1000BHP or similar. Then Merc can still profit from its good development by running this mode longer and on the other side we do not see the current downsides with a strong qualifying benefit and missing overtakes.
It is being used as an excuse by other teams
Auto brake bias was deemed a driver aid and an advantage over drivers changing it manually.nzjrs wrote: ↑13 Aug 2020, 15:42If they go in the direction of regulating this like Parc ferme then I imagine such automatic changes would be seen as not allowed using similar argumentation used to punish Renault for the automatic brake bias adjustment.Mudflap wrote: ↑13 Aug 2020, 15:38Exactly the point I was going to make next.henry wrote: ↑13 Aug 2020, 15:17In the end the team that has something in hand will have something hand no matter how they tinker. Race pace is almost exclusively tyre limited, if they have to use one PU mode for both qualy and Race the best teams will write a more sophisticated mode that recognises when a driver isn’t pushing and drops output, and system stress, accordingly.
They would have to define what constitutes an engine map in order to define what a change in engine map is.
What is stopping a team from creating a mode that recognizes a slow qualy outlap and then triggers a qualy map on the last corner before the finish line ? We already know they use GPS data to control harvest and deployment behaviour.
I think this is entirely covered by the regulations dealing with engine torque output as a function of pedal position as well as the fact that the MGUK is inactive below a certain car speed.Just_a_fan wrote: ↑13 Aug 2020, 15:41Do the rules still require the first lap to be run in a particular map (to prevent launch control)? If so, just make the first lap map and the qualifying map the same map. There are a number of ways that the teams will get around such a change and, yet again, the best teams will do better.
But until they copied the CAR of Mercedes having the engine left them back among the pack. They have had the engine several years and not been top 3 contenders.Sieper wrote: ↑13 Aug 2020, 15:42That is not really a strong line of argumentation if one team has just suddenly come on the grid (RP) with a car so akin the works team it could have been a clone. Then what use does talking about a total package still have. In fact, the works team has had place 1 and 2 every race so far and place 3 and 4 are very much up for grabs by the customer team that has a works team akin car as was shown by a reserve driver stepping in and putting it there after 2 weekends. Williams have (which I feel to their merit) tried to keep designing their own car to some extent. A car that f.e. in Hungary was on P3 at the beginning of stint 2 in Q2. Engine does very much. Team 4 (McLaren) will also be a the pointy end of the grid next year with that Merc qualy mode. They have been coming closer every year on their on merit already.Big Tea wrote: ↑13 Aug 2020, 15:11But there are 3 teams running this engine (soon 4) and they are not places 1-2-3. In fact one of the teams is right down the blunt end. I think far too much emphasis is put on Merc having the best engine. I agree it is the best engine and the best package, but there is far more to them being the dominant team because they were when Ferrari had the best engine.basti313 wrote: ↑13 Aug 2020, 13:31
Well, the problem is that every racing series needs some sort of BOP. In Formula 1 the BOP in the past were frequent rule changes and restrictions to top inventions. Examples are the double dif, blown dif, FRIC and F-Duct. They could have fun for one or two seasons, then this was restricted and the field was leveled again.
Having one engine far ahead of the rest is something which works for some years, but could put F1 into the grave if the same dominance is taken to the new rules in 2022. To me it is clear that you can say goodbye to engine manufacturers like Renault or Honda, maybe even Ferrari if there is no chance in winning after 22 and with the new rules leveling aero the engine becomes even more a differentiation. Then the Black Mercedes can run against the Pink, Orange and White Mercedes...
But I think the proposal is nonsense. We know that Mercedes can run higher modes for longer time than the others. So restricting the modes will hurt the others and favor Mercedes. The worst would be to restrict it to maybe two modes like race and harvesting, which would put a big difference in HP on the engines. Yes, one can say Merc did a better job, but this will be just a nonsense competition in the end.
I think that a general HP limit would be better. Highest mode = 1000BHP or similar. Then Merc can still profit from its good development by running this mode longer and on the other side we do not see the current downsides with a strong qualifying benefit and missing overtakes.
It is being used as an excuse by other teams
Maybe that is also why there are now rumours around this. The RP can continue to race, but it will get reprimanded every race. FIA (not only there to serve Mercedes and its customers, the other teams should also not have to compete against a (partly) illegal car) is clearly not happy. Maybe feels that cloning the car (although partially within the letter of the rulings, but also partially not, proven already) goes against the sporting regulations and say, OK, if you wan to play the game like that then lets go the other way, no more qualy mode. It is not unprecedented, FIA does change ruling to break periods of dominance. Merc has been dominant in qualy ever since 2014.
True- and imagine if in the last race Max was sitting behind the two Mercs on their chewed up tyres but was stuck with GRANNY mode® and unable to push home his advantage?stevesingo wrote: ↑13 Aug 2020, 15:40I can see it coming. Post race interviews;
2nd placed driver, "I had a great tyre offset and was gaining on P1, but couldn't get close enough to mount an attack because I didn't have the full use of the PU due to the fixed mode".
The excitement of the two Austrian races was facilitated by Lando using the more extreme engine modes available.
Without the ability to turn up the PU, the viewer will likely be robbed of the racing opportunities they present.