new details of the budget cap to be announced today(thursday)

[news.bbc.co.uk]

is that not the most sinister photo you've ever seen



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/30/2009 11:05AM by marwood82.

I Heard, they just ban refuelling & heat device stuff?, is this good?

Just bring the cars back from 1989 and its all sorted.

full details here

[en.f1-live.com]

some seem a bit odd, others i'm wondering how they'll inforce,
but I do quite like the idea of this,

"To help encourage the new entrants, Formula One Management has agreed to offer participation fees and expenses to the new teams. >This includes an annual payment of US$10 million (£6.7m) to each team plus free transportation of two chassis and freight.

To be eligible for this, each new team must qualify as a 'Constructor' and demonstrate that it has the necessary facilities, financial resources and technical competence to compete effectively in Formula One. "

get rid of the massive entry fee as a deterrant to time wasters and instead actually talk to the individuals to see if they are able to give it a serious go and actively help the ones that are. thats a nice bit of common sense



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/30/2009 03:15PM by marwood82.

[www.formula1.com]

Weight limit UP to 620kg - Good for taller heavier drivers e.g. Kubica - but makes the cars slower

No refuelling So races might be shorter

More powerful KERS allowed, along with other stuff, for budget capped teams. This will probably include Williams and Force India, maybe Brawn too.

Races won't be shorter. They weren't shorter before refuelling was re-introduced, so I can't see why they should be shorter now. Mosley wants a greener F1. Keeping the races at the same distance will require teams to increase their MPG. Shortening the races won't require the teams to do that, which doesn't lead to a greener F1.

Not sure how much the refuelling ban will add to the spectacle, but I guess its true purpose is to get some trickle down technologies for the car market. I mean once everyone starts borrowing like crazy again they'll want the latest, greatest and greenest cars ever... :D

---

another thing that could happen in years to come with the cars now using full tanks to last the race is they can implement a rule where each year fuel wise would be reduced by (what ever amount of %)
heh this would bring back memories of cars running out of fuel in the old turbo days

also i`m glad those tire warmer blankets r getting banned which will cause a few overtaking when they come out of the pits with cold tires and the rivals already on track coming up behind on already warm/hot tires fun fun fun like the old days wonderful

So with the fuel ban, are they making any changes to Q3 of qualifying? It seems like a pointless session if everyone is on the same fuel load.

damn! i really wanted them to keep fuel stops, i love all that strategy! will they still have to stop for tyres?!

---

[en-gb.facebook.com]

iCeMaN pAuL Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> damn! i really wanted them to keep fuel stops, i
> love all that strategy! will they still have to
> stop for tyres?!

Hopefully they'll make the supersoft the only available tyre. They'll be in every 10 laps. :D

I'm also going to miss the fuel stops. The surprise of strategy has been lost a bit this season already, but it still adds a bit of variation. As has already been said, the fastest man will likely be on pole now (which isn't a bad thing), but in theory, the field will finish in the order they qualify.

I know the a few reasons have been put out (save on freight, safety, etc), but the real reason is so drivers don't use pit-stops in order to overtake. The only problem is, they'll all have the same weight and roughly the same performance. It'll end up like the 2nd half of Bahrain. We want the first half.

agreed, i dont like this decision at all.

---

[en-gb.facebook.com]

Why? If they want to win... overtake.

y2cwr2005 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So with the fuel ban, are they making any changes
> to Q3 of qualifying? It seems like a pointless
> session if everyone is on the same fuel load.


Readed somewhere FIA will change the Qualy system... for 649819819161984615 time in 7 years... I love the old traditional system from 1950 to 2002

Guess then there's every reason to welcome the change

---

Frantic Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> y2cwr2005 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > So with the fuel ban, are they making any
> changes
> > to Q3 of qualifying? It seems like a pointless
> > session if everyone is on the same fuel load.
>
>
> Readed somewhere FIA will change the Qualy
> system... for 649819819161984615 time in 7
> years... I love the old traditional system from
> 1950 to 2002

you do realise it wasn't the same system from 1950 through to 2002, don't you?

---

[en-gb.facebook.com]

and the old system was pretty dull compared to current one. There you had an hour to do your best lap there was less sense of urgency compared to current system, all it needs is maybe some tweaks.

Less exciting, but not necessarily worse off for it. It depends on what you want to see... sport or spectacle.

The competitor in me wants to see a return to the fastest driver being on pole, rather than the bloke who manages to get up to speed fastest. The TV viewer in me wants to see big names eliminated early on and a bit of last minute 'drama'.

I think overall the older format is far better, but the racing the next day suffers for it... and it's the racing we really want.



On a similar note, why is it that at the more processional tracks we don't mind a bit of dramatic qualifying, loving watching the drivers trying to wrench every last mm from their car... yet in the race, we hate that the drivers are doing just that lap after lap if there's no overtaking or close calls? Sport is weird.

If not mistaken the proposal was to ban fuel pit stops reducing then the race length from 300km to 250km, sounding more like a measure more like related to greater cost cutting than improve the racing if putting in a balance.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/03/2009 05:55PM by Rodrigo007.

The older qualifying format wasn't really that bad spectacle wise....As I remember 1996 especially was brilliant because Damon Hill had the knack of coming out at the last possible moment and grabbing pole...There were some fabulous battles. There were also all sorts of strategies involved, I think in Montreal it could be quicker to do two runs rather than the normal four...All in all I preferred it.

Banning refueling could go either way. It could be processional, but the competitiveness of cars and drivers can vary a lot from qualifying to the race anyway, without the interference of fuel strategy. If it is to work, the FIA will have to be softer on failed overtaking manouevres. If they keep penalising drivers for racing incidents then it won't work.

Whats the deal with changes to the car between qualifying and the race atm? If they're banning refueling I'd be in favour of allowing teams to change pretty much anything they want between quali and the race, although that'd fly completely in the face of their cost-cutting agenda.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/03/2009 06:34PM by The Lopper.