planetf1.com

It is currently Thu Jul 19, 2018 8:07 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Posts: 6056
Location: Mumbai, India
Aston Martin has been impressed by the new envisioned rules that would be adopted into F1 from 2021. I hope other manufacturers too like it & are willing to enter F1.
https://www.crash.net/f1/news/892715/1/aston-martin-extremely-pleased-f1-2021-plans

_________________
Feel The Fourth


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26410
Lotus49 wrote:
That first list needs to be unanimously approved by the teams by 30th April to introduce it for next year.

So not a chance in hell then.

For clarity it's this one I believe...

* Airbox fin stays as it is
* Load tests for the attachment points of the noses are tightened
* Height of the exhaust pipes is reduced
* Exhaust pipes must not be angled upwards
* Bigger rearwing flap
* Ban of slots in upper part of rear wing endplate
* Increase of the slotgaps to the main wing
* Simplification of the front wing and ban the cascades
* New bargeboard dimensions
* DRS everywhere on the track
* 80kg min. weight (driver+seat)

No I think that looks good they are trying to improve the on track racing, it's just the DRS that needs specifying, I'm guessing it means you can use it wherever you are on the track provided you are within 1 second of the car in front?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 6th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26410
UnlikeUday wrote:
Aston Martin has been impressed by the new envisioned rules that would be adopted into F1 from 2021. I hope other manufacturers too like it & are willing to enter F1.
https://www.crash.net/f1/news/892715/1/aston-martin-extremely-pleased-f1-2021-plans

Aston Martin building an engine to compete against their parent company Mercedes?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 6th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4640
With no 'H' and a cost cap there will be a whole lot of interest. There is capacity there to make money now rather than spending half a billion to compete.

A lot of good engineers will be available and looking for more senior positions to get outside of the cost cap as well so starting a team rather than taking one over is an easier task on that front too. (In the sense of filling it with experienced talent rather than newbs I mean)

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4640
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
That first list needs to be unanimously approved by the teams by 30th April to introduce it for next year.

So not a chance in hell then.

For clarity it's this one I believe...

* Airbox fin stays as it is
* Load tests for the attachment points of the noses are tightened
* Height of the exhaust pipes is reduced
* Exhaust pipes must not be angled upwards
* Bigger rearwing flap
* Ban of slots in upper part of rear wing endplate
* Increase of the slotgaps to the main wing
* Simplification of the front wing and ban the cascades
* New bargeboard dimensions
* DRS everywhere on the track
* 80kg min. weight (driver+seat)

No I think that looks good they are trying to improve the on track racing, it's just the DRS that needs specifying, I'm guessing it means you can use it wherever you are on the track provided you are within 1 second of the car in front?


Oh it looks good yeah, I just don't believe for a second Red Bull and McLaren to name 2 will vote for it. It takes away too many places they can make up for their engine deficit in unfortunately.

It'll either die a death and be put back to 2021 or it will be heavily neutered I fear.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 3:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26410
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
That first list needs to be unanimously approved by the teams by 30th April to introduce it for next year.

So not a chance in hell then.

For clarity it's this one I believe...

* Airbox fin stays as it is
* Load tests for the attachment points of the noses are tightened
* Height of the exhaust pipes is reduced
* Exhaust pipes must not be angled upwards
* Bigger rearwing flap
* Ban of slots in upper part of rear wing endplate
* Increase of the slotgaps to the main wing
* Simplification of the front wing and ban the cascades
* New bargeboard dimensions
* DRS everywhere on the track
* 80kg min. weight (driver+seat)

No I think that looks good they are trying to improve the on track racing, it's just the DRS that needs specifying, I'm guessing it means you can use it wherever you are on the track provided you are within 1 second of the car in front?


Oh it looks good yeah, I just don't believe for a second Red Bull and McLaren to name 2 will vote for it. It takes away too many places they can make up for their engine deficit in unfortunately.

It'll either die a death and be put back to 2021 or it will be heavily neutered I fear.

If it's both Red Bull and McLaren that don't agree to it then they just expose themselves as being hypocrites.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 6th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 3:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4640
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
That first list needs to be unanimously approved by the teams by 30th April to introduce it for next year.

So not a chance in hell then.

For clarity it's this one I believe...

* Airbox fin stays as it is
* Load tests for the attachment points of the noses are tightened
* Height of the exhaust pipes is reduced
* Exhaust pipes must not be angled upwards
* Bigger rearwing flap
* Ban of slots in upper part of rear wing endplate
* Increase of the slotgaps to the main wing
* Simplification of the front wing and ban the cascades
* New bargeboard dimensions
* DRS everywhere on the track
* 80kg min. weight (driver+seat)

No I think that looks good they are trying to improve the on track racing, it's just the DRS that needs specifying, I'm guessing it means you can use it wherever you are on the track provided you are within 1 second of the car in front?


Oh it looks good yeah, I just don't believe for a second Red Bull and McLaren to name 2 will vote for it. It takes away too many places they can make up for their engine deficit in unfortunately.

It'll either die a death and be put back to 2021 or it will be heavily neutered I fear.

If it's both Red Bull and McLaren that don't agree to it then they just expose themselves as being hypocrites.


Being hypocritical seems to go with the territory in F1 so I'm sure they'll brush it off if indeed they do block it, I'm obviously just speculating and there could be others who do it of course.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 4:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:17 pm
Posts: 96
UnlikeUday wrote:
Aston Martin has been impressed by the new envisioned rules that would be adopted into F1 from 2021. I hope other manufacturers too like it & are willing to enter F1.
https://www.crash.net/f1/news/892715/1/aston-martin-extremely-pleased-f1-2021-plans

I think with these new rules, there might be even more teams willing to enter the sport.

Maybe even that long rumored chinese team.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 4:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 12:13 pm
Posts: 1298
Lotus49 wrote:
Oh it looks good yeah, I just don't believe for a second Red Bull and McLaren to name 2 will vote for it. It takes away too many places they can make up for their engine deficit in unfortunately.


There will be no vote. Each team will have to individually decide of they want to participate. Or leave.

When the next Concorde rolls around it will be very different than previous practices. Teams will have no input or say, there will be no negotiations, they either sign up or leave.

_________________
Only dogs, mothers, and quality undergarments give unconditional support.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 4:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4640
Blinky McSquinty wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Oh it looks good yeah, I just don't believe for a second Red Bull and McLaren to name 2 will vote for it. It takes away too many places they can make up for their engine deficit in unfortunately.


There will be no vote. Each team will have to individually decide of they want to participate. Or leave.

When the next Concorde rolls around it will be very different than previous practices. Teams will have no input or say, there will be no negotiations, they either sign up or leave.


We're talking about the 2019 proposals which do require unanimous agreement by the teams by April 30th or they won't be introduced.

The bigger 2021 one will be as you describe but they do still have a say, it's just majority rules instead of unanimous.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 4:24 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6121
pokerman wrote:
UnlikeUday wrote:
Aston Martin has been impressed by the new envisioned rules that would be adopted into F1 from 2021. I hope other manufacturers too like it & are willing to enter F1.
https://www.crash.net/f1/news/892715/1/aston-martin-extremely-pleased-f1-2021-plans

Aston Martin building an engine to compete against their parent company Mercedes?


I am not sure this is correct, Mercedes is not a parent company; Daimler (not Mercedes) owns 5% of Aston Martin and they also have an engine deal with Mercedes. The engine deal is for the V8's, while the V12's will be produced by Aston Martin. At least this is what I gather from that deal.

It is still weird, especially as AS get technical knowledge from Mercedes.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 4:26 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6121
Blinky McSquinty wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Oh it looks good yeah, I just don't believe for a second Red Bull and McLaren to name 2 will vote for it. It takes away too many places they can make up for their engine deficit in unfortunately.


There will be no vote. Each team will have to individually decide of they want to participate. Or leave.

When the next Concorde rolls around it will be very different than previous practices. Teams will have no input or say, there will be no negotiations, they either sign up or leave.


Surely it can't be as simple as that. What if half the teams don't agree on the terms? Will Liberty risk running with half the grid?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 4:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 3242
Lotus49 wrote:
Shamelessly lifted from "statman" on AS...

* Airbox fin stays as it is
* Load tests for the attachment points of the noses are tightened
* Height of the exhaust pipes is reduced
* Exhaust pipes must not be angled upwards
* Bigger rearwing flap
* Ban of slots in upper part of rear wing endplate
* Increase of the slotgaps to the main wing
* Simplification of the front wing and ban the cascades
* New bargeboard dimensions
* DRS everywhere on the track
* 80kg min. weight (driver+seat)

* Budget cap of $150 Million
* Budget cap excludes salaries for drivers and executives, and spending on marketing (the non pure racing items)
* Evenly distribution revenue streams to the teams
* Bonus available for Ferrari ($50 Million) and all engine manufacturers ($10 Million)
* Bonusses cannot be used on the car
* Simple majority decision making
* Special critical decisions at 75% majority
* In case of emergency voting: panel of ten representatives each of the FIA, the F1 management and the teams is entitled to vote

* 1.6 liter V6 turbo
* Elimination of MGU-H
* Stronger MGU-K
* Increase of revs (+ 3000)
* Relaxing of the fuel flow limit
* Standard batteries and turbochargers

These plans are non-negotiable, teams can accept or leave



Not much to dislike imo. Would have preferred a return to v8s or a twin turbo v6 but those changes are mostly positive.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 4:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4640
kleefton wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Shamelessly lifted from "statman" on AS...

* Airbox fin stays as it is
* Load tests for the attachment points of the noses are tightened
* Height of the exhaust pipes is reduced
* Exhaust pipes must not be angled upwards
* Bigger rearwing flap
* Ban of slots in upper part of rear wing endplate
* Increase of the slotgaps to the main wing
* Simplification of the front wing and ban the cascades
* New bargeboard dimensions
* DRS everywhere on the track
* 80kg min. weight (driver+seat)

* Budget cap of $150 Million
* Budget cap excludes salaries for drivers and executives, and spending on marketing (the non pure racing items)
* Evenly distribution revenue streams to the teams
* Bonus available for Ferrari ($50 Million) and all engine manufacturers ($10 Million)
* Bonusses cannot be used on the car
* Simple majority decision making
* Special critical decisions at 75% majority
* In case of emergency voting: panel of ten representatives each of the FIA, the F1 management and the teams is entitled to vote

* 1.6 liter V6 turbo
* Elimination of MGU-H
* Stronger MGU-K
* Increase of revs (+ 3000)
* Relaxing of the fuel flow limit
* Standard batteries and turbochargers

These plans are non-negotiable, teams can accept or leave



Not much to dislike imo. Would have preferred a return to v8s or a twin turbo v6 but those changes are mostly positive.


Agree about the twin turbo for sure. Would've sounded a lot better too for those that don't like the sound. No mgu-h will help that as well but a twin would've been better and helped turbo lag too.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 4:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4870
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
That first list needs to be unanimously approved by the teams by 30th April to introduce it for next year.

So not a chance in hell then.

For clarity it's this one I believe...

* Airbox fin stays as it is
* Load tests for the attachment points of the noses are tightened
* Height of the exhaust pipes is reduced
* Exhaust pipes must not be angled upwards
* Bigger rearwing flap
* Ban of slots in upper part of rear wing endplate
* Increase of the slotgaps to the main wing
* Simplification of the front wing and ban the cascades
* New bargeboard dimensions
* DRS everywhere on the track
* 80kg min. weight (driver+seat)

No I think that looks good they are trying to improve the on track racing, it's just the DRS that needs specifying, I'm guessing it means you can use it wherever you are on the track provided you are within 1 second of the car in front?

I would imagine that that's what it means. There might be some unintended consequences there. It raises questions about how the tech would work. Having sensors on the track would become pointless. The sensors would have to be in the cars themselves in order for that to work properly.

Maybe I'm too old school but I think that truly effective regulations should mean that there is no need for DRS.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 4:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4640
Toto on sky saying it's good to know where Liberty stands. Doesn't think 150m cap is realistic though.

Basically sounded like there's some things they'll argue about but some things they like which of course will be most teams standpoint. Be interesting to see what happens.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 4:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2017 12:58 am
Posts: 210
Location: Kansas
From what Toto said it sound like they need to separate out the budget for the car and the budget for the power units. Since both Merc and Ferrari sell PUs to other teams they need to spend money on development of those units.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 5:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 12:13 pm
Posts: 1298
Lotus49 wrote:
Blinky McSquinty wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Oh it looks good yeah, I just don't believe for a second Red Bull and McLaren to name 2 will vote for it. It takes away too many places they can make up for their engine deficit in unfortunately.


There will be no vote. Each team will have to individually decide of they want to participate. Or leave.

When the next Concorde rolls around it will be very different than previous practices. Teams will have no input or say, there will be no negotiations, they either sign up or leave.


We're talking about the 2019 proposals which do require unanimous agreement by the teams by April 30th or they won't be introduced.

The bigger 2021 one will be as you describe but they do still have a say, it's just majority rules instead of unanimous.


I don't know why, but two separate topics are in this thread. The first (going by the OP) is the long range plan paid out by Liberty, and the second are the technical changes due in 2019. To me they are very distinct issues and topics. I was talking about Liberty's long range plans.

_________________
Only dogs, mothers, and quality undergarments give unconditional support.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 5:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 12:13 pm
Posts: 1298
Lotus49 wrote:
Agree about the twin turbo for sure. Would've sounded a lot better too for those that don't like the sound. No mgu-h will help that as well but a twin would've been better and helped turbo lag too.


Today's technology is pretty good at minimizing turbo lag. But is it really such a bad thing? We shall see which driver(s) have had their perceived abilities masked by tech. If they are good, they will shine like Senna did. If they fail, then they don't have as much talent as some believe.

_________________
Only dogs, mothers, and quality undergarments give unconditional support.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 5:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 3:25 pm
Posts: 427
Location: USA
I think this is complete nonsense. The budget cap is the biggest nonsense. So you can cap the cost of the team at 150 million (or whatever the number) but not cap drivers salaries? That means you are capping engineers? The whole idea of a budget cap is to do exactly that Cap costs...then any bonus money can't be put into the development of the car? where does the money go? Profits? which just shows that true racing teams we have not, we have teams that just want a profit. So Ferrari gets 50Million and they just put it in the coffers? why the hell do that? They don't need the money for profits they make so much in merchandising and licensing the name than building cars, they put the money back into the team, salaries for the best engineers, the best drivers, the best technology that is what you do in a commercial enterprise. This is the most silly thing ever.

Please MB, Ferrari, McLaren its time to take the big three and Williams and let's go find a new playing field. Let Liberty choke on the billions they spent. Everyone forgets they are making money on the backs of these engineers that now will have salaries capped but not drivers...just more silly nonsense.

_________________
One.
The best song ever written....thanks Bono
I am the Number 1Tifosi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 5:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4640
Blinky McSquinty wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Blinky McSquinty wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Oh it looks good yeah, I just don't believe for a second Red Bull and McLaren to name 2 will vote for it. It takes away too many places they can make up for their engine deficit in unfortunately.


There will be no vote. Each team will have to individually decide of they want to participate. Or leave.

When the next Concorde rolls around it will be very different than previous practices. Teams will have no input or say, there will be no negotiations, they either sign up or leave.


We're talking about the 2019 proposals which do require unanimous agreement by the teams by April 30th or they won't be introduced.

The bigger 2021 one will be as you describe but they do still have a say, it's just majority rules instead of unanimous.


I don't know why, but two separate topics are in this thread. The first (going by the OP) is the long range plan paid out by Liberty, and the second are the technical changes due in 2019. To me they are very distinct issues and topics. I was talking about Liberty's long range plans.


Yeah I know because I posted the list that contains both but was unaware at the time. Myself and pokerman were talking about the 2019 changes when you quoted me though but maybe the new quoting system hid it I'm guessing?

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 5:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26410
sandman1347 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
That first list needs to be unanimously approved by the teams by 30th April to introduce it for next year.

So not a chance in hell then.

For clarity it's this one I believe...

* Airbox fin stays as it is
* Load tests for the attachment points of the noses are tightened
* Height of the exhaust pipes is reduced
* Exhaust pipes must not be angled upwards
* Bigger rearwing flap
* Ban of slots in upper part of rear wing endplate
* Increase of the slotgaps to the main wing
* Simplification of the front wing and ban the cascades
* New bargeboard dimensions
* DRS everywhere on the track
* 80kg min. weight (driver+seat)

No I think that looks good they are trying to improve the on track racing, it's just the DRS that needs specifying, I'm guessing it means you can use it wherever you are on the track provided you are within 1 second of the car in front?

I would imagine that that's what it means. There might be some unintended consequences there. It raises questions about how the tech would work. Having sensors on the track would become pointless. The sensors would have to be in the cars themselves in order for that to work properly.

Maybe I'm too old school but I think that truly effective regulations should mean that there is no need for DRS.

No this is just for 2019 and 2020, the 2021 cars may not need DRS for close racing and overtaking?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 6th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 5:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26410
Mort Canard wrote:
From what Toto said it sound like they need to separate out the budget for the car and the budget for the power units. Since both Merc and Ferrari sell PUs to other teams they need to spend money on development of those units.

The engine manufacturers are going to get $10M to produce and develop the engines, I guess that might not be enough?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 6th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 5:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26410
AstoriaisBACK wrote:
I think this is complete nonsense. The budget cap is the biggest nonsense. So you can cap the cost of the team at 150 million (or whatever the number) but not cap drivers salaries? That means you are capping engineers? The whole idea of a budget cap is to do exactly that Cap costs...then any bonus money can't be put into the development of the car? where does the money go? Profits? which just shows that true racing teams we have not, we have teams that just want a profit. So Ferrari gets 50Million and they just put it in the coffers? why the hell do that? They don't need the money for profits they make so much in merchandising and licensing the name than building cars, they put the money back into the team, salaries for the best engineers, the best drivers, the best technology that is what you do in a commercial enterprise. This is the most silly thing ever.

Please MB, Ferrari, McLaren its time to take the big three and Williams and let's go find a new playing field. Let Liberty choke on the billions they spent. Everyone forgets they are making money on the backs of these engineers that now will have salaries capped but not drivers...just more silly nonsense.

I guess you missed the part about the drivers being the stars, do you expect them to get paid in peanuts when comparing with other major sports?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 6th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 6:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6242
Location: Nebraska, USA
poker, If the drivers don't like they can go to other series... Kind of like what is being said of the teams, after all, they are also employees, just high paid ones.
;)

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 6:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 8:48 pm
Posts: 2719
Location: UK
I'm all for levelling the playing field but a budget cap seems a bit of an extreme measure. I would love to see an equitable division of the TV revenue and the end of special payments to certain teams so that everyone can compete fairly, but I have no problem with some teams having a bit more to spend on top as a result of effective marketing/branding and sponsorship deals.

But overall I'd give a thumbs up to the direction that Liberty are trying to take the sport.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 6:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4870
j man wrote:
I'm all for levelling the playing field but a budget cap seems a bit of an extreme measure. I would love to see an equitable division of the TV revenue and the end of special payments to certain teams so that everyone can compete fairly, but I have no problem with some teams having a bit more to spend on top as a result of effective marketing/branding and sponsorship deals.

But overall I'd give a thumbs up to the direction that Liberty are trying to take the sport.

The whole problem with the cap is enforcement. It's impossible to enforce. Huge corporations like Mercedes can hide R&D for the racing team in other departments/business lines. There is no way to police the spending of an organization of that magnitude. Mercedes is a MUCH larger entity than F1.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 7:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 12:13 pm
Posts: 1298
AstoriaisBACK wrote:
I think this is complete nonsense. The budget cap is the biggest nonsense. So you can cap the cost of the team at 150 million (or whatever the number) but not cap drivers salaries? That means you are capping engineers? The whole idea of a budget cap is to do exactly that Cap costs...then any bonus money can't be put into the development of the car? where does the money go? Profits? which just shows that true racing teams we have not, we have teams that just want a profit. So Ferrari gets 50Million and they just put it in the coffers? why the hell do that? They don't need the money for profits they make so much in merchandising and licensing the name than building cars, they put the money back into the team, salaries for the best engineers, the best drivers, the best technology that is what you do in a commercial enterprise. This is the most silly thing ever.

Please MB, Ferrari, McLaren its time to take the big three and Williams and let's go find a new playing field. Let Liberty choke on the billions they spent. Everyone forgets they are making money on the backs of these engineers that now will have salaries capped but not drivers...just more silly nonsense.


Yes, a budget cap of 150 million is a cap on engineers. The number of engineers and a reduction on the resources used.

For the big teams, they design and built sets of distinct wings for every race. This is irresponsible spending, on a massive scale, basically a war on who is willing to pour more money down a black hole. Because once the race weekend is over, all that money spent on building those wings is completely written off.

So does it sound irrational to mandate just one wing design that would cost under 100,000 dollars compared to 20 million a year? Would it have that much affect on the fans?

An unrestricted budget limit is bad for engineers, not good. Does anyone remember the three teams that entered Formula One only to fail a few years later? One big reason was the disparity in revenue sharing. Who was advocating for all those who lost their jobs because Ferrari and others did not want a budget cap or play nice with others?

And uh, don't put your money on Williams going anywhere. Claire Williams admits she wanted to "crack open some champagne" after the meeting with Formula 1 owners Liberty Media that outlined its future vision for the sport.

_________________
Only dogs, mothers, and quality undergarments give unconditional support.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 7:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 1754
Location: Miami, Florida
UnlikeUday wrote:
Aston Martin has been impressed by the new envisioned rules that would be adopted into F1 from 2021. I hope other manufacturers too like it & are willing to enter F1.
https://www.crash.net/f1/news/892715/1/aston-martin-extremely-pleased-f1-2021-plans

Aston Martin on it's own has NO MONEY for developing anything at this level. Unless Mercedes provide them with an influx of disposable cash with which to develop anything they wont be developing a thing. The entire Aston Martin/Red Bull partnership is a marketing exercise that everyone hopes will help AM earn more money.
In 2017 AM finally hit the $1 Billion mark and considering the costs involved for developing an engine for F1, I don't see how AM is going to afford it. They have operational costs for their consumer division to consider before extra curricular endeavors.

So while they may be "impressed" I'll believe it when I see it, and if they do produce an engine, it will most likely have been funded by their parent company.

_________________
HAMILTON :: ALONSO :: VETTEL :: RAIKKONEN :: RICCIARDO :: VERSTAPPEN
BOTTAS :: MAGNUSSEN :: OCON :: SAINZ :: PEREZ :: VANDOORNE :: HULKENBERG
GROSJEAN :: GASLY :: ERICSON :: LECLERC :: STROLL :: SEROTKIN :: HARTLEY


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 7:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:17 pm
Posts: 96
sandman1347 wrote:
j man wrote:
I'm all for levelling the playing field but a budget cap seems a bit of an extreme measure. I would love to see an equitable division of the TV revenue and the end of special payments to certain teams so that everyone can compete fairly, but I have no problem with some teams having a bit more to spend on top as a result of effective marketing/branding and sponsorship deals.

But overall I'd give a thumbs up to the direction that Liberty are trying to take the sport.

The whole problem with the cap is enforcement. It's impossible to enforce. Huge corporations like Mercedes can hide R&D for the racing team in other departments/business lines. There is no way to police the spending of an organization of that magnitude. Mercedes is a MUCH larger entity than F1.

So it's better to not try because some would try to cheat the system?

I would rather implement the system and try to catch the cheaters.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 7:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 3:25 pm
Posts: 427
Location: USA
Blinky McSquinty wrote:
AstoriaisBACK wrote:
I think this is complete nonsense. The budget cap is the biggest nonsense. So you can cap the cost of the team at 150 million (or whatever the number) but not cap drivers salaries? That means you are capping engineers? The whole idea of a budget cap is to do exactly that Cap costs...then any bonus money can't be put into the development of the car? where does the money go? Profits? which just shows that true racing teams we have not, we have teams that just want a profit. So Ferrari gets 50Million and they just put it in the coffers? why the hell do that? They don't need the money for profits they make so much in merchandising and licensing the name than building cars, they put the money back into the team, salaries for the best engineers, the best drivers, the best technology that is what you do in a commercial enterprise. This is the most silly thing ever.

Please MB, Ferrari, McLaren its time to take the big three and Williams and let's go find a new playing field. Let Liberty choke on the billions they spent. Everyone forgets they are making money on the backs of these engineers that now will have salaries capped but not drivers...just more silly nonsense.


Yes, a budget cap of 150 million is a cap on engineers. The number of engineers and a reduction on the resources used.

For the big teams, they design and built sets of distinct wings for every race. This is irresponsible spending, on a massive scale, basically a war on who is willing to pour more money down a black hole. Because once the race weekend is over, all that money spent on building those wings is completely written off.

So does it sound irrational to mandate just one wing design that would cost under 100,000 dollars compared to 20 million a year? Would it have that much affect on the fans?

An unrestricted budget limit is bad for engineers, not good. Does anyone remember the three teams that entered Formula One only to fail a few years later? One big reason was the disparity in revenue sharing. Who was advocating for all those who lost their jobs because Ferrari and others did not want a budget cap or play nice with others?

And uh, don't put your money on Williams going anywhere. Claire Williams admits she wanted to "crack open some champagne" after the meeting with Formula 1 owners Liberty Media that outlined its future vision for the sport.



I cam pretty confident if Ferrari, McLaren and MB leave Williams will be part of that world. As for the nose cone is concerned your right thats an excellent point for sure, my point is why not spend that money on getting fractions of speed? thats is the essence of F1 going from GP to GP finding speed and building components to find the tenth..as a fan its awesome. My position is the 50% of revenues that go to Liberty and not the teams, why is it that Liberty can make billions on F1? Every other sport that has revenue sharing/cap costs also control 100% of the venue the sport generates, get rid of Liberty and let the teams own the sport from a commercial perspective. When this happens there is no need for these crazy regulations. The smoke screen your are getting served is look at the hand not the face...Liberty is pulling the wool over everyones eyes, they don't deserve the billions at the expense of the teams.

_________________
One.
The best song ever written....thanks Bono
I am the Number 1Tifosi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 7:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:17 pm
Posts: 96
AstoriaisBACK wrote:
Blinky McSquinty wrote:
AstoriaisBACK wrote:
I think this is complete nonsense. The budget cap is the biggest nonsense. So you can cap the cost of the team at 150 million (or whatever the number) but not cap drivers salaries? That means you are capping engineers? The whole idea of a budget cap is to do exactly that Cap costs...then any bonus money can't be put into the development of the car? where does the money go? Profits? which just shows that true racing teams we have not, we have teams that just want a profit. So Ferrari gets 50Million and they just put it in the coffers? why the hell do that? They don't need the money for profits they make so much in merchandising and licensing the name than building cars, they put the money back into the team, salaries for the best engineers, the best drivers, the best technology that is what you do in a commercial enterprise. This is the most silly thing ever.

Please MB, Ferrari, McLaren its time to take the big three and Williams and let's go find a new playing field. Let Liberty choke on the billions they spent. Everyone forgets they are making money on the backs of these engineers that now will have salaries capped but not drivers...just more silly nonsense.


Yes, a budget cap of 150 million is a cap on engineers. The number of engineers and a reduction on the resources used.

For the big teams, they design and built sets of distinct wings for every race. This is irresponsible spending, on a massive scale, basically a war on who is willing to pour more money down a black hole. Because once the race weekend is over, all that money spent on building those wings is completely written off.

So does it sound irrational to mandate just one wing design that would cost under 100,000 dollars compared to 20 million a year? Would it have that much affect on the fans?

An unrestricted budget limit is bad for engineers, not good. Does anyone remember the three teams that entered Formula One only to fail a few years later? One big reason was the disparity in revenue sharing. Who was advocating for all those who lost their jobs because Ferrari and others did not want a budget cap or play nice with others?

And uh, don't put your money on Williams going anywhere. Claire Williams admits she wanted to "crack open some champagne" after the meeting with Formula 1 owners Liberty Media that outlined its future vision for the sport.



I cam pretty confident if Ferrari, McLaren and MB leave Williams will be part of that world. As for the nose cone is concerned your right thats an excellent point for sure, my point is why not spend that money on getting fractions of speed?
I don't think the little team can compete with that
Quote:
thats is the essence of F1 going from GP to GP finding speed and building components to find the tenth..as a fan its awesome.
I would like less also rans, so not entirely awesome as a fan for me
Quote:
My position is the 50% of revenues that go to Liberty and not the teams, why is it that Liberty can make billions on F1? Every other sport that has revenue sharing/cap costs also control 100% of the venue the sport generates, get rid of Liberty and let the teams own the sport from a commercial perspective. When this happens there is no need for these crazy regulations.
No regulations simply means the richest team wins, again, not so fun
Quote:
The smoke screen your are getting served is look at the hand not the face...Liberty is pulling the wool over everyones eyes, they don't deserve the billions at the expense of the teams.
I don't know, I think new teams will see this as leveling the playing field and would be more interested in joining as a result. As it stand now, smaller teams cannot afford to compete with the big guys and they can't make money, which leads to them being bought out or folded, and few teams wanting to enter the sport.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 9:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26410
Blake wrote:
poker, If the drivers don't like they can go to other series... Kind of like what is being said of the teams, after all, they are also employees, just high paid ones.
;)

If the drivers don't like what, there is to be no wage cap for them.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 6th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 9:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26410
j man wrote:
I'm all for levelling the playing field but a budget cap seems a bit of an extreme measure. I would love to see an equitable division of the TV revenue and the end of special payments to certain teams so that everyone can compete fairly, but I have no problem with some teams having a bit more to spend on top as a result of effective marketing/branding and sponsorship deals.

But overall I'd give a thumbs up to the direction that Liberty are trying to take the sport.

A budget cap is actually the only way to level the playing field between the teams.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 6th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 11:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2017 12:58 am
Posts: 210
Location: Kansas
pokerman wrote:
Mort Canard wrote:
From what Toto said it sound like they need to separate out the budget for the car and the budget for the power units. Since both Merc and Ferrari sell PUs to other teams they need to spend money on development of those units.

The engine manufacturers are going to get $10M to produce and develop the engines, I guess that might not be enough?



Ya think???? :lol: Even when you add what the teams pay per PU that probably won't be enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 11:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 13578
Blake wrote:
poker, If the drivers don't like they can go to other series... Kind of like what is being said of the teams, after all, they are also employees, just high paid ones.
;)


Drivers are exempt from the budget cap. They are contractors rather than "also employees".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 11:30 pm 
Online

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:04 pm
Posts: 1878
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Mainly worthless. It's easy to set out ideals without any indication of how they're going to be achieved.

This. There's nothing specific there. All just looks like PR speak


:thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 11:35 pm 
Online

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:04 pm
Posts: 1878
Lotus49 wrote:
Apart from the Ferrari payment which is, well it is what it is,


... just wrong, plainly and simply wrong.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 11:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 8:04 am
Posts: 1838
No way the 2021 plans fly with not just top 2, but top 4 teams.

$150 million cap? Please... Thats BS specially when it does not cap the top management and drivers. Mercedes and Ferrari can easily bypass these restrictions.
Simple majority decisions are fine, but only 75% majority for critical change is again BS. So if Ferrari, redbull or Mercedes exploit a rule and gain advantage (still within regulations), all other teams can simply gang up and vote them out to get that advantage blocked mid season. That is not going to fly with any top team, nor is it fair.

If Liberty is so much in favour of betterment of small teams, how about reducing their extraordinary 50% revenue share and share maybe 15% more with the teams increasing their revenue and set some realistic budget cap like $200-250 mil.

As far as standarding of the parts is concerned. I am completely opposed to anything other than ECU to be standardised. You can ban cascade wings or make single element wing mandatory. Thats fine. But no standard Turbo, No standard MGU-K. Sorry but that wont be F1. Whats the point if you want to run hybrids but want to standardise the hybrid part? How does that remain road relevant for the teams? If they cant innovate with hybrid tech, its pointless to have it on the car at all. Nothing on the power unit can and should be standardised.

Other changes like removing fuel flow limit etc are fine.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 1:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:45 am
Posts: 678
Location: Australia
Looks pretty reasonable at this stage but it will all come down to how it is implemented. The DRS thing is a bit ridiculous.
My only thought is that if F1 moves towards a spec series surely it will push up the price of the drivers and engineers who can find those small advantages in a tightly regulated environment?

_________________
#Keep Fighting Michael


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], Jenson's Understeer, mds, Paolo_Lasardi, Siao7, SteveW, Zoue and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group