#F1 Daily News and Comment: Friday, 15th May 2015

DNandC

Updated 09:15 GMT A Daily Round up of Formula One news, inside whispers, opinion and comment. Today,

The Nasty Word

Genii doesn’t sell

Rosberg racing for charity

The Nasty Word

Benzindurchflussmengenbegrenzung is a very naughty word. I challenged Richard to try to pronounce it on the podcast, but he didn’t take the bait. And it was just as well. After nine hours of test reporting, waiting for and then listening to the podcast, I was so hogwashly bladdered I wouldn’t have been able to pronounce it myself.

This seemingly chaotic sequence of letters is the German word for ‘fuel flow’, a truly nasty word because it has turned F1 into the limp-wristed spectacle we’re seeing every other weekend. And the sad bit is, it is entirely unnecessary. We already have a limit of 100kg, don’t we? Why do we need a limit on how much of it is used and when?

Because that would enable the manufacturers to mobilize 1.500 horses or more over a single lap. So what? How utterly cool would that be? The manufacturers would strictly limit that ‘overkill mode’ to very few laps over a weekend. But it could be used for quali and overtaking. We could finally do away with the horrible DRS and the 100kg fuel limit would make sure there’s only so often you can use that mode. And on top of it we would finally start breaking some lap records who’d been standing for over ten years.

A rule that isn’t there cannot be circumvented. So do away with it and start fixing F1. I’m looking at you, Strategy Group.

Top

Genii doesn’t sell

It has been known for some time that Renault has been looking at four teams for a takeover and a return as a works team. The candidates are Lotus, Sauber, Force India and Toro Rosso.

While Toro Rosso’s Franz Tost has been sympathetic to the idea, expert were expecting Lotus to be the prime candidate despite the fact that the Enstone based team has the highest debt of all four candidates. According to Motorsport Total Gerard Lopez had offered Renault to take over the team for free and passing it back debt-free after the 2019 season, an offer that Renault unsurprisingly declined.

Matthew Carter, Lotus CEO, made it clear yesterday that Genii is not interested in selling the team now that the switch to Mercedes power has put the team back in competitive shape. Lotus is currently sixth in the constructors championship and the investors obviously expect the team’s financial fortunes to turn around with more Bernie money on the horizon.

Top

Rosberg racing for charity

Every Grand Prix Weekend there are people making money off the race by betting on several forecasts, but it is fair to assume that nobody earned the eclectic sum of €27.930, except for Laureus’ “Sport For Good” children charity.

AMG Mercedes decided before the season to donate €100,- for every kilometre that Laureus ambassador Rosberg would spend in the lead this year. So far the German had not been able to collect much in that regard, not being able to overcome his team mate, but a near perfect weekend in Barcelona meant he collected 60 laps with 4.655km each.

Next on the calendar is Monaco, where Rosberg is traditionally strong and could well add to that tally, were he to grab pole position again.

Top

Advertisements

18 responses to “#F1 Daily News and Comment: Friday, 15th May 2015

  1. “Why do we need a limit on how much (fuel) is used and when?”

    Didn’t the manufacturers put that particular rule in to lower development costs?

    At this point, it’s pretty clear that any rule change proposal that raises costs is going in the wrong direction.

    • Ahhhh, but if the flow meter were removed…..there must be a saving, surely.
      By the simple measure of tossing that in the bin….

      • No, the development costs would be big because the manufacturers would need to redevelop the motors to be competitive at higher and lower fuel flow rates. The cost would likely be surprising, in a bad way.

        The smarter solution would be to reduce, eliminate the aero wash vulnerability problem that prevents these cars from running nose to tail.

        • “The smarter solution would be to reduce, eliminate the aero wash vulnerability problem that prevents these cars from running nose to tail.”

          Indeed. Place development restrictions on the front wings…

          • I was just thinking at the weekend, why not just get rid of all the appendages on the front wing? Allow two beams and a single end-plate. Beams and end-plate must be free of slots but can be any shape desired within a certain box. Simple.

        • That would mean a change of all the aerodynamics, not just a front wing. Most of it (turbulence/dirty air) is caused by the rearwing of the car driving in front anyway…. Don’t get me wrong, I would like that very much, back to the wing cars of the 80’s, but it would be just as expensive probably. More power and more downforce, and qualify setting please 🙂

    • I agree rule changes usually seem to raise costs but maybe not by so much in this case. Engine manufacturers could redirect the funds they are currently using to find ways to circumvent the rules towards achieving a maximised result within the rules.

      • Honda approached its entire turbo design around the fuel-flow limit. Remove that, and Honda need to redesign a big chunk of their engine from scratch.

        It seems to me that fuel-flow limits were a direct result of Red Bull and Renault going extreme with the engine maps in the blown diffuser era, costing all and sundry fortunes to catch up. Remove that, and a lot of cash will be sunk into developing extreme engine mappings that have no relevance to much if anything…

  2. How about they get rid of the flow sensor as it appears to be too complicated and riddled with inaccuracies. Wouldn’t it be better to focus on the 100kg for the race and say 15kg for qualifying? That 15kg gets put in at the start with no refuelling throughout, any leftover fuel can be added to the race fuel. This way you will see some of the back of grid cars turning up the wick to get through qualifying whilst other teams will have to balance it to try to get the lap in for Q3 but still get through. This also means that if somebody gets knocked out early, they have extra fuel to use for overtaking in the race, which would spice things up a bit!

    • This might just be the best and easiest-to-implement idea I’ve ever read on this site…

      • Me too. The 4mj energy storage needs getting rid of and let them harvest, store and deploy as much electrical energy as they can get their grubby little mits on, from both the H and the K.

      • I wouldn’t. Merc have 1sec in hand now? All of a sudden that may jump to 3 or 4sec. I’m not sure this is what we want to see…

    • Yup. I have been advocating this for months. Open up the limitations on the hybrid recovery systems. they will be at 1000 hp in no time, without having to completely redesign the car/PU.
      This is the future folks. A tiny, highly efficient, twin charged ICE that runs at a constant rpm (its most efficient speed), that is simply just a generator, creating electricity to feed to the batteries and the electric drive motors. If they want the ICE attached to the wheels, it will be done through a CVT. (Williams was way ahead of their time).

      BTW, this talk of “1000 hp” is all well and good, but it will be a pointless exercise if the tires can’t handle it. Eventually the hp and torque will be too much for the rear tires alone, then what? we throttle back the power again, or go to 4wd.

      Sounds a lot like WEC doesn’t it?

  3. No need to tell me I’m dreamin’, but:

    2016 FORMULA ONE TECHNICAL REGULATIONS

    ARTICLE 1 : FUEL
    1.1 Each team will be supplied 100.000kg of standard specification fuel prior to the race.

    ARTICLE 2 : THERE IS NO ARTICLE 2 – JUST GET ON WITH IT.

  4. I agree with the sentiment regarding the fuel flow, despite comcerns for cars becoming dangerously fast at some places without it. Mileage matters in the real world, cars ‘come with it’, fuel flow is irrelevant to consumers.

Leave a Reply