Do changes to the 2016 F1 calendar risk safety?

The_Abyss

The_Abyss

The_Abyss

Soldato
Joined
15 May 2007
Posts
12,804
Location
Ipswich / Bodham
Posted this on F1fanatic but would be interested to see what people here think.

The change to the 2016 F1 calendar, bringing forward the start in Melbourne, has had a knock on effect to the initial testing program.

This test program had already changed, dropping the number of tests from three to two (losing Jerez in the process). Now that test program is even more compressed into the start of the season. It now looks to be:

22-26 Feb, Barcelona
1-4 Mar, Barcelona
18-20 Mar, Melbourne

Although the regulations are relatively stable from 2015 to 2016, the lack of testing must be a concern on several levels.

Firstly, there are now just 8 days available to test a brand new car and get it up to a race performance standard. All the teams will be running significantly changed engines, and that’s not a lot of track time to test them.

Secondly, there’s little time between tests to make any significant changes, even modifications to aero let alone more complex components. Teams will be continuing testing in Melbourne to a far greater extent than ever before.

I worry about the impact to safety. These cars are now being put together in record time with a minimum of real world testing. Although manufacturing standards are higher than in the past, this doesn’t feel like sufficient time to safely test everything. How long will it be before a component fails and flies off into another driver? The chances must be slim but equally they must be increasing.

This reduced testing isn’t reducing costs at all – it is increasing them because the time available to develop is shortened. There’s going to be a higher risk of failure, and as well as the possible impacts on safety it also risks a higher number of retirements and ruining the on-track race spectacle. After all, as much as I personally enjoy watching testing the majority of F1 fans go to watch races, and that’s where the show should be at its best.

If this isn’t resolved by the next set of significant regulation changes in 2017, the start to that season risks becoming a test for a number of the teams rather than a competitive race. F1 doesn’t need that right now, and it certainly doesn’t need to risk making the sport less safe.
 
First off, 99% of engine testing is done in the lab on dynos. The test is to get that final engine working in a new chassis with new electronics, cables, find which bits of the car overheat and come up with solutions. The engine is not a problem, anyone that has a fundamental engine problem in preseason testing will not fix it by the start of the season regardless of the amount of testing, engines take longer to make/fix than a few weeks.

Not many changes will get made between tests, they are just for different planed testing stages. first week, get the car as bug free as possible electronically, not always much aero work done. second week, add some new aero parts on. Aero parts that are the result of changes in testing will mostly be data collected, go back to the team and then new designs made and brought to Spain.

Fixes to current designs are different, front wing fell off because it was made to weak, they can make up a new one or patch it to add strength.

Safety won't be impacted in the slightest. Everything that needs to be safe, crash test safe, is done... via crash tests.... before those parts get used. The chassis, the front nose, everything critical that has to be safe has to pass a crash test, if they can't they don't get used, if they do then it's the same as every other year.

Lets look at 2014, 28-31 Jan, 3 week gap(first day to first day), second test 19-22 Feb, third test 27-28 Feb.

This is a year in which the chassis, the car, the engine, the electronics, everything changed. Between tests there was a 3 week gap then a 1 week gap between the last tests. It's more than enough, they have always been close, you are underestimating what they can do in a week and overestimating what changes can be made between preseason and the start of the season.

90% of aero stuff bolted on in the 2nd/3rd test are parts they had before the first test started, but pats they test slowly over time to see the individual changes from one part and also to hide their best parts from the teams to give them even less time to copy them. If someone has a killer idea it is almost never seen on other teams in Australia but maybe seen in Spain or even further down the line in Canada, that is how long bigger changes make.


Testing is about getting what they already decided to start the season on(for the most part) working together while moving at high speed and finding the things they didn't find when it wasn't working. Minor changes, small fixes, adding extra heat shielding here or removing it there.

There are absolutely zero safety indications as a result of losing one week of a gap between that they had in 2014. With 100 times as many new parts the 2014 testing was more than adequate, it was even enough to get the RBR from disaster to the podium(ish) in the first race.
 
Car parts are tested to the extreme in the R&D test rigs, there is no way we would let any part get near the track that was not considered safe.
 
Redundant point really. Test chassis must pass crash tests before hitting the track so there won't be time for them to make chassis changes between testing and the first race. The cars will be deemed safe by mid Feb.

First test is over 3 weeks later than it was a couple of years back, so hardly putting pressure on either.
 
Interesting thoughts, but I still believe there's an increased risk.

In the past couple of years we've seen mirrors and cameras and other bodywork detach from cars, tyres fail dramatically when supposedly within their tolerance. No significant harm has happened as a result, but this is a sport of fine margins. Reduced testing will put pressure on these margins, and whilst open cockpits remain the risks must surely be increased.

Reduced testing is impacting development delivery and performance. Can we be sure that it isn't also reducing safety?
 
Tyres aren't something that are being developed during the test sessions and really, failures are not THAT common - it's not something that the test sessions would really mitigate anyway.

As for the bodywork - that's developed through the season anyway, so those parts won't see track time until a race weekend anyway in most cases so I don't see how the risk of failure is really increased that much?
 
It's a fair point - Force India brought new upgrades to Hungary which failed, rear suspension broke sending Perez into a spin, then flip, during practice, and Hulkenberg's front wing mount failed down the main straight in the race.

Those both leapt to mind, and I accept that it's the same race and same team but these things can definitely still happen.
 
Neither of those failure would have been affected by having more or less pre season testing though, which is the point The Abyss is talking about?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom