***Official 2010 F1 thread***

[Stormrider]

er yes, KERs is totally legal next year and is included in the technical regs.
Its the teams themselves have agreed to not run it next year as they see that it's in their own best interests. Well, apart from Williams who eventually agreed not to run in next year.

 

[Glaucus]

o is reduce the size of the engines and bring back turbocharging. But they can't quite wrap their heads around that concept at the moment.

Don't even need to regulate like that. Reduce fuel tank by 25% initially and allow any engine size. format, turbo or what ever. And every 2 years cut fuel tank size by 5%. End of the decade 50% less fuel being used in a race and hopefully cars doing similar speed. Real world application and kers and other energy recovery systems coming into there own. but only if they are far less regulated as well.

 

[sunama]

It's in the rules FIA would not interfere other teams would have to start designing as fast as they could.

In the past there have been situations where a team has designed a car or part. At this point the design is legal. They race and they absolutely batter the opposition. The FIA intervene and ask them to re-design their vehicle to remove the part that is giving them such a huge advantage. Even at this point, the FIA do not render that design illegal, however, in the interests of sportsmanship, ask the team to make the changes.

The above has happened numerous times in the past when a particular design has given a single team, too big an advantage.

Obviously it depends just how much of an advantage the team is gaining. If its 0.5s/lap, the FIA is unlikey to interfere. If however, it gives a team 2s/lap advantage, the FIA will intervene.

 

[sunama]

Don't even need to regulate like that. Reduce fuel tank by 25% initially and allow any engine size. format, turbo or what ever. And every 2 years cut fuel tank size by 5%. End of the decade 50% less fuel being used in a race and hopefully cars doing similar speed. Real world application and kers and other energy recovery systems coming into there own.

Nice idea.

 

[Glaucus]

In the past there have been situations where a team has designed a car or part. At this point the design is legal. They race and they absolutely batter the opposition. The FIA intervene and ask them to re-design their vehicle to remove the part that is giving them such a huge advantage. Even at this point, the FIA do not render that design illegal, however, in the interests of sportsmanship, ask the team to make the changes.

The above has happened numerous times in the past when a particular design has given a single team, too big an advantage.

Obviously it depends just how much of an advantage the team is gaining. If its 0.5s/lap, the FIA is unlikey to interfere. If however, it gives a team 2s/lap advantage, the FIA will intervene.

That was before the rules were so tight and this is specifically allowed unlike the others and the rules go into great detail. The comparison is nothing like each other.

 

[sunama]

The fact still remains that in the past, the FIA has done all it can to prevent a single team from gaining too big an advantage, even if the said team has done this, legally.

And the rules have always been as tight as possible. In fact, this year the rules were so loose that Brawn were able to create a car which had a double diffuser, giving them a decisive advantage in races, which ultimately helped them win both titles in 2009. So obviously, the rules are not that tight.

 

[Glaucus]

The fact still remains that in the past, the FIA has done all it can to prevent a single team from gaining too big an advantage, even if the said team has done this, legally.

That fact does remain, but is totally pointless and unrelated to what would happen if a team runs kers.

 

[Kenai]

The fact still remains that in the past, the FIA has done all it can to prevent a single team from gaining too big an advantage, even if the said team has done this, legally.

They've not done it when the advantage is gained from being the only team to utilise something the FIA are pushing though.

 

[sunama]

OK. Yes.

But how would the FIA respond if McLaren turned up with a cr 2s/lap faster than the rest, mainly due to their implementation of KERS? I just can' see the FIA standing back and watching while McLaren demolish the opposition and turn 2010 into a Hamilton benefit.

 

[JRS]

OK. Yes.

But how would the FIA respond if McLaren turned up with a cr 2s/lap faster than the rest, mainly due to their implementation of KERS? I just can' see the FIA standing back and watching while McLaren demolish the opposition and turn 2010 into a Hamilton benefit.

If it's solely due to KERS, an 'innovation' that the FIA actively encouraged and still want to see on the grid for the foreseeable future, then I can't see them banning it. Even if their not-so-favourite amongst the teams was doing all the winning.

 

[Glaucus]

OK. Yes.

But how would the FIA respond if McLaren turned up with a cr 2s/lap faster than the rest, mainly due to their implementation of KERS?.

Same as what they did this year with brawn.. Get building the new parts that's all they can do. Thinking anything other than that would happen is utter stupidity.

 

[Kenai]

OK. Yes.

But how would the FIA respond if McLaren turned up with a cr 2s/lap faster than the rest, mainly due to their implementation of KERS? I just can' see the FIA standing back and watching while McLaren demolish the opposition and turn 2010 into a Hamilton benefit.

I think even with it being McLaren they'd respond with 'See, we told everyone it was awesome and to use it, look how fast the one team using it is, our idea was so good, everyone better start using it'

 

[sunama]

But BrawnGP weren't dominating the GPs by 2s/lap. I think they were about 0.5s-1s/lap faster than the rest at the start of the season. Had they been 2s/lap or more, faster then perhaps it would've been different.

Another point is that while BrawnGP got away with their double diffuser I struggle to see how McLaren would get away with some other innovation. History suggests that McLaren don't get get let off easy.

EDIT: OK, I think Kenai has hit the nail on the head. The FIA probably would say that, "We told you so..."

 

[Glaucus]

It's mot an invention. It is specifically allowed in the rules and FIA can not change this. It is not the same as any previous situation you are talking about. Doesn't matter if it/.s 0.5 or 10seconds a lap. They will not ban it, they can not ban it.

 

[FrankJH]

Yes, they make the car as light as possible. That ballast is then used to balance the car. Using kers compromises the balance due it's weight and where it can be placed.
.

WHy cant KERS be placed on the central axis so as not to unbalance the car?

Or Even car is made underweight by more than twice the weight of the KERS unit and then having corresponding weight on the other side of the car (so as to balance the car again)

Just out of interest

Not only that, but it would a bizzarre scenario, if Button is wearing No.1 on his car, yet is being asked to defer to his team-mate. I don't actually think I've ever seen that happen, but should Button move to McLaren, Hamilton will undoubtedly be given preferential treatment and will have the advantage even before either driver has even set foot inside the 2010 car.

Exactly - although Button (or whichever 2nd driver does go to McLAren) will start with additional help for integration into the team I would expect - but come serious testing that 2nd seat will still be No2 whatever No is on the car.

 

[Glaucus]

WHy cant KERS be placed on the central axis so as not to unbalance the car?

Or Even car is made underweight by more than twice the weight of the KERS unit and then having corresponding weight on the other side of the car (so as to balance the car again)

Just out of interest

It isn't about balance in central line. It's about the overall balance of the car. The weight that is used in kers can be placed anywhere to set the car up and get perfect balance. Also there's only so much space in a car.

 

[FrankJH]

It isn't about balance in central line. It's about the overall balance of the car. The weight that is used in kers can be placed anywhere to set the car up and get perfect balance. Also there's only so much space in a car.

surely thats exactly what balance means though!!!

Same as what they did this year with brawn.. Get building the new parts that's all they can do. Thinking anything other than that would happen is utter stupidity.

Brawn may have been the team that made the most of it, but remember there where three teams in Aus with a double diffuser, so it wasnt like one team only using the device (ie surely the FIA would have found it easier to ban a device only used by one team, but by three totally seperate teams would have been far more difficult imo)

 

[Kenai]

surely thats exactly what balance means though!!!

It's not just a case of left and right though, it's front and rear too. No good having perfect lateral balance if all the weight is sat too far forward / backward

Not having KERS means if you can place small amounts of ballast here there and everywhere to have the overall centre of balance exactly where you want.

With KERS you lose a lot of that as it needs to be more of a big lump in one spot.

 

[Glaucus]

Brawn may have been the team that made the most of it, but remember there where three teams in Aus with a double diffuser, so it wasnt like one team only using the device (ie surely the FIA would have found it easier to ban a device only used by one team, but by three totally seperate teams would have been far more difficult imo)

It is specifically in teh rules, they can not and will not ban it , if some one runs it. To think otherwise is stupidity.


There is more than a central line in a car for balance. There's front-back and of course height. Using kers severely limits extra weight you can add where you want.

 

[sunama]

Brawn may have been the team that made the most of it, but remember there where three teams in Aus with a double diffuser, so it wasnt like one team only using the device (ie surely the FIA would have found it easier to ban a device only used by one team, but by three totally seperate teams would have been far more difficult imo)

That was my thinking. But as was suggested above, KERS is something the FIA is pushing, so it may be difficult for them to ban it or ask the KERS equipped super fast car to take it off, simply because the said car is 2s/lap faster than the rest.