F1 Engine Future - April 1?

[Garak]

Read here. The Motorsport comment section shows a lot of disbelief. It hasn't been retracted yet, but I find it exceedingly hard to believe that all that stakeholders met in Paris the other day (I suppose someone curious and industrious enough could confirm whether such a meeting actually took place; I'm skeptical with their being no pictures), plus brought in outside stakeholders (i.e. VW/Audi who pulled out of WEC and WRC), to come into some "general agreement" for the future, very quickly and in such a sunny fashion.

On the other hand, if it is real, I still don't believe it. With Bernie mostly out of the picture, Todt has become the resident senile, and they could easily be blowing smoke up his rear end, with vague promises about something that may or may not transpire long after his mandate expires. We've already seen teams promise something one day, then change votes two days later, throwing everything up in the air. Look at the debacle we had with last year's qualifying. It should have been solved immediately with the teams being supposedly unanimous, but it never worked out that way as various decision deadlines passed.

I haven't seen this posted on the official F1 site, just the Motorsport/Autosport sites, and the usual suspects that just copy everything they see, fuelling a bit of skepticism. Then again, anyone who takes something seriously from that date without massive, independent confirmation is simply asking to look foolish.

 

[Klutch9]

I, too, am doubtful that this 'meeting' happened. While probably just an April fools joke, it would be nice to see a louder and more competitive F1. Sounds like deju vu!

 

[Garak]

What gets me is that there are no quotes of any other stakeholders, other than Todt. In another story around the same time, Monisha Kaltenborn was interviewed, talking about Sauber getting points this season. She didn't mention a word of this, yet would have very likely have had to have been at this meeting, and would be someone jumping up and down with glee at cheaper engines and engines that wouldn't disadvantage non-works teams so much.

Max Verstappen said something about liking this idea and expressed an interest in V-10s, but whether that's spurious or not remains to be seen.

Of course, if the meeting really did happen and it did turn out the way the article says, there's a very good reason why Autosport/Motorsport aren't jumping up and down with loads of editorials and opinion pieces. The sport can't get its head around what it should do with a halo device, despite a fair bit of cooperation among the teams. Something this involved and far reaching and that far down the road is virtually meaningless.

By the time that time frame comes about, Bernie could have already started a competing series.

 

[billt460]

We'll find out Friday. If it's true Matchett will be all over it.

 

[Garak]

I'll have to be satisfied with Martin Brundle and Pat Symonds. Even if "true," it strikes me as one of the most disingenuous statements made in the business in the past several years.

 

[billt460]

I think these teams are shocked at how much these new turbo power plants cost to develop and maintain, compared to the V-10's. Now they're looking for a way out. I hope they find one.

 

[Garak]

It can't be any worse than having 100 plus engines in the install/ship/rebuild/ship/reinstall pipeline of years past. And, the three engine weekends are over, unless you're running Hondas.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: billt460
I think these teams are shocked at how much these new turbo power plants cost to develop and maintain, compared to the V-10's. Now they're looking for a way out. I hope they find one.

Unless they're stretching the gag, it looks like some sort of meeting took place. However, at least one manufacturer wants a four cylinder. So, yes, this is going to go really well. It's just more of the same from F1, and the gag's on us.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: billt460
I think these teams are shocked at how much these new turbo power plants cost to develop and maintain, compared to the V-10's. Now they're looking for a way out. I hope they find one.

A few more details have crept out. It seems like it was just some journalist or an F1 press release writer overselling the issue substantially. It doesn't seem like a lot of relevant people were involved at all. The current engine manufacturers were there. From outside interests, as in potential constructors/engine suppliers or independents, VW Group was there and so was a Fiat representative. Oh, and Mario Ilien was there. What a fantastic turnout.

I don't doubt the appeal of some of the engines of old. But, it's been pointed out that these engines have gone from a decent thermal efficiency of 40% to exceeding 50% in a very, very short time frame. Throwing that baby out with the bathwater won't be exactly appealing.

The concern is that the VW Group will try to push a front wheel KERS, which other constructors fear is a prelude to 4WD F1 cars, which is as good an excuse as any for other teams to vote against any change whatsoever.

 

[billt460]

It's gotten to the point with all of this endless "technology", that one would think the cost of these cars could be cut in half by simply eliminating most all of it. Everybody gets that F1 racing is on the "cutting edge" of racing technology. But they have almost taken it to the point of ridiculousness involving cost. I've never seen so much money simply burned. And in the process not delivering any more excitement on the track. Wider tires and wings are cheap compared to all the KERS and turbo equipment they've been putting on these cars. It shouldn't cost hundreds of millions of dollars to knock a second and a half off lap times on these circuits.

 

[Garak]

Sure, it could be cut in half. However, Christian Horner put it best. When the sponsors pay a team, the team will spend the money, and all of it, no matter how much it is.

Budgets have actually fallen since several years ago, particularly compared to what they were at the height of tobacco advertising. As I mentioned, having dozens of engines per car in a pipeline of endless rebuilds and refits, and three or four engines per weekend under the old rules (current Honda notwithstanding) runs into a lot of money, too.

At least the companies of Mercedes, Ferrari, Renault, and Honda can see some justification in a board room meeting for making an advanced, expensive engine. Dump normally aspirated V-10s or V-12s with minimal technological goodies onto the teams, and you'll be having board members asking why they're bothering with something that's been mastered decades ago.

I have no problem with the older stuff. But, it's a delicate balance, and it's always the law of unintended consequences. I would like to see a system where teams could use something less advanced, that would have equivalent output, or they could be a customer team for something more advanced, or build their own. Mandating expensive engines has its obvious pitfalls. Turning the clock back is dangerous, too.

It's always going to be difficult to reign in spending. Most attempts at doing so have been counterproductive, and teams would laugh at a budget cap, particularly teams that have other divisions, like Williams F1 team versus their engineering branch, the same for McLaren, not to mention Honda with them, Mercedes F1 team versus their parent company, and so forth. Trying to control that by dollar amounts never works, so you have to try to control man hour inputs, or wind tunnel limits, which get circumvented by computer simulations, and then you have computer simulation hours limits, which get circumvented by getting the fastest and most expensive computers. It never ends.

 

[DeepFriar]

Originally Posted By: Garak
Oh, and Mario Ilien was there.


Wow, a blast from the past! And here's another one....

I say they mandate slide rules!
If it's not done with a slide rule it's illegal.
There are only so many man hours in a day.
That'll keep costs down and put more "art" back into F1.
We went to the Moon that way.

Pay no attention, not having a great day here.

 

[billt460]

They could cut costs and still play follow the leader out there. It's not as if spending more will make it less boring. We know that to be fact.

 

[Mitch Alsup]

Originally Posted By: DeepFriar

And here's another one....

I say they mandate slide rules!
If it's not done with a slide rule it's illegal.
There are only so many man hours in a day.
That'll keep costs down and put more "art" back into F1.
We went to the Moon that way.


A typical F1 team could hire 400,000 people to perform slide rule calculations. See: still no savings.....

 

[Garak]

And if they were forced to use slide rules, some undoubtedly would hire a whack of people to do so, and still spend as much as is humanly possible.