Herman Tilke

[oziengineer]

What do you think of Herman Tilke's circuits(Sakir, Shanghai and Sepang)? Personally, I am not a fan of any of them. I think they are all weird designs that are far too clinical for F1. No inherent danger in any of them. Why couldn't he design another Spa or something.

[dubby99]

I am not a fan of his circiuts too.

When you design a circiut you say:

Put this corner next to that cliff
this fast left hand sweeper goes down that hill
couple of barriers here and there
couple of humps in the road so the cars can get some air
heavy cambered hairpins over there

and so on.

Well that's how i will do it

[Kempi]

couple of humps in the road so the cars can get some air

Such sentences always make me shiver. Shows that the people writing them have no clue about modern racecars, whatsoever.

If modern racecars "get some air" they flip. Look at Le Mans 99. Look at Petit Le Mans 98. Look at Petit Le Mans this year (one of the Audis caught air, fortunately didnt flip, but had a huge off in practice). Look at Talladega 2003 and this year, where Elliot Sadler flipped in a car that nowhere closely resembles a modern race car.

I am not a fan of Tilke tracks either. But he has got to work with what the track owners give him. He simply has no second Ardennes tucked away in some pocket that he can use to build a second Spa. He got three relatively flat spots on which he had to put the tracks.

Of course, they lack character, but that is due to the fact that they are new, haven't been around forever and since have nothing charismatic _yet_ that we can flag them with.

The one big mistake they DO have is that due to the wide tracks and huge runoffs the cars look slow even if they arent. That is something that could be worked on with camera placement and such, I guess.

[ASCII Man]

With the amount of effort going into the Shanghai pit complex, it wouldn't be too hard to artificially create some kind of elevations in the track, i'd like to see more banked and/or blind corners in any new circuit, humps are not recommended for stuff like F1 or LMP's really...
Only for rallycars and such...

Shanghai looks okay, yet a bit dull to me while Bahrain... well, i don't really like that one that much, i'll put it that way...

[luke]

I can't stand Sepang at all.

It's designed with the same prinsiples as Shangai and Bahrain.

[f1manoz]

The major problem is that Tilke only seems to be given flat pieces of land to build tracks on, so having major elevation changes (such as Spa) is always tricky to put in.

But his circuits ARE bland anyway.

[RWC]

Tilke does pretty well ok with what he's given to work with.
The problem is that great tracks usually CAN'T be made on the land (or circumstances in the case of hockenhiem) where they are building them.Tilke could have said no to getting involved!
So now that his name is a byword for generally **** tracks is fair enough

[alesi95]

They're all the same.
He made Nurburgring (already a very bland circuit) terrible.

[Kicking-back]

Tilke's designs normally allow decent overtaking opportunities.

His tracks are hardly the Hungaroring!

[luke]

The Hungaroring was the worst designed circuit ever.

It was only built because of the cancelation of the street race.

[luke]

Infact it was so bad infact I doubt kart racers would refuse to race there.

[luke]

Originally posted by luke
Infact it was so bad infact I doubt kart racers would refuse to race there.

[Phoenix1]

Originally posted by luke
Infact it was so bad infact I doubt kart racers would refuse to race there.

Firstly Luke, the nurse will see you now!

Secondly the circuits:

Originally posted by dubby99
couple of humps in the road so the cars can get some air

Nothing wrong with it but with the politcally correct 100 meter gravel traps of today it is not going to happen. In response to Kempi I would say that designers should esign the cars for the track and not make others change the road. You don't see Ford or Ferrari make a road car then make the goverment of a country change the road surface!

The problem with the circuits is they have lost some of their magic. I suspect that part of the problem is down to a lack of fights between drivers to give the circuit those 'moments'.

Technically the circuit designs, excluding that pit entry in China, are good and correct but they lack emotion. As well a driver fights there is no individuality. The is a part in a musical 'Chess' where the guy says that he does not care where he is as all he sees is chess and the same goes for these circuits. Show me a corner of Silverstone for example and even if I can not identify the corner on it's own the shade of grass, the random tree, the spitfire (donington) adds to the circuit.

Bernie wants perfection but when I go to a circuit in the UK I get it - on the track, I may need to climb up a grass bank to see it but that does not matter in the end.

Histroy adds, legends add, location adds, locals add, but in the end perfection is... imperfection.

[BootsOntheSide]

Laughing at your own jokes eh Luke? Maybe you should re-read it and see if it makes sense first - notice the double negative.

It's a shame Tilke gets to design every track, because, even if they were all great, his deisgn style would get repetitive (imagine if your favourite musician made EVERY record ever). Hs tracks seem characterless, but ultiamtely a track gains character from years of great races and support - which is the inherent problem with the abandoining of popular circuits. Malaysia has prodced great races and Bahrain had a reasonable start, so tehy're not all awful.

[ralf fan]

Talking to yourself luke?

Tilke tracks are monotonous..... 1 is ok but having 2 or 3 of the same type of tracks is boring...

[luke]

I was testing out the new smilee.

And secondly it was a double post so I had to put something different.

And I meant it was similar to a kart circuit (note it was to tight and twisty).
And I also meant that kart drivers would refuse to race there it was so bad.

Now I hope it makes sense.

[Number Juan]

Tilke's trakcs do encourage overtaking, and are specifically designed for modern F1. therefore, he is a successful track designer.

however, as many have already pointed out, his circuits can be a bit bland. yet, people have forgotten the simple facts that he has to design a track that is to the tastes of the backers, the country, bernie, the FIA, the drivers, the fans etc. i can assure you that the Nurburgring wasn't to that specification, it was designed to be the toughest track ever. Spa is just a collection of public roads, Silverstone is an old WW2 runway that has matured with age...all these tracks are considered "classic" tracks, and all encourage exciting racing. they were all designed by 'mistake' to a certain extent. it is not like a writer sits down and says "right, im going to write a novel that will change the world", if he did, he would be both very arrogant and very stupid. he wouldn't accomplish it in a million years.

the same goes for track designing. you cannot simply set-out to create a masterpiece of racing tarmac. Herman Tilke does the best he can do in his position, and at least for the sake of F1, he makes tracks that are good for spectators and the drivers alike. i cannot remember a Malaysia that was ever forgettable, and i don't believe there was any shortage of overtaking there or any-other Tilke ring.

i guess you just can't please some people

[ttc]

Frankly, I think the Shanghai track was designed "very well", since it incorporated the Chinese character of "Shang" in "Shanghai" as the overall track design, yes, the track literally "spelt" out "Shang".

                *
                *
                ******
                *
                *
           **************

Bet most of you are not aware of that bit, eh?

[429CJ]

Originally posted by luke
Infact it was so bad infact I doubt kart racers would refuse to race there.

Let's replace Hungaroring withTHIS!!

[oziengineer]

Originally posted by Kempi
Such sentences always make me shiver. Shows that the people writing them have no clue about modern racecars, whatsoever.

I'm sure he wasn't serious, and whats more, one of those circuits would be much better than a Tilke circuit. I dislike Tilke circuits because of the layout of boring, long corners plague his circuits. And also, Eau Rouge is one of the most dangerous corners ever, and drivers love it and engineers design cars so that they can take it flat!

[rustyfan]

Originally posted by Kempi
Shows that the people writing them have no clue about modern racecars, whatsoever.

If modern racecars "get some air" they flip. Look at Le Mans 99. Look at Petit Le Mans 98. Look at Petit Le Mans this year (one of the Audis caught air, fortunately didnt flip, but had a huge off in practice).

Yeah you are totally right about that although it's not just modern sports-cars that are able to blow over - it dates back to at least 1972.

A few examples to add to yours above;

1972 - Mark Donohue, Porsche 917/10, Road Atlanta - flip in testing (CAN-AM)
1983 - Claude Gou, Lola T333CS, Lime Rock - flip in warm-up (CAN-AM)
1988 - John Morton, Nissan GTP ZX-T, Lime Rock - flip in race (IMSA)
2000 - Bill Auberlen, BMW V12 LMR, Road Atlanta - flip in race (ALMS)

+ quite a few others others...

Edit: Perhaps I should clarify that the accidents mentioned above are all "front blowovers", where the nose of the car went skyward.

Originally posted by Kempi
Look at Talladega 2003 and this year, where Elliot Sadler flipped in a car that nowhere closely resembles a modern race car.

You really can't compare stock-car backwards blowovers to the sports-car blowovers in your example though, considering the stock-cars don't need a hump or elevation change to go airborne (once they have spun around, that is).

Once a stock-car gets turned around it acts like an airplane wing, building up pressure above the car which literally "sucks it up" in the air.

There have been numerous sports-car accidents where the car has gone airborne while going backwards as well of course, but it has usually been due to something happening that allows for air to get in underneath the car (like in Alboreto's tragic accident, where he, if I'm not mistaken, blew a rear tire which unsettled the car enough to allow air to catch the flat bottom of the car once it spun around).



Edit: As for the topic at hand, I agree that most circuits designed by Tilke are rather uninspiring and on the brink of being boring.

However, I do think he's done a rather good job with some of his designs. The new Hockenheim for example, and as much as I hate to say it the racing there is better now with much improved opportunities for overtaking and side-by-side racing (as we have seen over the past couple of years) as opposed to old layout.

[Purist]

The old layout of Hockenheim allowed for overtaking and a good bit of slipstreaming. They could go two wide no problem. Three wide, with those chicanes, or at any very tight corner after a long straight is just asking for trouble. At least having less width instilled the drivers with a bit more precaution, and they still put on a good race.

[Rich R]

wasn't that one of the reasons they changed hockenheim, that the track was to narrow for modern safety standards, and to widen it would have required them to cut down more trees than to shorten the track would have done. they have effectively replaced most of the trees by replanting them on the old circuit.

[DSM]

Originally posted by ttc
Frankly, I think the Shanghai track was designed "very well", since it incorporated the Chinese character of "Shang" in "Shanghai" as the overall track design, yes, the track literally "spelt" out "Shang".

                *
                *
                ******
                *
                *
           **************

Bet most of you are not aware of that bit, eh?

Well, yes, I think we probably were. We were told the same every time the track was mentioned in the run up to the GP.
Personally I can't think of a worse basis for a design of a racetrack - the shape of a letter.

[garcon]

Yeah, all those shaped like an "0" are dreadful...