2009 and 2010 regulations to be released today.

[Down F0rce]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/72456

The one that leapt out at me the most was a ban on refuelling for 2010!

[safc_fan89]

Most of it I think seems fair enough, but reducing engine revs to 18000rpm doesn't exactly go with F1 being 'pinnacle of motorsport'. GP2 cars will be faster soon. I think that's a rubbish idea and should be reconsidered...

No doubt it won't be though.

[andybg40]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/72459

[Marbot]

The ban on refueling is good,although the possibilty of shorter race distances (is this an attention span thing I wonder) is not so good.

Renault get to fiddle with their engine which means Alonso 2009 WDC,Webber to Renault etc.

[Pingguest]

The ban on refuelling and tyre warmers are good. But why do they want to make the races shorter? I think the mid-season ban on testing is reasonable, but I oppose the on-going proces of standardization.

If they really wanted to reduce engine production costs, they should have lifted the engine freeze and allow only one engine per season.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

If they really wanted to reduce engine production costs, they should have lifted the engine freeze and allow only one engine per season.

One engine per season,like DTM then.

It's not really the production costs that will be the problem.It will be the development costs,which means building loads of engines to test that will never see the light of day.Plus if you're only allowed one engine per season when do you introduce the upgrade?

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by Marbot

One engine per season,like DTM then.

Yes. Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't support such a rule. But about limiting engine use, they should only choose for not restricting, or restricting to one engine per weekend or one engine per season. All other options requires an artificial, complex and possibly unfair set of rules.

It's not really the production costs that will be the problem.It will be the development costs,which means building loads of engines to test that will never see the light of day.

Ironically, the FIA never considered this as a problem when they introduced and tightened the rules for enforced engine reliability.

Plus if you're only allowed one engine per season when do you introduce the upgrade?

If they FIA would allow only one engine per season, mid-season engine development would be impossible and hence effectively banned.

[Devilsadvocate]

So no in season testing, will that mean best car at first race is likely to remain best car all season? Will this affect Ferrari and McLaren more than others? They are two teams who have relied heavily on in season development.

I don't get the shorter races idea. How will that save any money? Bit of fuel perhaps and engines doing less milage (minimal) but I just don't see the point in that one.

Overall I am pleased though. Particularly with the market research proposals. Does that mean we might finally get our views listened to and actioned upon?

[REALIST]

What will they call this type of racing? Because it sure as hell won't be Formula 1 any more.

Desperate times call for desperate measures I suppose, and some of these are truly desperate.

[Stefvh]

I think shorter races are due to the ban on refuelling, rather than costs.

[Silk Cut Jaguar]

Originally Posted by Devilsadvocate

So no in season testing, will that mean best car at first race is likely to remain best car all season? Will this affect Ferrari and McLaren more than others? They are two teams who have relied heavily on in season development.

They're going to have to put a lot more faith in their wind tunnels and CFD results, that's for sure.

I really hope they don't shorten the race length though, it'll end up with Monza being a 30 minute sprint before long.

[chillibowl]

so instead of developing a more fuel efficient engine they are opting to ban refueling and shortening the race to make it work. what does that even mean?

are they thinking about moving to a race weekend comprised of several sprint races or just going to increase the size of the fuel tank?

so since everyone will have to start with a full fuel tank, what format will quali take on now. as i like the current format, maybe just a tweak to Q3 will be all that is required.

[nycuk]

Generally these new regs look pretty good as far as I'm concerned. I'm glad that refuelling is going - never liked it, glad to see the back of it. Not sure about shorter races though - how long will they be? 2 x 45 minutes?

The FIA say that some (still to be decided) changes will be based on the results of market research - how and when will this be conducted?

[nycuk]

Originally Posted by Stefvh

I think shorter races are due to the ban on refuelling, rather than costs.

Running 180+ miles on one tank wasn't a problem before 1994 - can't the fuel tank size just be increased to go a race distance?

[Stefvh]

I think they can, but don't want.

[ECW Dan Selby]

To me it sounds like the shorter race distance will be pitched to the general public... Which is good and bad, I guess. It doesn't really seem to have much impact as far as being more "green" goes. I honestly think it's just to try and attract the every day Joe Bloggs to F1. The most common whinge is "how can you watch these cars zoom round for so long???". So yeah, it could be good or bad :/

Selby

[duke_toaster]

2009 aspects

Engine changes : Good
Testing : Good
Other bits : Good
Sporting spectacle : No medals please.

2010 Aspects

Engine : Good
Transmission : OK ...
Chassis parts : Sensible thinking
Spec radio and telementary : Great idea - any chance of having them non-encrypted and all available for TV though?
Tyre warmers ban : Sensible
Refueling ban : WHY? WHY? WHY? Maybe don't have the plane refuelling rigs and instead just use NASCAR-style cans? It would cut costs but not remove one of F1's more unique aspects and not need the shorter races. GPs that aren't 300km wouldn't have the same ring (Monaco is just 78 laps ... let's hope that one isn't changed).

Any news if the SC rules have changed?

The new engine rules are something I'd want to see first, I'd like to see smallish turbos with current power levels, but with rules on the materials used to ensure relevancy.

[the sniper]

It's interesting that rule changes concerning the replacement of points with medals, changing the qualifying format and shortening races will depend on the results of 'Market Research'. Though I doubt they will, I hope they have a survey on the FIA site like they did a few years ago, this way us proper fans will be able to get our view across on what we think of these stupid ideas.

It's more likely though they'll just ask a bunch of glory hunting Hamilton fans who think F1 started in 2007...

[Pingguest]

I don't see how standard board radios will really reduce spending. I guess the radios are already more or less standard. I don't like the standardization of telemetry eiter: they should have banned that technology.

[Marbot]

With regards to the 2010 refuelling ban: Will it mean that they'll be a tyre made to last a race distance and that tyre stops will be optional rather than necessary do we think?

[Aloysius]

Well, everything looks pretty good, except banning tire warmers(which are a safety measure), and refuelling, which is what makes races exciting. The idiocy of these two ideas astounds me. I can't understand why the FIA goes aroung unecessarily screwing up circuits by adding chicanes in the name of safety(a la Barcelona), but then goes an banns tire warmers, which leads to more accidents. Also, they say they are always looking for more overtaking, but they ban refueling. Don't they realise that for overtaking to take place you have to have cars running different speeds, and if you have straight up qualifying and no in race strategy, there is no opportunity to have slower cars in front of faster ones. So you end up with less passing.

Still, the changes could be much worse. Lets just hope they don't pick up medals system.

[Glen]

One detail that might have slipped the attention - team numbers to be reduced by sharing info about fuel and tyres, hence removing the need for spotters. If you do that then surely you may as well qualify virtually dry?

[safc_fan89]

Originally Posted by Aloysius

Well, everything looks pretty good, except banning tire warmers(which are a safety measure), and refuelling, which is what makes races exciting. The idiocy of these two ideas astounds me. I can't understand why the FIA goes aroung unecessarily screwing up circuits by adding chicanes in the name of safety(a la Barcelona), but then goes an banns tire warmers, which leads to more accidents. Also, they say they are always looking for more overtaking, but they ban refueling. Don't they realise that for overtaking to take place you have to have cars running different speeds, and if you have straight up qualifying and no in race strategy, there is no opportunity to have slower cars in front of faster ones. So you end up with less passing.

Still, the changes could be much worse. Lets just hope they don't pick up medals system.

Refuelling means drivers can wait to overtake until their strategy allows it. I would have thought that was obvious, that is why it has been the subject of debate for so many years. It was introduced to try and spice up the racing, and as with most attempts, it failed.

Everyone uses just about the same strategy now anyway. Top 7 or so go for two-stoppers, everyone else fuels to half distance and hopes for the best. How is that interesting? I used to think it was interesting when the top teams had two, maybe three, alternatives, but that is not the case now.

Btw if everyone carries the same amount of fuel, surely no-one will need to do any fuel spotting?

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Aloysius

Well, everything looks pretty good, except banning tire warmers(which are a safety measure), and refuelling, which is what makes races exciting. The idiocy of these two ideas astounds me.

So you're OK with refueling which is dangerous,but you don't think that a professional Formula One driver is capable of driving on cold tyres! ?

Tyre warmers were never introduced as a "safety measure",they are a 'performance enhancement'.Refuelling was introduced to 'spice things up'.It has failed miserably!

[ivanalesi]

Everything is OK, I like the ban of refueling. I remember it was introduced just to please Ferrari because they had V12 engines, now everybody has V8, so no need for it and it makes for waiting games.
But I don't like the in-season testing, it will be very unfair for some drivers. Just imagine 2007, Kimi and Fernando would have made much much less progress. Usually it's one driver that the car suits more and w/o in-season testing you don't give much chance to the other.