F1 Banter Online Forums
F1 "Future Vision" plans - Printable Version

+- F1 Banter Online Forums (https://www.f1banter.co.uk)
+-- Forum: Formula 1 Discussions (https://www.f1banter.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: F1 General Discussion Board (https://www.f1banter.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=2)
+--- Thread: F1 "Future Vision" plans (/showthread.php?tid=173)



F1 "Future Vision" plans - Monster Hesh - 05-04-2018

Liberty and FOM will be unveiling their plans for the future of the sport covering, technical rules and all things money.
This is all happening behind closed doors.

Do you think fans/F1 world should be kept in the loop?

I'd personally l think they should. User group testing, which is critical for a product. F1 is a self proclaimed 'business' and for a business not to test its product is begging for failure. Release an overview of proposes and potential impacts and see fans reactions. I guess the problem is 'informed reactions', so produce a report of the simulations they must of run.


RE: F1 "Future Vision" plans - Jody Barton - 06-04-2018

I don't know how focus group / UX design of some kind would help here. The fans have told them what they want:

More noise
Closer racing
Quicker cars
Drivers being the biggest differentiator
Blah, blah, blah...

They know what the fans want, and they know what the teams need in terms of finances etc. Now, do I think the FIA and Liberty Media are the right people to do this, and get it sorted? Nope.


RE: F1 "Future Vision" plans - Foghorn Leghorn - 06-04-2018

(06-04-2018, 02:32 PM)Jody Barton Wrote:  Now, do I think the FIA and Liberty Media are the right people to do this, and get it sorted? Nope.

FIA bit aside, as it seem largely unchanged there, but from what I've read so far, I'll take LM over the Bernie style of divide and conquer. They have agreed to keep discussions behind closed doors, which I think is a good thing, the media often poisons discussions such as these. But I guess we'll have to wait and see where the first leak comes from. . . . . cough. . . . cough . . . . Ferrari

I thought the bullet points seemed largely aligned with what the fans want, with a few nods, like "must keep the unique heritage", etc, etc a bit of a concession to SF.

It's a tightrope for sure. But I'll remain optimistic until proven wrong


RE: F1 "Future Vision" plans - Jody Barton - 06-04-2018

The trouble is that the plans don't cover things like active suspension, and ground effect. I really do not believe without those things we'll get the close racing we all want. They also don't appear to have put forward a template chassis / car. At this stage I'm skeptical, the engine thing also seems slightly regressive, I just don't think they've got the answers.


RE: F1 "Future Vision" plans - Foghorn Leghorn - 06-04-2018

(06-04-2018, 06:53 PM)Jody Barton Wrote:  The trouble is that the plans don't cover things like active suspension, and ground effect.  . . .

I get what you're saying Jody.  But isn't that more down to what will happen in the negotiations?  And what the teams can get to and agree on?  - I only really see LM as mediators in this process, to increase the entertainment value, which makes sense to me, and the FIA is . . . well the FIA,

My main point is really only that I prefer their open, (though behind closed doors) approach better than Bernies, I don't think it's the commercial rights holders, place or have the expertise to make decisions about GE or active suspension, that's more down to the teams, Ross Brawn aside, they just want to improve the spectacle, I'll continue to give them a chance and hope for the best

Edit: and we don't really know what the full plans are, as they want to keep the discussions / negotiations, between themselves and the teams private, which, as I said makes complete sense to me, as public scrutiny can often derail such things


RE: F1 "Future Vision" plans - Monster Hesh - 06-04-2018

I still think they need a "user group" for views from the outside, fans and none fans. Obviously confidentiality could come into play. As a product it needs it, you can't just release a major global product as the way the manufactures want it.

I like Horner's call for rapid response timeline for the proposal (or whatever he's calling). You think he has alot of contract negotiations waiting on the results of these discussions? haha.


RE: F1 "Future Vision" plans - PapaofGags - 17-04-2018

Sergio Marchionne has reiterated that he will pull Ferrari out of Formula 1 if it becomes "more of a spectacle than a sport".
"If F1 becomes more of a spectacle than a sport, if we go in the direction of NASCAR races, then Ferrari will leave," he said at a shareholders' meeting, via AFP.
"If there are any proposals that distort F1, I think Ferrari will pull out..."
Marchionne says Ferrari are working with Liberty Media to find a "compromise" following a recent meeting during the Bahrain Grand Prix in which the sport's owners outlined plans for the future.
"We are working with Liberty Media to find acceptable solutions," he added. "We had a proposal from Liberty 10 days ago, we expect to know the details and then we will make choices in the interest of Ferrari.
"We could look for alternative solutions, it's not a threat, but it does not mean we stop shopping."

I'm not a Ferrari fan but LM need to sort this out, F1 is so much better with them in it.

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:8ESCNXQczmEJ:https://www.afp.com/en/news/207/sport-not-spectacle-ferrari-warn-f1-pullout-doc-1401ir3+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk


RE: F1 "Future Vision" plans - Foghorn Leghorn - 17-04-2018

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1-rule-change-news-1027456/

relax, peeps, as I've said from the start, it's in no ones interest to let this cash cow die, some good news for next year, and very encouraging, they will get a compromise  Wink

good news on the driver weight thing also, finally some pie eaters can drive Smile


RE: F1 "Future Vision" plans - Monster Hesh - 17-04-2018

Personally I'd like to see the energy store/KERS extra power deployment be at drivers digression.

They should be responsible for the "harvesting" in a lap aswell. Though with the H going I guess this couldnt happen now.


RE: F1 "Future Vision" plans - Jody Barton - 20-04-2018

Hesh, as you well know, I've been calling for a few things with regards these engines:

1) Relax the fuel flow rate, we've seen how fast they are when given just enough juice to go full beans over one lap.
2) Unrestrict the rev limit placed on them. I mean, what was the purpose of it anyway?
3) Give them more KERS, maybe even Unrestrict the amount teams can harvest and use per lap? Let the drivers deploy it and let manufacturers decide how big they want those batteries to be.
4) Give them more than bloomin' 3 engines. This season, we've seen these cars are significantly quicker than last year's cars already, and that's with the bloody halo. Yet we've had three races now that we're longer than there equivalents last year, that includes China where the race started wet, there and there were multiple safety cars. Something is wrong.

I think we are starting to see convergence on these PUs now. Renault finally look on top of the MGU-H issue, and are almost there. Honda have clearly made massive strides. I expect 2019 for the gap to contract more. By 2020 we're looking at near parity, and in 2021 they want to scrap that? Why? New engine manufacturers maybe? The only group truly interested in supplying new engines to F1 is maybe the Volkswagen Audi Group in the shape of Porsche with a team, and then maybe supply rebadged engines under some of their other marques like Lamborghini or Audi to other teams. None of the American manufacturers are interested. Period. So why risk two, if not three of the greatest names in F1, Ferrari, Renault and Mercedes for maybe Porsche (who don't really have a great history with the sport) and a slim possibility of Aston Martin?