Printable View
Last seat in the house looks like an interesting satire, l have ordered a copy. I think l would love it from the few pages that l read on Amazon.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
Just in case you are wondering what l am talking about, l am talking about a book by Rollo called "Last seat in the house". Go get it. :-)
It is looking like the Cheap engine proposal has met with a cold shoulder from the manufacturing teams. But all signs seem to indicate that the FIA are going to try to force the issue and see what happens. From the look of things, this would put some pressure on the Lotus -Renault deal, Mercedes would seriously be reconsidering their position and this may give Honda a face saving exit strategy. It all comes down to Ferrari's reaction which has been somewhat quite on the matter as they contemplate things.
It is safe to say that we are about to witness a tug of war between the FIA and the manufacturing teams on this matter. One side will come out of it with egg in face whatever the outcome. The reality is that teams like Mercedes, Renault, Honda are likely not to find commercial advantages with the cheap engine scheme. Of course this would depend on whether these teams are willing to produce cheap engines for their customers. Now, whatever format these cheap engines may take, they are unlikely to be as competitive as the hybid engines which would be much more expensive due to the specification of the hybrid era. It would seem the FIA are finding their regulations have produced a situation of expensive engines and are clumsily taking a U-Turn.
I say clumsily because they are throwing out most of their good policies to try to make the Cheap engine idea work. For instance, the FIA are ditching their green policy of cleaner F1 and low fuel consumption. And they are likely to scrap their safety policy and return to refuel at pit stops. Just to name a few. This battle is one that would rumble into the 2016 and may produce some interesting controversy.
The issue at the core of this is one that has been present for a long time. Lack of a long term vision for F1 and direction. The teams and the FIA attempted to address this with the introduction of the V6 hybrid engines and I personally think it was a great approach. The problem really has been reach from lack of a holistic perspective as to the impact this has on the entire grid e.g. the Engine manufacturers had their say and all came to an agreement but no one took cost into acocunt for customer teams e.g. Sauber, Force India whom would be paying for these engines. I'm sure that they would have asked the estimated cost of these units.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitrodaze
Mercedes, Ferrari et al, then went off and implemented a business model to govern these projects and in this BM they factored the R&D costs and, at the end, came up with a selling price of each unit. It is unrealistic for the FIA to expect them to lose 8 million on them then after factoring the selling cost into their Business model. The cost may currently be €20million and they expect them to pay just €12. €8 million loss? No way and Ferrari were 100% right to veto.
It's bad management coupled with a good vision that caused this. The idea was right, the implementation was wrong.
They are horrible. Just look around here. We used to have BIG TIME rows in these threads. Now everyone's gone...
The big time rows are still very much going on in other threads. I just came from one.Quote:
Originally Posted by N. Jones
Great observation. There doesn't seem to be a clear direction other than the cheap engine initiative at the moment. And that is looking like a dead duck at this point. This happens to be one of the few things that the promoters and the FIA have a common view on. One would think that their combined force would bring about some level agreement among the teams and the manufacturing teams in particular.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Black Knight
Like you say, a holistic approach is required and the FIA has to do a better job this time round to find a middle ground. It is a test of Jean Todt's presidency to get this right as the hybrid idea was his baby to start with. If you ask me, the promoters and the FIA seem abit lost and aloft on this matter of finding a new better direction for F1. The process of reigniting the F1 fire or spirit is in motion but moving against it own inertia. This remains a very interesting topic for the foreseeable future.
Yes but there were many more people on this forum when I started in 2004 then there are today.
It seems the FIA are backing down, but only on the premise that the manufacturer teams provide €12 million engines to the smaller teams. What these €12 million engines are going to look like, is yet to be clarified. One thing is certain, the manufacturers are not going to provide cheap engines that is faster than their more expensive hybrid engines. A fair situation may appear to be the original proposition of having a 3rd party develop these cheap engines. OR have a combination of 3rd parties and the Manufacturer teams to produce these cheap engines so that the smaller teams can buy the best cheap engine on the market.
The €12 million engine idea only works if there is some competition among suppliers and supply is not exclusive to the manufacturer teams to produce these engines.
Clarity on the characteristics of the rules governing the two types of engine powered cars is also paramount to not inadvertently produce a 2 tier F1 fomula. F1 is emulating MotoGP, they have to get it right and do as well as MotoGP has managed at least.
I don't think that's to do with F1 to be honest. Seems that this forum has been quiet for a while now. I'm not sure of the reason for it but there seems to have been a mass exodus of users at the one time about three years ago. It's been getting quieter and quieter since then and now on the F1 forum there are only 10-15 regular posters now.Quote:
Originally Posted by N. Jones
The same thing has happened on every forum that I've been on for any length of time. One site allows users on Facebook to post - and those are some of the absolute dumbest posts that I have ever read (really!). But it seems that more than a few of the members here have wandered into that great intellectual wasteland, known as Facebook, and don't post here as much.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Black Knight
As an aside, I've always had to subscribe to pay channels to watch F1. But for those who are new to that, I think that has a lot to do with viewership losses too. And I'd say that the people who have been "priced out" probably aren't commenting as much on something that they're not watching as much. Me, I'll watch until the day that I die... or the series dies. If I ever suffer financial ruin and one of you sees a story about a guy in a homeless shelter who is guarding the TV set with a tire iron, so that he can watch F1 in peace... you'll know what became of me.
It would seem the FIA has backed down on its push for cheaper engines. Bernies subtle politics has met a momentary obstacle some may say. With such enthusiastic and promising response from the tender for supply of the 2.2 litre engines, one would doubt that this matter is properly over. All would rest with how robust the proposal to be put forward by the manufacturer teams is. It would be particularly interesting to see what propose and if it would be acceptable to mid size to small teams. I think it would come down to whether the manufacturer teams can supply cheap engines that is no slower than 1 sec than the more expensive hybrid engines.
With 2 seasons of the hybrid season gone, it is possible that the manufacturer teams would be able to find a combination of the past evolution of engine parts that could be strung together to produce a suitably cheap engine.
Simple ploy to get some compromise , it seems .
Rumour has it that teams may ask for 16 , instead of Todt's !2 million , to be considered as cheap .
BE and JT need to careful they don't say too much about the ploy , given there's some obvious work that goes into making a tender , and some karma coming the next time they ask anyone for any bids for entry .
Those 2 are like buddies now. I wonder how many times they text each other in a day :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagwan
Every so often Andrew Benson puts out one those gem of an article that is unmissable. The following is a thorough incite into the state of affairs of current F1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/35037357 . The tripartite tug of of war continues. While the world commission has blocked the dirty cheap engines, the world council has contrarily enpowered Todt and Ecclestone to take whatever action they deem necessary to revive F1.
It would seem the manufacturer teams have big sway in the commission but not in the council. But what does this new emergency power given to the FIA and Rights owners mean? I doubt it is powerful enough to block the manufacturers from leaving F1 if it does not align with their commercial interests. Similarly, a decision making process that does not include the teams is a recipe for the death of F1 as we know it; surely.
The world council's mandate to the FIA and the rights owners seems somewhat comical at best, and certainly is without aspirational conviction. I say this because the mandate would be properly tested at a price that may quickly dislocate the interests of the FIA from that of the rights owner, if the prospect of the continuation of racing under the banner of F1 by the teams collectively [bar Redbull] is under threat of coming to an end. Whatever the new banner might be, the FIA must be in a position to provide governance or it also puts itself at risk of losing legitimacy to govern all world motorsport.
As far as the rights go, it is only as good as the number of teams that are willing to race in it. This is the main reason the World council mandate is comical as they seem to have lost sight of the symbiotic relationship that binds this tripartite endeavour which is F1.
There's no point really focusing on the current rules and formats of F1. Everything seems to change before it's begun, everything's fine apart from DRS and the no fuelling aspect. I preferred to watch cars fly around a track on no fuel, pit in and fire out again. This was proper strategy!
Controversially, I wouldn't mind seeing rules causing all cars having to have similar power and performance. This'll create better racing and would make it more down to drivers rather than 'whoever has more money/resources.'
Alas, Horner has joined in the call for rule changes. He claims Redbull won four titles but did not have as easy as Mercedes is having it. The boot is on the other foot now buddy.
Isn't it great, the FIA is crapping engine restrictions from 2017, hip hip hoooooraay :-)