How about a few weeks earlier when we was mussing up Lando's hair like he was a 3 year old child? Or all the times he has awkwardly inserted himself in with Max or Charles or George?
It may not be his overwhelming arrogance, he may just be that socially awkward. Either way, he's a distraction. Also, an appointed position with FIA, not Chase Carey or Derek Chang, so hands off the product, bud!
You only have integrity once. - imprezaguy02
Posts: 13530 | Location: Madison, MS | Registered: December 10, 2007
Originally posted by Georgeair: How about a few weeks earlier when we was mussing up Lando's hair like he was a 3 year old child? Or all the times he has awkwardly inserted himself in with Max or Charles or George?
It may not be his overwhelming arrogance, he may just be that socially awkward. Either way, he's a distraction. Also, an appointed position with FIA, not Chase Carey or Derek Chang, so hands off the product, bud!
I don't usually watch the post race, but saw him pouring the water on Kimi Just odd
It can happen in 2031 if the FIA stands firm, but how many OEMs are they willing to lose. Honda will probably leave since they don't want to build V8s for anybody. Cadillac would prefer a V8, but are they really going to build a V6 Turbo Hybrid to race a year or two?
Posts: 5337 | Location: Kansas City, MO | Registered: May 28, 2004
Originally posted by DanH: Cadillac would prefer a V8, but are they really going to build a V6 Turbo Hybrid to race a year or two?
Could probably extend the Ferrari customer deal to get through the end of the V6 regs. I wouldn't mind dropping the turbo and the complexities, adding some RPM range & noise back. I'd be surprised if they're making 1200hp, though. I'd guess at that point they'd have to dumb down the aero and/or grip to limit performance.
F1 power unit changes agreed in principle for 2027
A reduction of electrical energy and increase in the power output of the internal combustion engine (ICE) has been agreed in principle for Formula 1 power units in 2027, the FIA has announced.
The latest set of regulations feature a near 50-50 split between the output from the Energy Recovery System (ERS) and the ICE, which has been cited as one of the primary reasons for the current complaints from drivers about their inability to push during a qualifying lap. When the electrical energy runs out, the power unit can begin harvesting, effectively working against the ICE and causing speeds to reduce despite drivers still being at full throttle.
Although tweaks to the regulations were made ahead of the Miami Grand Prix, it has been acknowledged that more significant changes to address the imbalance would require hardware and regulatory amendments that are only realistically possible between seasons.
The FIA says a meeting between the governing body, Formula One Management (FOM), team principals and power unit manufacturers brought a “unanimous commitment to introduce changes which further enhanced fair and safe competition, that were intuitive for drivers and teams and were in the best interests of the sport”. Explaining the measures agreed in principle for next season, the FIA said changes to the regulations “would see a nominal increase in Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) power by ~50kW with a fuel-flow increase and a nominal reduction of the Energy Recovery System (ERS) deployment power by ~50kW.
It was agreed that further detailed discussion in technical groups comprising teams and power unit manufacturers was required before the final package was decided.”
The FIA stated the input of multiple stakeholders had been required – highlighting the involvement of the drivers as invaluable – with the next steps being the power unit manufacturers voting on the package, and then the World Motor Sport Council having to approve the change via e-vote.
The thinking behind the changes is that an increase in power from the ICE would make it easier to harvest the lower amount power permitted for deployment by the ERS, reducing the amount of super clipping at the end of straights to charge the battery and creating a more traditional speed trace.
Following the introduction of the tweaks in Miami, the FIA also said evaluation of their impact is ongoing in order to inform potential further adjustments at future events.
50KW is roughly 65hp so if my math is right, the ICE will go up to 510hp while the battery will go down to 390hp. I would think a 100KW swing would be better given where the technology is now, but I doubt we'll be that lucky until the 2031 supposed reset.
Posts: 5337 | Location: Kansas City, MO | Registered: May 28, 2004
IIRC, the current PUs are limited to 15k RPM. But they all shift around 12k because there's no power above that Hopefully the fuel flow increase will let them make use of the top of the rev range, just have to hope it's not so much that we have people running out of fuel. Can't remember the last DNF due to running out of gas.
How Honda's $19million F1 bailout will really work Jon Noble
The potential for Honda to have a $19million spending boost to help its engine recovery in Formula 1 appears, on the face of it, to be quite generous.
After all, with power unit manufacturers operating under a cost cap, such extra funding is enough to not only get Honda back in the mix but also give it the momentum needed for a push to the front over the next few years.
Let's not forget that Honda went from a disastrous modern era return with McLaren from 2015 to 2017 to powering Max Verstappen's first drivers' title win with Red Bull in 2021.
But don't think for a second that Honda's rivals have ignored history and agreed, for the good of F1, to give the Japanese manufacturer a blank chequebook so it can become dominant.
Instead, there are complications and compromises laid down for Honda to get some of the extra cash - plus it will involve some big strategic calls that will impact long-term fortunes.
Honda's helping hand
The changes agreed to help Honda come as part of F1's regulations related to Additional Development and Upgrade Opportunities (ADUO).
This catch-up mechanism was integrated into the 2026 rules to help any manufacturer with a new power unit that was well adrift of the benchmark.
Any manufacturer deemed to be 2% adrift after a defined segment of the 2026 campaign would be allowed an additional engine upgrade for this season and one for the next one.
If any marque was 4% adrift or more, then it would get two development chances this year and two in 2027.
To help make the upgrades for new specification engines, those manufacturers deemed to be qualifying for additional development also get more testing hours and more money.
In terms of test-bench running, manufacturers 2-4% behind get an extra 70 hours, those 4-6% behind get 110 hours, 6-8% behind gets 150 hours and there had been a previous cap of 190 hours for anyone more than 8% off.
That cap has now been lifted, meaning that any manufacturer that is more than 10% off, as Honda appears to be, gets 230 hours extra.
Extra money
There is a similar sliding scale on cost cap spending too, with two elements making up the potential for Honda to get the total of $19m extra spending.
The first $11m relates to adjustments allowed in the cost cap, which means more spending power for any manufacturer that is granted upgrade concessions.
Previously, the extra cash on hand had been a $3m boost for manufacturers who were deemed to be 2-4% adrift over the season.
It then went all the way up to $8m for manufacturers that were deemed to be behind by more than 8%.
Now what has been agreed is that any manufacturer over 10% off will get an extra $11m.
But there is now also a second element of the cash boost that is a lot more interesting, as it is not a simple hand out.
Instead, it is a type of loan - and Honda is going to have to borrow money off itself from the future.
Borrowing against the future
Worth a maximum of $8m, revised rules allow for a performance-based loan-style system for any manufacturer that is deemed to be behind by more than 10% in its first season.
This available extra spending "on paper" is classified as relief rather than a gift, so has to be paid back.
That is done through reducing the declared cost cap expenditure over the two seasons it is claimed - but it then gets added on to future years beyond that.
In simple terms, spend an extra $8m in 2026 and 2027, and you need to pull back your spending by $8m over the following three years as a consequence.
In theory you are front-loading extra development spending, rather than holding it back for future years when cost cap limits have reset.
How it gets paid back
The rules allow a manufacturer granted this relief the choice of how much extra they want to spend and how it gets split across this season and next.
It must then repay 100% of whatever relief is taken - although there is a degree of freedom in how that repayment is split.
The repayment is spread over the three seasons after it has been spent, but each of those three years must have at least one payment that is somewhere between 20% and 50% of the total amount.
The flexibility of how much a manufacturer chooses to take, and how it then decides to pay it back, means there are many options in terms of how aggressive it wants to be.
It could choose to be balanced and split both the $4m and the payback over the maximum duration.
Here is one example - with N being the current season:
Downward adjustment (relief they take now)
Inaugural season: $4m (50%) N+1 season: $4m (50%)
Upward adjustment (pay back later)
The manufacturer must spread the full $8m across N+2, N+3, and N+4, with each year getting between 20% and 50%. One possible split:
Or it could front load the relief and backload paying it back:
Downward adjustment
Inaugural season: $6m (75%) N+1 season: $2m (25%)
(This gives it more cost-cap breathing room in its very first season.)
Upward adjustment
N+2: $2m (25%) N+3: $4m (50%) N+4: $2m (25%)
The rules are explicit that a manufacturer taking the extra spending freedom cannot repay the whole amount in a single year, and that no more than 50% can be paid back in a single season.
So it would not be allowed to use 60% one year and then slash that back to 10% the next.
There will be a price to pay for extra development now that will last for a considerable time - and not be worked around by some clever financial tinkering over a single season.
The choice is then clear for Honda in terms of how much it wants to invest now to make big gains, and how much it wants to hold back so it isn’t left without any development budget in the future.
It could choose to throw everything it can at the present, so it gets itself into a better position as soon as possible, but equally it may conclude that it is better to take things slow and steady and not burn through the cash immediately.
The call on that will first of all depend on how far adrift the FIA deems Honda to be when it makes its first ruling on where each manufacturer stacks up after the Canadian Grand Prix next week.
Only then will Honda know what its real options are.
Posts: 5337 | Location: Kansas City, MO | Registered: May 28, 2004
Zak Brown is on the warpath again now that Mercedes wants to buy a chunk of Alpine. I think he's got a point:
If F1 wants to play the "Teams are franchises" game, then no team should be allowed to own two teams or operate them like Red Bull and Racing Bulls operate, and if Mercedes does get to buy a piece of Alpine, Toto Wolff will have his fingers into THREE F1 teams as he owns a piece of Mercedes F1 and still has (or has had) a share of Williams F1.
Something that springs to mind is instead of F1 Sprint races, let every F1 team run a 2nd Junior team so they can get better F1 experience than doing an F2 race with completely different cars that race differently. It would also give the F1 teams more test time in order to help develop the cars. It also springs back to an idea from several years ago that in addition to the rookie F1 test after Abu Dhabi, they run a race with all of the rookies in the now "obsolete" cars. Of course it went no where because it was a cool idea.
Posts: 5337 | Location: Kansas City, MO | Registered: May 28, 2004
Originally posted by DanH: Something that springs to mind is instead of F1 Sprint races, let every F1 team run a 2nd Junior team so they can get better F1 experience than doing an F2 race with completely different cars that race differently. It would also give the F1 teams more test time in order to help develop the cars. It also springs back to an idea from several years ago that in addition to the rookie F1 test after Abu Dhabi, they run a race with all of the rookies in the now "obsolete" cars. Of course it went no where because it was a cool idea.
Other than the risk of an F2 driver binning the F1 car before GP quali, having the Sprint be an F2 driver exhibition would be a fun idea, other than them not getting any practice sessions in the car.
The Max 24 sure got a lot of press time in the off weekend. The racing looked good but those sort of cars just aren't what I like. Plenty of other races if that's what you're looking for. He made the rest of the field look like the semi-pro's they are.
risk of an F2 driver binning the F1 car before GP quali
Just hop in the T car. Oh, wait, never mind....
I sorta like endurance racing, and find the GT3 class more interesting than the LMP, etc. guys that are SO freakin' fast in relation to the others and the tracks.
You only have integrity once. - imprezaguy02
Posts: 13530 | Location: Madison, MS | Registered: December 10, 2007
In other news, Colton Herta got his first Top 10 in F2 at the Sprint Race before the F1 Sprint, so he is making progress. It also seems that Kimi is starting to lose his cool and might start making mistakes again.
Posts: 5337 | Location: Kansas City, MO | Registered: May 28, 2004
A pretty wild first half. After George’s issue the race for the lead was over but still lots of action for 2nd on back. What was McLaren thinking? Might not have mattered given the other issues they had but they didn’t look too smart by lap 2.
Both the Sprint & GP were a fun watch. Good fights for position, a few mistakes, shocking amount of retirements, but not overly unexpected early in a new engine reg year 1.
Looking forward to seeing how these cars handle Monaco. The reduced size will likely be most noticeable here than most circuits [along with Singapore and half of Baku, but not looking forward to the massive derating on that crazy long front 'straight' there].
