Ferrari F1 Team Principle Says "Ban Simulators"

During this weekends Spanish Formula 1 GP six team principles were asked a question during a press conference:

"If each one of you can make a single change to the (F1) regulations for next year, what would it be?"

Ferraris F1 team principle Maurizio Arrivabene stated he thinks the simulator should be banned.

I read this as implying that their simulators are costing them more then actually testing in real life?

http://www.formula1.com/content/fom...16/5/fia-friday-press-conference---spain.html

 

Is it just me or all of the retarded news in motorsport is coming from F1.

Damn its like they dont want viewers

 

Why is that retarded? IMO all the things he stated are legit points While i can say some of F1 news really are retarded, this one is not. It's an interesting thought. DISCLAIMER: I'm not watching F1 that much, and don't have much knowledge about F1 as a whole and their political discussions.

 

Seems sensible to me. Get the cars back out on track for more scheduled communal test sessions. Give the real drivers the chance to drive real cars.

 

simulators are massive for keeping costs down, now you do have to spend a lot on the simulators themselves but what happens if you cant use sims anymore, either drivers become worse jeopardising the safety of themselves, the other drivers and the cars or they have to go to a bunch of tracks in reality use resources that dont need to be used and they cant optimize their laps as much because they arent training on the right track.

Solution: Cost cap the damn simulators.

 

That's what I assumed, but his comments seem to imply the simulators are costing MORE than actual REAL WORLD testing is, which is one of the reasons they banned real world testing in the first place.

Solution: Cost cap the damn simulators by only allowing them to test in Forza.

 

Thats either a lie or the simulator devs are having a giggle because they know the f1 chaps dont really have another alternative.

 

Simulators aren't the issue. CFD and windtunnels are.

Constantly having to upgrade software and hardware only for the parts to not work at the track. Wasted millions when there are tracks within 300 miles of all of them where results will always correlate with the track.

(What amazes me is there is no testing allowed of full size aero parts (aside from virtually) but engine manuafacturers can run race sims on full size engines in dyno rooms. I watched a Mercedes V8 (engine + airbox + exhausts + kers) do a full simulation run of hungary in 2013 based on hamilton's inputs throughout the race.)

It'll never happen because those teams that have invested in CFD and purpose built windtunnels will lose their advantage and their investment. But hey, talking about things that will never happen is more fun than considering what can and will change in F1 right now.

Edit: Obviously track time would have to be limited just as CFD and windtunnel time is limited now.

 

It makes sense, running the cars is probably cheaper day for day than all the computer CFD and wind tunnel stuff they do. The huge complex sim rigs cost a fortune also...

I don't know how you stop it now though.

 

Its not so hard to do that. Just put a new regulations about front wings and rear wings. The rest of the car are too similar on most of the teams, but the wings are the problem. So, if FIA put a new regulation about wings, that they have to be as simple as possible, like on this picture of 89 season: http://st.automobilemag.com/uploads/sites/11/2013/05/1989-Honda-Formula-1-car.jpg , perhaps, we can see a reduction with windtunnels tests and also, reduction of the turbulences. The DRS ideia was the most horrible thing on F1, because make the overtakes too boring to see and the cars still produces too much turbulances.

 

I am surprised that the italian Maurizio didn't hear about AC and how cheap it is....maybe when mentioning "millions" he was referring to iRacing...

 

Make them use simple spec wings.

Remove all the "monkey seats" and other ridiculous aero ****e they've sprouted over the last 10 years, then let them use some basic ground effect to claw some of the downforce back. That's clearly what the drivers want.

 

I dont think he means banning simulators specifically. I think he's just talking about being able to replace simulators with real world testing, which teams are not allowed to do.

I understand the arguments against it, those with the money to test continually benefit the most, but it is quite insane that you have to do all your 'evaluation' of your car design solely via computers.

 

Track time costs money. Ferrari has plenty of it, other teams much less so. Banning simulators means to secure an advantage for Ferrari. Other teams then need to invest into tracktime, of which they can afford less then. Simulator time I expect to be cheaper.

Its like a football club like Barecelona or Bayern Munich buying star players that are not really needed, and sit on the bench all the time - but that way, they canot play for a rivalling team. Thats what is behind many transfers in football, good example in Germany would be Munich eroding the BVB Dortmund since long time, its closest rival.

 

The drivers want all kinds of different things. Dont think one or two's opinions represents everybody's.

Spec wings would never fly. Fans and the teams would throw fits and I'm not sure I could blame them. You get rid of all the external aero bits and throw spec wings on the cars and not only would the cars all look the same - there'd be so little scope to actually develop them.

Two, ground effect is not this miracle solution people think it is. Any car that is built to get laptime through aerodynamics is going to suffer in dirty air. Doesn't matter HOW the downforce is generated. You follow in somebody's wake, you're not only being affected by lower quality air, but also lower quantity of air. The floor is still going to be highly affected by this.

In the end, the more downforce a car is built to run with, the more it is going to be affected by following another car. The teams already tried reducing the turbulence a car makes with the 09 aero regulations, but it really doesn't make that much difference. You still have winged cars scything through corners at 100-150mph+ and that is going to mess with the air quite severely. The only *real* solution is to reduce downforce levels significantly. Like, to the point where they're like late 80's F1 levels. The cars would be slow as all hell, but they'd be able to follow better.

 

It's more like telling a football club that they're not allowed to practice in between games, they have to play FIFA....

 

Cause the budget didn't change, only the venue... the same money gets more simulation time than track time, they're just spending a lot of hours simulating whatever they're allowed to (and probably more secretly, I mean, it's f1).

They can't just rent an empty track, they have to get full course safety staff, full pit crew ready to fix things when they break, etc. real world track time costs a lot.

 

The problem is that they are doing serious development work on the simulators and not just use them to train the drivers.
To be able to do proper development work, the simulators need to be really really accurate and every bit of detail can pay off. That's what makes them so horribly expensive.

Would be easy to solve: The FIA delivers the simulator software, the teams can make some minor adjustments and that's it.

 

I think F1 is in a major crisis since decades. Boring races with little to none overtaking on track. Just pit strategy to decide about race position.
To me, despite the howl technical aspect, which I find amasing too, this series is highly overrated.
Give them a low aero spec car at the beginning of each season to evolve individually throughout the year (through computational or real testing). In reasonable financial limits of course.
And get rid of that Ecclestoned f***.

 

It's clearly been a long time since you've watched man. There's far, far more overtaking than nowadays than there ever used to be.