Formula One - 2010

[AintNoSin]

Okay, let's start off this seasons thread with a few burning questions.

1. How will Michael Schumacher do?

2. Will Mercedes GP be able to build on Brawn's early success last year?

3. Can McClaren resume last year's late season form?

4. Is Felipe Massa fully recovered and back at full speed?

5. Is Fernando Alonso in a Ferrari the combination to beat this year?

6. Does anyone really care that USF1 won't be on the grid next year?

7. Will the "no refueling" rule improve competition or hurt it?

[PrivatePixel]

Originally Posted by AintNoSin

1. How will Michael Schumacher do?

Hard to say because Schumacher hasn't made any recent headlines, though his teammate Rosberg has been posting solid times in pre-season testing, which leads me to believe that the Mercedes chassis should be competitive.

2. Will Mercedes GP be able to build on Brawn's early success last year?

Whatever momentum Brawn GP had initially during the first half of last year was all but lost during the second half of 2009, when everyone began designing and implementing their own rear diffusers, and outpacing them eventually during the qualifying rounds.

If the Mercedes engine is every bit as reliable as last year's offering, couple this with Schumacher's input to the engineering team, Mercedes has the potential to be one of the top five teams. We should have a better idea where Mercedes is in about nine days, during Friday's practice.

3. Can McClaren resume last year's late season form?

With Hamilton in the driver's seat, McLaren has a contender for the drivers' championship. Button may be the current F1 champion, but I still believe Hamilton's skills are the superior of the two.

4. Is Felipe Massa fully recovered and back at full speed?

His pre-season results at Barcelona would indicate that he's in prime form, that there are no lingering effects from last year's accident.

5. Is Fernando Alonso in a Ferrari the combination to beat this year?

A potential top three contender (maybe), but I still give the nod to Hamilton as the driver to beat.

6. Does anyone really care that USF1 won't be on the grid next year?

As much as I like the notion of a N. American representative in F1, neither its presence nor absence will affect my viewing habits (where this sport is concerned) or whom I will root for. Windsor's passion for the sport is evident, but it is an operation in disarray. With no updates since January, no announcement of a second driver or chassis shown, and with staff layoffs announced today, I think it will fold, which is unfortunate for N. American fans.

7. Will the "no refueling" rule improve competition or hurt it?

I'm still undecided on this. Competing for the best Q2 and Q3 times was something I looked forward to, but I won't know where I stand on the issue until the first race has completed.

[AintNoSin]

Originally Posted by PrivatePixel

As much as I like the notion of a N. American representative in F1, neither its presence nor absence will affect my viewing habits (where this sport is concerned) or whom I will root for. Windsor's passion for the sport is evident, but it is an operation in disarray. With no updates since January, no announcement of a second driver or chassis shown, and with staff layoffs announced today, I think it will fold, which is unfortunate for N. American fans.

Unfortunately, Windsor couldn't find a partner with the organizational skills to match his passion, someone to run the day-to-day operations of the team.

I think that, if we are to have an American F1 team, you would need to start with an established name in the sport. I'd think that your best shot would be a team with roots in multiple disciplines, like Ganassi or Penske. Bringing the name Roger Penske to the table would give the team instant credibility and an organizational structure already in place. Of course, there is no way that Penske or Ganassi could mount an F1 operation on their own, so there would have to be another financial partner in the mix.

[PrivatePixel]

Originally Posted by AintNoSin

I think that, if we are to have an American F1 team, you would need to start with an established name in the sport. I'd think that your best shot would be a team with roots in multiple disciplines, like Ganassi or Penske. Bringing the name Roger Penske to the table would give the team instant credibility and an organizational structure already in place. Of course, there is no way that Penske or Ganassi could mount an F1 operation on their own, so there would have to be another financial partner in the mix.

The last statement sums it up: it's about financing the sport. As established as Penske and Ganassi are in motor racing, whether independently or combined, they would need heavy backers, in addition to surrendering one or more ventures in IndyCar and/or NASCAR, if they wanted to pursue an F1 venture, and the audience numbers aren't there in the US to justify such a pursuit. It's also why Windsor's announcement in 2009 to field an F1 team this year struck me by surprise. The foremost question in my mind was: who's going to fund this in the midst of a recession?

Penske dabbled in F1 during the mid-to-late '70s, but the costs then were nowhere near what they are now, even with adjustments for inflation.

USF1 is an ambitious idea, but the timing is wrong, and there's too much inner turmoil to overcome.

[partridge]

I just hope that Jensen doesn't get left behind by Lewis; no particular reason why he should but I'd hate for him to go from being No1 in Brawn to the No2 driver in McLaren.

This season should be amazing with so many decent drivers with top cars under them.

Did the new points system get the go ahead? Sounds stupid to me, but whatever. I wish they'd leave the rules alone for a few years instead of tweaking them every year!

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by AintNoSin

6. Does anyone really care that USF1 won't be on the grid next year?

I am sure that no one in the USA care's anyway. They would rather watch NASCAR racing with yellow flags for 150 of 200 turns and see a race finish under yellow then watch real racing

[AintNoSin]

Originally Posted by partridge

I just hope that Jensen doesn't get left behind by Lewis; no particular reason why he should but I'd hate for him to go from being No1 in Brawn to the No2 driver in McLaren.

Sorry, but Jenson Button is the #2 driver at McLaren.

[PrivatePixel]

Originally Posted by AintNoSin

Sorry, but Jenson Button is the #2 driver at McLaren.

He may be the reigning F1 champ, but we all know that Hamilton is the better of the two drivers. If Button qualifies higher and more consistently throughout the season than his teammate, I think an argument could be made over who is pegged #1 on the team, but the designation is somewhat superfluous because I don't think McLaren team principal Martin Whitmarsh plays favourites (unlike his predecessor Ron Dennis), i.e. gas up and go; it's every man for himself.

[PrivatePixel]

ESPN: US F1 team suspends operations, eyes '11 entry
Autoblog: USF1 operations 'effectively shut down'

[SquidPuppet]

I have been a huge Moto GP fan 30+ years, but have never followed F1 closely.

I intend to change that this year.

May I ask a few questions so that I can feel more connected?

1. What are the displacement and configuration limits of the engine?
2. Will there still be tire changes, and if so, what are the limits, if any?
3. How much fuel will a car need to carry to complete an average race?
4. Is traction control allowed?

Thanks.

Pat@, some of us Yanks are actually embarrassed by the faux racing known as NASCAR.

[AintNoSin]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

I have been a huge Moto GP fan 30+ years, but have never followed F1 closely.

I intend to change that this year.

May I ask a few questions so that I can feel more connected?

No problem.

1. What are the displacement and configuration limits of the engine?

F1 Engines are 2.4 Liter V-8s.

2. Will there still be tire changes, and if so, what are the limits, if any?

Yes. Bridgestone brings two rubber compounds to each race. Each car must use a set of tires from each compound (unless it rains and they have to go to rain tires).

3. How much fuel will a car need to carry to complete an average race?

That probably varies from car to car and is a closely guarded secret.

4. Is traction control allowed?

No, not since 2008.

Other things to watch this year:

There are at least three new teams on the grid this year. A fourth, USF1, is in disarray and may field a car next year.

7-time champion Michael Schumacher is coming out of retirement to drive for Mercedes (Formerly Brawn GP, which used to be Honda, which used to be British American Racing (BAR), which used to be Tyrell. ).

McClaren is fielding a team with the two most recent driving champions (Lewis Hamilton and Jenson Button).

Schumacher's old seat at Ferrari is being taken by 2-time champ Fernando Alonso.

Schumacher's replacement at Ferrari, Kimi Raikonnen, is sitting out the year.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by AintNoSin

Yes. Bridgestone brings two rubber compounds to each race. Each car must use a set of tires from each compound (unless it rains and they have to go to rain tires).

That probably varies from car to car and is a closely guarded secret.
No, not since 2008.

Other things to watch this year:

There are at least three new teams on the grid this year. A fourth, USF1, is in disarray and may field a car next year.

7-time champion Michael Schumacher is coming out of retirement to drive for Mercedes (Formerly Brawn GP, which used to be Honda, which used to be British American Racing (BAR), which used to be Tyrell. ).

McClaren is fielding a team with the two most recent driving champions (Lewis Hamilton and Jenson Button).

Schumacher's old seat at Ferrari is being taken by 2-time champ Fernando Alonso.

Schumacher's replacement at Ferrari, Kimi Raikonnen, is sitting out the year.

Thanks!

I knew about Schuey and that is a factor in my refreshed interest. Always curious about a #1 athlete coming out of retirement.

Good to hear about the traction control.

More please?

1. Why are they forced to use both compounds? Is it a way to force the teams to create/employ a "strategy"?
2. Is there a Maximum allowed fuel load?
3. Why is Kimi sitting out?

[AintNoSin]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

1. Why are they forced to use both compounds? Is it a way to force the teams to create/employ a "strategy"?

Exactly. When they lost Michelin as a second tire supplier, there was no competition any more. The two compound rule was created to force the teams to do something related to tires during the race. Usually only one of the compounds is well-suited to the track so the teams have to decide when they are going to switch to the inferior compound (usually the softer one, which doesn't last very long).

2. Is there a Maximum allowed fuel load?

No. Too much fuel will makes the car too heavy and slow it down, so the teams only want enough in the take to finish the race and no more.

3. Why is Kimi sitting out?

Despite losing his seat to Alonso, he is still under contract to Ferrari. He can't find another team to buy him out (at least not a good team that can actually win) so he's going to spend 2010 driving rally cars instead. He may be back next year.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by AintNoSin

Exactly. When they lost Michelin as a second tire supplier, there was no competition any more. The two compound rule was created to force the teams to do something related to tires during the race. Usually only one of the compounds is well-suited to the track so the teams have to decide when they are going to switch to the inferior compound (usually the softer one, which doesn't last very long).
No. Too much fuel will makes the car too heavy and slow it down, so the teams only want enough in the take to finish the race and no more.
Despite losing his seat to Alonso, he is still under contract to Ferrari. He can't find another team to buy him out (at least not a good team that can actually win) so he's going to spend 2010 driving rally cars instead. He may be back next year.

OK. Then I give the showrunners five of these for the silly tire rule.

With regards to the fuel, I may have worded my question poorly. Is there a maximum load that can NOT be exceeded. I ask because MotoGP did this (21 litres) to force the manufacturers to detune the bikes. Didnt work though.

Do I have this right? Toyota and Honda have bailed. That leaves The Red cars, BMW, Mercedes Renault?

[AintNoSin]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

With regards to the fuel, I may have worded my question poorly. Is there a maximum load that can NOT be exceeded. I ask because MotoGP did this (21 litres) to force the manufacturers to detune the bikes. Didnt work though.

Again, I don't think there any incentive in F1 to carry more fuel than you need. Fuel=weight and weight is the killer of speed and handling. Even if you crank up the engine to use more fuel, that extra fuel means your car doesn't handle as well.

Do I have this right? Toyota and Honda have bailed. That leaves The Red cars, BMW, Mercedes Renault?

Ferrari is still there. Mercedes just rejoined after buying Brawn. The BMW team is in the process of being sold and BMW will no longer be involved. Renault has sold most of its team to investors, but still supplies engines and lets the team carry the name.

So currently, the only true factory teams are Ferrari and Mercedes.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by AintNoSin

Again, I don't think there any incentive in F1 to carry more fuel than you need. Fuel=weight and weight is the killer of speed and handling. Even if you crank up the engine to use more fuel, that extra fuel means your car doesn't handle as well.

Ferrari is still there. Mercedes just rejoined after buying Brawn. The BMW team is in the process of being sold and BMW will no longer be involved. Renault has sold most of its team to investors, but still supplies engines and lets the team carry the name.

So currently, the only true factory teams are Ferrari and Mercedes.

I completely understand the fuel/weight issue. Thats not what I am asking. I am asking if the rules say, for example, 1. The fuel tanks/cells shall not exceed a maximum capacity of 120 litres. With the switch to no fuel stops, I am curious as to where they "capped" the fuel load because it may/could come into play as a strategy for the teams.

Ferrari = Red cars

So satelite/privateer teams must lease/buy engines from those 3 manufacturers and build their own chasis?

[AintNoSin]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

I completely understand the fuel/weight issue. Thats not what I am asking. I am asking if the rules say, for example, 1. The fuel tanks/cells shall not exceed a maximum capacity of 120 litres. With the switch to no fuel stops, I am curious as to where they "capped" the fuel load because it may/could come into play as a strategy for the teams.

As far as I know, the only change to the rules has been the ban on refueling. The teams are free to pack as much fuel as they want into the cars. For now, I guess the FIA believes that the weight penalty is enough incentive.

Ferrari = Red cars

Of course. Who else?

So satellite/privateer teams must lease/buy engines from those 3 manufacturers and build their own chasis?

Apparently, teams can also buy older chassis from other teams. One of the new teams is using Toyota chassis from last year. Until this year, Toro Rosso used the Red Bull chassis from the previous year.

There was supposed to be some rule change that would allow teams to buy their chassis but I don't know where that went.

Teams are free to buy engines from anyone. The aborted USF1 team was going to use Cosworth engines. Most teams will buy Ferrari, Mercedes or Renault engines because those teams have the experience making F1 engines.

[PrivatePixel]

SquidPuppet had a number of questions regarding rule changes for the 2010 season; all of the changes (and respective impact for each) was posted on the official F1 website (link below)

F1: Cause and effect - the impact of 2010's new rules

Practice 1 commences in less than 13 hours.

[AintNoSin]

Originally Posted by PrivatePixel

F1: Cause and effect - the impact of 2010's new rules

Great link. I hadn't thought about the impact of the more fuel on tires. That probably means no one will be using the soft compounds at the start of the race.

The heavier cars will probably put more strain on the engines, too.

If a team can build a more economical car, it will handle better and the parts will last longer.

[steve1971]

I am getting amped up for the new F1 season and its starts this Sunday. I am so intested to see how Michael looks back behind the wheel of an F1 car and I am gonna be really interested to see how well Alonso does with my beloved Ferrari team. I am excited as hell.