Would sparks and contrails from F1 cars increase your enjoyment of the sport? Would active suspension or glowing brake discs add more intrigue to the race? That’s what AUTOSPORT says the sport is examining when it convenes to discuss the future of F1 and cost savings.
As part of the ongoing concern over the cost of F1, teams will be discussing ways to improve the spectacle of the sport as in days of old when titanium plates would create massive sparks from under the rear of the cars as they traveled down the bumpy circuits. Glowing hot brake discs would be clearly visible in daylight and the contrails from the rear wings slicing the air would be visible and stunning in photographs. They were heady days of F1.
If you consider the desire to reduce costs in F1, you might be inclined to suggest that a reduction in aerodynamic dependency, design and computation though CFD and other exotic systems used to produce these car could be a place to start.
In what seems to be the first notion of breaching the holy aerodynamic fortress that has remained sacrosanct for over a decade, F1 seems to be implying that the cost cutting discussion could lead to cars that are not quite as aero-dependent and therefore, more reliant on ride height, deeper wings and open braking systems. This would prompt such notions as sparks, glowing discs and contrails.
It is possible to connect the dots in cost cutting to mechanical functionality similar to days gone by and in some circles that would be a welcome change. Would this amp up the excitement for you?
Aerodynamics ahs been the black art of F1 for along time but it is also the element that has eroded close racing and some of the excitement of F1. It has long been suggested that the FIA should drastically reduce the aerodynamic impact of the current cars in order to get racing back into the series but that has not been something they’ve been willing to do on a drastic scale and what they have removed has simply been gained back through crafty design.
Could F1 finally be forced, through crappy economic conditions and waning interest to reverse its course and return to a less aero-dependent era? Would that be abrasive to those who feel F1 should never look back and always move forward in technological advancement?
It will be interesting to see what the group comes up but I suspect cost cutting will take occupy most of the discussion on May 1st.