Formula1 Journal

Ken Anderson's Comments

Peter Windsor's Comments

My Favourite Moments of 2009 - By Paul_Murtagh

2009 - Arguably the best season in Formula 1 for years. Since 1984 only four teams had won a Formula 1 title - Ferrari, McLaren, Williams or Benetton/Renault. But it was all to change this year, when two new forces emerged in Brawn and Red Bull. These teams breathed fresh air into F1, with new regular winners in Button, Vettel and Webber. F1's elder statesman Rubens Barrichello showed that he could still do it, while Lewis Hamilton and Kimi Raikkonen showed that both McLaren and Ferrari were more than capable of challenging the new regime. Here I look back at my highlights of 2009

USF1 Website Goes Live - by Sportsman

This is the news that we have all been waiting for. This is looking very promising. USF1 have always said that they would interact with F1 fans and this a a great start.

The fact that Chad Hurley is involved is already apparent with the YouTube video's.

http://www.usgpe.com/

USF1 Video - This Should Answer Some Questions

Has Schumi Made The Right Decision? - By Paul_Murtagh

On Friday morning it was announced that Michael Schumacher is to make a sensational return to Formula 1 with the new factory Mercedes GP team. He will partner Nico Rosberg, and his return will be welcome by many, but has Schumacher made the right decision in returning to the sport that he left back in 2006?

As with many decisions, there are both pros and cons to the argument.

USF1 Chassis Pics?

This is suppossedly a leaked pic of the USF1 chassis. I hope so! That is not Ken Anderson in the pic, that's Nick Craw, the American President of the FIA Senate. I'm not sure what that's all about!

This is a pic of the Falcon IRL car that never raced. Ken Anderson designed that car in 2002. Do you see any similarities?  

Points Mean.........What Exactly? – By Paul_Murtagh

 

For 2010 F1 will see the most radical shake-up in the points scoring system in it’s 60 year history. For the first time ever, drivers will be able to score points right down as far as 10^_th place, meaning that 38% of the starting grid next season will score at least one point. But what exactly does this mean in layman’s terms?

 

The first thing to establish is how the points as distributed. Under the previous scoring system, the winner receives 10pts, second place 8, third place received 6, fourth place got 5 and so on as far as 8^_th place. While this rewarded consistency, it had it’s critics right from the minute it was introduced in 2003. Many felt that it began to devalue the win, and previously there was a 4-point gap between 1^_st and 2^_nd compared to 2pts, and it meant that drivers who had built up a sizeable lead at the beginning of the championship, such as Fernando Alonso in 2005 and Jenson Button last season, were able to sustain a championship challenge without challenging for race wins in the second half of the season. This prompted Bernie Ecclestone to try, and fail, to implement a ‘medals’ system whereby the driver with the most wins won the title regardless of how many points he had. Thankfully this was never passed.

 

Racing With Matchett - Fuel Bladders

USF1 Team Has a New Technical Partner

 
 

Advanced Composites Group Inc. (ACG), part of the Composites Division of Umeco plc, is proud to announce the signing of a long term supply agreement with US F1 Team, the only US-based team to take the grid for the 2010 FIA Formula One World Championship.

With strong backing and a solid team to enable it to meet the challenges of building a new car in an extremely short timeline, US F1 Team is focused on challenging the world’s best drivers and teams.

Ken Anderson, US F1 Team President, CEO and Team Principal, said: "US F1 Team is pleased to announce ACG as a technical partner in the design and construction of our 2010 Formula One car. The team faces a tremendous challenge to design and produce the first American-based Formula One car in more than 40 years, and ACG's composites expertise will be critical for us to meet our goals and expectations in 2010 and beyond."

ACG’s heritage in Formula One goes back many years; the Group’s philosophy of providing outstanding product development, application-specific, customised products and technical support at all stages of development and manufacture has placed it at the forefront of the motorsport industry.

Adrian Potts, President of ACG Inc, said: “There is an exciting time of change in Formula One racing and this has created the opportunity for new teams to enter the grid. US F1 Team is the sole American entry, and we are proud to support them from our Tulsa facility. I’m confident that the new team has signed up with the very best support and service in the industry, and we will demonstrate that their confidence in us is well placed.”

Jon Mabbitt, Managing Director of Umeco Composites Structural Materials, said: “It’s reassuring to know, in these turbulent times for Formula One, that ACG remains a strong technology leader in the field and that the motorsport industry can still provide exciting, new business opportunities such as US F1 Team. We wish the team every success in their endeavor.”

For further information please contact:

Advanced Composites Group Inc
Dr Adrian Potts – President
Tel: (+1) 918-252-3922
Web site: www.acg.co.uk

http://www.advanced-composites.co.uk/newsmain.html

2010 – What It Means To The Regular Fan? – By Paul_Murtagh

With 2010 seeing the biggest overhaul of F1 in a very long time, I decided to look at what it means. As I am not very technical or business-minded, I thought it was best if I looked at it from a regular fan’s perspective. New teams, new drivers, new circuits and new rules mean that 2010 should, in theory, be a lot different from what we have been used to recently.

 

Let’s first of all start with the glue that holds them all together – the rules. While not much has changed from an aerodynamic point of view this year, the car shapes will change slightly due to the ban on refuelling. They will become bulkier just behind the cockpit, which will affect the airflow to the rear end of the car. The bigger fuel tank will also affect the handling as the cars will be around 160kg heavier at the start of the race than at the end, meaning the balance of the car will change as the races progress. The increased weight limit will also change the way the car weight distribution is designated, and throw into the mix a narrower front tyre in 2010, and all these changes mean that a car will be a different beast to drive from last season. Drivers will have to change their driving styles accordingly to suit the new regulations.

Full Race Distance Fueling: A Radical Change - by Sportsman

 

F1 2010 will bring about yet another change in the regulations. This latest change is probably even more radical than the downforce changes that were introduced for the 2009 season.

 

I am of course referring to the ban on in-race refueling. This is ostensibly to improve overtaking, save costs by not having to carry refueling rigs to each race, and improve pit stop safety. All of which make perfect sense.

 

But just what effect will this measure have on the cars and races?

 

Regarding design and engineering: it is a major undertaking. Next year the cars will need to start the race carrying an entire race fuel load. It’s not simply a matter of fitting larger fuel tanks to the existing designs with all other parameters remaining the same. The basic nature of the car will change.

 

Adding a load of arguably 165kg of fuel to an F1 car and optimising the performance of the suspension, balance, and handling characteristics over such a wide spectrum is no easy task as many factors will change as this fuel load is consumed. Also, next year the minimum weight of the cars has been increased by a further 15 kg now making the minimum weight 620 kg.

 

So, 620 + 165 = a starting weight of 785 kg. This could well be heavier at some circuits, and the calculated fuel loading taken from various sources could be inaccurate.

 

But even so, that is far heavier than anything we have seen this past season.

The factors to consider are as I see them as follows:

 

Firstly tyres: The rules have not changed regarding tyre usage. There must be at least one tyre stop due to the two-compound rule. Bridgestone may nominate harder compounds for both prime and option tyres. The rationale is that one needs to minimize tyre changes. Or, maybe not: after all it is their last year in the formula and they may not spend a dime on development.

 

However, assuming that the option tyre will be a softer compound, this tyre will almost certainly be used only in the final laps. Theoretically the cars will be at their fastest pace at this point as they are on their lowest fuel levels. A team will want to minimize laps on the option under high fuel loads.

 

By rule, the front tyre will be narrower. When slicks were introduced the grip differentials between the front and rear tyres changed. Narrower front tyres are meant to compensate for this effect.

 

Perhaps the construction of the tyres will change even if the compound does not. The construction may be made stronger (sidewalls) to accommodate the extra weight. No news on that point.

 

There is no doubt, however, that the demand on the tyres next year will change. Let’s assume some baseline data. This is subjective and not based on observed facts, but the example will be useful to illustrate a point.

 

2009 average starting weight with fuel – 650 kg

2010 average starting weight with fuel – 785 kg

 

The braking force available will not improve because the brake spec remains the same. Braking force is also dependant on tyre grip. The speed that a car enters a braking zone will probably be slower, but let’s just accept that speed as a constant based on 2009 performance. The circuits will be the same, so that is a constant. And let’s assume the tyres will be the same. The only variable we are allowing for this example is weight.

 

Negative Acceleration = Braking Force/Mass

 

So, if the braking force is the same, and the mass increases, then the braking differences will increase proportional to the increase in mass. Let’s include some numbers.

 

The weight increases 20.7% and the braking force remains the same. I would conclude that braking distances would increase by that proportion. Perhaps by working the tyres harder one could shorten the distance but that would also accelerate the wear on the tyre.

 

Lateral g-forces follow the same laws of physics. The centripetal force required to hold the car in the “curving arc” is also proportional to tyre grip (centripetal force) and mass. The same effect will be seen.

 

In conclusion, the brakes and tyres will be essentially the same. The mass they are required to negate will be 20% greater. The load on the tyres will be massive, and a driver must deal with all of these issues.

 

In my opinion the extra weight changes the tyre loads, the suspension loads, the gearbox loads, the engine loads, the chassis loads, etc. Will tyres fail? Will brakes fail? Will gearboxes fail? Will engines fail? And will chassis fail under crashes?

 

Of course they will, and I think that a  prudent driver will use the car to take advantage of these challenges and other drivers will exacerbate the problems these challenges bring.

 

More on this subject to follow………….