I suppose it's pretty subjective. I think two full seasons in F1 should qualify for "experienced" status, and five seasons should put a driver in the "veteran" category. One should also consider their pre-F1 racing achievements, however, like Bourdais' four Champ Car titles, and Glock's Champ Car and F1 test experience.

Well, I'd welcome an expanded grid.

But I don't like the idea of a budget cap being imposed on some teams and not on others. Budget caps should be universal, not discriminatory, and Mosley's dream 30M Euro budget is just unrealistc. He says his advisors think it should be more... well, he should listen to them.

Barmy Bernie.

USGPE then.

I wonder how Lola will come into play? I doubt they have the money to field a team of their own, so they'd probably be supplying the chassis and aero to another team. Perhaps Prodrive will adopt Lola and stick an Aston Martin engine in it.

All the tracks that were touted as KERS tracks have been disappointing for KERS team so far (Malaysia and Shanghai). I think you're right not to expect much from KERS in Bahrain, even though it should theoretically be advantageous.

Does anyone think that there will be some massive T1 action between P4 to P11? There is an interesting mixture of oddly weighted KERS and non-KERS cars mixed in there.

Quote from dawguk :

well, bernie said there will be three new teams in 2010. If the recent rumblings are anything to go by, that would be lola, aston martin ... And who else?

usf1

Just because it's first come first serve, I hope people don't start making threads a fortnight before race weekend.

Official GP threads should not be started any earlier than one week prior to race weekend, otherwise the first few pages are just mindless dribble.

Oh come on, Kovalainen did well in the second half of 2007 against Fisichella, although I'll admit Fisichella isn't exactly top-flight.

Amazing qualifying. I can't remember any season in F1 with so many competitive cars.

Some quick number crunching: these are times differences between Q3 and the fastest Q1/2 times for each driver in the top 6:

TRULLI: 0.760
GLOCK: 1.099
VETTEL: 1.541
BUTTON: 1.202
HAMILTON: 1.345
BARRICHELLO: 1.397

So, it seems the Toyotas are light. Vettel is heavy (!). Button, Hamilton, and Barrichello are on moderate fuel loads.

Quote from Mustafur :

Its kinda weird how he was with BMW for awhile though(probably due to the fact he won that BMW series), and I heard hes on a 2 year contract with a clause at the end of these season if he doesn't like it, but after this season im sure he will probably extend it.

I think his stint at BMW was a try-before-you-buy loan from Red Bull. Vettel was very fresh at the time. Red Bull didn't want to risk Vettel in their "big" team, but BMW needed a committed 3rd driver since Glock was occupied with GP2. Red Bull loans Vettel to BMW to be BMW's 3rd driver, and scores a chance to gauge Vettel's talent before plugging him into one of their own cars.

Quote from Mustafur :

Btw i can see Vettel staying at Redbull for a few more years.

Red Bull "owns" him. I wouldn't be surprised if he's on a long-term contract with the team, like Hamilton's contract with McLaren.

Could a mod please merge this with the existing GP thread? http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=56607

You don't have to be an ass to be a world champion.

Damon Hill was apparently a nice fellow, even with his champion status. Jackie Stewart was no snot, but he won three championships (and a knighthood). There are more.

Whether because of his age or his relatively sheltered racing superstar upbringing, Hamilton has said some things which were purely rude. When he is polite, it feels contrived. Vettel has the ability to sound polite and sincere. Reality or perception? Who knows, we don't live or work with these drivers. But the difference in perception has nothing to do with media coverage (Vettel got plenty at BMW, STR, and now RBR) or the status of their teams, but it's the way they present themselves to the public and to the sports media.

Without doubt, Vettel is not without flaws. He seems to be make judgemental errors when racing. Too hard-nosed, like Hamilton. But unlike Hamilton, Vettel is willing to apologise, even to his own detriment. That sort of redemptive attitude gives him a one-up on Hamilton in the "nice bloke" scorecard.

To determine driver skill, I think it's reasonably fair to use the proportion of points earned by a driver for their team during a season.

Here comes some number crunching. I'll use only unweighed 2008 and 2009 scores (by "unweighed", I mean the percentage values from both years will have equal significance, despite that the current season is still under progress). For teams with no points in either season, I've calculated the ratio on the basis of average race classifications.

Alonso: 88%
Barrichello: 60%
Bourdais: 18%
Buemi: 75%
Button: 40%
Fisichella: 51%
Glock: 49%
Hamilton: 57%
Heidfeld: 72%
Kovalainen: 43%
Kubica: 28%
Massa: 56%
Nakajima: 17%
Piquet Jnr: 12%
Raikkonen: 44%
Rosberg: 83%
Sutil: 49%
Trulli: 51%
Vettel: 71%
Webber: 61%

1. Alonso
2. Rosberg
3. Buemi
4. Vettel
5. Heidfeld
6. Webber
7. Barrichello
8. Hamilton
9. Massa
10. Fisichella
11. Trulli
12. Glock
13. Sutil
14. Raikkonen
15. Kovalainen
16. Button
17. Kubica
18. Bourdais
19. Nakajima
20. Piquet Jnr

There are some odd ones (eg. Kubica, Raikkonen, Buemi, Button). The results get thrown if people are paired up with really good or really bad team mates, or had a season in a backmarker team.

So in this year's lineup, first ordered by aggregate percentages of two drivers in the team, and if the aggregate is equal to another team, then ordered by the team containing the highest percentage-scoring driver:

Red Bull = 132
Renault = 100 (Alo. 88)
Williams = 100 (Ros. 83)
BMW = 100 (Hei. 72)
Brawn = 100 (Bar. 60)
McLaren = 100 (Ham. 57)
Ferrari = 100 (Mas. 56)
Toyota = 100 (Tru. 51)
Force India = 100 (Fis. 51)
Toro Rosso = 93

Man, I feel like a nerd.

No, this is not statistically sound!

Last edited by samjh, Thu 23 Apr 2009, 01:51.

Pfft...

1. I put up some good ones last season, so why aren't I on the poll?

2. Let the first thread starter win (as long it isn't more than one week prior to the race weekend).

Quote from 5haz :

Domenicali promising a big step forward in Spain.

Didn't he say similar before Malaysia and China?

We'll see.

Well, the question is, will it be a BIGGER step forward than the other teams? Everyone takes forward steps in F1, it's a matter of how big the step is.

I think Renault will be angling for the biggest step in Spain.

Quote from Mattesa :

It think it's great we're putting our LFS sim experience to good use.

LFS sim experience means jack all. LFS doesn't simulate aero turbulence, which influences the behaviour of F1 cars a lot when they try to overtake each other, nor does LFS simulate flat-spots in terms of chassis vibration and its affect on drivers, and LFS's tyre simulation is much more forgiving than F1 tyres. And finally, LFS doesn't simulate fear!

More info on flywheel energy storage: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flywheel_energy_storage

Scroll down a bit to see mention of motorsport usage. Scroll a bit further for advantages and disadvantages compared to chemical battery systems.

I'm not sure if this has been posted before...



He did a pretty good job with Kate's Dirty Sister.

Quote from bunder9999 :

pardon my ignorance, but what's the difference? wikipedia isn't helping much.

No worries. To explain in the simplest possible terms:

Battery-driven KERS use a battery to store the energy. The charge stored in the batteries drives a motor to provide more power to the driving wheels.

Flywheel-driven KERS use a rotating flywheel to store the energy. When the rotational speed of the flywheel is forcibly slowed down, the energy is transferred to the car's driving wheels for more power.

Last edited by samjh, Mon 20 Apr 2009, 03:45.

Quote from BenjiMC :

aren't mclaren using a flywheel kers system?

No. Theirs is battery-driven.

Williams is the only team using flywheel KERS, but they haven't deployed them on their cars yet.

Quote from zeugnimod :

<3 Vettel!

First in subleague and 12th overall thx to him.

I'm so glad I switched from Rosberg to Vettel.

Still lagging behind in the subleague though.

I fear the Brawns will be back in dominant form in Bahrain and the European races.

Quote from Intrepid :

Toro Rosso > Ferrari

Most embarrassing upstaging of them all.

Quote from Intrepid :

Newey must be a happy boi!

Ugh, teen-speak.

Glock, Buemi, and Sutil deserve honourable mentions. Glock made up 12 places, the son-of-a-gun! Buemi comprehensively destroys Bourdais' reputation... again. Sutil: a great drive ends in tears... again.

Weather changes.

Yeah, it is raining now. Forecast says it will be clearing until night (then rain again).

I wonder how this will affect strategies.

http://www.accuweather.com/wor ... ode=ASI|CN|CH024|SHANGHAI

It seems there will be no rain for the race.

Don't read anything into the practice times. Qualifying is when the hammer falls.

Quote from 5haz :

Hmm TBH I don't think the there is much the entertainment industry can do to stop people turning to piracy, even if a DVD has it's price slashed, you're still going to go for the free option if it's easily available to you.

Criminals generally re-offend if they are not rehabilitated. Pirates are the same.

However, most "pirates" are otherwise honest consumers. If the price is reasonable, they'll buy. At the moment, the prices for movie DVDs and music CDs are not reasonable (in my opinion, of course).

IMHO, the recording companies can just disappear and the music industry will be just fine as long as rights to artists' music is transferred to appropriate rights holders under new contracts. Artists can hire producers to record their albums, and sell those albums to distributors for retail sale. For concerts, artists can hire their own promoters and organisers whose business is specifically for running and promoting concerts. Just those two separate arrangements can cut out the record company in the middle. At the moment, the business model for music artists and record companies is that the record company owns all rights to an artist's music, and does everything from organising concerts to publishing and distributing CDs, while scoring themselves hefty commissions and up-front payments - in return for minimal benefit to the artist, and hight prices for the consumer due to the magnitude of commercial risk that record companies take upon themselves. It's a laughably flawed model, but the industry juggernaut is too big to adapt such a radical change; not to mention that record companies won't be happy to be left out of the loop!