Quote from Bean0 :

Isn't the KERS 'a stupidly large battery' ?

actually no
the energy needed for the kers under current regs (or maybe it was the earlier slightly less hp regs... doesnt matter really) works out to about the size of a largeish laptop battery (granted you probably need a larger number than the strictly necessary amount of batteries to achieve the 80hp power output)
also being lithium based (i believe most teams use life chemistry) the batteries can be rather small

anway the battery should be smaller than you average rubbish lead car battery

Just use the kers as starter motor?

Quote from Senninha25 :

Didn't understand this part. External starters like those screw drivers that are stuck to the back of the car to get the engine going? Or outside help? So seems like we're getting starter motors now. There goes another bit of the good old F1.

er actually the cars in the 70's used to have an onboard battery and starter, generally the cosworths had a small chance of firing before the battery failed but as the batteries became lighter it got to the stage where the battery could only turn the engine a couple of revs so eventually the requirement was dropped

Kobayashi and Perez both resigned for 2012 season with Sauber: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/93417

Quote from Mustafur :

Kobayashi and Perez both resign for 2012 season with Sauber: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/93417

I thought for a moment you meant leave when you said 'resign'
Now I understand you mean sign up again. A bit similar aren't they

Quote from P1lot :

I thought for a moment you meant leave when you said 'resign'
Now I understand you mean sign up again. A bit similar aren't they

He meant re-sign.

Almost gave me a heart attack! Would have been nice to see Kobayashi in a Ferrari though....

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/93447

Very interesting. Be interesting to measure the real demand in watching F1.

Quote from Intrepid :

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/93447

Very interesting. Be interesting to measure the real demand in watching F1.

My REAL demand is high. But not when I have to pay to have a satellite dish, a monthly subscription, and all the shitness that Sky will bring.

I'm thinking of buying a LOT of DVD recorders, going to a neighbours house (who already has Sky), recording the race onto DVD somehow, and then distributing it on the same day to friends and family. It'll cost me, but better than paying Sky.

Quote from Intrepid :

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/93447

Very interesting. Be interesting to measure the real demand in watching F1.

sort of know what you mean, not a true figure as football looks like a minority interest if you take sky's viewing figures but at the same time it'll be interesting to see how F1 compares to football.

F1 is very keen on stating it's the worlds most popular TV sport but i'm guessing that in most countries at best it comes second to at least one other sport, it's like someone winning the F1 championship without winning a single race just because they score in every country no matter that they're 5 laps behind in every race.

lets be honest if you took the total spectator attendance figures for all uk circuits for all meetings in a year, you'd probably find one weekends football attendances would be larger. motorsport is a minority interest, even those figures that were bandied about for the RAC in the group B era of 2 million spectators have to be takes with a pinch of salt, in theory that meant one in 30 of the uk population went and watched it, in practice a large part of that number were people who watched it at many venues, in 1984 i would have counted as 12 people.

Quote from tristancliffe :

My REAL demand is high. But not when I have to pay to have a satellite dish, a monthly subscription, and all the shitness that Sky will bring.

I'm thinking of buying a LOT of DVD recorders, going to a neighbours house (who already has Sky), recording the race onto DVD somehow, and then distributing it on the same day to friends and family. It'll cost me, but better than paying Sky.

you sound like someone on welfare who just got refused extra welfare.

Quote from tristancliffe :

My REAL demand is high. But not when I have to pay to have a satellite dish, a monthly subscription, and all the shitness that Sky will bring.

I'm thinking of buying a LOT of DVD recorders, going to a neighbours house (who already has Sky), recording the race onto DVD somehow, and then distributing it on the same day to friends and family. It'll cost me, but better than paying Sky.

I'm lucky in one respect, my father in law has Sky subscription, and I'm setup to watch channels via the SKYPLAYER. SS1 and SS2.


But cmon, what do they want F1 fans to do? Listen to DC and MB one weekend and then some washed up has-beens (or people who don't know F1 at all) the next?

Sky Sports to me, has always had a reflection of pub atmosphere and not the serious yet humorous nature of the BBC. Can only see things going downhill, at the end of the day, it's a no brainer, everyone with a TV has the ability to watch BBC1, but not everyone has the financial stability to pay for SKY...

Quote from Mustafur :

you sound like someone on welfare who just got refused extra welfare.

I'll shoot myself before I have to claim welfare payments.

Quote from tristancliffe :

I'll shoot myself before I have to claim welfare payments.

God help you when you finally set foot in the real world then.

http://www.petitionbuzz.com/petitions/keepf1onthebbc

I'm still in the Matrix.

Quote from tristancliffe :

I'm still in the Matrix.

What out for those green source codes lining theoretical walls in a metophoric atmosphere.

Quote from tristancliffe :

My REAL demand is high. But not when I have to pay to have a satellite dish, a monthly subscription, and all the shitness that Sky will bring.

lets not foget putting money in murdochs pockets

I think it is really sad. There are sports which lend themselves to advertising breaks, and there are those that do not. Football doesn't really, but the broadcasters put up with it, compared to formula one though, football is almost as advert friendly as its American namesake.
The bbc can do F1 in a way no other broadcaster ever would. If they lost wimbledon to itv, you'd still see every shot, the adverts wouldn't have anywhere near the impact as they do on an f1 race. In this sense, wimbledon is a complete waste of bbc money.

I feel as though the bbc has a responsibility to provide services that other channels cannot. F1 uninterrupted is one such service.

Sky are promising no adverts during the race.

But because F1 doesn't lend itself to breaks doesn't mean it's a BBC obligation to provide coverage. It's a sport for billionaires, and lines the pockets of many shady regimes and people. They shouldn't enjoy the benefits a public subsidy.

I really don't want to get Sky, F1 would be the only strong reason I would want it.
The thing I don't understand is; despite paying a subscription fee, there are more frequent advert breaks than other commercial channels. How much profit is enough?

As someone who's never had F1 without commercials, I think you'd be ok with your adverts.

The commentators fill you in on anything you missed during a break. It's not really a big deal.

Is commercial-free better? Yeah, always. Is it a dealbreaker? Not really.

But then again I've been weaned on American TV, so my perspective is certainly skewed.

Im surprised BBC doesn't just add adverts i mean its common sence and it can relax the costs.

Even if they added adverts during the pre race shows or 1 advert at a time during the race im sure it would be enough to make up the costs for the series.

ABC, Australias public broadcaster has adverts to cover the costs rather then making everyone in the country pay some ludicrious fee.

The BBC bring in £3.4 Billion from licence fees and a Billion more from other sources. I doubt they could dream of that through ad revenue.

Quote from Mustafur :

Im surprised BBC doesn't just add adverts i mean its common sence and it can relax the costs.

Even if they added adverts during the pre race shows or 1 advert at a time during the race im sure it would be enough to make up the costs for the series.

ABC, Australias public broadcaster has adverts to cover the costs rather then making everyone in the country pay some ludicrious fee.

ABC? ABC only advertises its programmes, retail products, or sponsored events/shows/etc. It's not quite the same as commercial advertising on other free-to-air channels. It's funded entirely by the Commonwealth government.

SBS does advertising though.

I wonder if the new broadcasting agreement will change anything for Australian coverage.

Oh, I thought abc brought in ads recently.

I wouldn't really know though because there shows are aimed at pensioners.

Doesn't SBS have a format where it has something along the likes of 10 to 20mins of straight adverts then none at all during the show. IMO it's a good format none the less and would work brilliantly during a live broadcast.