FORUMula1.com

[sagi58]

... I'm sure part of any extension to testing could include the teams with tracks having to share at reasonable costs.

Translation: LESS than the cost of a video game... ooops, did I say that? I meant a simulator!! Really... that's what I meant to say!!

[CookinFlat6]

Also, his point about the cost of simulators compared to simply getting out on a track is a very good one. Plus, as he points out, time on track is more engaging for the fans and, provides more opportunity for the sponsors to get value.

He is very good at maths that Monte, I guess the cost of already owning your own testing track is much less than building simulators

And in the real world, for the 9 other teams, I guess building a track is cheaper than building a simulator

Shame the fans and sponsors can't see cars on Fiorano instead of on the sim, but I guess the other teams are in the same position , or would be if they had their own tracks

That's a sensible point. I'm sure part of any extension to testing could include the teams with tracks having to share at reasonable costs.

Hard to make the 'reasonable' track hire overcome the main costs - hauling your cars,kit and staff over to Fiorano by airfreight and accommodating them. So we would be back to where we are now - neutral tracks where all the teams test at
just more tests - but that's not what monte wants. He wants unlimited testing wherever

[Jabberwocky]

Also, his point about the cost of simulators compared to simply getting out on a track is a very good one. Plus, as he points out, time on track is more engaging for the fans and, provides more opportunity for the sponsors to get value.

He is very good at maths that Monte, I guess the cost of already owning your own testing track is much less than building simulators

And in the real world, for the 9 other teams, I guess building a track is cheaper than building a simulator

Shame the fans and sponsors can't see cars on Fiorano instead of on the sim, but I guess the other teams are in the same position , or would be if they had their own tracks

That's a sensible point. I'm sure part of any extension to testing could include the teams with tracks having to share at reasonable costs.

Hard to make the 'reasonable' track hire overcome the main costs - hauling your cars,kit and staff over to Fiorano by airfreight and accommodating them. So we would be back to where we are now - neutral tracks where all the teams test at
just more tests - but that's not what monte wants. He wants unlimited testing wherever

Most of the teams are within a stones throw of Silverstone.

Sent using NCC-1701

[racechick]

Also, his point about the cost of simulators compared to simply getting out on a track is a very good one. Plus, as he points out, time on track is more engaging for the fans and, provides more opportunity for the sponsors to get value.

He is very good at maths that Monte, I guess the cost of already owning your own testing track is much less than building simulators

And in the real world, for the 9 other teams, I guess building a track is cheaper than building a simulator

Shame the fans and sponsors can't see cars on Fiorano instead of on the sim, but I guess the other teams are in the same position , or would be if they had their own tracks

That's a sensible point. I'm sure part of any extension to testing could include the teams with tracks having to share at reasonable costs.

Hard to make the 'reasonable' track hire overcome the main costs - hauling your cars,kit and staff over to Fiorano by airfreight and accommodating them. So we would be back to where we are now - neutral tracks where all the teams test at
just more tests - but that's not what monte wants. He wants unlimited testing wherever

Most of the teams are within a stones throw of Silverstone.

Sent using NCC-1701

YES!! So am I I vote unlimited testing at the track accessible to most teams

[Jabberwocky]

I used to like the week days tests. A day of work and a pack of sarnies and that was me set for the day

Sent using NCC-1701

[spankyham]

Whilst Luca wants unlimited testing, I'm sure he'd settle for a reasonable increase. Especially if it was coupled with a ban on simulators. Having teams test at their closest track just makes sense for all the teams. Red Bull 1 & 2 could use the newly upgraded A1 Ring or something closer to Milton Keynes. Merc have a plethora of tracks to choose from. Silverstone plus plus plus in the UK - there is an abundance of easily accessible sites there.

As far as travel costs go the big costs come out when you have to air freight stuff. All the teams have their own pantechnicon and drivers so its just the fuel and track costs.

Banning the simulators would mean the drivers would have to get out on track and spend time in the real cars - another bonus for those sitting on the sidelines enjoying a sanger while their billy boils.

[What's Burning?]

Ban simulators? Why ban something that's already been bought and paid for?

[spankyham]

Ban simulators? Why ban something that's already been bought and paid for?

Those who believe in budget caps would say to save the lower teams money.

Plus the precedent has been clearly set, there is no problem in banning expensive capital items that teams already have paid for - remember Ferrari had invested in two track when testing was banned. I didn't hear any concerns then about the fact that Ferrari had bought and paid for their tracks

Also, with simulators, the cost in keeping up with the latest sim technology is now higher than the cost of real testing - that's one of Luca's point.

[racechick]

I personally would prefer real testing on real tracks with real tyres, but I can understand the cost concerns. A mix of limited track testing( but more than now) and continued use of simulators would seem a good compromise, but why do Ferrari want to ban simulators altogether? Have they not got a very good one?

[Jabberwocky]

They use a comedore C64

Sent using NCC-1701

[spankyham]

I personally would prefer real testing on real tracks with real tyres, but I can understand the cost concerns. A mix of limited track testing( but more than now) and continued use of simulators would seem a good compromise, but why do Ferrari want to ban simulators altogether? Have they not got a very good one?

A ban on simulators would save teams money. One of the points made is that the cost of maintaining simulator hardware and software is now more than track testing. So ban simulators, use tracks for testing, save money and better for fans and sponsors.

[spankyham]

They use a comedore C64

Sent using NCC-1701

I think that's where the team went wrong, they were supposed to purchase a Commodore 64 but they ended up with a commode for 64's.

[Jabberwocky]

Or 64 commodes Lol

Does anyone know if the cpu processing limit placed on teams includes simulation time?

Sent using NCC-1701

[bud]

Spanky I still would love to see some hard data on the claims running simulators costs more than track testing.
Just because Luca says it does, means little considering he always stretches things to suit Ferraris agenda.

[acosmichippo]

I find it ironic that the team with the highest budget is the one complaining about sims costing too much. Maybe if you're spending too much on sims, the faults lie within your own organization, and not the system itself.