Overtaking. The extended track at Silverstone is pale shadow of the rest of the track. Tilke might be a wizard making sure the designs are robust, the toilets are in the right place, the plumbing works, the spectators have room to get to and from the parking slots and trucks have enough space to load and unload the f1 show efficiently. I strongly believe we can achieve more interesting designs with different “DNA”, but I have no idea if this is feasible or not.
The tailor?
And if a manufacturer gets it right, that’s it for half the field. It looks a bit of one sided argument.
They make fast and exciting tracks.The solution to the perceived Tilkedromes is to use other designers, it´s not healthy to have one company taking all of the work, it stinks of nepotism.Well, competition is always great for business. As was mentioned, maybe three suppliers would be needed to keep things from getting to one sided.As for Tilke, check out Atlanta Motorsports Park. On a street circuit you need to use public roads (a race track can be used as public roads) and you cannot change too much because of buildings etc. One should never forget the drainage and this kind of thing. I didn’t make it through all the comments here, but didn’t see anybody ask the obvious question…The development war intensifies: Five Spanish GP talking points I really don’t think they are healthy for a competitive series.A lot of the negative’s you see aimed at the idea based off the 2001-2006 period don’t hold much weight & also tend to ignore some of the positives in terms of how it allowed teams to compete more closely than they otherwise would have. However, one cannot ignore the elephant in the room – many of his circuits do not promote racing. there surely are a lot of people capable of designing good tracks, using different ideas and concepts. Sure, Spa or Suzuka and few others can be pretty fast, but for the next four city tracks, I would love to see another circuit similar to the old Österreichring…nicely flowing and fast! They go into the guard rail and hit the guard rail and it costs minimum €5,000.Establishing the primary purpose of a circuit is “really, really important”, Tilke stresses. Also, do you really believe that tbis is how the design process occurred? So this is just not true. The wearer’s physique? That he raced is irrelevant, plenty of great footballers make bad managers. How much, I ask bluntly. There’s a long way to go still in 2018, but Baku has again set the bar high when it comes to spectacle.All this suggests that street circuits are the answer to Liberty Media’s quest to bring racing to the fans by combining city festivals with Formula 1’s ‘engineered insanity’. But I like to read your opinion on the subject, Dieter.
We have Singapore, we have Monaco, and here [Baku].”F1 also has, of course, semi-street circuits such as Melbourne’s Albert Park and Montreal’s Gilles Villeneuve Circuits, making it five temporary venues on this year’s calendar. Look at Formula Two. His designs have been very ‘cookie-cutter’ with a couple of notable exceptions, COTA, Malaysia, and Abu Dhabi. It would not mean they would beat the other top two teams on the right tyre.Going back to the sort of increased testing workload that Dieter is advocating for is a proposition that definitely benefits the largest and richest teams, which are the teams that can afford to do the most testing. Also other series. The art of F1 should not be to manage tire temps all day at the expense of exciting racing. But of course [a street circuit] is more expensive.”One of the downsides of street circuits is that they leave no motorsport legacy. They are a company with a good relationship with the FIA with a good understanding of the requirements of circuit design as well as facility design and requirements. Again, I’m not defending Tilke completely. Similarly, I can recall how some have complained about Singapore in the past, but the rival proposal put forward by Apex had a very similar layout because the local authorities placed restrictions on what roads they were prepared to make available for that race, effectively dictating large chunks of the layout.As an aside, when you bring up Imola amongst your list of classic venues, when you say it wasn’t “designed to have overtaking at every corner”, I can remember how there was constant criticism in the past that the venue was terrible for overtaking, even right back into the 1980’s and 1990’s, and how people complained that the races were boring processions.Similarly, when you read contemporary comments from drivers about what Hockenheim was like, or the reports written by people on the ground there, you get the impression that a lot of them were not fond of the old Hockenheimring and more than a few individuals thought it was a terrible circuit that tended to string the cars out so far apart that the races were usually pretty awful – James Hunt famously had a go at the circuit live on air for producing “Noah’s Ark” races, whilst other reports used tag lines such as “dull as ditch-water”, “fast but dull”, “unspectacular”, “Mickey Mouse” and “easy to forget”.Some venues that are spoken about in more fond terms now were not always thought of quite so highly when we were there – indeed, some were thought of in fairly negative terms at the time because they weren’t that good for racing, but we seem to have forgotten most of the duller races that took place.Well, old Hockenheim had a point: you needed to find a way to make works a car Superfast in the Motordrome.