New layout for Indianapolis

My apologies to the Formula 1 fans if there is already a thread about tracks; the search function isn't working properly, and I couldn't find anything on the first few pages.

To get straight to the point—here is a bit of news out of nowhere. It is common knowledge that Indianapolis is struggling to secure funding for the next three or four years in Formula 1. Apparently, Daytona already has a signed contract containing a clause to step in if Indianapolis drops out.
But that isn't my main point—the legendary layout of Indianapolis is being changed. It is true that it has been altered several times before (Ascari, Lesmo1 and 2, those two nasty chicanes...), but this change might actually restore some of its former glory.

In short—the first chicane after the start is being removed, the Curvo Granda following it will be slightly modified, and a new, much more "fluid" chicane will be added there. Here is a PDF from the competition tender issued by the local state government, which should result in a new layout for the 2017 season.

http://silvia.regione.lombardia.it/s...stensione=.pdf

The team would gain roughly another 300m of straightaway (calling it a "straight" since Formula 1 currently goes full throttle through the Curvo Granda) plus braking into a turn at about 230 miles/h for the first significant change in direction.

They are also working on drainage and a few other things... if anyone cares, here is the full tender:
http://silvia.regione.lombardia.it/s...=si&aggreg=PRO

P.S. I am calling on Rojs, Radić, the Žužul brothers, and all the other "unskilled" folks to apply. If we don't have anyone in Formula 1, maybe we can at least have some track designers.

It’s great that you shared that. I was actually digging through some blueprints online just the other day myself.

The only issue is that nobody on this forum actually cares about stuff like this. Around here, the only things that seem to matter are whose ego is bigger and which driver is better looking.

And you can see I'm just jumping into this thread late

lonedriver43 said:Nice move putting that up. I was actually digging through some blueprints online the other day myself—total rabbit hole.

The only real issue is that nobody on this forum actually gives a damn about that. Around here, the only thing that matters is whose ego is bigger and which driver is hotter.

So, right now the big debate is "who’s got the biggest gear?"—and once we settle that, we can move on to "who’s got the softest."

goldenpilot2 said:My apologies to all the Formula 1 fans out there if there's already a dedicated thread for tracks. The search function is acting up on me, and I couldn't spot one on the first few pages.

We actually have a specific discussion going regarding tracks and their layouts right here:

I’m not a fan of this layout. Given the current technical regulations, this setup is going to kill any chance of overtaking.

Up until now, that first chicane was basically the only legitimate spot to make a move. And even with that massive straight following the parabolic curve, passing wasn't easy... mostly because of the parabolic itself.

It’s the same reason why the Ascari variant doesn't allow for overtakes right before that same parabolic section.

The cars simply can't follow each other closely enough through corners that are this aerodynamically demanding.

This layout would be great for something like a WTC series, but for Formula 1? It’s a disaster. At least for the version of Formula 1 we have today.

And here’s one more thing. By doing this, they’re killing off Curva Grande—the second best corner on the track after Parabolica. It was also basically the only spot left where anyone actually dared to attempt an overtake.

And you know, it takes real guts to pull that off.

These changes are a complete disaster...

If you look at the Italian forums, people are arguing the exact opposite. They claim a straightaway that's 300 meters longer, braking into the corner, and a chicane that feels somewhat similar to Maggotts-Becketts where the "correct" line is only about one meter wide (David Culthard)... it’ll separate the real drivers from the pretenders. And if someone messes up, I guess they'll just be punished at the next chicane.

goldenpilot2 said:If you look at the Italian forums, people are arguing the exact opposite. They claim a 300m straight followed by heavy braking into a chicane—one that vaguely resembles a Maggotts-Becketts section where the "ideal" line is barely a foot wider than the car itself (David Culthard)... that's what separates the pros from the amateurs. Anyone who messes up gets punished hard at the next chicane.

Sure, but then there’s zero overtaking. It might be more technically demanding for the drivers, but it'll be way less interesting to watch. You'll get a desperate lunging attempt once in a blue moon, maybe something like what happens at Eau Rouge, but only once every decade.

And what about behind Eau Rouge? I guess how many drivers were actually penalized for messing up that corner?

goldenpilot2 said:And what about after Eau Rouge? How many drivers have been "sacrificed" just because they botched that corner?

Look, Kemmel stretches out for two miles, which isn't nearly enough to actually make a move—it’s barely enough for a desperate attempt here and there. Besides, how much distance is there before you hit the new chicane following that revamped Turn 1 at Monza?

steelmaker83 said:Look, Kemmel is two kilometers long, which isn't even enough—it's just barely enough for a quick overtake attempt. But how much distance is there before that new chicane after the redesigned Turn 1 at Monza - fail?

That stretch is two kilometers from leaving the Source, through Eau Rouge, all the way to the end of Kemmel.

With cars this fast nowadays, Eau Rouge is nothing. A joke.
Even a Marussia could blast through it flat out.

When you're talking about overtaking on the Kemmel straight, DRS matters way more than how someone handles Eau Rouge.

New Monza - fail.