2010 Korean Grand Prix Status Report

[TomWazzleshaw]

66% complete

Not accounting for elevation the track looks abit too technical for me and probably would be better if it skipped turns 15 and 16 altogether. But that's just my personal opinion

Anyways it seems that the Koreans maybe able to host a race for a major motorsport championship ontime for once (From memory a few years back they couldn't get a facility to host a Champcar or A1GP race (Not sure which one) in time)

Your thoughts?

[Captain Hammer]

I actually think Korea could be good. It's got a nice blend of corners in the back section. However, I believe turn four has since been modified to be more of a hairpin, and the corner immediately after it will be a sweeper that the cars will accelerate through. Even if it's only a two-dimensional planographic, it looks a hell of a lot more interesting than pretty much every Tilke circuit ever made with the possible exceptions of Sepang and Istanbul (which we know to be great circuits).

[watka]

Reminds me of Valencia, just without the walls.

[kowalski]

66% complete

Not accounting for elevation the track looks abit too technical for me and probably would be better if it skipped turns 15 and 16 altogether. But that's just my personal opinion

Anyways it seems that the Koreans maybe able to host a race for a major motorsport championship ontime for once (From memory a few years back they couldn't get a facility to host a Champcar or A1GP race (Not sure which one) in time)

Your thoughts?

I wonder if anyone spots the sneaky little shortcut...

[tristan1117]

Being a proud Korean-American, this is a great thing for the sport. I remember the Champ Car race they had was canceled so this is their first taste of international motorsport. The track on the other hand looks slightly dull with the traditional long Tilke straights followed by slow corner affter slow corner. Not a Valenicia but probably the same level with Abu Dhabi.

[RAK]

Well, if nothing else, the Korean course looks better than the upcoming Jaypee Group Circuit in India.



Stereotypical Tilke - the infield looks horrid.

[f1-gast]

In what part of Korea will it be ? if it's north Korea i think it will sucks.
But anyway the track looks quet technical but like the TO turn 15 and 16 should be skipped, and connect turn 14 and 17.

Seem like the circuit is 2 parts like zandvoort good for also other race classes.
-point is that the circuits is again designed and developed by Herman Tilke.

[Phoenix]

Promising, but as usual, only an actual race will tell us the truth.
That shortcut is for Schumacher only, right?

[shinji]

In what part of Korea will it be ? if it's north Korea i think it will sucks.

It's in the South...

But if there were to be a race on North Korea it'd be epic. Some local driver would be forced in to a Ferrari or McLaren and all the others would have to let him win.

And there would of course be ample opportunity for some ronery jokes.

[AndreaModa]

Not sure if anyone was aware of this but its not the first time a Korean GP has been mentioned. I've got an old Autosport from 97 (incidently the one covering Hill's second place in Hungary) which has a short article about the Sepoong Circuit, located on the west coast of Korea about 110 miles south of Seoul. Harvey Postlethwaite provided 'technical support' to design the track, which resembles a quicker version of Catalunya really. There's a nice little image of the design with all the simulated speeds and gear positions at various places around the track. Not sure what happened to it, but at the end the article mentions Malaysia who of course actually won the race to host an F1 event in Asia.

[mediocre]

Sepoong, Sepang...So what?

[Jack O Malley]

Well, if nothing else, the Korean course looks better than the upcoming Jaypee Group Circuit in India.



Stereotypical Tilke - the infield looks horrid.

That's reminds me the "new" kyalami, but clockwise.

[Jynister]

66% complete

Not accounting for elevation the track looks abit too technical for me and probably would be better if it skipped turns 15 and 16 altogether. But that's just my personal opinion

Anyways it seems that the Koreans maybe able to host a race for a major motorsport championship ontime for once (From memory a few years back they couldn't get a facility to host a Champcar or A1GP race (Not sure which one) in time)

Your thoughts?

Turn 3 is awful. Other than that I'm not too sure. Seems all a bit faffy from turns 4-17.

[Salamander]

Turns 14 to 17 remind me of turns 8-12 (IIRC) on Belle Isle.

[Captain Hammer]

Seems all a bit faffy from turns 4-17.

Then what, exactly, makes a good circuit? Don't just say Spa or Silverstone, actually tell me what makes for a good circuit.

[Cynon]

Seems all a bit faffy from turns 4-17.

Then what, exactly, makes a good circuit? Don't just say Spa or Silverstone (Boring as hell for F1), actually tell me what makes for a good circuit.

I think you need to state for what series/cars. Some tracks, like the Circuit de Catalunya, are absolutely HORRID for F1, but the GP2 races there have been pretty good. Also, the Chicagoland Speedway oval -- boring as batsh*t for NASCAR, but a fantastic track for Indycar racing. So, is one circuit bad if the top open wheel category does not produce good racing, but a track that produces great finishes with other series??

[TomWazzleshaw]

I think you need to state for what series/cars. Some tracks, like the Circuit de Catalunya, are absolutely HORRID for F1, but the GP2 races there have been pretty good. Also, the Chicagoland Speedway oval -- boring as batsh*t for NASCAR, but a fantastic track for Indycar racing. So, is one circuit bad if the top open wheel category does not produce good racing, but a track that produces great finishes with other series??

I've always felt that Tilke's tracks are better suited for one make championships rather than Formula 1.
Case of point: Earlier today I watched the V8 Supercar race around Bahrain and it was a pretty good race. Same with the race at Abu Dhabi last week.

And some of the finishes at Chicagoland over the years have been absolutely epic in Indycar

[Collieafc]

Seems all a bit faffy from turns 4-17.

Then what, exactly, makes a good circuit? Don't just say Spa or Silverstone, actually tell me what makes for a good circuit.

Spa and Silverstone

I suppose it would be whatever delivers exciting races even in the dry

[thehemogoblin]

Seems all a bit faffy from turns 4-17.

Then what, exactly, makes a good circuit? Don't just say Spa or Silverstone, actually tell me what makes for a good circuit.

Spa and Silverstone

I suppose it would be whatever delivers exciting races even in the dry

Silverstone sucks without water.

[TomWazzleshaw]

Then what, exactly, makes a good circuit? Don't just say Spa or Silverstone, actually tell me what makes for a good circuit.

Spa and Silverstone

I suppose it would be whatever delivers exciting races even in the dry

Silverstone sucks without water.

Or some suicidal idiot running down Hanger Straight

[mario]

Seems all a bit faffy from turns 4-17.

Then what, exactly, makes a good circuit? Don't just say Spa or Silverstone, actually tell me what makes for a good circuit.

I might as well take the bait and have a go at answering this. After all, whilst there have been (and still are) some excellent tracks for F1, there have been some really atrocious ones along the way (the Las Vegas GP, anyone?), which are conveniently forgotten when people hark back to the good old days and the good old circuits...

OK, I think that the first thing that a good track needs is a blend of variable speed corners. Spa comes to mind, because there are some very high speed corners (Blanchimont, Eau Rouge/Radillon), tempered with a mix of partial throttle corners (Pouhon in particular), where driver skill can gain time, and slow corners where a bold driver can potentially make up places (La Source and Les Combes). This is one failing of chicanes, which Tilke uses liberally - it is easier to defend, because if your opponent overcooks it in the first part, chances are he'll be too far offline to make the next corner, and have to give up on the attempt.
Making it so that the set up is always a compromise is between one part of the circuit and another seems to work well too - Interlagos, for example, where you can either go for a lower downforce setting and maximise the first two sectors, or higher downforce and make up time in the middle sector.

Elevation changes and surface imperfections can also be used to challenge a driver and make a track a bit more special - Istanbul Park is one of the better Tilke circuits, because he was able to use the natural topography to make the turns more difficult. Perhaps this is where a few of the older circuits fall down - for example, Silverstone is as flat as they come, because it was built over an old air force base. As a drivers track, it is quite popular, because of the high speed nature of the circuit - however, because there are only a limited number of slow speed corners, it is tricky to overtake, and it becomes less exciting as a circuit (although the weather has commonly intervened there to liven things up).

Equally, the fact that areas such as the braking zones are so smooth means that the drivers are less likely to make mistakes - perhaps the best corner that Tilke came up with is turn 12 at Bahrein - trying to slow the car down for that corner whilst taking the corner is surprisingly challenging, as we have seen during free practise sessions over the years.

Most of the modern circuits are custom built in totally flat areas (take the latest one, in Abu Dhabi, as an example), so you can't play around with the terrain that much, and since the circuits are usually part of a complex (the Valencia street circuit, for example, formed part of the city's regeneration program), a certain amount of the groundwork has already been set out by alternative architects. And the fact that Tilke is always asked (although, to be fair to him, there is only one other company apart from his which specialise in track design) means that we don't have enough variety - if we had a few more new designers, then we might see a bit more experimentation with corner layouts and so forth.

[watka]

Seems all a bit faffy from turns 4-17.

Then what, exactly, makes a good circuit? Don't just say Spa or Silverstone, actually tell me what makes for a good circuit.

I might as well take the bait and have a go at answering this. After all, whilst there have been (and still are) some excellent tracks for F1, there have been some really atrocious ones along the way (the Las Vegas GP, anyone?), which are conveniently forgotten when people hark back to the good old days and the good old circuits...

OK, I think that the first thing that a good track needs is a blend of variable speed corners. Spa comes to mind, because there are some very high speed corners (Blanchimont, Eau Rouge/Radillon), tempered with a mix of partial throttle corners (Pouhon in particular), where driver skill can gain time, and slow corners where a bold driver can potentially make up places (La Source and Les Combes). This is one failing of chicanes, which Tilke uses liberally - it is easier to defend, because if your opponent overcooks it in the first part, chances are he'll be too far offline to make the next corner, and have to give up on the attempt.
Making it so that the set up is always a compromise is between one part of the circuit and another seems to work well too - Interlagos, for example, where you can either go for a lower downforce setting and maximise the first two sectors, or higher downforce and make up time in the middle sector.

Elevation changes and surface imperfections can also be used to challenge a driver and make a track a bit more special - Istanbul Park is one of the better Tilke circuits, because he was able to use the natural topography to make the turns more difficult. Perhaps this is where a few of the older circuits fall down - for example, Silverstone is as flat as they come, because it was built over an old air force base. As a drivers track, it is quite popular, because of the high speed nature of the circuit - however, because there are only a limited number of slow speed corners, it is tricky to overtake, and it becomes less exciting as a circuit (although the weather has commonly intervened there to liven things up).

Equally, the fact that areas such as the braking zones are so smooth means that the drivers are less likely to make mistakes - perhaps the best corner that Tilke came up with is turn 12 at Bahrein - trying to slow the car down for that corner whilst taking the corner is surprisingly challenging, as we have seen during free practise sessions over the years.

Most of the modern circuits are custom built in totally flat areas (take the latest one, in Abu Dhabi, as an example), so you can't play around with the terrain that much, and since the circuits are usually part of a complex (the Valencia street circuit, for example, formed part of the city's regeneration program), a certain amount of the groundwork has already been set out by alternative architects. And the fact that Tilke is always asked (although, to be fair to him, there is only one other company apart from his which specialise in track design) means that we don't have enough variety - if we had a few more new designers, then we might see a bit more experimentation with corner layouts and so forth.

+1

Just a bit more on Tilke; I've said before that we can't really criticise him too much he gets told where to build the track and has to play with the resources (e.g. elevations, or roads in the case of street circuits) that he's given.

[LionZoo]

Seems all a bit faffy from turns 4-17.

Then what, exactly, makes a good circuit? Don't just say Spa or Silverstone, actually tell me what makes for a good circuit.

I might as well take the bait and have a go at answering this. After all, whilst there have been (and still are) some excellent tracks for F1, there have been some really atrocious ones along the way (the Las Vegas GP, anyone?), which are conveniently forgotten when people hark back to the good old days and the good old circuits...

OK, I think that the first thing that a good track needs is a blend of variable speed corners. Spa comes to mind, because there are some very high speed corners (Blanchimont, Eau Rouge/Radillon), tempered with a mix of partial throttle corners (Pouhon in particular), where driver skill can gain time, and slow corners where a bold driver can potentially make up places (La Source and Les Combes). This is one failing of chicanes, which Tilke uses liberally - it is easier to defend, because if your opponent overcooks it in the first part, chances are he'll be too far offline to make the next corner, and have to give up on the attempt.
Making it so that the set up is always a compromise is between one part of the circuit and another seems to work well too - Interlagos, for example, where you can either go for a lower downforce setting and maximise the first two sectors, or higher downforce and make up time in the middle sector.

Elevation changes and surface imperfections can also be used to challenge a driver and make a track a bit more special - Istanbul Park is one of the better Tilke circuits, because he was able to use the natural topography to make the turns more difficult. Perhaps this is where a few of the older circuits fall down - for example, Silverstone is as flat as they come, because it was built over an old air force base. As a drivers track, it is quite popular, because of the high speed nature of the circuit - however, because there are only a limited number of slow speed corners, it is tricky to overtake, and it becomes less exciting as a circuit (although the weather has commonly intervened there to liven things up).

Equally, the fact that areas such as the braking zones are so smooth means that the drivers are less likely to make mistakes - perhaps the best corner that Tilke came up with is turn 12 at Bahrein - trying to slow the car down for that corner whilst taking the corner is surprisingly challenging, as we have seen during free practise sessions over the years.

Most of the modern circuits are custom built in totally flat areas (take the latest one, in Abu Dhabi, as an example), so you can't play around with the terrain that much, and since the circuits are usually part of a complex (the Valencia street circuit, for example, formed part of the city's regeneration program), a certain amount of the groundwork has already been set out by alternative architects. And the fact that Tilke is always asked (although, to be fair to him, there is only one other company apart from his which specialise in track design) means that we don't have enough variety - if we had a few more new designers, then we might see a bit more experimentation with corner layouts and so forth.

Very well said. I would like to add to this that with the FIA's emphasis on safety these days, some of the more legendary corners on circuits would never be approved today. I mean can you imagine the GPDA giving their stamp of approval to the old versions of Eau Rouge and 130R? Both these corners are romanticized, but tend to live on reputation as these days they've been reprofiled and are easy flat in modern F1 cars. The corners that require huge balls and thus distinguish the men from the boys are also the ones that are the most dangerous. While it's easy to say put in the danger, we want exciting racing, I think such statements are rather selfish as we're basically risking the lives of other people for our entertainment. Thus, we tend to end up with circuits that have a lot of technical corners. Tilke designed them, but he's also a bit constrained.

[Jynister]

Seems all a bit faffy from turns 4-17.

Then what, exactly, makes a good circuit? Don't just say Spa or Silverstone, actually tell me what makes for a good circuit.

A good question. But not one I can answer because I honestly don't know.

[shinji]

The reason people blame Tilke is because he's an easy skapegoat for the supposed lack of entertainment in F1; he designed many of the modern tracks that are regularly judged without people even seeing a race there.

In fact he has no impact on it whatsoever. His tracks are fine. The problem is the cars. But one man is not responsible for them, so there's no easy blaming.

In brief, Tilke ftw.

[Waris]

The reason people blame Tilke is because he's an easy skapegoat for the supposed lack of entertainment in F1; he designed many of the modern tracks that are regularly judged without people even seeing a race there.

In fact he has no impact on it whatsoever. His tracks are fine. The problem is the cars. But one man is not responsible for them, so there's no easy blaming.

In brief, Tilke ftw.

This is a good post for the "Unpopular F1 opinions" thread.

[Cynon]

Then what, exactly, makes a good circuit? Don't just say Spa or Silverstone, actually tell me what makes for a good circuit.

Spa and Silverstone

I suppose it would be whatever delivers exciting races even in the dry

Silverstone sucks without water.

I'd rather watch a wet Hungarian GP than a wet Silverstone GP. The 2006 Hungarian GP was a lot better than the 2008 British GP.

[Mister Fungus]

To answer captain hammer's question:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jO99ekYBZmQ

THIS! I want this track in F1!!

(it will be the last race of this years GT1 world championship)

[TeamTipper]

Now thats what I would call a awesome F1 track.

[AndreaModa]

definately want that in f1! doesn't look like much needs doing to the circuit itself, theres some parts without the tall saftey fencing, and the facilities might need to be upgraded but its certainly not a donnington job!

anyone spot the rejects on show in the clip? tuero was sharing with reject-to-be lopez in the 37 car and i also saw mazzacane and bruni!

[TeamTipper]

I think if they can get the FIA Safety Standerds then I see why not. if its on the F1 Calender will Mazzacane return????

[Frentzen127]

For instance, I think Jarama would be a brilliant circuit for an F1 driver. Its hilly, its twisty, its bumpy.
But the racing there would be dreadful. It WAS dreadful. All in all I think what makes a good circuit is a combination of length, terrain, and wise use of corners. Tilke's tracks are essentially tight, hairpin-like corners, connected together by straights, and dotted by chicanes here and there.
If you notice Interlagos or Spa, with the exception of La Source, none of the corners is particularly pointy. Bahrain and Valencia are as pointy as a snowflake.

[Jordan]

I think the Korean track should he half in North, half in South Korea. The finish line should be the DMZ

[Porrima]

I think the Korean track should he half in North, half in South Korea. The finish line should be the DMZ

Now that's a great idea. All the millions of mines on the border area there would generate the needed excitement, and reduce reliability a bit. Perhaps we'd see teams adapt by armoring the underside more.

[dr-baker]

I think the Korean track should he half in North, half in South Korea. The finish line should be the DMZ

Now that's a great idea. All the millions of mines on the border area there would generate the needed excitement, and reduce reliability a bit. Perhaps we'd see teams adapt by armoring the underside more.

And having all that weight at the bottom would lower the centre of gravity... and make the cars heavier.

[mario]

The reason people blame Tilke is because he's an easy skapegoat for the supposed lack of entertainment in F1; he designed many of the modern tracks that are regularly judged without people even seeing a race there.

In fact he has no impact on it whatsoever. His tracks are fine. The problem is the cars. But one man is not responsible for them, so there's no easy blaming.

In brief, Tilke ftw.

I agree that sometimes Tilke is criticised quite heavily by those who do not consider the limitations which are imposed on him (the FIA safety regulations, existing infrastructure and so forth). I would say that we could do with a bit more variety in the track design, because the tracks do have some very predictable features - although, as was pointed out before, what may not work for F1 can produce some great races for other series (the recent GP2 race at Bahrein was pretty lively, for example).
Inevitably, though, the idea of whether it is the cars, or the tracks, or this, that and the other is always under debate for why overtaking is rare. Now, I would argue that we don't want overtaking to be too common, otherwise it'll take the element of skill out of it (see Indy cars, for example, when they stuck the Handford device on). The current cars do make it more difficult to overtake (especially since the DDD was brought out - the increased turbulence has probably made it harder to follow somebody), and are part of the problem. The tracks, meanwhile, do have a role to play as well. So, I would say that putting the blame on one factor is unwise, when the problem stems from a number of things.

[Captain Hammer]

THIS! I want this track in F1!!

Not going to happen.

The revival of the Argentine Grand Prix depends on government funding. As it is, Potrero de los Funes is in San Luis, which is the centre of a seat controlled by the national opposition. The government will not support a race there. To make matters worse, the government had been banking on an Argentine in the sport before committing to a race. That man was Jose Maria Lopez, though with USF1 in jeopardy and rumours suggesting that Campos will not sign Lopez at all, the revival of the Argentine Grand Prix has suffered a huge setback.

Plus, Potrero de los Fuens needs a lot of work before it can be accepted as a Grade-1 circuit.