Singapore, 2012

How can Singapore’s F1 track be improved?

Debates and pollsPosted on | Author Keith Collantine

Singapore, 2012The Singapore Grand Prix has been one of the most successful recent additions to the F1 calendar.

Ahead of last week’s race Bernie Ecclestone and the race organisers announced a five-year extension on the original deal which will keep it on the calendar until at least 2017.

Compare that to the other track which joined the calendar in 2008, Valencia, which did not feature on the provisional 2013 F1 calendar which appeared before the race.

However the Singapore track is not without its shortcomings and the possibility of changing it has been raised.

One of the chief concerns of the race organisers is the costs involved in constructing the circuit for each race and the disruption it causes to the city. They put the total cost of hosting the race at ??75m.

There are also practical problems with the circuit, such as the difficulty of recovering stranded cars. In the five races at the track so far, the safety car has been deployed eight times.

The slow average speed around the lap means the race can fail to go the distance, as happened this year.

One part of the circuit which drivers would like to see altered is also one of few corners on the track to have earned a name: the Singapore Sling chicane at turn ten.

Sebastian Vettel explained the drivers’ objection to it during the post-qualifying press conference: “I think we’ve discussed it many times, every year actually, to find a better solution in turn ten which probably requires to take a little bit of land from the cricket club for those couple of days or maybe remove the pavement for three/four days.

“I don’t know, but if you consider the costs for this whole event, I think taking a pavement away and putting it back on shouldn’t be a big problem,” he added. “In terms of safety I think that’s one of the worst corners we have on the calendar, because you’ve got these big kerbs, big bumps and it’s a bit tricky to find a better solution right now with the space we have, but I think that’s something we need to work on.”

Lewis Hamilton and Pastor Maldonado backed the world champion’s view.

Changing the Singapore track

A straightfoward way to tackles some of the problems could be to direct the cars left instead of right at turn eight (by the red marker on the above map), rejoining the present circuit at what is currently turn 14.

Kimi Raikkonen, Lotus, Singapore, 2012This would reduce the length of track which needs to be illuminated and cut out some section of track where recovering a car is difficult without a safety car. Although it would mean losing features such as the Andersen bridge, it would cut out the drivers’ least favourite corner (pictured).

With the present track length just over 5km, cutting this much of it would bring it close to the FIA’s minimum length for F1 tracks of 3.5km. A Grand Prix would likely have over 80 laps to reach the minimum race distance.

As Singapore is a street circuit, the opportunities for change are limited by the surrounding network of roads. But there may be opportunities to increase the use of purpose-built sections, such as the start/finish area.

Although Singapore has struggled to produce good races (averaging 6.3 in Rate the Race over the past four years), it has proved a popular addition to the calendar and those who’ve been to the race seem to have enjoyed it very much.

Whatever changes they make, hopefully the organisers see fit to keep it as a proper street circuit where drivers have to cope with a bumpy surface, a twisty track and foreboding walls.

What do you like or dislike about the Singapore Grand Prix track? What needs to be changed – and how? Have your say in the comments.

Debates and polls

Browse all debates and polls

Image ?? Sahara Force India F1 Team, Singapore GP/Sutton

138 comments on “How can Singapore’s F1 track be improved?”

  1. By cancelling it.

    1. Comment of the year.

    2. Ha, good to see you on here too (McP here). But yeah, unless they can actually change the track to give rise to overtaking, it’s always going to be more of a spectacle that a race, and I for a fact don’t like that. But then, the track gets it’s money because the spectators seem to love it (I guess again for the spectacle, but also for the atmosphere it must have), so the organisers obviously wont care.
      I just wonder if a good tack layout could assist it. It’s unlikely, but it’s worth a try before it gets cancelled in five years time for not having any good races.

    3. I agree but if they were to cancel every GP at circuits that produce consistently boring races there would be fewer than 10 races left on the calendar.

    4. I don’t think Vettel’s fans will agree. If they exists, of course.

      1. I enjoyed this years Grand Prix despite Vettel winning. How can you say there were no overtakes?! I think this grand prix was actually better than the belgian grand prix this year

    5. Same would apply to Monaco then? At least Singapore has a USP. Personally i think it’s a great track.

      1. I think Singapore should stay, but Monaco is the most prestigious and demanding events on the calendar.

      2. Gimmick that’s only used to suit the European time zone.

    6. That was my first thought, well said. It’s time they paid more attention the fans of the sport rather than Bernie’s pockets.

  2. Personally, I would not change it at all as I see no problems with the circuit. The driver’s complaints about the Singapore sling are silly, it is unusual but that’s what makes it great. Many of the latest circuits have nothing unique to them. I hope turn 18 also stays if changes are made because that corner catches out a lot of drivers. The circuit must remain long to offer more chances to make mistakes, so I’d be firmly against the suggestion in the article of turning left at turn 8.

      1. yes, much shorter lap, more laps, more overtaking opportunites into T1, T7
        Also cut out all the turns from T16-final corner, its just chicane, chicane, chicane, last 2 turns

    1. Couldn’t agree more @slr

    2. @slr

      The circuit must remain long to offer more chances to make mistakes

      I don’t follow your reasoning here. While a shorter lap would mean fewer opportunities to make mistakes over a single lap, that wouldn’t necessarily be the case over the same race distance (i.e., with more laps).

      1. @keithcollantine I was talking about over one lap (i.e. a hot quali lap) rather than a race distance.

    3. The driver’s complaints about the Singapore sling are silly

      Why? How?

      I think if you get drivers complaining then you have to seriously look at why.

      1. Simple: He’s not the one in the car.

      2. I think they’re not silly, but I don’t think it should change; turn 10 is one of the defining features of the track; it’s the corner everyone associates Singapore with.
        It’s quite exciting watching onboard footage of it, and I believe that to make it safer, they should have curbs with either a gradually increasing, or a constant gradient, so the curbs act like circular ramps; that should allow the drivers to take it a bit faster, and if the curbs were flatter, and due to the small gradient, the drivers will be able to ride the curbs more, thus reducing the risk of damage due to the small angle at which the curb meets the tarmac.

        1. To clarify, I’d like the curbs to be circular, and for them not to protrude from the tarmac too much, much like the initial curb at the Ascari Chicane (from 2011, 2010, 2009, etc but not 2012)
          Only for the other sides to be identical to the curbs facing the track

    4. yes i like this coment!

    5. What about this idea: a crossover at turn 8/14!

      So instead of going right at turn eight, make it a straight there and take ‘turn 10’ the other way around (no sling necessary, because of slow exit of the turn before that). So give the circuit an 8-layout like Suzuka. The only drawback would be an expensive crossover at turn 8/14, but you get the straights in return!

  3. Turn 10 defo needs to go. It’s an awful corner, and not a very safe one. I’ve complained about it since ever here, and sometimes I get responses like “it’s an unique corner, an unique challenge and needs to stay” which I think it’s missing the point completely, but oh well…

    I don’t know how to improve that track, I guess you need to know that bit of the city to give a proper suggestion…

    To be entirely honest, I don’t like the Singapore track, so whatever they change will be welcomed, specially if it means racing will be better (or safer). But I think it should stay because it’s proven to be a massive challenge for the drivers and the cars, plus it’s a great spectacle. Watching the cars racing at night it’s still as cool as it was in 2008.

    1. Personally, I would round Turn 10 (which is the major problem corner) off – the picture at the bottom of the article makes it clear that there is the space to make it into a more gradual, high speed left hand turn.

      The other thing I would change is get rid of the last stadium section where the cars go under the seating – there are just two many 90 degree turns in that last section of the lap. Make it a flat out run to join those two sections of the same road together.

      1. @heskin-radiophonic

        I would round Turn 10 (which is the major problem corner) off – the picture at the bottom of the article makes it clear that there is the space to make it into a more gradual, high speed left hand turn

        There’s no chance of them doing that with so little room for run-off there, which is what Vettel alluded to.

        1. That’s a shame. After all it is a street circuit. How fast would they go? And how Does it compare with other sections?

    2. @fer-no65 I think Martin Brundle hit the nail on the head when he said the reason drivers don’t like the corner is because it makes them look silly.

      Not in the sense that it’s a challenging or difficult corner to get right, but that it’s so inelegant you can’t help but think they’re not driving it well.

      To put it another way, I don’t think I’ve ever seen a driver go through it and thought “they nailed that”. It’s more like “they survived that”.

      1. Yeah that sums it up pretty well. People say it’s a challenge, but it’s like a challenge in the way that literally threading a needle is. Sure, it’s hard to do, but does anyone actually enjoy the act?

      2. @keithcollantine that’s what I’ve always said. It’s a complete car breaker. If they want to “make it interesting”, when why not spil oil on the track? It’s a survival test, and if something goes wrong, bang, you hit the wall while still in the air !

        It’s hardly a challenge. It’s just ridiculous.

  4. I think that the the Singapore Sling chicane at turn ten should be made into a smooth corner, it would make the track faster during that particular section and would prevent the cars hoping over the curbs.

    1. That’s not possible for safety reasons, but I think they could simply ease the chicane a bit, with less obtrusive kerbs.

    2. There isn’t enough run-off there to have a fast corner.

      Make it a fast corner & if anyone went off there they would have a big impact on the outside barrier & then likely slide down the track to have another big impact in the runoff just before the bridge. Not to mention that in a race with a lot of cars around having a car bouncing off a barrier back onto the track wouldn’t be a good situation.

      The 3 kurb chicane isn’t ideal but is the safest solution to run round that part of the track, Whatever else you do wouldn’t leave enough run-off. After the 1st race in 2008 Charlie asked the drivers for feedback & alternatives & they gave feedback on the kurbs (And they have been tweaked over the 5 years) but nothing on possible alternatives to the layout & thats why nothing has ever really been changed there.

      The issue with cutting the track in half as Keith suggested in his article is that you then take away 2-3 possible passing spots that exist in that section (Turns 10, 14 & 15) of the track & basically leave the track with only 1 passing spot (The DRS zone).

      I like the layout as it is, Despite the bitching on here after this years race I actually thought it was a very entertaining race & I quite enjoyed the 2010/2011 races as well. Some intresting strategy, good/close racing, some good fighting & some good overtaking.
      I personally enjoyed Singapore far more than most of the races which recieved higher ratings earlier in this year as it featured far more of what I enjoy about racing (The things I listed above).

      Im also confused as to how people can say there was no overtaking as I saw quite a lot through this years race & most were not easy DRS drive-by’s either.

      1. I agree with everything GT_Racer said, I’m not a fan of turn 10 but it adds a bit of spectacle. The only way I can think of improving it is to lower the curbs, but then you’ll have Massa cutting the whole thing…

  5. I don’t think that turn 10 is the biggest problem at least not from spectators view, it might be for the drivers though. Instead I’d extend the track by one block after turn 7 so the Raffles Boulevard would be couple hundred meters longer and after that there would be just one corner before turn 10. That might increase overtaking. Also a good way to make track shorter and faster is to go straight from turn 16 to 20 if that’s possible.

    1. Good Idea – you could also tighten the corner going onto Raffles Boulevard to make traction onto the corner more important.
      Also, they could tighten turn 10 slightly to make it more of a braking point to aid overtaking – tighten the first part into about 90 degrees, which can also leave run-off as it is further forward, and then having a nearly flat out end to the chicane. They could then straighten out the next chicane and move the next corner back slightly (there’s enough space as it is dual carriageway at this section).

  6. 2 ideas from me:

    http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=5682333
    Make it slightly less twisty, reprofile the sling so intsead of being a double chicane its a single one, with a flick to the right before going left, bypass the under the grandstand bit.

    http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=5682345
    Go clockwise! that way the Singapore Sling can be a proper corner, and straighten out the silly boxy bit in the middle of the lap.

    1. The corner that is now turn 5 would be very dangerous if the track is run clockwise.

  7. Well I think that the organizers should build a bridge or a tunnel at Turn 8-14 crossroads in order to connect Turn 7 with Turn 13 and Turn 9 with Turn 15-16 . Thus two slow corners will be removed and two long straights will be added , leaving the circuit mostly as it is but making it faster with more overtacking opportunities. As for Turn 10 the should make it a bit smoother .

    1. The costs associated with the modification wouldn’t be too gargantuan actually and a tunnel/bridge would actually improve day-to-day normal traffic.

      Any building of a bridge/tunnel in would mar the landscape around the Civilian War Memorial though and the authorities wouldn’t allow that.

    1. http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=5682386

      Instead of the urban jungle, the real jungle. The Jersey GP will provide the skyscrapers on the calendar from then on.

      1. That looks fantastic. If only.

        1. It looks like a Singapore Spa version to be honest.

          Just to add on, the curvaceous part that is the current Old Upper Thomson Road at the ex-Thomson Road circuit is one of the most dangerous roads in Singapore

          There is one particular corner that is not known as the Devil’s Bend for nothing and is rumoured to be haunted as well. The link below has a vintage photo of a 1961 circuit map and you can see how dangerous it was in its full glory.

          http://spi.com.sg/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11145&sid=a02058e7fc163350cebf60afda090a0b

    2. Oh yes! Yes, this gets my vote! Yeah, a little work on that, and Singapore’s F1 track will be up there in terms of history, though it IS Formula Libre history, and not Formula One. :P

  8. What about making curve 16 less sharp, so that it the chicane can be taken faster.

    Then, curves 7, 8 and 9 can be changed so that the track goes around the other side of the park. This will remove the actual curve 7, a new curve similar to curve 8 will appear at the opposite side of the park, and curve 9 will be a new chicane.

    In google maps you can see how these changes may be possible and they will reduce the time per lap (effectively shorting the race). Moreover, they will need “minor” changes in terms of lightning and installations.

    1. * “What about making curve 16 less sharp? So that the chicane can be taken faster.” *

      Sorry xD

    2. And let all “curve”s be “turn”s. I don’t know what I was thinking about :-) Sorry

  9. Go right to the wall on the inside of T5 (it makes the corner much quicker and may allow cars to follow better on the run to T7.
    Go right to the wall on T7 and make the apex 2 or 3 metres later, rather than that stupid kerb in the middle of the road.
    Straighten out the silly right left just before te Anderson bridge (T11,12) its pointless
    Get rid of the section near the end. Have T16, but rather than go underneath the stands, keep going and emerge where the current T20-21 section is, perhaps then tighten the last corner to allow for an overtaking opportunity or open it out to allow cars to stay close for a lunge in T1

    1. The silly right left before Anderson bridge is where the road goes.

    2. One problem with bypassing Turns 17-19 to form a straight is that the Bay grandstand cannot be used anymore. It is one of the largest grandstands which sit 30 thousand people.

  10. Let’s create a bridge so the figure-of eight- would be possible, and yo uwould turn 4 medium straights in 2 long straights. I imagined this by looking at the picture of this article. From above looks possible. Invest a couple of millions to create that bridge or even something they can put and retire (would that be possible, I mean a temporary flyover?)

    1. artificial racer
      26th September 2012, 19:48

      ^^^ this is what I was pondering by looking at the map. Have either a bridge or an underpass built for F1 so that the circuit would go clockwise around the cricket ground and potentially create a bit better overtaking possibility. It would also benefit the city traffic the rest of the year. And there is plenty of runoff going round that way.

      Other alternatives would be a massive reworking to have the circuit use more of the shoreline area north of turn 1.

  11. make the lights go off at random times

    1. Hahaha that’d be interesting !

  12. Singapore looks spectacular.
    *Looks* spectacular. But it isn’t really.
    The bright shiny lights in the darkness and the flashing off the cars between the walls, the howling of the engines echoing in the canyons of the streets . . . Should be fantastic, but it isn’t, is it?
    There are lots of tracks that I can actually imagine going round with my eyes closed, but Singapore is just so visually bland that I get lost watching it on telly. Too many 90 degree bends and too many concrete walls that all look the same. I could imagine a tired driver getting really confused towards the end of the 2 hour race in that heat.
    I think the Turn 10 problem could be rectified by bringing the track up (widened) Connaught Drive which runs parallel to the T9 to T10 straight and would lead in the Anderson bridge turn quite neatly. There might have to be a bit of tree clearing there though to provide a run-off area.
    Alternatively, as others have pointed out, it would be far more exciting to have figure eight layout with a crossover at T8 and T14 instead of the two 90 degree bends (yawn). That would make the turn over the Anderson Bridge absolutely mighty and the T10 problem would be reduced.
    I’d also like to axe the section that goes in front of and under the Grandstand; it’s four 90-ish degree bends and a blast in front of the stands, whereas the track could have gone behind the permanent Grandstand and provided a superb overtaking spot into the 90 degree (Arrghh!) bend underneath the elevated highway. I know this is never going to happen though, because the seats in the grandstand must provide a decent wedge of income for the organisers.
    I still don’t think that the race will deliver the sparkle and excitement it promises, though. It’s not visually exciting enough on TV. I can’t be the only one out of love with it?

  13. I woud make it into a faster chicane with the same amount of runoff, like this: http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=5682453

  14. I don’t mind the idea of a shorter track, and it would be fun for the spectators too, to see the cars pass by 80 or more times. It would make finding a gap in qualifying more difficult, though. My only problem with the suggested shortcut is that I don’t like sector 3 in Singapore. Sectors 1 and 2 are interesting, but S3 has too many slow chicanes. F1 cars need to stretch their legs from time to time!

    I don’t see the big safety issue with the Singapore Sling. If you drive over the kerbs, you’ll be going pretty slowly, so you might be in for a bit of rough ride and possibly end up in the wall the way Raikkonen did in 2008, but would drivers really hurt their backs there, or dangerously climb over other cars? And if for some reason you don’t slow down enough for the corner, then you’d miss the middle of the corner altogether.

    1. @adrianmorse

      I don’t mind the idea of a shorter track, and it would be fun for the spectators too, to see the cars pass by 80 or more times.

      That’s a good point.

  15. I don’t know if it has already been mentioned, but alter the track to go straight at turn 8 and make turn 13 a monaco style hairpin. This would open up a good overtaking spot, an increase the average speed of the lap.

    1. That’s a very clever idea! From a quick glance at google maps, it is feasible as well.

  16. Personally I think there’s no real need to change the track for purposes of the racing. The sling is just about the only point on the track that really stands out, maybe combined with the turn back under the grandstands where we saw people crashing ever since the first race.

    I do get that if its to big a burden on city life, they could try to make more of it into a semi permanent part in the parkland, but it would mean changing quite a lot of the track and would make it less of a city race (we would cut two brides out for example and surely the cricket club and war monument, although who sees them during the race anyway), but the need to have a life around it and save on yearly buildup is good enough a reason to me.

    So that brings us to something like what @prisoner-monkeys posted in the roundup then.

  17. Basically, this course sucks. You all know why.

  18. Go north:
    http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=5682595
    If the circuit can’t be routed down the road that avoids the Singapore Sling, then skip the bridge loop entirely.

  19. I think that Singapore is one of the best tracks currently on the calendar. And not just for the nighttime or the uniquely coloured walls of which I’m a fan.

    The 2hour marathon races it produces are something that the drivers should be tested for at least once during a season. I have no problem watching all of it as I don’t find the races processional; there’s lots of overtaking to be had at turns 6/7, 8 and 14 which means cars don’t get stuck behind others for too long (I’m sure there were many overtakes last weekend); plus there’s lots of room on the straights for the back-markers to get out of the way. The race result is always a fair result of pace.
    I love the way the walls are close to the exits of the corners too. It doesn’t have the oppressiveness of Monaco because there’s breathing space on a lot of the corners and straights, but the closeness you get to see on some of the exits (especially of turn 21 before that beautiful sweep onto the straight) is incredible. Oddly enough it’s like a mix between Monaco and Canada for that.
    And given the rest of the track, I really don’t mind the Singapore Sling. It’s a unique solution to the problem of limited runoff. But the runoff area is the only thing I’d change about the track itself: it needs more in order to stop people hitting the wall (which is sometimes a bit harsh on drivers). I think the risk of suspension failure keeps the car in line, so a few extra yards of run-off by ripping up tarmac isn’t going to change the corner characteristic.
    The only other thing I’d want is for them to really go overboard on ways of removing cars from the track quickly and without a safety car. Jam it with cranes, open more walls, whatever. If there’s nothing they can do though then it’s an acceptable price to pay for the track layout.

    Basically I like Singapore. It has far less faults than other circuits, and it’s a good event to boot. And it has a good sporting role in the F1 championships. I don’t see much to change. The question “how can Singapore’s F1 track be improved?” strikes me the same way as asking “how can Neapolitan ice-cream be improved?”. a) is it’s improvement an issue? and b) there really can’t be too much to change before it stops being Neapolitan ice-cream. Why would we want to change Neapolitan ice-cream into something else which already exists? just keep the Neapolitan ice-cream.

    1. P.S. I like Neapolitan ice-cream.

      1. Get rid of the sickly strawberry/raspberry stuff.

        1. Madness! And have have chocolate and vanilla? Wouldn’t that be like any generic chocolate-coated lolly?

          1. No! Replace it with Pistachio. . . or maybe that’s pistacchio or pistashio – the nutty green stuff.

  20. The best solution to the Singapore Sling “problem” is to instruct the drivers to take the corner sensibly. You drive according to the conditions – and if the kerbs mean you go flying over them if you take them too hard, well, don’t take them so hard. Any part of any racetrack in the world can be dangerous if not treated with respect. Just because a corner is challenging to get right doesn’t make it inherently dangerous.

    1. It isn’t about it being dangerous, it’s that it is technical without any of the fun of a normal technical corner, slow without any possibility of overtaking, and really can only be used with one line, regardless of conditions.

  21. Lengthen second straight pass the monument garden then 2 lefts under the office towers, brings you back down other side of monument and onto existing track.

    Track distance is 3.75Km. Makes for an overtaking spot at end of the straight as slightly higher speeds equals more time on brakes, (that first left could be designed so it’s slow enough that they have to brake hard into it).

    Still would have 15 corners so drivers would be busy.

  22. My suggestion? Get rid of the current start finish, and relocate it to the national stadium parking lot. Then you can do a track that takes advantage of some of Singapore’s lovely curving streets, like this one (I know it’s a little long):

    http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=5682674

    1. I don’t think this is feasible at all – your plan involves them going up the 20m high Benjamin Sheares Bridge expressway sector. (much as i will like to see a F1 car speed along that bridge – would they kind enough to do a one-off demo?)

    2. It’s long, but a lot more of it is flat-out. F1 cars taking highway on/off-ramps and screaming down the freeway? Yes, please!

      I’m thinking it’s completely unfeasible, but this is definitely something I would love to see…

  23. How about removing turn 7, instead going straight to Beach Road, and there going left where it will rejoin the original track at St. Andrew Road? That way the track stays roughly at the same length, but the main straight and a secundary straight will be lengthened out; it will also be 2 corners less, of which the aforementioned turn 8. That will result in much faster laps.

      1. I don’t think this is feasible at all – your plan involves them going up the 20m high Benjamin Sheares Bridge expressway sector. (much as i will like to see a F1 car speed along that bridge – would they kind enough to do a one-off demo?)

      2. Better – less 90 degree corners. But it still leaves Turn 10 as a problem.

  24. Whilst it is true that changes need to be made to the track, a focus needs to be made towards making cars more able to follow each other closely. Since 2008 we’ve seen major steps forward in this, but cars still seem to struggle in the dirty air behind the lead car, up to approx 1 second behind it (depending on the track).

    I like the Singapore Sling. Yes, it is a unique corner and unique challenge to the drivers, but if F1 folks quickly acted on every driver’s whinge and complaint, the sport would change one weekend to the next. No thanks to that! It would be a shame to lose the bridge sections of the track, they provide stunning imagery, and Massa at least showed it is possible to overtake here too ;)

  25. Hold it in daylight.

    1. @racer After watching the GP2 races in daylight, I don’t agree. The darkness adds to the spectacle and covers up the less attractive areas.

    2. It’s too damn hot in the daytime for spectators.

    3. No way….. unless the spectators and drivers fancy getting heatstroke in that horrible humidity

  26. Do away with the HUGE stupid chicane lumps and concentrate on improving over taking…
    Best overtaking move this year was Massa on Maldonado…

  27. 23 corners are too much even for 5km length circuit. Corners must be reduced.
    From seeing the map overlay in google maps, one small change that could improve the track is in the area of corners 7,8,9 by simply removing corners 8 and 9 and extending the DRS straight about a block and then turning left at the junction to rejoin in corner 9. This way the DRS zone get’s bigger and easier to overtake and also the straight to corner 10 becomes also bigger giving another opportunity for overtaking (assuming the micky mouse chicane there is also replaced with a normal corner).
    The track becomes this way a lot quicker , and drivers have a few seconds to relax too ( this track as it is now is brutal for drivers -mostly mentally because they must be ALWAYS 100% focused).
    It’s a small change in the layout but has a big impact in the characteristics of the track.

    1. Then people will complain that the overtakes are too easy and “artificial”. It’s a lose-lose situation!

    2. However, I do agree with you, more corners dont necessarily mean more overtaking due to the brake zones!

    3. Yeah exactly the same as what I was thinking. You don’t even need to make the DRS zone longer; with the straight being longer you already increase the chance for overtaking.
      There might be one problem though. You have the end of the new straight The stanford Singapore; finding there run-off area isn’t that easy.

  28. @andy , i didn’t saw your comment… that is what i was trying το describe…. :)
    Apparently i totally agree with you

    1. Yeah could do with one wet Singapore race once in a while if only to see what it looks like under the lights….. a minor miracle in fact that no rain has hit the Sunday main race

  29. Put a chicane in half way down St Andrews Rd (slower speed, easier to navigate and as it’s fairly close to turn 9, easier to overtake) and turn the launch pad chicane in a 90 left (lower speed, less run off needed).

  30. A shorter circuit and an 80 lap race? I’ll take that, thanks! We need some change from all the new circuits which are around 55-60 laps, so one 80 lap race would be a unique challenge, especially as the best overtaking spot on the track would be passed 20 more times.

    I wouldn’t make any other changes though. Part of the appeal of Singapore is the atmosphere, making it much like Monaco in that respect. Also, Singapore Sling aside, it’s a decent track with a couple of half-chances to overtake, but which allow a driver to defend against a rival with DRS.

  31. I don’t understand how cutting the track from turn 8 into 14 will make it a shorter race. It will be a shorter lap, however looking at the track layout I can imagine the actual distance covered in 2 hours would be lower, simply because of the longer straights between 9 and 10, and 13-14. Haven’t calculated this though, so it might not be as big an issue as it seems, as it does remove ‘that’ awful slow chicane.

    I personally also really dislike the boxcar section at the end of the lap, but as there is no road through that directly bypasses it, it really is a necessity. And as someone brought up earlier, the first corner of it catches out a few people.

  32. The Crashgate grandstand section is indeed lame. But i doubt they would drop it to be honest as it guarantees at one stroke 30,000 more seated spectators.

    A 3-day pass to that section costs USD185/£115 now in the early bird sales phase for next year’s tickets. So that’s USD5.5m/£3.45m in revenue; not a Mickey Mouse amount.

    1. Just to add on, sectors 1 and 2 of the circuit are actually fine enough as most people have mentioned

      The last sector with all the mickey mouse 90 degree turns and going through the Crashgate grandstand area is just terrible though and this is one part where the most improvements can be made to improve the spectacle.

  33. I won’t be surprised if the revised track turns out like this. It is a very radical tweak but does incorporate all the rumoured revisions that had been mooted over the weekend.

    No Singapore Sling for good and the track extends into the Marina Bay Sands Casino area. The Crashgate grandstand is kept for “economic reasons” but the direction is reversed and it could be worthwhile to see whether it does improve the racing going the other way. The straight along the Esplanade Drive is a bit long and dangerous so a Mickey Mouse chicane could possibly be installed at the junction near the Anderson Bridge to slow the cars down.

    http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=5680434
    http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/102740
    http://twitter.com/byronf1/status/249808340908126209

  34. Ideally, this is what they would do. Go around the War Memorial instead of inside it, which should lengthen the straight and allow for more overtaking and adds a bit of a high-speed flick as the cars head towards the Singapore Sling. Then, instead of going across the Anderson and Esplanade Bridges, the circuit loops back up around Connaught Drive, cutting out whole host of slow corners until it gets to Raffles Avenue. Then it is flat out to the final chicane near the Singapore Flyer, skipping over the fiddly, novelty-value-only chicanes under the grandstand, which would need to be taken apart and turned around so that spectators could see.

    1. Actually, with the exception of the Turn 10 problem, I think you’re right. Specially if they could work out a way of keeping the Nicoll Highway open to traffic.

    2. I had that in mind as well, only if they go as far as to rebuild the grandstands, they should also do something about turns 1-2-3. I think they’re horrid and servo no purpose whatsoever. Either make turn 1 a real hairpin or make them a fast double apexer, like Suzuka.

      I take it that you’re going to keep the sling as it is?

      1. The Sling stays.

  35. Reading on Joe’s Blog, apparently the issue is that the circuit crosses over too much of the city. Causing traffic chaos. They want to cut the track around the Cricket Club area. So, here’s my suggestion for the track. It reduces the circuit to 4.5km, but also adds two big straights that will increase the average speed quite a bit, also, create a slam dunk overtaking spot. What you think?

    http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=5683022

    1. I like your thinking, but that back straight you’ve added would need a monumental run-off area.

      1. The road just keeps going after where i put the hairpin, so the run off would be fine.

        1. It’s a nice idea, but unfortunately that’s Esplanade Drive / Nicoll Highway which is one of the north/south routes the city want to keep open.

    2. I love your idea! However, if we let the track run on both sides of the bridge, I’m not sure if there would be enough space left for recovery equipment if an accident occurs along the Esplanade bridge.

  36. Just how do you fix a pretty bad race track which seems to be riddled with limits in an environment where the city itself at night is one of the true treasures, visually spectacular, of anywhere on this planet ??

    Current cars are racing with many gimmicks that the fans would rather see not used. They are there to enhance what otherwise is an impossible task, passing the car in front of you. Now add to the mix a track where the passing with all of the techincal nonsense is pretty much a rarity.

    Now the Organizors want to stir it up and present some change, a new version of a bad layout in hopes of keeping the circus coming to town for the near future.

    I question how it can be done and fear that this event is on the block and is only being saved by lights.

  37. The excuse of “not enough run off” is nothing more then a pathetic excuse. messing up & hitting the wall in that turn at speed would be no more dangerous then messing up & hitting the wall on the straight at the same if not faster speeds. If you’re gonna hit a wall at speed it’s gonna hurt just as much no matter if it’s in a turn or if it’s on the straight. If they’re afraid of hitting the wall I’m sure there is a stadium or store parking-lot in the area that they can setup cones in & turn F1 into an Autocross event.

    With that being said I didn’t even know there was a bridge down there til I looked at it on Google Earth, on TV it just looks like they drive under a few random metal beams & then make a turn onto a straight. So cutting out 1 or both of the bridges wouldn’t make a different presentation wise (atleast to me).

    I’ve taken to Google Earth and came up with these 2 alternative options.
    http://hostingbytes.us/images/3/603715.jpg
    Pink = Current
    Yellow = Bypassing the bridges
    Yellow to White = Keeping the bridges

    The Yellow one shaves off close to 1km. However both of those would require temporary asphalt to be put down (ROC style I guess?) over the field & park as well as some landscaping changes by getting rid of some of the trees on the side of the field & park that is next to it.

    1. @fisha695 – I’m afraid the “yellow path” cuts through the cricket club, which has existed since before Singapore achieved nationhood and which reportedly has rights that even the government cannot touch.

  38. I don’t get the hate for the Singapore Sling. It’s by no means an elegant corner, but it poses a unique challenge to the car and driver. If every corner got changed to the drivers’ preferences, tracks would become massively more homogeneous.
    I still think the track should be shortened though, the races are still taking slightly too long (personally I love marathon F1 races, but the casual audience needs to be kept interested). Turns 7 to 9 don’t appeal to many by the sounds of it, is there any chance of creating one sweeping corner with a huge run-off area to cover the safety aspect?

  39. I wouldn’t made seeing turn 10 made into a 90degree corner. Yes, I know, there are plenty of right-angle corners across the track, but I’d rather see that than the width resrictions.

    This might be a long shot, but could they not go straight on at turn 8. So they go straight down the bridge on one side, hairpin (possibly a roundish hairpin), back up the other side.
    Therefore you miss out on the width resrictions, reduces the number of right-angle corners, makes the track slightly shorter with a slightly quicker average speed.

    1. No room to collect cars if there was an coming together in the bridge
      (slaps head)

  40. Make turn 10 a banked curve. Then it would really be a Singapore slingshot.

    And as with all my comments…. Get rid of DRS and bring back the tire war and refueling.

  41. Extend the straight leading up to turn 7, so that the circuit would be couple hundred meters longer along Raffles Boulevard and the lead up to turn 10. This should increase overtaking and speed up the lap, as there would only be one 90deg corner instead of three. Turn 10 itself could be altered, especially the entry, where it narrows significantly. The photo above shows there is room for the entry to be wider, again increasing the chance to overtake.

  42. How about move the Singapore GP across the causeway to Johore. There is a permanent circuit there called Pasir Gudang Circuit and it used to held World Superbike and MotoGP. If San Marino GP can be held in a circuit that is 100km from the actual San Marino, I don’t see any different for Singapore GP.

    1. I don’t think bernie will allow Malaysia to host 2 f1 races in the same year as Bernie is already clamping down on such arrangement with Barcelona and Valenica alternating to host the Spanish GP and the European GP ditched altogether.

      The only exception is for America and its gigantic market that F1 is trying desperately to reach out to. I don’t think any marketer associated with F1 will complain that USA hosts more than one F1 race a year.

    2. But that’s in Malaysia, and Singapore is a totally separate, fiercely independent country. No way would the Singapore motorsports association agree to pay for a race that was being held on their next door neighbour’s track!

      1. My bad, I though Malaysia and Singapore have the same relation like Hong Kong and China. How about the new Sport Hub and also some rumour on new permanent circuit near Changi Airport?

        1. @Joanna Bessey

          Singapore-Malaysia ties are more like a local derby between Man City and Man United or Austria and Germany. Outsiders might think both sides can get along as they are neighbours and speak the same languages but deep down, both are actually dying to get at each other.

  43. Let them race in daylight. The track looked awesome in P3, very american roadcourse-ish.

  44. Take it off the list and make it a Supermarket car park

  45. Sean N (@sean-p-newmanlive-co-uk)
    27th September 2012, 9:24

    Just after turn 8 the track should cut left down Connaught Drive (on the other side of the cricket ground) and rejoin the current circuit just after turn 12. This will omit the awful turn 10 and still keep the iconic Anderson bridge.

    Also as mentioned by others turn 17 and 18 should be missed out. Turn 15 should go straight to turn 20. They could then turn the grandstands around to see more of the track!

    1. Sean N (@sean-p-newmanlive-co-uk)
      27th September 2012, 14:35

      My route as described above at 4.5km long

      http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=5683633

  46. I agree with those who think the track is fine as it is.

    Generally, I’m against circuits which does not have a particular character and try to be like a mix of all things. Like the majority of the new tracks: a few high-speed, medium-speed, low-speed bends, hairpins, long straights and no elevation and camber changes at all, which would literally add an extra dimension to the challenge. I know high-speed corners, elevations and cambers are more dangerous, but I think principally other areas have be addressed in respect to danger. Like downforce levels, aero in particular.

    I think Singapore has a character, because of a lot of things, a lot of which would be eliminated with a cut. Like the unusual length and number of corners. Or Turn 10. Its a different challenge, a breath of fresh air. It’s not dangerous as its slow and visible: no major accident occured there so far.

    What I’m not satisfied with is the monotone right-lefts of S3, but it cannot be cut out, or modified. But then again, one of them, a left-hander turning below the stands is unique in that just after the turn-in point it is very slightly downhill, often causing oversteer. This is what caught out those, who slammed into the barriers there, prompting an SC. It’s part of the challenge. I like the corner.

    Also, Anderson bridge is unique in terms of look – in this respect new tracks fare better, like Abu Dhabi. And a third argument: The straight after the hairpin where the Massa-Senna near miss occured became a fine passing zone – without DRS. I think this is in part because radius of the hairpin itself increased this year, IMO, but I didn’t do a comparison. Increasing track width on the outside of Turn 14 after the kerb blunder last year also helped. Nonetheless, Webber passed Alonso there in 2011 in a fine move, so it is good sequence in this respect as well. I would miss it, if it would be altered.

    Once again: so much tracks are boring nowadays because they try too hard to be all good things. Singapore is an exception, it is unique in a way. Please don’t tinker with it.

    1. Michael Brown (@)
      27th September 2012, 22:07

      +9000

  47. Michael Brown (@)
    27th September 2012, 22:05

    Keep turn 10. For once in a recent track there is a unique corner and they want to change that.

  48. Hello everyone! My first comment here. I’m from Singapore and I think the circuit is fine.

    What F1 needs are circuits which are both unique and challenging. People love Monza for its long straights, Spa and Suzuka for their fast corners. Singapore is the opposite with its tight and twisty corners and unlike Monaco it is possible to overtake, even on a 2-lane bridge. If we make the circuit go faster it will become yet another medium-speed circuit. Seeing the drivers sitting on the couch exhausted after a 2 hour race is what makes Singapore different from other races.

    I agree it can be hard to differentiate between corners but I think that is down to the camera angles which are so low. Building an overpass/underpass at T8/14 is quite impractical even for normal days as most cars make a turn there. The grandstand at T17/18 can’t be turned around as it is a permanent facitily used for the National Day Parade. The places which can be sped up are probably T5, 11/12, 16 & 20/21 and tightening T7 should help overtaking. However, making big changes could lose Singapore’s reputation as a physically and mentally challenging race for both drivers and engineers. And that is something that shouldn’t happen.

  49. No one seems to get the idea that to make F1 cars look great on TV they need to be set in context of an environment. An F1 car moving at 200mph on tarmac with no context might as well be moving at 30mph. Cards flashing past things look amazing. Monza, has trees. Monaco – has buildings. Canada and Australia, have lots of long shots through trees etc.

    On the other hand Valencia was just cars on tarmac with dull concrete walls, Silverstone is just flat green now (no atmosphere at all) and Singapore is just black. The first year it was shown it looked amazing…now its just deadly dull….you get no idea where the cars are in the city. One part is along the waterfront..I couldn’t tell you which part, even the bridge is lost. Its all part of the sterile coverage of Bernie Tv (a mon not known to understand much about art and soul).

    It probably looks good if you are there though…..unlike Valencia.

  50. My route idea.
    They can extend the north track a little and cut the problem.
    http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=5684859

  51. I like the simple idea you propose of simply turning left at the crossroads. The circuit as it stands is too long for a street circuit. Considering the expense of setting up a street circuit, especially with floodlights, this would be a big cost saving. A short lap means that fans see the cars more times, and drivers are challenged more by traffic etc.

    If you considered this length too short, you could take advantage of the dual carriageway, and instead of turning left or right at the crossroads, just go straight ahead towards a hairpin, swinging back the other way along the current track. I expect that the hairpin would be too tight unless you found extra space beyond the road on the exit; the only possibility as far as I can tell would be here as there’s a little extra space. With this layout, the circuit would have 3 good overtaking opportunities, all in succession so that they would flow into each other. The track would be halfway between the current length and the 80-lap length you suggest. I’m not sure, however, that even with space for a sensible hairpin it would be safe: there’s nowhere to put marshalls or anyone beside the track. It’s an obvious enough suggestion that it was probably considered when the track was first designed, and it may well have been ruled out then too. So, for me, the best idea is your one of simply skipping the whole of turns 7-14 or whatever they are.

  52. The floating platform and stadium area (turns 16-19) is actually temporary and is slated to be removed within the next 5 years. There was also talk recently in the media that they wish to race through the Marina Bay Sands casino in order to reduce disruption to the business district. This track would be viable in the future when they don’t need to go through Turns 16-19, it is also much much faster:
    http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=5686161

    Here is a another version that does away with Singapore Sling and extends the main straight. It would also reduce disruption to the city as it cuts less into business district:
    http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=5686159

  53. I don’t want to see any changes whatsoever. The circuit is a pain in the backside (literally) for the drivers, it’s a long race way out of their comfort zone and like JB said, it’s what they train for. I don’t want to see the drivers treated like they’re a charity case and the track seems safe enough for any crashes.

    As far as the organisers are concerned…well they obviously don’t feel the GP is that much of a pain or cost as they just signed a new 5 year deal on it!

  54. Personally, i think that they should make Turn 10 a double-apex left hander, not a triple apex left-right-left corner. basically just get rid of the middle apex, and straighten out the track between the two left-handed parts. To slow the drivers a little bit i would introduce a slightly high kerb (similar to the “sausage” kerb, but a little bit smaller). And i would get rid of Turns 19 and 20 and put a straight between 18 and 21. Those changes should make the lap quicker than it is currently.

  55. I would remove curves 18,19,20 and 21 to become the lap faster and probably create a new overtake point. The track has too many courves, so boring race.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.