singapore track idea
28th September 2010, 4:40 at 4:40 am #128109
While watching the race, i was thinking of what would be the best way to get rid of that annoying T10 chicane that everyone birates all the time, and I have some up with it! Of course, this is not realisic without ALOT of money, but still, could work…
I would propose a fly-over to create a track crossing. Accually an underpass would proberly work better in the atmosphere of the race, but I dont think that would be as easy to do (but what do i know :P). This then reverses the direction of the western loop. There is space for run-off at the end of the esplanade bridge, so no worries there. Keeping the old t12 Chicane means run-off isn’t needed at the old turn 10, and that chicane can go. I believe there is room at the end of Raffles Ave for the nessicary run-off there due to increased speeds.
The only issue that I can think of is that my proposed run-off at the old T9 (I put this on the map) isn’t really straight to the track. While this is not ideal, I believe it would still work well enough to not need something micky-mouse there.
Well I’ve just put too much thinking time into this little redesign, so leave you comments :P28th September 2010, 6:29 at 6:29 am #145941
The only problem with your theory is that the organisers are talking about changing the circuit for 2011 (they couldn’t do it in 2010 because there wasn’t enough time to get it approved). One of the proposed changes would see turn seven moved up and turns eight and nine cut out completely; the cars will go around the War Memorial as opposed to cutting down the inside of it as they do now. The other proposed change is to cut out the chicane under the grandstand completely so that the cars will go fat out from turn eighteen to turn twenty-three. Both changes will seriously improve the circuit without removing the chicane at turn ten. As it is, turn ten is a neccessary evil because there is no run-off and an accident there without the chicane will be as bad as an accident with one. The chicane is just designed to reduce the chances of one happening.28th September 2010, 6:42 at 6:42 am #145942
Yeah, I was just trying to think a bit laterally. I believe they could cut the entire west loop (as I think it should be called :P). I wouldn’t of thought they would cut out the small loop under the grandstand though, too many tickets to be sold there :P28th September 2010, 7:07 at 7:07 am #145943
Would be hella-costly, but it’s definitely an improvement on the current arrangement…28th September 2010, 7:19 at 7:19 am #145944
I wouldn’t of thought they would cut out the small loop under the grandstand though, too many tickets to be sold there
The circuit would just go along in front of the grandstands. It wouldn’t go under them. No loss of grandstand seats.28th September 2010, 9:12 at 9:12 am #145945
I really like that idea GT Virus as if they weren’t going to do anything else I’d be fully behind it.
I’m not sure how they’re going to around the War Memorial instead of in front of it, as much as I’d welcome cutting out that section. Are the roads wide enough? If so, good. But it still leaves us with the necessity of the stupid Turn 10 chicane.
Subject to run-off availability, I think this is the best way to avoid the whole problem: http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=4070928. You might have to tighten the approach to the bridge for safety reasons, and though most small deviations are by the clumsiness of my hand I’ve deliberately made Turn 1 tighter.
But if you could have the fly-over and get rid of 19-22 that would be even better in my opinion. The only problem is it would have to be permanent and there might be some serious traffic issue in replacing an intersection.28th September 2010, 11:30 at 11:30 am #145946
I think it’s a great idea, and it also opens up more overtaking opportunities in to the old turns 9, 14 and 17.28th September 2010, 12:28 at 12:28 pm #145947
Well I like it.
The advantage is that the cross over junction has a one way street on one part that reduces the cost of building an underpass bridge.
Cost would be the problem though. I mean who really builds and disrupts local traffic for a annual event? :)
Being an F1 fan I would.
Poor local people, with no interest in the GP, maybe not.
and like Macca says, it opens up some better passing places.28th September 2010, 12:46 at 12:46 pm #145948
Great idea- though it’s not very practical and I’d be very surprised if it ever happened28th September 2010, 14:05 at 2:05 pm #145949
Well, knowing my government authorities, they are not going to allow the flyover idea – although I agree it’s very innovative.28th September 2010, 14:26 at 2:26 pm #145950
The problem with a flyover is that there’s no space for it. Sure, you could have one road going over the other, but where are you going to fit the connecting avenues, the ones that link the nort-south road to the east-west??
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.