6 ms·
The Economics of The Formula One Grand Prix of Monaco
- JonnieCache 13y agoWow, someone found a way to make the modal begging cup even more annoying! Congrats! Enjoy your bounce rate!
- fijal 13y agoThis is the first time I see someone using Fahrenheit degrees outside of 0-150 range. Do Americans usually use F for stuff like material limits etc?
- jetti 13y agoI haven't come across temperatures that hot very often, but my assumption is that the average non-scientific US resident would use Fahrenheit for all temperatures, no matter what range, just because it is what they were most likely raised on. Just out of curiosity, what would you suggest they use instead? Celsius? Kelvin?
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- paganel 13y agoNot the OP, but I'd say that for high temperatures it doesn't really matter if one uses Celsius or Kevin, and that's because 1 degree Celsius = 1 degree Kelvin. So, let's say that you have a reading of 800 Celsius, you just need to add ~ 270 to it if you want Kelvin. If I then get a second reading of 1200 Celsius I know for sure that it's 400 degrees higher compared to the first reading, no matter if I'm thinking Celsius or Kelvin. For Fahrenheit things are not that straightforward
- sp332 13y ago1200-800=400 in Fahrenheit too, you know :p
- paganel 13y agoReally? Ok, I learned something new today :) Of course, if it wasn't obvious enough enough I'm from Europe where Fahrenheit has always confused us.
- sp332 13y agoYeah :) They're both linear. What confuses people is that degrees F are both smaller than degrees C and the 0-point is lower. They meet at -40 (so -40C == -40F) and from there, the F number changes faster than C, that's all.
- nexox 13y agoBaking and candy making regularly specify temperatures in Fahrenheit up to 500 degrees in America. As for engineers, it largely depends on the policies of their employer. For most material properties, since the boiling point of water isn't terribly relevant, F works just as well as C (though obviously for any calculation beyond a simple threshold, you're going to want an absolute scale.)
- jaynos 13y agoWe use it when talking about heat treating of carbon steel and other materials. Regular heat treat cycles between 900-1050 F. Some reference to higher temps when we talk to the natural gas people.
- csense 13y agoYes. Non-science Americans use it for everything, in my experience, and can get confused by Celsius.
- chaz 13y agoThis article is a weird non-graphic infographic that turns a data table into prose. I suppose it's mildly interesting if you haven't seen these numbers before. From the title, I was hoping for an analysis behind the business economics. If you're new to F1, the Monaco GP is this weekend and is considered by many to be the one to watch of the entire season (though I tend to like other circuits). Aside from the raw speed, fame, and fortune, the technology itself is a big draw for a lot of F1 fans. This site does a great job of analyzing the nonstop flow of new F1 tech: http://scarbsf1.com/ http://scarbsf1.com/
- fsar7 13y agoI found this interesting but annoying to read, so I pasted it into jottit here: http://www.jottit.com/fsar7 http://www.jottit.com/fsar7
- stblack 13y agoThank you!
- mavroprovato 13y agoThe amusing thing is that the trophy given to the winning driver is the cheapest in the Formula 1 calendar. I remember hearing that it costs something like 700 euros, but I cannot find a citation now.
- tgodard 13y agoSeriously?
- mavroprovato 13y agoYes, I'm not joking, I remember the commentator telling this on TV during the GP some years ago.
- neilmiddleton 13y agoSir Lewis? Eh?
- waterside81 13y agoHe was awarded an MBE by the Queen after winning the F1 title a few years back
- mpclark 13y agoHe'll have to wait a while longer for the knighthood.
- neilmiddleton 13y agoSure - but that doesn't make him a Sir.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- josh2600 13y agoNormally I'm very patient with new people posting on HackerNews, but this is almost ridiculous. 1) Your "PLEASE SIGN UP" full page flashover is so annoying. I don't know what to say other than I hate this :(. 2) The Infographic at the bottom is like a list of numbers with no real rhyme or reason (relative to the kinds of content we've come to expect from companies like priceonomics). 3) This is just a kind of lavish puff piece about how great Monaco is; there's not a lot of meat. In short, I was actually hoping to learn a lot more about Monaco, but your harassing signup page and the content didn't work for me. Better luck next time, but please do try again because it seems like you want to produce good content. This kind of long-form stuff is exactly what you should be doing, just try to produce new insight instead of regurgitation and turn off the spam signup thingy when you post to HN.
- PhantomGremlin 13y agoFlashover, what's that? :) By default I browse the Interwebs using Firefox and NoScript. HN is quite readable w/o Javascript. And I didn't see any flashover when I read the article, because I invariably view unknown random websites with Javascript disabled by default. NoScript is my sine qua non for browsing. I'm not saying you should use Firefox. I'm not saying you should browse with Javascript off. To each his own. HOWEVER, if you have an easy way to rid yourself of some of the worst excesses of the web, then I think you've ceded at least some of the moral "high ground" by complaining rather than by simply using tools easily available to you.
- josh2600 13y agoI suppose that's true. That's really only one of my complaints though. I care much more about the content (or lack thereof) than I do about the annoying popup. Point taken though :).
- waterside81 13y agoAs one of the FB commenters on the article mentions, the ironic thing is Monaco is one of the worst races to watch, from a pure driving point of view. Lots of narrow turns, very little passing, next to no straightaways (unlike Hockenheim where you can really let loose).
- T-zex 13y agoFrom the pure driving point of view Monaco GP is the most interesting due to its very low margin for error. Majority of drivers love this track. Racing sometimes is boring, but with current F1 upgrades like DRS, KERS and tyre degradation there is plenty of action on track.
- k-mcgrady 13y agoIt depends on why you watch F1. If you want to see the drivers constantly on the edge, kissing barriers, and interesting strategies Monaco is unbeatable. If the rain hits it's usually spectacular. If you want to see cars go fast and overtake quite easily then thanks to DRS and KERS every other race is better. I like both aspects of racing but I find Monaco even more special now that overtaking is so common in other races (due to DRS).
- exDM69 13y ago> If the rain hits it's usually spectacular. Every spring I wish it rains in Monaco. There are few things more spectacular than an formula car racing the streets of Monte Carlo in full wet conditions.
- devindotcom 13y agoUnless you watch it in Frankenheimer's classic movie "Grand Prix" - in which case it is mind blowing.
- T-hawk 13y agoTo appreciate the Monaco track, drive it yourself in a video game such as Gran Turismo. There's tons of technical stuff going on around every corner, to find good lines for accelerating out of the turn. Elevation changes in particular create some very interesting and not necessarily intuitive characteristics on many of the bends. Monaco has a lot more curvy uphill and downhill segments than most Formula 1 tracks.
- NatW 13y agoThere are some interesting prices here, but to get to the economics of the situation, I'd want to hear an economic rationale for car companies to participate, not just prices. It seems really expensive for them. I assume they're in it for the marketing? But would that money be better invested in Research & Development for their products on the road or for car commercials?
- chaz 13y agoAt a high level, the teams are largely their own companies that get money through sponsorships, and spend their money on developing cars. For companies like Mercedes-Benz and Red Bull Racing, it's a big advertising opportunity (and obviously a selling point for Mercedes-Benz sports cars). For teams like Williams and Force India, they're independent ventures. Every car needs an engine, which may be developed internally or purchased from a supplier. Ferrari supplies engines for its own team (the "factory team"), but also sells engines to other teams like Toro Rosso and Sauber ("customer teams"). Engine development is extremely expensive, so amortizing the cost across several buyers makes sense. Smaller teams cannot afford to develop their own teams. The best teams can afford to pay their own drivers lots of money, upwards of €20m/year. Some teams can only afford to pay €150k/year, and the drivers hope to prove themselves and move to a faster team after their contract is up (many top drivers came up this way). Some teams can't even afford that, and are willing to take "pay drivers," who pay the team to drive. They're not bad drivers, but they're not necessarily the best ones, either. Cutting loose a good paid driver for a worse pay driver is bad for the sport. Participating in F1 has a unique marketing value to the right customer, and can't be replaced with just R&D or more commercials. I think it's fair to say that Ferrari wouldn't know what to do with themselves if they quit F1, as it's so much of their brand identity.