A Bangkok F1 Street Race? A Mad Idea Resurfaces

[PeterRS]

I read that Thailand is once again preparing a feasibillity study on hosting a Formula 1 Grand Prix street race. As one who enjoys F1, I realise it could do wonders for the image of the city worldwide. This from Newsweek of March 19 - 

"Although Thailand has an FIA-approved Grand Prix circuit in Buriram, the country is gearing up to host a Formula One street race in Bangkok. Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra recently met with F1 President and CEO Stefano Domenicali to discuss the ambitious plan. As a first step toward bringing F1 to the capital by 2028, Thailand will now move forward with a feasibility study."

But it will never happen! It's madness! Back in 2012 one entrepreneur claimed he would bring an F1 race to Bangkok's streets. This drew quite an extensive correspondence in this forum -

So many factors rule Bangkok out. First, roads and traffic. Hosting an F1 race means deciding on a route of around 5 - 8 kms with roads which will not pose any hazard to cars, drivers and spectators. Remember the first Las Vegas race last year? A manhole cover broke loose during practice and it was a miracle that it caused no damage. Then an F1 race requires roads to be closed to all traffic for several hours on the two practice days and the qualification day in addition to virtually the whole day of the race itself, a day which will also include Formula 2 races. With Bangkok's roads already vastly overcrowded, can you imagine the mayhem such closures will cause?

Second, infrastructure. Grandstands for 100,000 plus spectators have to be erected and sturdy fencing around the track to ensure no spectators are involved if there is a crash (and crashes do happen with some regularity on street circuits). A very long area needs to be set aside for the construction of the team pits and garages and the Paddock Club for the high-rollers who pay fortunes to be close to the action.

Third, time of day. Apart from existing tracks where racing is held in the afternoons local time, increasingly F1 wants races that can be televised at reasonable times in Europe and the USA. Hence most new tracks in the Middle East and Asia in the last 18 years have involved some form of night racing. No doubt the views of temples and the Grand Palace at night will be spectacular, but the installation of tens of thousands of specially designed light fixtures can easily cost US$30 million or a lot more.

Total Cost. SIngapore was the first night race on the F1 calendar in 2008. For 2024, it is estimated that the total cost for 100 minutes or so of televised racing along with all the pre- and post-activities in SIngapore was US$150 million.  Of this the government chipped in $90 million with the private sector paying the rest. Hoteliers and airlines hiked prices considerably to recoup some of their costs, and a private entertainment entrepreneur organised a major week-end of massive parties with top of the line pop stars.

SIngapore's F1 street circuit race track.

Can Bangkok meet all these specifications? In my view, definitely not unless a group of zillionaires comes together. Even so, the need to get so many government departments to sign off on it will be an insurmountable headache, even with many brown envelopes flying around. In my view a feasibility study is virtually a waste of time and money.

https://dollarsandsense.sg/cost-singapore-host-f1/

[BjornAgain]

The idea of a Thai F1 race has been kicking around for a number of years, with either Pattaya or Bangkok heavily touted as options for a street race. 

The reality is it won't happen based on today's infrastructure or location.

Bangkok has been sinking for years, back in the '80's about 10cm per year, with some clever use of replanting forests and woodlands around the capital, these areas have slowed the sinking to approximately 2cm per year. Ironically the capital used to be surrounded by woodlands and paddy fields pre the 1980's and the expanding desire for a concrete jungle. In comparison, Venice is currently sinking by 1 to 2mm per annum, same as New York. With on-going current Bangkok construction, it's adding more weight to the sinking city, despite the green planting, water soaking initiative.

Current doom mongers have Bangkok seasonal floods effecting upto 40% of the capital by 2030, so any F1 construction will be short lived. No one has designed a floating F1 track, maybe this could be an option?

To me the best solution the Thai government could do is to the escalate the concept of building a new capital outside the current city, to accommodate the government machine, and with a green field site and modern construction techniques and foresight of expansion, absord the concept for F1 style racing circuit into the design. 

As messes Mitch Leigh and Joseph Darion wrote back in '65, made popular by both Jack Jones and Andy Williams, we can but "... Dream the impossible Dream".

[PeterRS]

Many will recall the devastating floods of 2011. These not only swamped parts of the city, Don Mueang airport was flooded and closed for some weeks. Ayutthaya was also under water for weeks. Particularly heavy rains in the north that year had caused an increase in the level of the Chao Phraya river. This coincided with extra high tides during the high water period in October. Both surges met in and near Bangkok. The ground floor of the house of one of my work colleagues was under water for nearly 3 months. Endless ideas were 'floated' by the government to reduce the impact of the flooding. One government idiot even suggested placing a line of long tail boats across the river with their propellers at full blast so as to push the surging Chao Phraya waters back up stream! Only in Thailand!

Since then, there have been warnings of flooding at this time of year in at least four or five years, the last two being 2022 and 2024 when there were alerts in Bangkok. Years earlier I can remember going down to the river during the flood season. Even then much of the river bank on both sides was packed with sandbags. At the Shangri La hotel they were not only at the river bank, they were also piled up around the swimming pool!

Moving the capital would not be a unique event. Myanmar did it a few years ago replacing Rangoon with a totally new city in Naypyidaw. 40% of Jakarta now lies below sea level and is subject to horrific annual flooding. Six years ago the Indonesian government announced a move to another completely new city 1,200 kms from Jakarta. Nusantara located on the island of Borneo will become the new capital. Were the Thai government to announce a new capital, no doubt those who have invested in all the huge modern structure in the city will be screaming with anger. But it would be their own faults.

As I understand it, one reason for Bangkok sinking is the result of government decisions in the 1950s. Bangkok then was the Venice of the East, a city of klongs and not very many roads. A decision was made to modernise the city. Consultants were brought in who clearly knew little about water management. They advised filling in the klongs and making them roads. And to me that is one problem with hiring outside individual consultants. Neither they nor those doing the hiring are really aware of the long term effects. The must be a wide range of consutants with different specialities to span the wide range of probable results.

[thaiophilus]

10 hours ago, PeterRS said:

Many will recall the devastating floods of 2011. These not only swamped parts of the city, Don Mueang airport was flooded and closed for some weeks. Ayutthaya was also under water for weeks.

And the worldwide price of hard disk drives increased by 50%. Three guesses where they were made...

[Keithambrose]

20 hours ago, PeterRS said:

Many will recall the devastating floods of 2011. These not only swamped parts of the city, Don Mueang airport was flooded and closed for some weeks. Ayutthaya was also under water for weeks. Particularly heavy rains in the north that year had caused an increase in the level of the Chao Phraya river. This coincided with extra high tides during the high water period in October. Both surges met in and near Bangkok. The ground floor of the house of one of my work colleagues was under water for nearly 3 months. Endless ideas were 'floated' by the government to reduce the impact of the flooding. One government idiot even suggested placing a line of long tail boats across the river with their propellers at full blast so as to push the surging Chao Phraya waters back up stream! Only in Thailand!

Since then, there have been warnings of flooding at this time of year in at least four or five years, the last two being 2022 and 2024 when there were alerts in Bangkok. Years earlier I can remember going down to the river during the flood season. Even then much of the river bank on both sides was packed with sandbags. At the Shangri La hotel they were not only at the river bank, they were also piled up around the swimming pool!

Moving the capital would not be a unique event. Myanmar did it a few years ago replacing Rangoon with a totally new city in Naypyidaw. 40% of Jakarta now lies below sea level and is subject to horrific annual flooding. Six years ago the Indonesian government announced a move to another completely new city 1,200 kms from Jakarta. Nusantara located on the island of Borneo will become the new capital. Were the Thai government to announce a new capital, no doubt those who have invested in all the huge modern structure in the city will be screaming with anger. But it would be their own faults.

As I understand it, one reason for Bangkok sinking is the result of government decisions in the 1950s. Bangkok then was the Venice of the East, a city of klongs and not very many roads. A decision was made to modernise the city. Consultants were brought in who clearly knew little about water management. They advised filling in the klongs and making them roads. And to me that is one problem with hiring outside individual consultants. Neither they nor those doing the hiring are really aware of the long term effects. The must be a wide range of consutants with different specialities to span the wide range of probable results.

That's what consultants do, make things worse!

[macaroni21]

I was in Singapore one year close to their F1 season, staying in a hotel within PeterRS' map above and exprienced some road closures for their practice runs (oh, the noise!!!). I was gone by the time the actual race took place though. I recall a few observations I made while there, which might be applicable to Bangkok or not.

As PeterRS mentioned, Singapore roads are nowhere as congested as Bangkok roads. Singapore also has plenty of major roads that run parallel to each other in the downtown area, sort of like a grid pattern, with roads 100 - 200m apart. If one road is closed, traffic easily diverts to a parallel road. In fact walking Singapore streets is like downtown Sydney or New York. Every 100 - 200 metres, you come to a traffic light crossing. Bangkok is not like that. Its major roads are often 1 km apart, e.g. Rama IV Rd, Sukhumvit Rd, Pethaburi Rd, and all are congested anyway. Few sois run parallel to the major roads and thus cannot serve as alternatives. Closing roads in Bangkok guarantees chaos.

The F1 circuit in Singapore (the map above refreshed my memory) wasn't in the busiest part of the downtown. It was in the more picturesque part with colonial buildings and museums but even on ordinary days, these weren't the busiest roads. So diversion wouldn't cause much spillover traffic. 

Presumably Bangkok might consider the analogous Sanam Luang and Grand Palace area, which should not cause as much economic damage as closing Sukhumvit or Rama IV roads.

However, looking at the map again, I see the Singapore has four MRT stations around the F1 circuit, so bringing in 100,000 spectators on public transport to various parts of the circuit is not a problem at all. In fact, I think there is a fifth MRT station at the bottom of the map where the Helix Bridge is. That's the station that serves the Marina Bay Sands complex. Also, there are lots of 4-star and 5-star hotels close to Singapore's F1 circuit. Tourists simply walk to the event. On both counts - insufficient public transport and absence of hotels within walking distance - the Sanam Luang/Gand Palace area is disadvantaged. 

[PeterRS]

As @macaroni21 mentions, Singapore traffic is far, far lighter than Bangkok's. That's partly because the tax on cars is vastly higher and partly because of the congestion charge motorists must pay to enter the central area. A new Toyoya Corolla Altis today costs S$173,888 (US$130,000). Of this S$103,799 represents tax. Total cost of owning, running and maintaining the Toyota over 10 years is estimated at S$253,326!

https://dollarsandsense.sg/cost-owning-car-singapore/

The other issues in his post are all extremely important to F1 organisers. I am not sure if Bangkok has environmental protection laws, but as also pointed out, the noise of even just one F1 car racing around a city can be heard virtually all over it. Make that 22 or 24 and the noise is ear-splittingly deafening.

I happened to be involved as a consultant (! pace @Keithambrose) with the Hong Kong Tourist Association when it was considering an F1 race in the late 1990s. As with Singapore, the television shots with cars racing around Hong Kong's harbour district would be worth vast sums in free worldwide advertising. The conclusion we all came to was that with all the efforts required to close roads. resurface roads, build the extensive necessary infrastructure, the noise which would greatly exceed environmental protection limits and most all the relatively small financial return, it was not worth proceeding. We had been given a copy of a study prepared by the former driver Gerhard Berger as a result of which the F1 Austrian Grand Prix had been reinstated. That made clear that the bulk of revenues to the government came as much from the VAT returns from hotel and other items as from the sale of expensive tickets. Hong Kong had no VAT on most items and only a minuscule hotel tax. It was an easy decision to take.