10/03/2009
NEWS STORY
 |
With just over two weeks to go, everyone is looking forward to this year's World Championship season with great anticipation, just as they always do.
However, in light of the present financial climate, we want to use this Talking Point to look a little further down the road.
Last week, the Formula One Team' Association (FOTA) held a press conference at which it announced its proposals for Formula One's future, subsequently issuing its own masterplan for the sport, its roadmap.
FOTA looked at the technical aspects of the sport, as well as the sporting regulations and the commercial side of things. Much was also made of a 'Global Audience Survey' held in late 2008 in which (F1) devotees and marginal and/or low interest fans in 17 countries gave their views on the sport.
If only with a hint of irony, it should be pointed out that the sponsor of that survey, the Dutch bank ING, has itself now announced its intention to leave the sport at the end of this year.
While some of the proposals make sense and should be encouraged, others - such as Constructors' Championship points for the quickest pit stop - appear to be nothing more than gimmicks, and surely F1 already has enough of these.
The results of the 'Global Audience Survey' focussed on five key points: 'F1 isn't broken, so beware 'over-fixing' it', 'F1 needs to be more consumer-friendly', 'Major changes to qualifying format are not urgent', 'Revisions to the points-scoring system' and the 'Evolution of pit stops and refuelling'.
We would very much value your personal opinion on these and anything else contained in the FOTA roadmap you either agree or disagree with.
It is said that surveys can be engineered so that they give one the results one wants, while many will not have participated in the survey either because they were not aware of it or because they were wary of giving out information to companies more interested in having your e-mail address than your opinion.
Therefore, we want your opinion on the roadmap, where FOTA is getting it right and where it is getting it wrong. Is F1 broken? Does it need to be more consumer friendly? Are major changes to the qualifying format urgent or not?
Naturally, being an F1-focussed website, Pitpass readers are more likely to be part of the 25% the 'Global Audience Survey' describes as "predominantly male" and featuring a "cross section of ages". However, if the figure is to be believed, this 25% is the sport's core audience and if the core audience becomes disenfranchised the sport is in trouble. While the sport must win over "moderate" and "infrequent fans" it must retain - indeed, build on - its core audience.
To check out the FOTA roadmap and remind yourself of the proposals, click here.
We want to hear, indeed, we're pretty sure FOTA will want to hear, your thoughts on where the sport is at and where it should be heading.
Chris Balfe
Editor
To send your thoughts, click here
Note: Please include your full name - without a full valid name we will not publish your entry.
Aaron Mullan - Chester
I think the best idea is the change to the points system but as I have said before a true champion is the driver that knows when he's been beaten fair and square and realizes that settling for second adds to the bigger picture. I believe all drivers try as hard as possible to win every race as that us their nature. I also believe that there is no shame standing one step down from the man who has performed best on that particular weekend.
I am 26, watch every race without fail and attend the British Grand Prix so I fall into the first catagory. I don't want gimicks like points for fastest pit stop or shorter races. If we had shorter races 08's dramatic final wouldn't have happened.
One idea I think would be good is for the driver who puts in the fastest lap of the race to score a championship point. I'm really excited about the coming season and the owg has got everything right with the new aero changes.
Hamilton to retain the title!!!!
Paul Dickson - London
Rather than a point for the quickest pit stop, a return to the '50s point for the fastest lap would, I think, be more interesting, and bring extra interest towards the end of the race, which can be processional.
Ralph Heesen - Atlanta, United States
Formula 1 is not broken, it could however use some tweaks. Though F1 is supposed to be the pinnacle of motorsports in a technological way, it can learn a thing or two from NASCAR when it comes to putting up a show. With the current designs to the cars & circuits overtaken is a near impossible task, and that will remain the case for as long as F1 cars are heavily reliant on the downforce generated by the front & rear wings. They should move regulation towards a complete removal of wings from F1.
Gimmicks like a KERS system are an expensive waste of money and in the long run barely help car companies with their "green" technology. If F1 really wants to start pushing the boundaries of what is possible with gasoline powered vehicles the regulations should limit the amount of fuel a F1 car can carry for a race. Removal of refueling and restricting fuel would force the engine manufacturers to look at making their engines more efficient, which would more then likely lead to more "green" advancement then having them focus on a single expensive item.
Qualifications have been messed with enough as it is, though I'd prefer it if they'd move back to the old way. Race laps for about 30-60 minutes and whoever goes fastest during this period gets to be on pole. It might not be the most interesting for the various sponsors, when it comes to TV coverage. But it was so simple, everyone understood it … and it was equally unfair to everyone.
For too long, the professional bodies of this sport have been of the opinion that the solution to every problem is to add more regulations, while a simplification of the regulations would more then likely improve the overall show.
Peter Mann - Cambridgeshire
I doubt if there's much we can do to influence things now other than concentrate on one or two single issues. So, the idea of shortening races is simply barmy - how does that help the all important fan?
On the points issue, I too would like to see the fastest driver and car of the day gain an extra point (so a point each for driver and constructor). Points for fastest pit stop? Why not - the teams work bloody hard, so a point for the fastest pit stop is nice reward and good for inter-team rivalry.
Philip Singleton
I was pleased to see the compromise of 3 points difference between 1st and 2nd. As we saw just a few years ago the 4 points that many people were demanding is too much, a season over by August is not exiting. I would favour a point for Pole and a Point for the fastest lap but I don't really see the advantage of a point for the fastest pit stop, that looks like a gimmick.
It will always be a tricky balance in F1 to stick to the principal of been the fastest cars over 300 km whilst allowing overtaking. Lets see what this season brings before proposing more changes to the technical regulations.
This will be my 25th season of following every F1 race so I'd call myself an experienced fan! I accept Max Mosley's comments about the technology been invisible to most fans but I would be very disappointed to see standardised cars or engines. For me The Technical development is all part of the F1 package. It's fundamental to the concept of GP racing going right back to the 1900's.
Kristian Kyed - Oslo
I am a dedicated Formula 1 fan and reader of Pitpass. FOTA's new proposals do make some sense, but as they say they should be aware of over-fixing it. The idea that makes the most sense is after my opinion a revised points system. I also like the idea of "Radical new points-scoring opportunities" but they should be for fastest lap in the race and pole position. I do not care about the speed of pit stops, only that they are done to provide excitement during the race.
I do not think they should change the race distance, which is part of the DNA of the sport and should be kept as it is. I think testing is a good thing for both fans and the media and to see less of this is actually sad. It makes for less opportunities for us fans to follow the sport we love and reduced testing is bad for new hopeful drivers. They should make more "all team" tests as the ongoing one in Spain, this way there is a better chance of comparing the potential performance for the coming season. What they should look at is for free online videos to be made available of these tests for the fans to watch. They could include some interviews in these as well. I would also like the sport to be more open to the public as has been suggested by Pitpass before.
As for the cost savings and technical issues I do honestly not care as long as the racing is good. When all is said I am really looking forward to this new F1 season, the most open one in years.
Forza Ferrari!
Jennie Crosier
I think I would fit in to the core audience category, except I do not think I contributed to their survey. Well not unless there was a link from pittpass as I have not been to another F1 websites or read a British magazines since 2003. So perhaps their figure of 25% is not completely accurate, how could they know how many of us there are if they did not bother to ask us.
I passionately watch every qualifying and race what ever time they are on. As such I would not like them to decrease the length of the GPs, I want to see more racing not less. From a viewing point, I do not care how few or how many engines they use, and I do not care how much time each team spends in a wind tunnel or using CFD, FEA or any other kind of CAD.
I am with them on changing the points though, but not points for fastest pitstop.
From a personal point of view I am not happy with the reduction in testing as the only time I have ever been able to see a F1 car live was at a free test at Silverstone. I am also not keen on knowing the teams strategy or fuel load before a race, as I enjoy finding out as the race unfolds who had the best strategy. In fact this part has been lessened by the qualify including race fuel. It is much less likely that a team will use an ingenious strategy as it compromises grid position. Do not know why they think getting rid of refueling is a good idea, there was always a possibility (pre fueled qualifying) that a team might choose to do a 4 stop against a 2 stop or risk a one stop to get ahead.
It is not part of their latest proposals, but I would like to say I am most unhappy about the push to pass part of KERS. I for one want to see drivers overtaking due to equal amounts of balls and skill not because they pressed a button.
My proposals would be:
1. They do definitely need to sort out the broadcasts, we need exciting and unbiased commentators. (Wish the two that commentate for the F3 on channel 4 had been employed to do the F1 in Britain as they are very good and make the F3 far more exciting than F1 has been since Murry retired.)
2. Probably going to be in a minority with this one, but less onboard shots during a GP. I know they are exciting to ex F1 driver commentators. However I like watching the cars from outside, so I can see what is happening and hopefully this year the cars will once more slide round the corners. Which is something I would like to see not a piece of tarmac and the cars nose.
3. Please, Please, Please no more flat soulless Tilke tracks. More up and down sweepy ones like Austria, Spa and Brazil. ( I did not like Valencia and as for that night race last season it could have been any service station off the M5 for all I know).
4. When a result has to be changed or a penalty given, it should be clearly explained sighting the applicable rule. So those that have not read the rules know what is going on an why. This should be done on the screen or by a FIA press release (if after a race), so as to avoid any misinterpretation by the media.
Richard Frankel
For me, we are still missing a fairly fundamental point; it's a World Championship - but we rarely get to see the World Champion 'officially' crowned.
We're just about lucky enough for some recognition if the Champion driver clinches it by finishing on the podium itself (Alonso, 2005 Brazil; or Schumi 2004 Belgium) - but of course it's not their anthem or team that is officially recognised by the event trophy-giving (in those 2 event mentioned it was Montoya/Mclaren and Raikonnen/Mclaren respectively)
And as for the situation where the championship is clinched OFF the podium (the obvious example being Hamilton, Brazil, 2008) - then we are left with nothing than a few handheld camera shots and post-race interviews in the pitlane/airport of the winning driver.
Hands-up who actually got to see the official FIA prize ceremony on TV, and do you really want to see your driver in a DJ & tie 2 months after he actually made the win anyway??
FIA/FOTA - whoever, need to create a specific ceremony which can be initiated at any race as and when the Championship is won; to formally welcome/acknowledge the winning driver and team. The finale should be equivalent in 'showmanship' to a football Champions League/World Cup win.
Brett Westcott - South Africa
I do believe that F1 as it stands today with the new rule changes will be pretty competitive this season. I think we all agree that the main reason why we watch F1 is to see twenty cars and drivers (not one or two)battle it out to see who is the best in the sport… So, in light of this I think it is essential that the there is some form of equality in the technology. So that all the vehicles can be equally competitive…
I feel this can be done by enforcing a technology sharing clause in the FOTA agreement between the teams.
Before the start of the season, midway through the season and at the end of each season, all the teams need to get together and share their advancements in their technology… this will bring the teams closer together in terms of competitiveness as well as cementing their relationships off the track…
This will benefit everyone by;
So instead of having "spy gate" issues, All the teams will embrace any new technology from each other that can improve performance and make the sport safer for the drivers and the planet…
Savo Jovanovic - Belgrade, Serbia
Scoring system
for Driver championship - best X out of Y (app. x = 80% out of y) - this would allow driver not to suffer for technical issues or team mistakes
for Constructors - all races
Qualifying
1 hour, all together, limited number of laps per TEAM - maybe Piquet needs more laps than Alonso, or any pair else.
Tecnical
Erase "banned" and "forbidden" from rule book.
Limit overall dimensions, lenght, width, height, weight.
Limit fuel available per car per race, without engine volume limit, or turbo limit, or else...
Set the minimum race lenght covered by alternative power source, without telling what alternative power source to be used.
Allow various transmissions systems, like CVT...
let them do some innovations
Racing
DO NOT shorten the race. It is perfect as is, regarding skill, focus, durability, concentration, mechanical strenght, etc.
What the f... is PIT CLOSED???? What the f... is new rule for pitting under the safety car - "for each driver calculated time depending on track position...." ??? Impose speed limit when safety car deployed, as simple as that. Or do not have safety car at all, only the mandatory speed limit instead of it. Put some responsability on the leader. Also, It could keep earned gap between the drivers so we wont see someone`s race ruined by other man`s crash.
Financial
Limit the money, let them do on a budget. Perhaps limit the number of staff, so everyone has a same manpower, let us know who is the best in that situation. See what is going on in WTCC with SEAT, 5 cars each testing different thing and came out with the best package. It is reasonable to suspect that smaller can not afford as many man as big, so we can look at the results and say that 1 did here what 8 or 10 did there. Even things up at all levels. Cut driver pay. There is a lot of quality drivers who will drive for less money.
Generally
Share finished races data. Make data public. Avoid spy scandals. Avoid any scandals. Show to the general public how F1 impacts regular cars. Take off some glamour in favour of genuine racing. Try to win back people like Jordan into the sport, it would be better for F1 than a 1000 celebrities arround each track.
Iain Paterson - Aberdeen
Two things spring to mind. Firstly, opportunity for technical innovation; and secondly, accessibility - to the drivers, their teams and their cars.
Given the cost-cutting exercises that have taken place, the teams should be allowed to be more experimental with their cars. Parameters such as engine, safety, underbody and peripheral aerodynamics and gearbox should be mandated for and everything else is up for grabs within an imaginary cube encompassing the whole car.
The accessibility aspect could be something along the lines of an elevator walkway built into the pits which allowed fans to view the goings-on in the pits without interrupting the teams - as in an aquarium, with one way glass. Individual team members could set up blogs or tweets which they would contribute to regularly.
My other suggestion is practice - split the hour into three and make all the cars complete a minimum number of laps per session and aggregate the times for the three sessions to get the pole sitter - simple and competitive.
Damián Baldi - Buenos Aires, Argentina
I don't want to sound as a nostalgic, but F1 had missed some great features in modern times. I can't understand the idea of shorter races, whats the good thing about it?. I want longer races, plus no refueling because this way you have to wait until the end of a race to see the drivers use their cars and go as fast as they can and as fast as the car are able to at that stage of the race. About the point's system, I think it just need to make a bigger difference between the winner and the second place to encourage the fights for victory but I don't agree with the medal's system.
I agree with the idea of fixed brakes, fixed suspension arms, fixed bearbox and other expenssive and unnecessary custom parts, but I don't understand why they still use engines reving up to 18-20.000 RPM with all the expenssive consequences of that. Why not an engine as the one used on A1GP, with great sound, torque and lower RPMs. That way other builders can make engines at lower costs. Im in favor of the last regulation changes as no TC, no automatic shifting, simplex aero and the return of slicks. I think the FIA knows that they diged his own tomb giving to car makers so many power. Now they are worried about a massive move away of car makers that let FIA with no team to manage.
I just hope to be able to see fights on track, drivers doing all they can with the cars they have, and not cars carry on drivers to the finish line. Pit stop's points? Medals? WTF? I want to see competition on track, ON TRACK !
Robert Passman - Silver Spring, Maryland, USA
Regarding the technical aspects of the proposal, the reduction in wind tunnel and CFD usage immediately eliminate some of the finest minds from the sport. I personally believe CFD is a starting point for much aerodynamic analysis but is insufficient in its own without real world testing. The high costs for incremental improvements are caused by freezes in design criteria and the elimination of innovative design and thinking.
Technical
The 2010 proposals move even further towards a standardized car so that Formula 1 cars will emulate the NASCAR Car of Tomorrow (COT). In the end the gap between quickest and slowest has been reduced but the teams with money and size still dominate the show. NASCAR has become a show where you watch driving for 450 miles and racing for 50 with only the luck created by caution lights intervening to affect the results.
The real bottom line is do you want a Formula 1 where the main differences between the cars is the livery and name badge. If so, then we're on our way.
Sporting
Reduced testing WILL lead to poorer reliability in the races. There is no way it won't. Reduced testing will result in reduced proficiency for the test and race drivers. Simulators are not cheap and to make up for the reduced testing will only become more complex and expensive.
The change in points seems more equitable, we'll have to wait and see.
If a teams strategy is revealed publicly before the start or at the start of the race, the benefits of any strategic moves will be reduced. For me it will be like knowing a significant portion of a story line before reading the book even if the ending may still be in doubt.
Why reduce the length of the race? I suppose you can save a few tires. The length has been the same for years. No one has complained about it and if something changes during the race, you have less opportunity to catch up or change strategy.
Commercial
I recall a meeting several years ago when I was part of an engineering division in the government responsible for crafting technical regulations related to aircraft design and performance. A woman spoke to us and started out by saying "..I don't know what you do but you have to sell yourselves." Formula 1 has always meant the best drivers in the best cars. The best driver in the worst care with the worst team could not win but that's racing.
As you mentioned in your article, I can design a survey after you tell me what you want for the results.
You say the survey results don't show an interest in race strategy. Race strategy sometimes has a dramatic outcome on the result and the flexibility provided by pit stops allowing for a change in strategy does add to the spectacle. What detracts is the safety car rule. I suppose some control over the rate of return to the pits will prevent a traffic jam but that has always been the risk in the pits. Drivers and crews have an incentive to do it right because of the consequences of a penalty if they mess it up.
Overall, it is coming to $$$. That's ok as costs should not escalate as they have but standardizing components, reducing testing, publicizing strategies, eliminating innovation will only have detrimental effects in the end. If you need any evidence, the pre-season testing we're seeing with new aero regulations, KERS and slick tyres are already showing larger gaps in performance and are testing the TEAMS to put it all together.
Fernado Alonso is not F1, nor is Lewis Hamilton, Massa, or the rest. While many people didn't like it, Michael Schumacher, Ross Brawn and Jean Todt (and other team members) showed what a team can accomplish when working at a high cooperative level. Not something we've seen from Ferrari consistently. McLaren is in a similar place. I hope I'm wrong but I see these changes as having long term detrimental effects on the sport.
You just had an interesting article on the division of money between the teams and the owners. There is still a lot of money in F1. How its divided is the real problem. Those who produce nothing get 50%. The tracks get nothing but opportunities to bid for races.
Alan J Cook - Wolverhampton, West Midlands, UK
My thoughts on F1 are these:
1) I have not attended (or watched on TV) a F1 race since the debacle of Spa 2008. Neither will I be doing so in 2009. After half a century of being an F1 fan this is a great disappointment for me. I now despise anything to do with the FIA and FOM.
2) The only way forward for F1 is to get rid of Mosely and Ecclestone - just like Jean Marie Balestre had to be got rid of many years ago. Otherwise the sport is headed for the graveyard. Once these two people are out of F1, I might return to the sport I once loved.
3) Stamp out the corruption that seems to exist in F1 - as in 2) above.
4) Any penalties for misdemeanours that are given, should be standardised and each driver and team treated equally - unlike the present situation where Ferrari is rather more equal than all the other teams put together and Ron Dennis and McClaren are always regarded as criminals.
John De Quincey
Moseley hinted recently about having less rules, and I think this is the way to go.
Engines should have a maximum capacity, end of engine rules. The number of cylinders, configuration, turbo etc.. up to the team. But the fuel should be limited. No refuelling, tell the team they have x litres and that is it. Each year this could be reduced forcing teams to be 'greener' by maximising the fuel available. Don't force ideas such as KERS onto teams, if the teams think it's a good idea to get the maximum from the fuel, they will use it.
Reduce wing size, or better still remove them. Any downforce required will have to come from body shape design.
The car should have a maximum length, width, height. The weight should be open but the car should also accommodate a driver of a certain size, so the car cannot be designed for a lightweight midget.
With regards to safety, this is where rules should be made, make sure the cars are as safe as possible.
Friday, one test session, one hour.
Saturday, one hour test session, qualifying for one hour (as we used to).
Sunday, 30 minute test session, and the FULL 2 hour race.
Points should return to the old system, 6,4,3,2,1. But have best 12 scores of 16 races.
Paul Anderson - Houston, Tx
I have been watching F1 for many years now and living in New Zealand, up until Feb' of this year, always stayed up until 2-3am to watch most of the racing. My 5 cents worth…
Points - The suggestion by FOTA is a good one in regard to the points given for position, but a point for fastest pit stop? How would it be timed? What about if a car does a splash and dash? That'll be real quick. A better idea is to award one point for the fastest lap. Maybe to both driver and car.
Aerodynamics - This season has gone most of the way to what I'd like to see. And that is front and rear wings and that's it. All other parts of the car should be neutral in regard to downforce/stability.
Overtaking - Not sure what can be done here but overtaking must be more common than it is now. The smaller rear wing might be a good first step. And why do they race at Monaco? It really is a joke in regard to the race itself. Oh that's right, money
Pitstops - Keep them, both tyres and for fuel. It adds the "What if" factor.
KERS - I can take it or leave it. It might add something so I'll reserve judgement.
Gareth James - Tampere, Finland
I am 31 years old. Male. Married for 5 and half years. A father to two girls. And I am truly, madly, some would say, insanely annoyed! I always feared that when FOTA started to get their own way in discussions with the FIA and other relevant parties, that things like this would start to happen. And my worst fears have come true.
Before I explain my reasons for these statements, I would like to state quite clearly, that with the possible exceptions of the old Citroen 2CV racing series, I will watch and enjoy all forms of motor sport, those old 2CV's being more comical than anything else to my mind. I watch NASCAR live, I watch IRC, I watch Ski-do racing, Enduro Cross, I attend the WRC round in Finland every year, DTM and the Le-Mans series always have me hooked, even the SEAT procession that is the WTCC right now can't stop me from watching it, and I love it all! But F1 has always been my first love! I have been following F1 for 25 years and in that time have missed maybe a dozen races, mostly due to being stuck in the middle of no where with no TV on a family holiday when I was a kid.
So I was monumentally saddened to hear that F1 was going the way of pandering to the lowest common denominator. They say that the survey showed that us fans like most of it the way it is now and would not react kindly to this dumbing down, yet they seem to ignore this and set about dumbing it down anyway. I don't want to hear every last word that passes over the teams radio's even if it is all in code words, after all here in Finland the commentators always talk right over the top of all but the last two seconds of it anyway because they can never be bothered to pay attention. I don't want to know how much fuel is in the car before the start of the race, as far as I am concerned they should ban refuelling as I have always hated this. I don't want to know what type of tires the car has on it, all those green or white or whatever colour's they use are just pandering to the "drop in" fan. I don't want to be able to see who uses what cornering line, indicated by funny colour lines on my TV screen, although I will admit that the occasional graphic showing corning g- force or the one showing the cars speed and gear along with braking/acceleration have been useful from time to time. Stick to sector times, speed trap readings and, if you must, split times in a close race between two or more cars. I don't want to see team members given comments during the race, if I want to know what a team has to say about something I will read about afterwards. I have a brain and I want to use it, I do not want to be spoon fed information that I would gain much more enjoyment from deducing myself!
If they must insist on the doubling of engine distance covered then allow the engine builders to use whatever materials they like. And if they are going to use a KERS then each team must build and utilize their own, of course if a team buys the engine and gearbox then of course they should have the opportunity to buy the corresponding KERS, but should be offered the engine/gearbox package at a slightly cheaper price if they intend to go it alone with a KERS. As far as race distances go well, they are to short by about 25% as it is, and the inane rule about cutting off wet races at the two hour mark just so that some ratings obsessed TV execs can stick the latest reality-that-isn't-show on at the advertised time is pandering of the most obscene magnitude. If a TV channel wants to show F1 that it must realise that no one can control the weather in an F1 race, although the Chinese might like a go at this, and if it rains then it will take a little longer than normal to cover the 250km's that the race must cover. If they are not prepared for this, then give it to someone who is. That should not be too hard.
Points. Yes I like the new idea of the scoring system, always good to shake this up every few years. Keeps us fans on our toes too, and is a fun mental arithmetic exercise. Yes, please give a point for the fastest lap of the race, and yes the idea of a point to the team who conducts the fastest pit stop, measured to the nearest thousandth of a second is a good idea as well. Although if the teams want to do this, and insist on keeping refuelling, then take the limits off the fuel pumps and corresponding systems and really get that juice flowing. Although this would really work at it's best if the teams got rid of refuelling and allowed just two mechanics per wheel, with one jack person at either end, then we could get back to some blindingly quick pit stops. Oh and up the pit lane speed limit while your at it. 110 Km/h would be fine for now. Of course scrapping it all together would be much better full stop.
Testing. Well I think that the current restrictions are enough as everyone tries to tighten their purse strings as much as possible, I would like to see the drivers be required to run at least a set number laps each on the Friday practice though, and the idea of set times for allowing homologations during the year is interesting, I would suggest once every four races, and find a way of setting a limit, or similar, on the number of changes that could be made to a car before the model number/name of the car must be changed to indicate such. For example more than six bodywork changes from the original and the car becomes the "B" model, with subsequent changes, say another four, needing to be labelled a "C" and so on. All the teams must indicate at the end of the race, which version they used for that race and qualifying, with the car being the same model/version for both, (I don't think the money is there right now for the return of "qualifying specials"). No limits on the team running any combination of models over the weekend, for example driver one starts Friday in the "B" model, but qualifies and races the "A" model, where as his team mate starts the weekend in the "C" model but qualifies and race's the "B" model. But notify only at the end of the race. As the season reaches it's climax this could add a very interesting sub plot for us fans to ponder and dissect. Also the use of fluid dynamic computing or wind tunnel testing should not in any way shape or form be scaled any further back than it is now, and ideally would be fixed at today's levels for something like five years.
I don't care if I have to get at 04:00 to watch a race, just make sure it's a real F1 race and not some "clown race". And please, please don't get all chummy all for the sake of the LCD. It's just not right. These teams are here to win what should the absolute pinnacle of motor racing, I fear if it gets any more diluted and chummy then that crown will pass irrevocably to LMP-1 cars and series, and it would take generations for it to be rested back.
F1 needs to be bleeding edge, pure unadulterated competition, with a tidy profit being a nice reward. The best minds, the best drivers, the best computers, the best everything, sticking it all on the line for ultimate glory. In fact F1's motto should always be "If you can't stand the heat, then get off the track!" If this means that a team employs a dedicated "hacking" force then so be it. If a team wants to spend money on poaching a person from another team then go for it. If a team gets caught doing something like this by another team or the FIA then tough, come down on their wallets like a tonne of bricks and that will teach them all a lesson in how not to do it. F1 needs a good scandal every now and then, team rivalry needs that extra bit of spice that comes from always wondering just what the guy down the pit lane might or might not be up to. Afterall team that is not wondering just how to gain a decisive, almost destructive, advantage over their rivals is just not working hard enough. So what if one team wins all the races in an entire year, it just makes everyone else look like a bunch of fools, and given the current driver field I can't really see a return to the Michael Schumacher days of one driver dominating the whole thing, even his team mate, to such a complete degree.
As for the "spectacle". Well I have always liked the RoC at the end of the year, and a few end of season match up between cars and drivers from different series would always be nice. Get a LMP-1 Audi, a F1 BMW, a NASCAR Toyota, a SEAT from the WTCC, and oh why not throw in DTM Merc, a Holden from Australia, a F2 and an Indycar and get them all together at a track, say Paul Ricard, and have all the drivers have a go at going as fast as they can if both their own cars and everyone else's, broadcast it all live online for a nominal fee, and I am sure it would really get the fans talking! Of course this is just the RoC done differently but then FOTA claim they want to hear what the fans think!
Jeremy Braithwaite
F1 is essentially a TV sport which needs to start to capitalise on today's technology.
It needs a complimentary internet feed & associated software that allows the 'viewer' to get real time data and which calculates track positions before and after stops. That way we could all play team manager and share the excitement and decisions that are made on the pit wall.
Would be great to also get actual data from each car so we could compare car to car and driver to driver and play race engineer. Access to the radio traffic would also be great.
Most of the TV is a single feed - in Australia we don't see a choice of views.
My personal view is that the cars sound terrible. The 19,000 rpm high pitched whine seems to send me to sleep! A V12 running at 12,000 rpm sounds much more like a racing car should.
We'll see what happens this year, but the cars must also be able to run close together and there should be enough drag to enable 'slingshot' passing moves.
Greg Cunneen - Tokyo
Races are short enough as it is, so veto that idea. Most of what FOTA said didn't seem to me to suggest much in the way of change at all.
Christopher Wright - Wollongong, Australia
The big turn off for me on these proposals were the suggestion of shorter races. Will this mean a reduction is ticket prices? A reduction in TV Contracts? I think not so the consumer will once again get less.
The only issue that anyone has really complained about with the points is that the current system does not reward the winner enough. The winner should get at least double that of the second place driver. Points need to be continued down to 8th, 9th or 10th to encourgae teams and drivers who are not running at the front.
If they are to bring in extra championship points, award a point for fastest after 15 minutes and at the end of each Friday Session. This would be purely to ensure that teams put their best foot forward on the Friday and with the 15 minute point, their best foot forward right from the start.
As for gimmicks, well gimmicks should only be there to enhance the sport. One 'gimmick' that may have merit is to mark the race track with dashed lines. This will emphasize the speed that the cars are travelling at which at modern circuits with huge tarmac run off areas seem boring and lifeless. I always remember the straight at the old Kyalami had these dashed lines.
Ignacio Dal-Re Compaire
I would like to see drivers taking points for overtaking (in track), this is what all fans want to see.
Wouldn't be great give an extra point to the driver that was in 3rd. position, and overtake the 2nd. This extrapoint could come from the driver who is overtaked for giving much more incentives to both drivers.
Nick Bee - Johannesburg
The new proposals I believe are definitely a step in the right direction and with such solidarity among the teams, this is a further step in the right direction.
Probably the only changes I'd make is revert to the old qualifying system - who remembers the 1998/1999 battles between Mika and Michael?
KERS is very debatable and even though the teams may contribute toward a central fund, the dangers of high voltage remain. One only has to look at hydrogen passenger cars as alternates to understand why there are so few on the road.
An extra point for fastest pit stop. How about setting pole and fastest lap rather.
Bob Dubery - Johannesburg, South Africa
Many of the changes or proposed changes in F1 are to be welcomed. The proposed points system, for example, will rightly confer a greater benefit to race winners.
However there is a worrying trend of trying to legislate outcomes rather than just updating legislation. This is most evident currently in engine restrictions. Having regulations that prevent the use of certain materials or technologies is one thing and has long been a part of F1. However moves to limit RPM and output are quite another. Such regulations are an arbitrary impediment to the technical innovation that has long been a feature of F1.
The trick, and this applies to any sport, is to manage the rules and regulations without changing the essential nature of the competition. I'm not sure that F1 is doing this right now.
Stephen A Stuart - Ottowa
One of the interesting things is that Max and the FIA repeatedly make a lot of noise about reducing the costs of F1, they are championing the introduction of KERS, which all acknowledge is costly and unproven and has a lot of potential issues surrounding both the technology and its application, and Bernie and FOM are hiking up the costs of staging a GP through such things as increased hosting rights (which benefit no-one other than the sports commercial owners (Bernie and CVC) and introducing night races where there is an exponential cost of infrastructure, and the question of sustainability has not really been raised by anyone. Whilst people see F1 as unenvironmental, how can the introduction of completely unnecessary high-energy lighting systems be justified?
It seems that, as usual, most of those involved in the management of F1 have their heads buried in the sand of rich States with no real affinity to F1, and who see it as a way of driving tourism revenues whilst F1 fans suffer from boring racing around yawn-inducing Tilke-designed circuits.
One day, perhaps aficionados will regain control of their sport and enable it to go racing again!
Good luck to the three B's (Brawn, Button, Barrichello) - let's hope it's not a B team!
Tim Rieberger
In a nutshell:
- Points: 9-6-4-3-2-1, and 1 point each for Pole and fast lap.
- Refuelling: Ban it and allow tire stops only.
- Engines: Go back to V-10s with 15000 rev limit
- Tires: Slicks are good, make rears 18"
- Race distances: Keep the current distance, limit safety cart use, and use red flag for serious accidents, mass pile-ups or too much rain. (remember 1994 - no red flag in Imola and Senna died... red flag used at Suzuka, aggregate times, and one of the more exiting races of the day!)
- KERS: Waste of time and money that could be focused on other areas.
- Night races: Enough already!! Singapore was probably the most boring race to watch...EVER, as was Valencia (why create a bogus street circuit when there is the incredible Valencia Circuit to race on?????)
Tracks: Now that cars are supposed to be easier to follow and overtake, it's time to get rid of the ridiculous chicanes that have sterilized the great circuits of the world. A couple worth mentioning... Catalunya, Imola,Spa ( please restore the Bus Stop to its former glory), also Hockenheim MUST be restored to its former glory as the current layout is completely laughable.
Spare Cars: To not have spare cars is just plain stupid, because half the grid could be taken out on the first lap and fans would be left watching 10 cars!(What's that about red flags??)
Bernie and Max: Yo ho ho, gotta go! For the better of the sport, don't ya know!
Testing: Allow testing, limited days but only where all teams can attend.
Wind Tunnels: Should be eliminated because the aero-age ruined the spectacle of F-1.
Driver Salaries: I think every driver should make a standardized and guaranteed base salary, with any other bonus monies paid based on performance relative to the car's competitiveness.
Shared Technology: In karting, everyone seems to help each other to be more competitive because it makes the racing better not only for the drivers, but for the all important fan of racing. F-1 should follow that example so as to eliminate the gap between front and back. F-1 would be far more exiting if the whole grid had a chance of winning on any given weekend.
Drivers: teams should hire the best drivers possible, not just the ones with the most sponsorship
Rules: Freeze for 5 years so smaller teams have the chance to adapt within their budgets.
MORE ON-BOARD COVERAGE!!!!!!!!!!!
I could go on forever, but I'll stop here. Hope B & M are listening!!!!!
James Chen - Melbourne, Australia
Has FOTA looked into Crystal ball or the 8 ball for the future of F1?
The long awaited FOTA statement was finally released on 5th of March detailing technical, commercial and regulations that have been agreed and will be implemented into future seasons of Formula 1 racing.
While it is encouraging to see all team principals participating and agreeing to cement their vision of the future of the sport, the current economic situation and the unsustainable use of resources provided have now forced their hands on the teams to agree to many technical regulation changes. Most of which involve homologating and producing long life or single make components; thus reducing the fascination of and image of technical advancement of Formula 1 racing.
This however does indeed take Formula 1 back to its roots before regulations of major components being required to self manufactured became applicable. However, it does not go as far back as off the shelf chassis as was the controversies over the last few years with the so-called customer cars. This does indeed cut down costs associated with the running of the cars however I don't believe the cost cutting measures have gone far enough.
Under regulations agreed by FOTA, Wind tunnel testing and CFD modeling will be restricted. This plugs one of the great black holes that teams and manufacturers have been throwing huge amounts of cash into for very little gain, yet it doesn't go far enough to restrict simulator work, which all teams will simply divert their funds into now that on track testing has been banned during the season. This has the potential to create the next potentially endless money pit of F1. Yet young drivers lose chances to show their stuff to prospective employers as well as teams losing chances to test prospective new talent as well as giving their reserve drivers time in the car.
The other aspect of FOTA's drive to bring F1 to the common man involves measures to dispel the fact that F1 operates on secrecy and exclusivity. Open air radio conversations and telemetry charts is a step in the right direction to create an air of openness to TV spectators, however, F1 in general still continues to treat on track spectators with contempt and delivers a raw deal to its in person spectators. Unlike many other categories, Spectators has literally no chance to be up close with either the drivers or the cars, and visiting the pit lane and the paddock is very much out of the question unless if you're visiting certain Grands Prix where a pit lane walkabout is offered to certain ticket holders the day before the circuit is open to the public. Mandatory autograph sessions featuring all F1 drivers either on track or off track is a must if F1 wants to create a positive image of itself in each city it visits, and to provide a platform of interaction between the spectators and the drivers themselves.
I certainly hope FOTA don't look into the crystal ball too hard for their future. They must work harder to ensure they don't fall behind the 8 ball in attracting and maintaining its fan base. Certainly in my case, i've lost just about all of my interest in F1 due to the loss of Super Aguri and Takuma Sato to the sport. I have been watching F1 since 1990 and believe I am firmly in the "core audience" category over the years that I have been watching F1. However I have become disillusioned with the sport over the later years and I believe time has come for me to switch off from F1. F1 can not afford to lose a large amount of their core audience like myself without attracting newer members to their core audience; and certainly with the sort of new markets they are now expanding into, it will take a very long time for them to attract newer fans that will become more dyed in the wool and can afford to come to the races.
Bill Willems - Bloomington, Indiana
First of all the racing needs to be fun for the fan. Something needs to be done about Bernie and Max. WE NEED AN FI RACE IN INDIANAPOLIS. The American market is the largest for the brands that race. Get back to Canada and the USA.
Not sure about 3 races per engine. As David Hobbs says when an engine goes...KABLAM. Hope we don't see more of that. No refueling is good. It has become a dangerous thing during the past couple of years.
Leave the qualifying alone. Add more points to the winner and give points for pole and most laps led. Ya I know that sounds like NASCAR but if a driver does good... reward him... or her (hopefully Danica).
Bill Goode, Jr - Florida fan
I found a lot of FOTA's ideas welcome indeed, particularly their plans to make the viewer's experience more fulfilling, informational, and accessible. ( BIg concern here is, who will walk us through the grid if Peter Windsor's in the garage with Team USA? ) ....Regarding the Technical plans, I tend to disagree with the idea of abandoning the exploration of new exotic materials in the design of the cars, as this seems contrary to the very essence of the sport whose appeal for me is the exotic nature of the machines. It seems like a big step backward to me. I suppose their thinking here is that with more limits on testing there would be fewer chances to test their new ideas except in the offseason.... As far as the Sporting plans, I like the present qualifying system. As far as any new format, I suppose it would depend on what kinds of ideas they come up with for 2010.... I do not like the idea of shorter races.....
Extra comment: I would also like FOTA to use their influence to return F1 to the US, particularly now that we are apparently getting our own team....