Revealed - the FIA plan to fix F1

[vat_man]

From Autosport:

Thursday's issue of AUTOSPORT magazine reveals details of the nine-point plan that motorsport's governing body, the FIA, has sent to the Formula 1 teams with the aim of transforming the sport's 'show' and slashing escalating costs to compete.

AUTOSPORT has obtained a copy of the controversial secret FIA document, which will be discussed at the next meeting of the F1 Commission at the end of this month.

The nine points are:
1 Driver swapping - divers race every car on the grid during the course of a season.
2 Aggregated qualifying - four half-hour sessions on Fridays and Saturdays at grands prix.
3 Bespoke tyres - rubber suppliers can produce different tyres for each of their teams
4 Success ballast - a penalty of 1kg in ballast weight per point scored during 2003.
5 Testing restrictions - limit testing during the 2003 season to just 12 days per car.
6 Aerodynamic freeze - from 2003 only two sets of bodywork can be homologated at the start of the season.
7 Long-life engines - one engine per weekend in 2003, one engine per four races in 2004, and one engine per eight in 2005.
8 Long-life gearbox - gearbox assemblies to have requiered life for a number of races.
9 Standardised parts - all teams would have to use standardised electronics, ECUs, brakes and fixed ballast.

Okay, let's have a pick through these and see which ones the FIA really want (this should be fun, eh Giles?).
1 - No chance
2 - Yeah, this'll probably happen
3 - Issue might be costs, but this seems a reasonable idea - be surprised if the tyre companies were happy with it, though.
4 - The teams will never let this go through.
5 - Didn't we already have the testing debate - I thought everyone agreed it wouldn't affect the richer teams as they'd just do computer simulations
6 - This'd be interesting - hope you get your package right at the start! Be surprised if the teams let it go through, though.
7 - Given the short time frame for a motor to last a full weekend (and that the 2003 motors are running now) I doubt this will go through on this schedule - could happen though
8 - So what happens if a box goes up - does that mean you go back 10 spots? Dunno about this one - a few of the teams are struggling to make them last one race, let alone 3 or 4
9 - I would think this would limit potential sponsors, wouldn't it? What happens to TAG if Magneti Marelli are the designated ECU provider?

 

[f1king]

The only one I see here that might got through is #2.

#7 Could very well happen but not that soon.

#9 well all I have to say about this is, this is F1 not NASCAR!

 

[GilesGuthrie]

Originally posted by vat_man
1 Driver swapping - divers race every car on the grid during the course of a season.
2 Aggregated qualifying - four half-hour sessions on Fridays and Saturdays at grands prix.
3 Bespoke tyres - rubber suppliers can produce different tyres for each of their teams
4 Success ballast - a penalty of 1kg in ballast weight per point scored during 2003.
5 Testing restrictions - limit testing during the 2003 season to just 12 days per car.
6 Aerodynamic freeze - from 2003 only two sets of bodywork can be homologated at the start of the season.
7 Long-life engines - one engine per weekend in 2003, one engine per four races in 2004, and one engine per eight in 2005.
8 Long-life gearbox - gearbox assemblies to have requiered life for a number of races.
9 Standardised parts - all teams would have to use standardised electronics, ECUs, brakes and fixed ballast.

1. Yeah right! Like that's EVER gonna happen! Certainly right up there in the stupidest ideas that the FIA has ever had!
2. This should, and probably will, happen quickly. Let's be honest, it's what should always have happened when they changed it from the Friday/Saturday qualifying. 4 30min sessions would be great.
3. This is a great idea. No, really! This way the FIA gets to massively increase tyre budgets, which will strangle development, and may force one or other of the companies out. This is the one the FIA want!
4. Success ballast has been used to good effect in tin-tops, but I'm not sure it should be applicable to single seater racing. This would treat the symptom, not the problem.
5. As everyone knows, physical testing is cheaper than simulation, so this is a bad idea. This also won't really help anyway, as it's trying to balance the difference between rich and poor teams. But the richer teams will always find ways to spend their money.
6. This one will be blocked by the teams. "Formula One is the embodiment of engineering and technical progress, you can't strangle us" they will cry.
7. This is probably something of a Draconian time scale. One engine per weekend I can see happening, but the expansion of this will probably go by the wayside.
8. Perhaps most of the teams should start by making their gearboxes last a whole weekend!
9. Will never happen. Firstly see point 6. Secondly, no engine supplier would allow another company to build them an ECU.

 

[slip2rock]

As just a passing viewer of F1... I'm curious about point 8.

Just how big do we think a gearbox for an F1 car would have to be to survive an entire season of F1 abuse?

American 18 wheel truck size or Aussie roadtrain tractor unit?

 

[Race Idiot]

The success balast idea worked quite well in BTCC, but because the cars are so small where will they put the extra weight?

1 Driver swapping - divers race every car on the grid during the course of a season.

I dont understand this? could someone explain this for an idiot here.

Most of the other rules would be nice but I doubt some of the more radical ones will take place. Like the Engine lasting a whole weekend session what happens if it blows up during practice?

 

[vat_man]

Ooh - good point on 3, Giles - hadn't considered the one supplier strategy - and tell me you'd get different tyres for different teams then.

I'm of the opinion that the close relationship between Bridgestone and Ferrari is a major element in their current domination.

 

[GilesGuthrie]

Originally posted by Y2TUSCAN
The success balast idea worked quite well in BTCC, but because the cars are so small where will they put the extra weight?


I dont understand this? could someone explain this for an idiot here.

Most of the other rules would be nice but I doubt some of the more radical ones will take place. Like the Engine lasting a whole weekend session what happens if it blows up during practice?

I think the driver swapping is a red herring. I wouldn't worry about it.

The engine probably could last an entire weekend with not too much work (despite what the manufacturers are saying). In answer to your question, if the team have to change engines, or do substantial work on the existing engine, then the driver starts 10 places behind their qualification position.

 

[GilesGuthrie]

Originally posted by vat_man
Ooh - good point on 3, Giles - hadn't considered the one supplier strategy - and tell me you'd get different tyres for different teams then.

I'm of the opinion that the close relationship between Bridgestone and Ferrari is a major element in their current domination.

Well Bernie did say (quite quietly) in a recent interview that if he had a free hand, there would be a return to the single-tyre formula...

I agree on the Bridgestone thing, but perhaps from the other side of the fence - Williams and McLaren seem to use their tyres in a fundamentally different way. But then this is McLaren's first year on Michelins - maybe things will automatically be different next year...

 

[f1king]

Do you guys realy think any of these rules will be in use in 2003???

 

[GilesGuthrie]

Originally posted by f1king
Do you guys realy think any of these rules will be in use in 2003???

I think that #2 almost certainly will, with possibly #3 and #7 for 2004.

It was interesting to see the drivers trying not to laugh when being asked about #1