The FIA's rule plans. 2003, 2004 & 2005

[z2252314]

I dont understand why so many believe the techonological aspect of F1 is dying. All the FIA has done is to standardise a couple of components which inhibit racing. There are still a thousand other componenets of the car where the teams can gain an edge by introducing cutting edge technology.

Thumbs up to Max for showing some balls.

P.S I would have paid a million bucks to see Ron's face when Max was laying down the new law!!!!

[Mal]

Standardised components, especially rear wings is a great idea as long as there are not too many. There will be plenty of other area of the car that the techincal boffins can play with to ensure the essence of F1 remains. I think there could be some interesting and radical new body shapes in attempts to win back downforce at certain circuits.

I am worried about the 2003 get out clause for the electronic aids. I can see all the teams preparing long statements as to why they cant remove such things in time.

I think the get out should only apply to teams with genuine financial troubles and there is no way an exemption should be allowed to any of the manufacturer backed teams.

Generally though this is a bold a brave move and should be applauded for trying to bring the excitement back to F1. It really needs the teams to follow the spirit and ensure that it is followed through without petty arguing and expensive lawsuits.

[neilwaynesmith]

Originally posted by Don K
I think they should allow at least Car-to-Pits radio communication.

By eliminating ALL communication, you also eliminate the temptation and/or probability of some teams using the radio to piggy-back or mask telemetry signals. I believe that allegations like this were floated a few years ago and technology has definitely moved on from then.

[josvandeperre]

To me it seems like the new rules mean that the most valuable thing in F1 today is an option on Jacques Villeneuve's services for 2004

[AllonFS]

Best news I have heard about F1 in a long time, I may even go back to watching the races live again. F1 has always been about a balance of car technology and driver skill. In the last few years the balance has tipped far too much to the car technology, this goes some way to regaining that balance.

A couple of thoughts on the subject of limiting technology and standardised parts;
1. Limiting technology: If you limit advances in one area, teams will concentrate in another. A prime example was in the introduction of the 1.5 litre rules in 1961 to slow down the cars. The subsequent 5 years saw enormous advances in the cars which were of course much faster by the end of that period than the cars they replaced in 61.
2. Standardised parts and engine supplying: Just check out the difference between the Lotus than won the first race with the Cosworth DFV in 1967 and the Tyrell than won the last race with it in 1983. I don't think we need to worry about development! (The racing wasn't too bad in those years either...)

All we need now are some decent tracks to race on, but that really is wishful thinking.

[Red]

That's not the same Allon. I agree that at some point virtually every car was powered by a Cosworth, however they were NOT standardized. That is, other engines existed and that stimulated the competition. And the 1.5 rule did not limit the advance in engines department neither stimulated it in aerodymanics. It was not a technology limit, just the engine's capacity.

Anyway. I understand that 2 problems exist. a) Reduce the costs and b) Increase entertainment. No spare cars might reduce costs. However how the heck does that increase entertainment is beyond me. They won't be able to use the spare car anymore? 18 cars on grid and yet they are wiling to risk that 1 or 2 of them won't be able to take the start? Is this their idea of increasing audience? Hmmm.

Banning communication between the car and pits, including telemetry, also might reduce costs. But that also will increase the rate of mechanical failures. Everyone seems to dislike the bidi telemetry, but I believe that the Monaco GP last year was better with 1 McLaren (remotely debugged) than a 'emphasis on the driver' Monaco GP with Coulthard DNFing. Furthermore, Williams had only a couple of DNFs last year, but without telemetry....

[Super Tourer]

Unsurprisingly it's not smiles all round....

Ron Dennis was reported to have left the meeting allegedly looking 'clearly unhappy' and telling reporters he had 'nothing to say'.

Presumably he is unhappy that all the money McLaren have invested in cutting edge technology will seem to have been wasted.

Great quote from Max Mosley on the feeling of the meeting ."There were some dissenting voices," FIA President Max Mosley admitted last night. "But the great majority were either in favour or at worst neutral."

I believe it require's two teams to take the matter to arbitration and challenge the ruling, thought this is unlikely as it would be a lengthy and costly process, with little guarantee of success.

quotes from:www.pitpass.com

[Wrex]

A challenge won't work.

Firstly Max and Co are quiet adament about pushing this through and any challenge would be a PR nightmare. This is what the fans want, and anyone that prevents it will be very unpopular.

[Korr]

For 1994, they banned driver aids.

Look what happened then. That is all that I am worried about.

In terms of technology, there are many ways that the FIA could have gone about the seeding of tech vs. banning it outright.

Of course, BE and MM only care about money, look how BE handled the AS death in 1994 to see how much importance he places on this sport, its teams, drivers and spectators.

All the teams would do well to find a loophole in the CA and walk away from it tomorrow.

F1 under BE is dead. Let it die, I say.

[R]

Well, I think it's great that they finally managed to come up with some significant rule changes. I'm in favour of most of the changes, but I'm worried about the issue with spare cars not being allowed any more. The number of cars on the grid is low enough as it is - a few crashes during practice and qualifying, and we might see only 15 cars on the grid if spare cars are not allowed. And what about the ruling for 2006 - "engine life to be extended to six races" - what does that mean? Does it mean that if a driver has an engine failure in race one, he will not be able to participate for the next five races? Not a good ruling in my book. The teams should be allowed to replace blown engines, and a retirement due to a blown engine should only affect that race weekend, not the next five, as the situation will be in a worst case scenario. One other thing: The grooved tyres should be replaced with slicks again, that's one part I am missing in these changes.

But overall, quite a shock to read about all these positive changes, and thumbs up to the FIA for being willing to introduce some drastic changes in order to save F1.

[Kex]

I'm relatively happy with all the proposed changes...everyone has pretty much covered all the pros and cons. However I believe they should have got rid of those stupid little paddles on the back of the steering wheel, and stuck a small gear lever in the cockpit - like I've said many times before...

[Valve Bounce]

First of all, I'll run with R on this one. I really don't see the advantage of eliminating the spare car as it will be to the detriment of racing. Cars get pranged in practice, no question, and in quals as well. Who the hell wants to watch a race if a couple of the cars pranged before the race and the drivers are out? Won't the sponsors be happy if the car is damaged during quals and is then taken to parc ferme. (Think Monaco, where one touch of the rails during practice could mean "no race".)

As for some managers not being happy, I'm going to take a totally neutral stance in my analysis. I think that Ron Dennis, and probably Frank Williams (and maybe a couple of other teams) have spent squillions trying to upgrade components to try to catch up or even beat Ferrari, and all that expenditure will go down the toilet. My view: too bloody bad!! Don't throw more money into the fire.

[neilwaynesmith]

The racing as it stands is ****-boring. You have adverts on TV by computer companies boasting about how they can re-map engines and solve mechanical problems while the car is half a lap away. You have teams going to the wall, or approaching it at speed with a worrying regularity. As a marshal, I personally am sick to death of people coming up to me on a Monday morning and ranting on about how ****ing bored they were watching the race..... Need I go on?

The rules as they stand have created this malaise. So change them. The only real cost will be the redundancy packages for a few thousand computer whizzes.

[paulzinho]

As the Friday mrning testing allows the use of spare cars do you think more teams might be inclined to use this option in 2004?

As for eliminating telemetry...good, gives the driver a bit more input, remember Senna?

Still want some slicks and decent circuits though! But its a very good start, more than i was expecting if i'm honest!

[Super Tourer]

Good point paulzinho, maybe the team's that have signed up for the Friday testing will gain an on-event advantage, as surely more track time can only help.

Whereas tooling around Barcelona or wherever for days at a time may not be so valuable now the teams have less technology to tinker with?

Whilst on the subject, I wonder if Toyota have shot themselves in the foot by opting out of Friday testing. Da Matta doesn't know any of the circuits and the one shot qualifying will put him at a severe disadvantage, whereas extra running on the Friday would surely have been beneficial.

As you say, some teams may now reverse their decision.

[Inigo Montoya]

Personally, I would have preferred a formula with no wings at all and all the electrical gizmos they want - if it meant avoiding standardised parts.

[Inigo Montoya]

Never mind...

With radios being banned, how are Ferrari gonna get Rubens out of the way for Michael?

Hang out a pit board that says "RUBENS - FAKE CAR TROUBLE NOW"

Originally posted by R
And what about the ruling for 2006 - "engine life to be extended to six races" - what does that mean? Does it mean that if a driver has an engine failure in race one, he will not be able to participate for the next five races?

Maybe they could deduct points for using extra engines ala BTCC?

[SJ Spode]

I wonder whether these decisions are going to impact on sponsorship for the teams (in particular Williams). I suppose it depends whether HP etc, provide the kit, expertise etc for free in exchange for coverage, or whether they contribute £££/$$$ as well.

I can't see the computer firms wanting to be associated with the new lo-tech cars, but if costs are reduced anyway maybe the teams won't be bothered by their withdrawl.

[Bononi]

This is big news everywhere, and as I thought many experts are voicing their opinion now. I think many of these rules will die on the way to become true.

[Maxmil]

Originally posted by Bononi
I think many of these rules will die on the way to become true.

No doubt you are correct, but if all or most of the changes come to nothing both F1 and the FIA are probably finished. The FIA has staked almost all of it's dwindling reputation on this move, and a major failure would cost Max his job and a huge loss of confidence in the organization. I also feel that the big three teams can not afford to look too reactionary in trying to avoid or postpone the new "interpretations". Judging from the reaction on the F1 sites I visit the fans are, by and large, pleased with attempt to save their sport.

[Hugh Jarce]

Been away for a couple of days - great thread and can't believe how quickly it's grown!!!!

I don't think I can add anything, especially as a lot of you guys have more technical nouse than I do. I agree with the weight of what's been posted and next season looks more worth watching than the last.

But a thought that crossed my mind in the 'wee hours' last night ...

If these and even greater restrictions are placed on the big manufacturers for the sake of the survival of F1 as we know it, will it ultimately push the 'big boys' out?

They may live with it for a time (PR and all that), but all the rumours about their own 'series' where all innovation and cost is welcomed isn't scuppered by this.

At the end of the day all that dosh is ultimately spent to promote that Ferrari etc. is at the leading edge of car technology. That's F1!

So, these great and welcome changes (for us) will help F1 survive for the short-term, but I wonder for how long the big boys will want to play ball with standardisation and limitation?

FIA is doing the right thing, but is it the 'last ditch' stand of a dinosaur approaching extinction. I really, really hope not but I have some doubts.

I guess the next five years will provide the answer.

[shiny side up!]

I think Mr. Jarce has a point... We have argued over how much F1 technology helps road car business before, and I know some will disagree with this... but... the technology easiest used on the road that is developed in F1 is the engine and drivetrain electronics. Very little from the chassis/suspension side is applicable to a passenger car. So if we force the Manufacturers to take a step back from the electronic and drivetrain technologies, I think the Car Manufacturer's series in 2007 is a real possibility, as they can write the rules in a way that benefits them more than the FIA is willing to do...

[Super Tourer]

Reaction from Toyota, note the use of the word 'proposal(s)', I thought they were rules to be implemented not the starting point for further discussion/negotiation......

Toyota reacts to changes
16-01-2003


The Toyota F1 Team issues the following at 13:30 on Thursday 16 Jan: Toyota supports and appreciates any FIA initiatives aimed at reducing costs, increasing the safety and improving the excitement for spectators of the Formula One.
In absence of an agreement between the teams, Toyota welcomes the proposal received yesterday from the FIA and will attend the meeting of the Technical Working Group in London on January 17, with the intent to positively contribute to the definition of the detailed rules.

Toyota expects the FIA to be open-minded and accept constructive proposals from the teams aimed to reduce costs, with no compromise for the drivers safety.