FIA regulations proposals

[Spencifer_Murphy]

I think they should leave the technical regulations for the car alone for a while...give all the teams a chance to develop what they have. The reason costs are spiralling and teams are all over the place in terms of pace is because there is no longer any consistancy in the tech regs. Imagine you are Paul Stoddart, you now have a car in 2004 with which you can work with and put in place a long-term plan to bring the team around, in time you will fully understand the aero you have and be able to develop them over a few seasons and bring them up to the standards of other teams (Given time, luck and good finacial sence). But just as you want to settle down and think long-term you have to design a car with a completly different ethos for 2005....not only is it hindering your development as a team but it is going to cost you even more! The reason Ferrari are doing so well now is because the team is soooooo good they can cope with any tech changes. In 2003 the rules had changed, but on the technical side of things they had not...Williams had settled and developed their ideas and had a car with which to mount a serious challege. In 2004 however in come a load of tech changes, Ferrari easily comply to them and Williams goes down the drain...again. Last years renault was phenominal, the R24 is good...but not as good as it could have been if it was a logical progresssion from the 2003 chassis. Not one of the cars on this grid is a TRUELY logical progression from last years chassis. How can it be? With so many changes to the technical side of the car it cannot possibly be a completly logical progression from last years car.

In 2002 something had to be done to spice things up, not only was Ferrari running away with it all, but even the racing behind them was dull. 2003 was a cracker and even though Schumi has run riot again this year the racing behind him hasn't been all THAT bad. The FIA want results quicker than is possible. Changing the rules every bloody season is just going to delay this process even more. They should stop fiddling about and watch how things settle out. Mclaren are now making their way back to the forefront, given some technical stability Williams could do too and BAR culd also improve even more as could renault. If the rules remain constant we could end up with five teams cometing for the chamipnship in 2 or 3 seasons time.

These technical reg changes cost the teams a lot of cash...which is bad enough as it is, but in today's finacial climate (Post 9/11) it is the LAST thing the FIA want...considering their insistance on "Cutting costs" here is how to cut costs: Keep the tech reg. constant and in time the cost to build things will drop. the prices of computers are dropping constanly because we are learning how to make them cheaper yet still better.

In short the FIA need to stop F****ing about with the regulations (At least for a while) and allow things to take their course. In time the rules will need changing again...they always do, but leave them for now, PLEASE!

[uzael]

except for the one engine rule and the 2 element rear wing limitation, tech regs have been very stable for the past 5 years easy. Costs are siparlling because big manufacturers are willing to sepnd big money to win. I read somwehere that the engine budgets for MB and BMW are somewhere in the realm of $100mm USD. Another eason budgets are so big is due to the big economic growth from 1994-2000. Companies had more money to spend since buisiness was booming, therefore it was worthwhile to spend ungodly sums in f1 advertising. hence, team budgets rise to use this additional capital. as the world eceonomy has slowed, the manufacturers who are partners with teams have been footing an increasingly large share of the bill to kepp things going. this leaves independant teams without a big partner in a lurch. no amount of redistribution of TV money or regs changes/stability is going to change that. Even though regs have been steady, development at the top level surely hasn't slowed.

[Monstrobolaxa]

So you can stuff your statistics

You don't have to be rude!

At the moment I'm not saying that they lost or gained viewers, they might have gained but the thing is that the case study has to englobe the whole season, studies made before the end of the season are base on some assumptions that might have happened in the first GPs but might not happen again! You might want to attend a class on statistics it's very interesting bernard....and usefull. You can also read the book "Winning: The business of Formula 1" it's also very informative on how television works with Formula 1...and also with team and sposorship management.

[bernard]

Sorry. I'm just saying it's not that big of a deal. It was only a part of the miss interpretations uzael had in his post. But I'm still in the right here!

[Spencifer_Murphy]

Costs are siparlling because big manufacturers are willing to sepnd big money to win.

Your right, but that is inevitable, no matter how much cost sutting measures are introduced large companies like Mercedes-Benz and BMW are always going to spend as much as they can on making their engines the best. But don't you think that making engines last greater and greater distances is going to increase these costs even further?

[Monstrobolaxa]

Probably it will......they will test the engines on the dyno and build new dynos in order to test more and more to compensate the amount of track time testing they'll loose.

[uzael]

Everything cannot possibly be more expensive than the current setup. There are almost no changes that will raise costs. Manufacturers will spend what it takes to win. Teams will spend what they get in income. No exceptions, nothing. Personally, I think the FIA proposal to force manufacturers to provide engines is an excellent idea. If they really want to compete and gain exposure from formula one, then they owe something back to the sport on a larger scale. Since no new teams are coming into the sport, it's not an open league. it's a partnership and they're all in it together, like it or not. Personally, I think it would be a good idea for the FIA to force engine, tire and fuel suppliers to sign contracts binding them to the series for X number of years, with a big cash payout if they break the contract. if they want in, make them commit.

[Monstrobolaxa]

Well actually my opinion is that it can get more expensive then what it is right now....new material might come into usage, new construction technics, more workers, etc.

But you are right that they'll keep on spending what it takes....the problem is that if they don't achieve what they want they think it's duw to lack of funds and start investing more.

[Guest]

Well actually my opinion is that it can get more expensive then what it is right now....new material might come into usage, new construction technics, more workers, etc.

But you are right that they'll keep on spending what it takes....the problem is that if they don't achieve what they want they think it's duw to lack of funds and start investing more.

You could ban exotic materials that cost too much. But if the rule changes are right, as Uzael said "speed gain per dollar spent" should be minimised. The FIA have to make spending 10million on a car as effective as spending 100million.

[Monstrobolaxa]

You are right but in the background engine manufacturers can spend millions without the FIA finding out!

[Guest]

Do want to sound repetitive but, if the FIA get the rules right it won't matter how much they spend. They can spend all they want but hopefully it will get them nowhere.

[Guest]

The problem is not that they are spending $400 mil, it is that you need to spend that much to be in the front half of the field. We need regulations that allow a team to spend $90 mil wisely and run for a couple of wins a year.

My proposal: no bargeboards or winglets. Mandate an innefficient wing design. Simplify the differnetials. Possibly standard driveshafts and simpler brakes( carbon, but single piston.) Also, how about exhausts that are regulated. I heard that minardi had several engines break in the past because a standard exhaust costs a little under a mil and should be changed every few races. They have to run them till they break and hope they can get another set.

[GuestAgain]

The problem is not that they are spending $400 mil, it is that you need to spend that much to be in the front half of the field. We need regulations that allow a team to spend $90 mil wisely and run for a couple of wins a year.

I agree. I dont have any proposals as such just that you if regulate everything to nth degree you stiffle inovation. If Team A want to spend $1 billion, thats for them and their sponsors. Inovation does not necessarily cost big bucks. Team B might find an advantage in some inovation which cost virtually nothing (they found some obscure person from some obscure uni, high school or company becos he/she/they/it happened to have a good idea). Or they found a way to achieve the same results as Team A for a fraction of the cost.
The reason why costs need to be cut now is because, for example, all engines must be V10 etc. Why not just say all engines must be max 3L (or 2hp whatever). You are NEVER going to cut cost by making all the equipment (cars, engines, tail planes, ailerons, dashboards, keys whatever) the same. Thats why a 0.001% performance advantage cost mega bucks.
Yes, forbid exotic materials, specify max & min dimensions, power, engine sizes, etc, etc, etc. There's no need to regulate engine config, bolt sizes, helmet design, shoe lace colour etc. (well, thats the way it appears to be going and next they will say all drivers big toe must be x cm).
Something, which for the life of me, I cannot understand is for teams like Minardi or Jordan, every year is a struggle to survive (financially) and yet they keep racing knowing that, as things stand currently, they CANNOT win (and dont tell me its for the love of racing or "Sun shines on a dog's @rse sometimes").

[sharkie17]

ive already proposed a 100 million a year budget to keep things competitive... about 3 months ago on this site... everyone thought it was a dumb idea, but i think its a great one...

[Monstrobolaxa]

Well I never though it was stupid....I had proposed a 50 million limit for privateer teams with a diferent kind of points system....and it was published in Racecar Engineering magazine.