Autocar - First for car news and reviews

Casanova June 1, 2009 1:12 PM

If the FIA has more applicants than places, then surely it is not going to consider conditional entries over unconditional ones, which could herald a shakeup and the exclusion of some established outfits.

It would be interesting to know if the selection criteria the FIA use are at all formalised, and transparent?  Or will it be playground politics - choices based on who Max likes and doesn't like this week...?

RacingPuma June 1, 2009 2:28 PM

Sadly, it is looking like the positions of FOTA and the FIA are becoming entrenched.

If only they would step  back and take a deep breath, they might see that their hopes and aspirations for F1 aren’t that different.

Despite the fact that F1 grids are closer than they ever have been, it is still very difficult for a £70m team (Force India) to score a single point in a season.  Grids have fallen from 26 cars to 20 and may fall further without changes.

Ultimately, what all sides want is

26 car grids.

£40m budget teams to be competitive (but not artificially dominant).

Exciting racing for spectators.

A combination of unpredictability in individual races but the best team ultimately winning the championship.

Profitability for all teams.

The trouble with the FOTA proposals is that they don’t go far enough to make a £40m team genuinely competitive.  

The trouble with the FIA proposals is that a budget cap is impossible to police fairly.  

Is the championship result going to be declared 2 months after the last race, when the accountants have done their audits?  

Is a team which already has it’s own wind tunnel or test track going to be saddled with it’s full costs even if they can hardly use it?  Or if they rent it out profitably, will that allow them to spend the extra income?  

Will the new teams have to lease all their equipment to avoid the full purchase cost coming out of the Year 1 budget?

The Solution?

Broadly, the FOTA cost cutting proposals with some extra cuts - e.g. standard front wings and mirrors to avoid excessive minor aero tweaks. Using cheaper materials in certain areas e.g. Tegris rather than carbon fibre for a standard front wing.

Different race formats at different GPs and a wider variety of tracks to mix up the results a bit e.g. 2 short half points races at some GPs, a couple more circuits as slow as Monaco but with runoffs.

I just hope common sense will ultimately prevail.

404notfound June 1, 2009 7:20 PM

I'm going to stick my neck out and vote that Mosley will indeed go nuclear.  I reckon they want fresh blood and lower budgets.  I'm going to guess Ferrari and others will be ousted.  And who do we think Mosley will vote for in the EU elections on Thursday?  Ooh, too easy.

kdwilcox June 1, 2009 7:55 PM

404notfound i think you may well have a point,but,the the one that will be kicked out will be Toyota.

They want to go any way,so no fuss,Mosley can then think thats he's the hard man,joke,stupid yes hard no.

He dare not touch Ferrari,and every one knows it!!!!!.

As for the idea that there should be run offs at Monaco,is this a joke or what.

Some one has not been to Monaco,had they been thay would not make daft remarkes like that,my god!!!!!!.

kd

404notfound June 1, 2009 8:38 PM

Well they would be the world's most expensive run offs.  Knock a few blocks of apartments down - should be what, £50 billion?

RacingPuma June 2, 2009 8:13 AM

@kdwilcox

Can I suggest that you actually read comments before slagging them off.

I did NOT suggest runoffs at Monaco.

What I actually said was

"more circuits as slow as Monaco but with runoffs"

i.e. There should be a greater variety of tracks in the F1 championship, including more slow tracks, but without the problems of the Monaco track.

Peter Cavellini June 2, 2009 11:00 AM

YES,yes,and yes!

For to long have the bullies in the playground ran F1 too suit themselves,now that the playing field is not so steep they don't like it!.If the big teams don't like it,go do something else!.It's like MP's expenses,now that budgets are going to be reduced,more transparent and that we the public are watching more closely,they're not going to be able too spend they're way to the top.

404notfound June 2, 2009 5:05 PM

Peter, you do get what Ferrari are saying though, do you?  What insanity would it be to have two levels of contributors: one who spends £40 million and can have all manner of mods, and one who spends £140 million but must obey the modification rules?  I can see both sides of the argument, but all the teams have to agree, otherwise it's dictatorship.  Strange that, coming from Mosley.

kdwilcox June 2, 2009 7:11 PM

Racing puma i am very sorry,it would seem that i misread your e mail,my mistake.

kd.

RacingPuma June 2, 2009 8:34 PM

@kdwilcox

apology accepted

No problem