Newsgroup: it.sport.formula1.moderato
Titolo: [ENG] FIA statement on proposed rule changes from 2008

Source: Motorsport.com F1 News
http://www.motorsport.com/news/article.asp?ID=188723&amp;FS=F1
PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE RULES FOR THE 2008 FIA FORMULA ONE WORLD
CHAMPIONSHIP
Introduction
Traditionally, Formula One rules have been written by the engineers.
Savein very exceptional circumstances, the Concorde Agreement (Clause
7.1)prevents anyone except the team technical directors making technical
rules.This may no longer be the best approach. A better method might be
tospecify what we want the rules to achieve and only then allow the
engineersto make proposals.
The purpose of this note, therefore, is to suggestobjectives together
with some new rules to achieve them.Safety, fairness, keeping the current
six major car manufacturers involved,preserving the independent teams and
ensuring that the public continue toenjoy Formula One are the five
principal challenges for the Formula OneWorld Championship in 2008.
Everyone is agreed on the need for the firsttwo; the last three are more
controversial.
The need to cut costs
On the face of it, costs need to be cut. We have lost two independent
teamsand one major manufacturer in the last three years with no
replacement insight. However, some manufacturers are opposed to any
economy measure whichmight curtail technical exploration. Five of the six
competing carmanufacturers are very large companies. Each assumes it has
the money andtechnical expertise to win the Formula One World
Championship alone or inpartnership with an independent team. Each is
apparently prepared to spendlarge sums to do so.
The manufacturers' dilemma
The problem is that however much money the six manufacturers
collectivelyspend, only one can win, while each season one at least is
going to finishwith cars in 11th and 12th places or worse. Dr Helmut
Panke, ChiefExecutive of BMW, said recently "We are not satisfied with
the sixth andseventh places and we are in intensive discussions on how to
do better".But if all six manufacturers and their twelve cars stay in
Formula One, oneof them will have to be content with sixth or seventh
place each year andtwo or three of the remainder will be even less
successful.
The simple truth is that whether the six manufacturers collectively
spendeuro 1.5 billion or (at the extreme) euro 150 million, the result will be
the same.The one with the cleverest engineers, the best-managed team and
the bestdrivers will win, the others will fail. At the end of the season
and aftereach race, manufacturers' cars will be placed all the way down
to 11th and12th and possibly worse if there are one or two good, fully
independentteams.
But the Championship will look and feel the same whether euro 1.5billion or
(again, at the extreme) euro 150 million is being spent. Indeed itmight be
better with euro 150 million, because the gap between first and lastwould
probably be less. So, arguably, some euro 1.35 billion is beingcompletely
wasted in Formula One each year by the six manufacturers.
Are costs the FIA's business?
Some say this is no concern of the governing body; how the
manufacturersspend their money is their business. But surely it is the
duty of thegoverning body to do what it can to keep all the manufacturers
involved,indeed to try to attract new ones. Manufacturers whose cars
finish in 7th,8th and so on, down to 12th place or below (which means at
least half ourcurrent six manufacturers) are more likely to stay if their
average annualexpenditure is, say, euro 25 million rather than euro 250 million.
A 90% reduction in manufacturers' costs without diminishing the spectacle
ofFormula One would probably be possible, given close and
rationalcollaboration with the manufacturers and teams concerned. But
even withoutsuch collaboration, the FIA must at least reduce costs to
levels whichindependent teams can afford. If we fail, we will lose the
independentteams.
Should costs continue at present levels or, worse, escalate in thenext
ten years at the same rate as the last ten, we risk simultaneouslydriving
out the independent teams and some of the less successfulmanufacturers.
The result would be non-Formula One cars on the grid or,possibly, the
collapse of the Championship.
To be clear, in suggesting a reduction from euro 250 million to euro 25 million,
weare speaking of just the costs to a manufacturer of supplying engines
to asingle team. The cost of running the team must be added to this to
arriveat the total cost of putting the cars on the grid. It is
extraordinary, buttrue, that some manufacturers are spending upwards of
euro 250 million just tosupply engines.
That this could be reduced by 90% or more is evidenced bythe fact that
Cosworth will be able to supply a fully competitive 2006engine for less
than euro 20 million and are even able to supply (to Red Bull)an engine to
race and qualify in the top ten under this year's relativelyfree-spending
rules, for less than one tenth of the expenditure of somemajor
manufacturers. It does not follow that expenditure is necessarymerely
because it is allowed.
A money-spending competition?
Formula One must not be allowed to become a money-spending competition.
Weneed more emphasis on rules which allow a clever but under-funded team
todefeat a less competent but richer rival. It must not be possible
simply tobuy success. This is essential for the survival of fully
independent teamswhich rely on sponsorship and income from the commercial
rights holder.
An independent team will never have the same resources as a team backed
by amajor car manufacturer, but they are nevertheless an essential
element ofFormula One. In addition to being part of the tradition, they
provide anentry point for young drivers and team personnel and bring
colour andinterest to the paddock.
It is probable that rules aimed at keeping all six manufacturers in
theChampionship will also make it possible for the independent teams
tosurvive. Conversely, failure to introduce these rules risks
thesimultaneous loss of the independent teams and some of the
manufacturers.The case for getting costs under control appears strong.
Resistance to cost-cutting
There has been a tendency for well-funded teams to resist
cost-cutting,because the higher the costs, the smaller the number of
teams which aretheir potential competitors. But rules which allow too
steep a slope on thecurve of performance versus expenditure must
eventually result in therichest team dominating and the remainder unable
to compete.
This hashappened in the distant past. If it were allowed to happen today,
FormulaOne would quickly lose its international television audience.
Collapsewould soon follow. Even the best funded teams should support
drasticcost-cutting in order to preserve Formula One in the medium and
longer term.
Formula One has become divorced from reality. If you ask a man in
thestreet how many people devote their entire working lives to putting
twoFormula One cars on the grid 17 times a year, he will probably reply
20 or30, plus maybe some part-timers. The reality is about 300 for a
small teamand up to 1000 for a top team, all full-time employees.
Most of thesehighly skilled and expensive people add nothing to the
spectacle or to thesporting contest. They are working on things which the
public never see andeven enthusiasts are unaware of. Hundreds of talented
people, allduplicating each other's efforts in the different teams, all
to no purpose.It is difficult to justify this on any rational basis.
Dumbing down?
It is sometimes suggested that reducing the scope for expenditure in
FormulaOne reduces its technical interest or "dumbs it down". The
immediatequestion is: reduces its technical interest to whom? It may
fascinate therelevant engineers that by spending millions of Euros they
can build a newgearbox with ratios that are 0.25mm thinner, but no-one
else knows or cares.
There is no additional value for the watching public who, ultimately,
payfor the whole thing. If we eliminate pointless (but very
expensive)engineering exercises, there will still remain huge areas of
technicalinterest, some of which can be directly relevant to automobile
engineering.
For example, a breakthrough in chassis dynamics (more probable with very
lowdownforce) or the reduction of engine internal losses would give a
bigadvantage to the team which made it. It would also be more
generallyrelevant than generating huge levels of downforce or making an
ultra-smallgearbox.
Keeping the public interested
If we manage to control costs and retain a reasonable number of
competingcars, we must also think about the public appeal of Formula One.
Everyoneconsiders themselves an expert on this, but until very recently
there hasbeen no serious attempt to find out what the public think. This
isextraordinary when one remembers that the commercial success of Formula
Onewould disappear overnight if the public were to lose interest. We hope
thatthe survey which the FIA is conducting in conjunction with AMD will
providean insight.
In the meantime we have taken a conventional approach and aimedat (i)
closer racing through a drastic reduction in downforce combined
withsignificantly increased "mechanical" grip; (ii) a more competitive
field byreducing costs and hence the competitive disadvantage of the
smaller teams;(iii) eliminating electronic driver aids to give greater
importance toclassic driver skills. If these objectives are achieved,
Formula One shouldat least be able to maintain its current level of
popularity.
Keeping speeds under control
In addition to containing costs, we hope to contain speeds.
Excessivespeeds in Formula One not only endanger the drivers, they also
causeproblems for the race organisers. This is because increased
speedsnecessitate upgrading circuit safety measures. Safety work
increases theorganisers' costs without producing any additional income.
Indeed movingthe public further away from the action on track, which is
increasinglynecessary for safety reasons, makes spectating less
attractive and risksfurther reducing the organisers' income. This is an
additional reason forrules which restrict the rate of increase in
performance.
A tight schedule
Once matters of principle have been decided, it becomes easier to
writerules. However, not all the manufacturers and teams have joined
thediscussions during the first four months of the year. The FIA
cannotcontinue to wait for proposals, because it is obliged to publish
the 2008Formula One Technical Regulations before the end of 2005.
In practice thismeans the new rules must be finalised by the fourth week
of September forsubmission to the World Motor Sport Council and the FIA
General Assembly atthe end of October. This, in turn, means we can allow
the whole of July forcomments from stakeholders, but final preparation of
the rules must begininternally on 1 August.
Some suggested objectives
We have prepared a first draft of the 2008 rules with the
followingobjectives:
- the rate of increase in performance of the cars should not exceed the
rateof improvement in measures to protect the public, marshals and
competitors;
- the rules and the means of enforcing them should be clear so that
everyonecompetes on the same basis;
- the rules and methods of enforcement must be sufficiently flexible to
dealwith unforeseen technical innovation;
- costs should be contained in order to (i) decrease the likelihood of
amanufacturer leaving after poor results (ii) enable a private team to
becompetitive without the support of a major manufacturer and (iii)
reduce theperformance deficit of the less well-funded teams;
- expensive technology which is invisible to the public and known only to
atiny band of specialist engineers should be eliminated where possible;
- expensive materials or designs should not be used as a substitute for
goodengineering;
- driver aids should be eliminated as far as possible. In particular
theuse of electronic devices should not be allowed to replace driver
skills;
- downforce should be drastically reduced and "mechanical" grip
increasedsubstantially for closer racing.
This, then, has been our approach to 2008. Criticism, constructive
orotherwise, is welcome. All comments received during the July
consultationperiod will be carefully considered when the FIA technical
departmentfinalises its proposals, which it will do in consultation with
those teamsand race organisers which have indicated their intention to
participate inthe Formula One World Championship from 2008 onwards.
We will also takefull account of the results of the FIA/AMD survey of
public opinion. Oncefinalised and approved by the World Motor Sport
Council and FIA GeneralAssembly, the rules must be published before the
end of 2005 as required bythe Concorde Agreement. Thereafter the 2008
technical regulations cannot bechanged without the agreement of everyone
concerned.
Changes for 2009 will still require two years' notice (ie publication
before31.12.2006). Thereafter notice of changes which affect the design
of thecar (sporting or technical) will be announced no later than 30 June
to comeinto force for the next-but-one season (ie a change for 2010 will
beannounced before 30.6.2008).
Summary of the main changes proposed for 2008
ENGINES
- All components of the engine will be controlled by an Electronic
ControlUnit (ECU) which has been manufactured by an FIA designated
supplier to anagreed specification
- The ECU may only be used with FIA approved software and may only
beconnected to the control system wiring loom, sensors and actuators
asspecified by the FIA
- All control sensors, actuators and FIA monitoring sensors will
bespecified and homologated by the FIA
- The control system wiring loom connectivity will be specified by the
FIA
- A 3 litre V10 engine will remain an option for teams unable to obtain
a2.4 litre V8, but subject to similar strict performance limitations as
in2006 and 2007
Reasons
- to eliminate the use of driver aids such as traction control
- as teams will not be able to develop their own ECUs, expenditure
onelectronics will be considerably reduced
- to allow the FIA to check testing mileage and other elements
- to keep engine costs low for the smaller independent teams
GEARBOXES
- All cars will be fitted with gear ratios, final drive ratios
anddifferentials which have been manufactured by an FIA designated
supplier toan agreed specification
- Gear changing will only be permitted by the use of a manually
operatedmechanical linkage to the gearbox
- Clutches will only be operated via a foot pedal connected mechanically
toa release mechanism
Reasons
- to restore control over the clutch and gear changing to the driver
- the use of standard gearbox internals will result in a very
significantreduction in expenditure
BODYWORK
- Downforce will be reduced to approximately 10% of current levels
- Drag will be maintained at current levels
- Overall car width will be increased
- By stipulating maximum and minimum dimensions cars will be "cleaned
up"with devices such as barge boards, flip ups, winglets and other small
add onparts removed
- Total advertising area on the car to remain unchanged
Reasons
- to reduce the reliance upon downforce as a means of improving
performance
- by increasing mechanical grip the likelihood of one car being able
tofollow another closely in corners, and hence be in an attacking
position atthe end of the following straight, will be increased
- eliminating winglets, bargeboards, etc, will reduce costs as well as
thedanger of debris on the circuits
- drag should remain unchanged in order to ensure straight line speeds
donot increase significantly
WHEELS AND TYRES
- Tyres will be supplied by one manufacturer appointed by the FIA after
aninvitation to tender. Such an appointment will be conditional upon :
- a suitable supplier being available ;- a suitable system to ensure tyre
testing is carried out in an equitablemanner ;
- no team being disadvantaged by the appointment of a single
supplier(detailed regulations will be written to ensure this would not be
the case);
- there being no legal impediments during the process of appointing
asupplier
- Slick tyres will be introduced for use in dry weather
- Lower profile tyres will be introduced
- Significantly larger wheels with minimum and maximum sizes stipulated
forfront and rear will be permitted
- Tyre blankets and other heating devices will be prohibited
- All tyre regulations will reside in the Technical Regulations
Reasons
- a single supplier would allow a bigger safety margin
- the absence of competitive tyre testing would reduce costs
- as relatively small differences in tyre compound and construction can
havea significant effect on lap times, a single tyre supplier would
simplyensure that no team would be adversely affected by being contracted
to the"wrong" supplier
- slick tyres would be re-introduced as a part of the low-downforce
andhigh-mechanical-grip package
- lower profile tyres would be introduced in order to give the wheels
andtyres a more modern look and also permit more freedom on brakes
andsuspension
- a ban on tyre heating devices would eliminate this significant
butunnecessary expenditure
CHASSIS
- The minimum height of the centre of gravity of the chassis will
bespecified
- The minimum weight for a chassis will be specified
- Energy of all impact tests will be increased
- Loads for all static tests will be increased
- Side intrusion test requirements will be increased
- Ballast will be reduced to minimal levels
Reasons
- to ensure that weight is distributed throughout the chassis
- the centre of gravity requirement should result in less pure ballast
beingused, the minimum weight will have to be achieved by the
construction of astronger chassis
- by raising the impact test speeds, the static load criteria on
structuressuch as roll hoops and increasing the penetration resistance,
drivers willbe even better protected than they are at present
BRAKES
- All cars will be fitted with brake discs, pads and callipers which
havebeen manufactured by an FIA designated supplier to an agreed
specification
Reason
- to reduce the cost of continual development of new materials and
designs,the FIA specified products will be designed to work on all types
of trackand last an entire Grand Prix weekend
DATA ACQUISITION AND TELEMETRY
- With specific exceptions, any data acquisition system, telemetry system
orassociated sensors additional to those associated with the ECU will
bephysically separate and completely isolated from the control
electronics
- Pit to car telemetry will be prohibited
Reasons
- to ensure that any data acquisition system used by a team cannot
interferewith the FIA specified ECU and sensors
- to ensure teams are unable to send messages to a car and
potentiallyaffect its performance
MATERIALS
- Limitations, similar to those within the 2006 engine regulations, will
beimposed on all parts of the car
Reason- costs will be reduced as research into exotic materials will
beunnecessary
STARTER
- All cars will be equipped with a driver operated starter which is
capableof starting the car without outside assistance a minimum number of
times
Reasons
- to simplify the operation of starting a car, at present it is
massivelycomplex
- to give the driver a chance of starting a car unaided in the event of
itstopping on the track
- to reduce the number of personnel needed at an Event and hence
reducecosts
NOTICE OF CHANGE
- Notice periods for changing the rules will be related to the effect
(ifany) of a change on the design of a car rather than an
artificialdistinction between "sporting" and "technical" regulations.
There will nolonger be a distinction between changes to the engine,
transmission orchassis.
Reason
- to ensure that changes may be made to the regulations in a timely and
morerealistic way
SPARE CARS **
- Spare cars will be prohibited, i.e. no team may have more than
twobuilt-up cars available at an Event at any one time. Spare chassis
will bepermitted but precisely what constitutes a car in this context
will beclearly defined
Reason
- by taking one car less to races teams will be able to save
considerablesums of money as, apart from the cost of the car itself,
fewer personnelwill be needed
TESTING **
- Testing will be limited to 30000km per team between 1st January and
31stDecember, subject to a single tyre supplier being appointed
Reason
- To reduce the enormous amounts of money currently being spent on
testing
CAR ACQUISITION **
- Teams will be free to buy a complete car or any part of a car from
anotherconstructor
- How constructor's points are to be allocated will be clearly defined
afterfurther discussion
Reason
- to enable a team to buy a complete car, or any part of a car, from
anotherconstructor. As a result teams will be able to save considerable
sums ofmoney on the design and development of their cars
** For the purposes of the submission to the World Council these
SportingRegulations will be included as an addendum to the draft
TechnicalRegulations
-fia-
Copyright 1994-2005 Motorsport.com, Inc.
-- 
Automatically gathered from the web
Subscribe/unsubscribe/info at
http://www.grandprixpassion.com/mailman/listinfo/webnews

 another constructor
Questa IMHO č la rivoluzione piů grossa.
Potrebbe aprire un nuovo mercato dove i grossi costruttori possono
vendere i loro gioielli tecnologici. E se il mercato diventa abbastanza
accessibile potrebbero arrivare anche altre scuderie, anche di 'garagisti'.
Se cosě fosse voglio vedere almeno 15 squadre in pista, non max. 12.
-- 
Un Ciao in DO Maggiore!
-=) Sbaturzio (=-

 Se cosě fosse voglio vedere almeno 15 squadre in pista, non max. 12.
Immagino sara' facilissimo convincere gli attuali 10/12 a rinunciare a parte
dei propri introiti, pero' :/
Chissa' se ci potra' essere qualcuno disposto ad entrare anche senza soldi
dei diritti televisivi nella convinzione che i soldi degli sponsor possano
bastare.
Ciao,
Luca

 bastare.
Già adesso mi pare che chi entra, come è stato il caso della Toyota,
anche se rimane entro il numero limite attuale, non partecipi subito alla
divisione della torta dei diritti televisivi. Per i primi anni, in
sostanza, prende molti meno soldi degli altri. O almeno questo veniva
spiegato quando la Toyota è entrata.
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 (o_        Vinci                     registered Linux User #276630
 //\         " Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent "
 V_/_                     Salvor Hardin, Foundation