http://www.crash.net/f1/news/148933/1/entertainment_classic_tracks_on_fota_agenda.html

Finally some common sense emerges from the realm of the ridiculously extravagant. I'm pleased to see that even FOTA are determined to balance the F1 budget.

OTHER GOOD NEWS:

FOTA are still planning to pursue more races at familiar locations. Maybe there's hope for a US GP yet.

KERS is getting scrapped.

Factories may start running 3 cars

BAD NEWS:

They might take a "fresh" approach to scoring

Good to see that FOTA (or at least Luca) have a few coherent ideas as to how to improve viewership and recapture F1's lost luster. I still think they've got to do something about the engine freeze. Back in the 3.5 era, tons of manufacturers participated and all of them built different engines with different power characteristics. If F1 had more engine suppliers it would be easy for new teams to join.

Luca also reveals that FOTA/FOM/FIA are keeping the refueling ban for 2010. If F1 cars really get 100km/75L then race distance will need to be cut in half to avoid a major redesign of the cars.

With everyone on roughly the same fuel load and the same tires, the pits are going to be a war zone.

thewon4 - 26 June 2009 06:08 AM

Luca also reveals that FOTA/FOM/FIA are keeping the refueling ban for 2010. If F1 cars really get 100km/75L then race distance will need to be cut in half to avoid a major redesign of the cars.

God I hope not. It's bad enough that it only takes an hour and a half to run a Grand Prix. If I paid almost a thousand dollars over a weekend, I'd be mighty miffed if the race only lasted 45 minutes. That's what GP2 is for.

They'll design the cars taking into account that they will have no refuelling. Besides, likes it been pointed out before, teams design 100% new cars every year regardless of whether there is rules stability or not.

Joe A.

BullittStang - 26 June 2009 06:42 AM

thewon4 - 26 June 2009 06:08 AM

Luca also reveals that FOTA/FOM/FIA are keeping the refueling ban for 2010. If F1 cars really get 100km/75L then race distance will need to be cut in half to avoid a major redesign of the cars.

God I hope not. It's bad enough that it only takes an hour and a half to run a Grand Prix. If I paid almost a thousand dollars over a weekend, I'd be mighty miffed if the race only lasted 45 minutes. That's what GP2 is for.

They'll design the cars taking into account that they will have no refuelling. Besides, likes it been pointed out before, teams design 100% new cars every year regardless of whether there is rules stability or not.

Joe A.

Ross Brawn has already got designs for a 2010 car with much larger fuel tanks, probably around 150L, and has been aero testing on it. I suspect the other FOTA members are also beginning their 2010 designs already or soon.

FOTA have been pushing for shorter races since the start of the year, they seem to think its what fans want based on a survey they conducted last year. Problem is I've yet to see a fan that wants shorter races?

When FOTA originally announced it, it was worked out that a race at Monza would be less than an hour long under the shortened length FOTA proposed.

How can you have the same rules for 2010 and then add a refueling ban at the same time? Obviously you'll have to redesign the car for that Buick sized fuel cell. This is just another recipe for boring racing.

11110001 - 26 June 2009 10:08 AM

How can you have the same rules for 2010 and then add a refueling ban at the same time? Obviously you'll have to redesign the car for that Buick sized fuel cell. This is just another recipe for boring racing.

They won't be running the same fuel loads as this year, they will have larger tanks to give them more than enough fuel to make it to the end.

They managed it Pre-1994 so why woudn't they be able to now?

Racing was also a great deal better before refueling, it was very noticeable watching at the time that the racing wasn't as good in 1994 as it had been in the years prior because they started using strategy rather than racing. Pre-1994 if you wanted to pass, you had to do it on track, when refueling came back in 1994 you didn't because you just had to sit behind & pass him in the pits.

With refueling banned next year I guarantee the racing will be a lot better.

We did lots of things per 1994, doesn't mean it was all that great. Technology does evolve and so should F1.

No redesign my arse, larger tanks means more ballast. They'll have to redesign the car. Heck they can't even add or remove KERS today without upsetting the ballast. At least today with fuel and tires they have multiple strategies, were just dumbing down the racing again.

I'm all for shorter races. Lengthening the races will not improve the quality of the show, but it will increase wear on the cars.

thewon4 - 26 June 2009 10:39 AM

I'm all for shorter races. Lengthening the races will not improve the quality of the show, but it will increase wear on the cars.

Have you ever paid for flights, hotels, meals, rental cars and tickets to attend a race?

All the years I did, I found the races to be over much too quickly.

No joke. If the drive to the airport is longer than the race, why not watch it on television?

Two hours should be the minimum time for a race. I want time to be able to visit a couple different corners. And the quality of the show has nothing to do with the length of the race. If the drivers are passing every lap, there are never enough laps. Only when you have a no-passing parade is the race boring, eventually.

The only people who really want shorter races? The TV networks, who want to shoehorn the show into their regular schedules, and the people who only watch racing on TV, and don't want to miss their normally scheduled programs. People who like racing can never get enough.

CerinoDevoti - 26 June 2009 10:51 AM

thewon4 - 26 June 2009 10:39 AM

I'm all for shorter races. Lengthening the races will not improve the quality of the show, but it will increase wear on the cars.

Have you ever paid for flights, hotels, meals, rental cars and tickets to attend a race?

All the years I did, I found the races to be over much too quickly.

Yep. The FIA will need to improve the support events.

And yes, I've driven much much farther than F1 race distance just to see a race. 2 hours at Indy was 1 hour too long for me.

If the race had been on a road course in a warm sunny southern state, I would probably have wanted more time.