Significant Cost-Cutting Measures Announced

2009

Engine

Engine life to be doubled. Each driver will use a maximum of eight engines for the season plus four for testing (thus 20 per team).

Limit of 18,000 rpm.

No internal re-tuning. Adjustment to trumpets and injectors only.

The three-race rule voted on 5 November remains in force.

Cost of engines to independent teams will be approximately 50% of 2008 prices.

Unanimous agreement was reached on a list of proposed changes to the Renault engine for 2009; all other engines will remain unchanged. Comparative testing will not be necessary.

Testing

No in-season testing except during race weekend during scheduled practice.

Aerodynamic research

No wind tunnel exceeding 60% scale and 50 metres/sec to be used after 1 January 2009.

A formula to balance wind tunnel-based research against CFD research, if agreed between the teams, will be proposed to the FIA.

Factory activity

Factory closures for six weeks per year, to accord with local laws.

Race weekend

Manpower to be reduced by means of a number of measures, including sharing information on tyres and fuel to eliminate the need for “spotters”.

Sporting spectacle

Market research is being conducted to gauge the public reaction to a number of new ideas, including possible changes to qualifying and a proposal for the substitution of medals for points for the drivers. Proposals will be submitted to the FIA when the results of the market research are known.

Note: It is estimated that these changes for 2009 will save the manufacturer teams approximately 30% of their budgets compared to 2008, while the savings for independent teams will be even greater.

2010

Power train

Engines will be available to the independent teams for less than €5 million per team per season. These will either come from an independent supplier or be supplied by the manufacturer teams backed by guarantees of continuity. If an independent supplier, the deal will be signed no later than 20 December 2008.
This same engine will continue to be used in 2011 and 2012 (thus no new engine for 2011).

Subject to confirmation of practicability, the same transmission will be used by all teams.

Chassis

A list of all elements of the chassis will be prepared and a decision taken in respect of each element as to whether or not it will remain a performance differentiator (competitive element).

Some elements which remain performance differentiators will be homologated for the season.

Some elements will remain performance differentiators, but use inexpensive materials.

Elements which are not performance differentiators will be prescriptive and be obtained or manufactured in the most economical possible way.

Race weekend

Standardised radio and telemetry systems.

Ban on tyre warmers.

Ban on mechanical purging of tyres.

Ban on refuelling.

Possible reduction in race distance or duration (proposal to follow market research).

Factory activity

Further restrictions on aerodynamic research.

Ban on tyre force rigs (other than vertical force rigs).

Full analysis of factory facilities with a view to proposing further restrictions on facilities.

Longer term

The FIA and FOTA will study the possibility of an entirely new power train for 2013 based on energy efficiency (obtaining more work from less energy consumed). Rules to be framed so as to ensure that research and development of such a power train would make a real contribution to energy-efficient road transport.

An enhanced Kinetic Energy Recovery System (KERS) system is likely to be a very significant element of an energy-efficient power train in the future. In the short term, KERS is part of the 2009 regulations, but is not compulsory. For 2010 FOTA is considering proposals for a standard KERS system. The FIA awaits proposals.

A number of further amendments were adopted for the 2009 and 2010 Sporting and Technical Regulations.


---------------------------


looks quite good. as mentioned yesterday, they seem to have focused on creating a 'new' f1 with the same basic DNA. this should definitely encourage some more independent teams, in particular those considering buying Honda. if they plan to ban refuelling i suppose the races will be much shorter, which i don't agree with. i think the race format and points system is pretty much fine - and they don't have to change everything, do they...

---

X (@ed24f1)



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/12/2008 02:55PM by SchueyFan.

All looks promising, particularly the ban on refuelling in 2010.

---

Its good too see them being drastic and keeping to their plans, not cutting corners on this etc, better for F1 inb the long run making the sport more financially stable with these measures

I like the great majority of it.

I only don't like the idea of the medals though and the shortening of the races. I'd rather see them lengthened, because cars are becoming faster and faster, so laptimes are going down, which means shorter races (in time). With all the new rules though, I don't know how much slower the cars will be.

one problem with these changes is, that as it is so drastic and set out over a long period of time, what happens if the economic landscape turns around fully by 2010 or 2011? will they continue with this, or will they be pushed aside, and the teams budgets start to balloon again...

---

X (@ed24f1)

I hate all of this.

I'm in the minority that was hoping F1 would eventually turn into Wipeout HD.

Yes it's all very responsible, but who gives a rats?

Well if the costs keep rising, then there may be more teams pulling out, until there are so few teams that a F1 race would be a farce.

Yes, it's all very responsible.

It's also very 1970's, which is about the era of Prime Time for the blokes who are calling the shots.

I don't consider regression a positive.

I might be wrong. It's just my gut reaction.

Nickv Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I like the great majority of it.
>
> I only don't like the idea of the medals though
> and the shortening of the races.

Agreed with that.

Surprised they managed to force through the in-season testing ban for 2009 though. I'd have thought some teams will have already scheduled updates and ideas around the schedule. Only real concern regarding that is that if a team is dominant from the start of the year, other teams are going to have to be brave and bring components not track tested to an event. Obviously a good idea, but I think some seasons will have had the sheen taken off of them (for instance 1997 and 1998 would likely have been a walk in the park for Williams and McLaren respectably, whereas in the end it went down to the wire in all 3).

I'm gutted with the majority of these rules.

I've been asking for a refuelling ban since 1994 Hockenheim incident with Jos Verstappen's Benetton, so that's the only good thing in these new rules.

I seriously hope that they dont even try to put the stupid medals system. Its s#(te.

18,000 RPM lmfao... It will only improve engine reliability I guess.

They're being so anal retentive with these engine rules, ffs, let them be as powerful as they want it to be!

I didn't understood what they want to do with the chassis for 2010 though. No idea of wtf they're talking about in this aspect.

Standardised radio and telemetry systems. FFS... so the teams cannot use their preferred system to read their data? Its like forcing GPG forum users to visit the forum using IExplorer only... bollocks.

Ban on tyre warmers. I can see drivers complaining like hell about this ban, FIA wanted to ban it in 2009, drivers moaned and it was back. tyre warmers are there for SAFETY reasons, I want to see who will be the first driver to suffer from that after a Safety Car restart.

Ban on mechanical purging of tyres. (WTF is that?)

Ban on refuelling. (Good!)

Possible reduction in race distance or duration (proposal to follow market research). (Not Good!)

---

yes, that's a good point. it will be hard for teams to catch up. this means that teams will start focusing on the following year's car even earlier; either as they are having a bad year, or know that teams behind them can't catch up

---

X (@ed24f1)

If they want to reduce costs, why not giving a limit for the annual budget? that is veeeeery simple.

Thanks GP3Hotlaps

but veeeeery hard to police

---

X (@ed24f1)

Bruninho Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ban on tyre warmers. I can see drivers complaining
> like hell about this ban, FIA wanted to ban it in
> 2009, drivers moaned and it was back. tyre warmers
> are there for SAFETY reasons, I want to see who
> will be the first driver to suffer from that after
> a Safety Car restart.

I disagree with the majority of what you've said (no shocks there then), but this I find... odd. Indycar had/have had (presume it's still in) this for years. You don't get cars ploughing off the track because of them. Just drivers struggling to match the pace of an otherwise matched car for a few corners. It will provide more excitement in close races, and in no way through any falsifying the sport. It will give the drivers more to think about, and more to work to do out of the pits. I can't see how that is a bad thing.


Anyway. Main point on the subject. WTF has this got to do with safety cars? They don't exactly press a button on the dash labelled "IMMEDIATE TYRE BLANKETS" prior to going green....


And I'm 99.99% sure it's not what killed Senna, if that's what you're referring to, but I'll not be replying to any reply on that, as it'll just go way off topic. I'm more than happy to discuss it in another thread about tyre warming if you want.

I'm not liking this... Damn this economic climate. Its bloody changing everything.

Bruninho Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> 18,000 RPM lmfao... It will only improve engine
> reliability I guess.

what is the difference to a tv viewer if it 18 or 19,000rpm? nothing is the answer. will improve reliability and save money so thumbs up.


> They're being so anal retentive with these engine
> rules, ffs, let them be as powerful as they want
> it to be!

Duh... NO, it is a cost-cutting measure. i suppose you support the use of qualifying engines too? it will save heaps of money and keep your favourite sport alive, and as you saw with the switch from v10 to v8, even if their is a loss of power, can you tell as a tv viewer? they are still bloody fast.

>
> Standardised radio and telemetry systems. FFS...
> so the teams cannot use their preferred system to
> read their data? Its like forcing GPG forum users
> to visit the forum using IExplorer only...
> bollocks.

Its not like that at all, it is an aspect of the sport that can easily standardised to keep costs down, and wont affect the performance of the cars in anyway.

>
> Ban on tyre warmers. I can see drivers complaining
> like hell about this ban, FIA wanted to ban it in
> 2009, drivers moaned and it was back. tyre warmers
> are there for SAFETY reasons, I want to see who
> will be the first driver to suffer from that after
> a Safety Car restart.

If they complain then they are crap drivers without enough skill to warm up the tyres. This will actually bring the better drivers to the fore, as driver skill will see some drivers making up time over others in the 2 or 3 laps the tyres are warming up. If they crash out, its there fault for not being able to adapt to changing conditions. and it will make for more exciting racing. do you really want f1 cars that monkeys can drive?

Im really gutted. Alot of people i know will be losing thier jobs. Drastic or what?

---

@gav: I do get your point but its a bad thing for me. At least from a safety point of view. Drivers will struggle to get them up to the temperature in the very first few laps while chasing their rivals in pursuits that could end in a very bad way.

---

Reducing the revs to 18k is pushing my patience for F1 as the technical forefront of motorsport. Anybody else spot the ban on refuelling?

---

Everyone knows that million-to-one chances happen 9 times out of 10; indeed, it's a common requirement in fairy tales. If the human didn't have to overcome huge odds, what would be the point? Terry Pratchett - The Science Of Discworld

GPGSL S5 Race driver for IED.

@dkpioe:

what is the difference to a tv viewer if it 18 or 19,000rpm? nothing is the answer. will improve reliability and save money so thumbs up.

The engines wont sound as powerful as they are meant to be - c'mon, that's Formula One, the pinnacle of the motorsport. Go search on youtube for a Marlboro McLaren Honda V12 @ Spa to see what I mean. Amazing sound, power.


Duh... NO, it is a cost-cutting measure. i suppose you support the use of qualifying engines too? it will save heaps of money and keep your favourite sport alive, and as you saw with the switch from v10 to v8, even if their is a loss of power, can you tell as a tv viewer? they are still bloody fast.

I dont care about cost-cutting, in fact i criticize the exaggerated ways that they're going to do in order to cut costs down.

I do support the use of qual engines like in the gold 80's years. What's wrong with that? Qualifying was meant to be about who's the fastest over the course of a lap.

OFC I CAN TELL AS A TV VIEWER THE DIFFERENCE OF AN ENGINE SOUND BETWEEN THE CARS! At least, since i've got a cochlear implant in 2007 that brought my hearing back after 20 years struggling with my deafness, just when I am doing shitloads of improvements in my hearing capabilities - i can now tell the difference between a Honda, a Merc and a Renault engine - now they just dont sound as much beautiful as they were used to be. Just when I am finally able to hear properly a Formula One car, they take that fun from me? ffs.

---

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/12/2008 06:07PM by Bruninho.