F1's Future Lies in the Industry It Should Be Influencing

FIAT has been in the news quite often, and rarely has it been positive.  In 2010, however, FIAT made news by almost reinventing the engine.  The new two-cylinder engine family made by FPT - Fiat Powertrain Technologies, called TwinAir, debuted in the Fiat 500. This is a brand-new concept on the worldwide auto scene and confirms the leadership of the Fiat Group in this field.  This development has been quite a breakthrough, and other manufacturers are sure to follow.

One must, however ask, had F1 had their input in everyday automobiles, would such technology be introduced earlier?  A few years ago, when BMW was still a F1 participant, the Electric version of the BMW Mini featured KERS; when a California owner of a Mini (as that version of the Mini is available only to garage owning California residents) applied his or her brakes the force absorbed from the braking would convert into a charge that could then be used as a horsepower boost by that driver.  This brilliant technology came from F1.  This fact proves that technology developed in Formula 1 can be applied towards road going car technology. 

KERS is but the latest F1 technology applied to road going cars from F1; paddle shifting, is possibly the most well recognized technology developed in F1 that has trickled down to the everyday car.  Yet KERS should not be the last technology to make that journey.  Formula 1 should once again start making an impact on road going technology; F1’s impact on the everyday driver should go beyond the road safety campaigns. 

Perhaps more importantly Formula 1 needs to go back to being the technological innovator, the pinnacle of motor-sports, and a pusher of the envelope.  Perhaps not all F1 developments will transfer through to road going automobiles, but being a leader in automobile innovation, the pinnacle of motorsports will result in the usable technologies being applied to your Ferrari, Mercedes, Renault, or even Ford.

While engineers, both aero dynamical and mechanical, have been able to work within the ever tighter envelope introduced by the FIA and make innovations, for F1 to really become groundbreaking certain rules must be relaxed.  F1 needs to make changes to what is and is not permitted. 

As the 2011 season is around the corner, changes cannot really be made, for the 2012 or 2013 season F1 should consider making the changes.

FIAT has demonstrated that a smaller engine can be developed, and a 2 cylinder engine can be just as powerful as a 4 cylinder one.  Currently F1’s enforced engine features 8 cylinders.  As of 2007 the engine specification was frozen to keep development costs down. The engines which were used in the 2006 Japanese Grand Prix were used for the 2007 and 2008 seasons and they were limited to 19,000 rpm. In 2009 the limit was reduced to 18,000 rpm with each driver allowed to use a maximum of 8 engines over the season. Any driver needing an additional engine is penalised 10 places on the starting grid for the first race the engine is used. This increases the importance of reliability, although the effect is only seen towards the end of the season. Certain design changes intended to improve engine reliability, for example, may be carried out with permission from the FIA. This has led to some engine manufacturers, notably Ferrari and Mercedes, exploiting this ability by making design changes which not only improve reliability, but also boost engine power output as a side effect.

The FIA has announced the intention to the change the 2.4-litre V8 engines to 1.6 litre straight-4 engines rev limited to 12,000rpm and other energy recovery systems in order to make Formula One more environmentally aware and so attract more commercial partners for 2013. Due to the power outputs mentioned of around 600bhp and the lower engine speeds it is generally assumed that the engines will turbo charged, however, this is not explicitly mentioned in the regulations. However, as it is not stated they must be naturally aspirated either it is possible that other forms of forced induction will be permitted also.

With aerodynamic modifications to cars being eliminated almost entirely from the current F1 development unfreezing the engines and allowing for development would result in more exciting, and perhaps unpredictable sport.  What if for 2012, Adrian Newey developed an even better car than last season’s Red Bull, yet the season would be won by HRT because of Cosworth’s engine breakthrough and development?   Yes, FIA limits the rpm level of the engines; however, what if Cosworth could create an engine that burns far less fuel, hence decrease the amount of fuel required per each race, and essentially make the car lighter and thus faster.  The current rules do not allow for such a scenario, but this could be possible, if the FIA decided to ease their engine rules.  And this technology could also trickle down to the road going cars, because the current theme among automakers is to make a more fuel efficient automobile. 

Modifying the rules of F1 related to its technology is one thing; changing F1 when it comes to its character can have positive and negative results.

In 2010 new teams entered the Formula 1 rink; teams such as HRT, Virgin, Lotus, Mercedes, and even Sauber to an extent were expected to make the sport more exciting.  These teams, with the exception of Mercedes, were small privateer operations that were trying to make a name for themselves in the sport as a result of the falling costs.  Bernie Ecclestone had been excited with the seasons beginning, but by mid season Mr. Ecclestone was quoted as saying that the new teams brought nothing to the sport. 

While getting a team up to competitive levels does take up to 5 years, Bernie was not really wrong.  The teams struggled well beyond the 107% qualifying limit, some such as USF1 racing ruined aspirations and careers, and most interfered in race outcomes on numerous occasions.  It is possible that in 2 years time this experiment with privateer teams will come to a sudden conclusion.  Yes, in the 1960s, and 70s privateer teams proved to be successful, but back then F1 did not limit development as it does now, and the sport was a sport rather than a sport and business.  Moreover F1 cars were built-in sheds and a team could be ran as almost mom and pop shops, rather than massive operations that require wind tunnels, CFD programmers, test drivers, simulators and so much more. One could argue that certain cars in 2010 failed their true potential due to the lack of testing, and Virgin Racing was bound to fail from the get go due to relying on CFD development only. 

When the 2 years have passed, and the F1 grid is yet again composed of the usual subjects, F1 needs to consider three car teams.  The idea of Ferrari, McLaren, or Renault running a third car is very beneficial to the sport and its future.  Running three cars could guarantee fuller grids that are far more competitive than having privateer teams that are minutes away in qualifying time from the pole-sitter.  The very nature of the competition could change as well. The positive side is that competition would get more aggressive as teams would have the opportunity of claiming the entire podium, and running a third car would offer a young driver proper opportunities for success in F1; Bruno Senna could possibly live up to his predicted potential if he was given the chance to pilot a McLaren or Ferrari rather than the HRT.  The negative side of this rule is that a driver such as Alonso could now be promoted two spots rather than one; the championship could possibly lose its excitement as a championship could be decided much quicker than earlier.  Whether positive or negative this change to the rules could guarantee the opportunity for teams to test modifications; hence the third car could be used as a test vehicle for upgrades that a team was considering introducing.

Running that third car does get around the rule limiting in-season testing.  Until such a rule can be introduced F1 teams are limited to running simulations on computers, and as Jody Scheckter has admitted following his test in a McLaren simulator, not even the best simulator can capture the true nature of driving a Formula 1 car on the track. Not every factor can be foreseen by a computer program, regardless how good that computer is, and the very essence, the very feel of the car on track is different.  

F1 must thus decide on its character; F1 must decide how far it will go to be green.  F1 must make the choice if it is worthwhile to reach a specific carbon footprint by completely eliminating testing at the price of its level of competition.  In season testing needs to make a return to F1, as it will give the smaller teams an opportunity to test modifications to their cars ahead of a race, and it will give newer drivers the chance to get more mileage under their belt. 

The engine development goes hand in hand with the drive for re-introduction of the in-season testing; if Renault built an engine that used 2/3 the fuel that Cosworth used in a race distance, then perhaps Renault could be rewarded by the FIA with the opportunity to carry out a test that uses the amount of fuel that was saved in that race vs., what Cosworth used.  This idea could further drive development.  Yet until this idea is even considered time is moving ahead, and F1 needs in-season testing, and it needs to figure out how to bring this back.

Bringing testing back is not something that can be re-introduced overnight.  The final change that should be brought about by F1 is perhaps easier to consider and pass.  As of 2009 F1 cars could be described as more naked, described as more natural; yet while the cars seem overall pretty they have a butter-face.  The cars in 2009 and 2010 resemble snowploughs; the middle, and back sections of the car seem natural, and then in the front sits this wide wing that does not belong.  The people that came up with the current F1 regulations could be geniuses in their field, thus how can they come up with something as ridiculous as the current front wing?  The wider wings are not only awful looking but also tend to pose a risk to a driver’s eventual place at the end of the race.  A driver attempting a pass on another driver could lose his position should the driver defending decide to block him.  In blocking that attacking driver, the wing on attacking driver’s car could break off, thus ending in the loss of the race and potential points.  Robert Kubica mentioned this risk upon seeing the new wings in 2009. 

Steve Matchett recalls an example where a driver came into the pits complaining about a part on the car.  Steve took a spanner and while appearing to make modifications left the F1 car as it had entered the pits.  The driver, having been reassured that the mechanic had listened, and that the issue was addressed, set a much better lap time and praised the car’s performance.  Such is the nature of the F1 drivers; if a driver trusts the car, believes in the car they will conquer the world; as soon as the driver questions even the minute detail the team can bid their race or even season behind.  Hence a driver as good as Robert Kubica questioning the front wings should send a message to the FIA; drivers will become less competitive and less aggressive, they will not take the same risks, fearing that an attempt at a pass may result in a loss of front wing and thus the race.

The wings may look sturdy, however, aerodynamicists will do everything in their power to limit the weight and bulkiness of any part on the car; the weight and size of the parts connecting the wing to the rest of car will be stretched as much as possible so that they do not fall off, but look like they may actually come off. 

Future F1 cars can be designed with narrower wings, yet still maintain or lower down force levels, something that the FIA strives to reach in F1.

In 2009 Jean Todt won the FIA presidency, however having been a long-time supporter of Max Mosley’s rules for F1 he made few if any modifications to F1’s technological development and evolution.  F1 however needs to adapt; examining other technological developments in motorsports or simply the automobile industry F1 must become a factor affecting both the auto sport and the modern car technology.  IT must become the shining beacon, and something that industry and sports leaders look to. 

As F1 strives to reinvent itself the sport will soon come full circle and make the engine the leading character, and it is almost ironic that the Enzo’s oldest quote will apply, “Aerodynamics are for people who can't build engines.”