sport, evolving to a decision that we should introduce a budget cap,
which was overseen by ex-Mercedes Financial Director NigelKerr,
and that alongside this we needed revised technical and sporting
regulations that encouraged financial efficiency.
On the technical side our starting pointwas to identify what
the mainperf ormance differentiatorsshould be. Even witha
simplification of regulations and the imposition of a budget cap we
wanted to avoid the situation where huge spending on minutiae
would yield performance, as we were sure that any initial budget cap
would only affectthe top teams. The finalfigure arrived at of $175m- which only applies tooperational design,devel opment and racing
activities – is stillprobably double that spent
by the midfield teams. Theperformance
differentiators we decided on needed
to contain spending on things that add
nothing to the sport, while at the same time
ensuring enough technical
differentiation remainsto
ensu re meritocracyyields
success. Weeven tually boiled
it down to three key areas.
The first one where we
felt techni cal excellence
should be rewarded was the
power unit. F1 has a long
history of introducing new
technologies to engines and
since 2014 has championed
the plug-in hybrid with remarkable
success. Unfortunately, it had also led
to the current engine being incredibly
complex (as well as heavy) and we hoped
that some simplification mightencourage
new manufacturers intoF1. When it
became obvious this would not be the case
we accededto the wishes of the existing
manufacturers and made some very minor
cost-saving changes instead.
We feltthe second performance
differentiator should be suspension design.
Or, to be more exact, vehicle dynamics
and the waythe car uses itstyres for both
maximum qualifying performance and
longevity during a race. Again there was
a desire to simplify things and a simple
active suspension system was even
considered. Ultimately it was rejected for
fear it wou ld lead teams to develop very
INSIDER
PATSYMONDS
UNDER
THE
HOOD
ItmaynothavedeliveredBrexit to the UK
population, thereby removing some uncertainty
from the nationalpolitical scene, but 31 October
2019 did deliver a set of Formula 1 regulations
for 2021 which clarified, to some extent, the
ever-murky F1 political scene.
The 2021regula tions themselves are now in the
public domain, butthe st ory behind them isless
well known. As someone deeply involved in the
gestation of them I will attempt to fill in some of
these details over the next few issues.
The story startswith Liberty Media’s purchase
of the commercial rights to the sport in September
- This resulted a sea change in attitude, with
a much more long-term view of the development
of the sport as a business than had been the case
under the previous ownership. A major part of
the plan was persuading Ross Brawn to oversee
a new motorsport group within Formula One
Management (FOM). This group wouldengagea
selection of experienced F1 personnel to study all
aspects of the sport, with a viewto puttingthe fans
first and unleashing the greatest racing spectacle
on the planet. In turn, Ross persuaded me to set up
the engineering side of things.
Of course, Liberty Media only bought the
commercial rights and so any desire to change
regulations had to be done with the full
cooperation of the FIA, since it is onlythe FIA
that can actually publish and policethe ru les.
Fortunately theF1 group maintained a very good
working relationshipwith the FIA, and so we were
able to apply resource to help it investigate new
regulations in a scientific manner. This resource
was something the FIA had lacked previously.
Our early discussions covered all aspects of theTHE STORY
BEHIND F1’S
NEW RULES
PICTURES:SHUTTERSTOCK;MARK SUTTON.ILLUSTRATION:BENJAMINWACHENJE@F1Racing_mag
facebook.com/
f1racingmagPICTURES24 F1 RACING JANUARY 2020
It’sbeenalongroad
butthe2021Formula1
regulationchangesfi nally
brokecoveron31October