Bob Barnard Track Engineering

In this month’s Motor Sport Mark Hughes provides a view on what should change with the current F1. It occurred to me that with the asking price for the current F1 being around $10bn, when CVC decide to sell, it would be much cheaper just to start your own. What would it cost? $2bn?

Here in the US it is a time honored tradition that if you do not like something you start your own. Banks, churches, and yes even IRL. So, with John Malone reportedly interested in buying F1 I thought why can’t he just start his own? He has the money and the media, so what else would he need?

FIA Approval: If you are going to run an International Series you need FIA approval, but that is not hard to get. Look at Formula E just starting up. The FIA don’t really care as long as they get a cut and some say in the running. You could not use Formula One of course, but so what. With a good promotional plan you can sell anything.

Tracks: Thanks to Bernie and CVC there are loads of tracks that can no longer afford F1. The real fans would love to see a series that goes back to some, and races on real tracks not “Tilkedromes.” You could go back to my first track in Adelaide. It is still used and a reasonable fee would have kept the F1 there, so price it right and there you go. Same with France, who started this, Indy in the US or a street race, India now has a track available, as does Turkey. Imola in Italy, any of the Spanish tracks, they are all FIA Level 1, and maybe even Valencia would like it at the right price. Japan has Fuji and China Zuhai. We would need a South American leg, and we are starting to get a decent calendar. In England the Circuit of Wales is being built to Level 1 standard, but does not want F1. And I am sure some of the existing tracks would come over at the end of their Bernie contract.

Drivers: As with circuits there are a lot of very good drivers who cannot make it to F1 because of the existing business model and some who made it and could not stay. Paul Di Resta and Nick Heidfeld for just two, and I bet for every Kevin Magnussen there are ten guys who could not afford to pay for drives to get there. We need to find them early and provide a path based on talent. A sort of Red Bull scheme but managed by the series. Who knows, we might even have an American driver succeeding.

Cars: There are very good designers currently not in F1 that could provide a specification for the car. Gordon Murray and Gary Anderson for two. They still need to be a high tech vehicle, and certainly not a spec series, but more open to get back to the Can-Am and early F1 rule books that allowed ingenuity to be rewarded. Costs are always a factor, but with money staying in the series and being shared equitably then the teams would have the money they need.

Teams: As with all of this there are would-be F1 teams who just know they could not survive. Just look at how HRT, Caterham and Murussia have struggled. There should be some basis for rewarding success, but Bernie’s formula is a recipe to fail for any new team. Do you think Gene Haas would rather invest in a more equitable series? There are plenty of very good teams in GP2, GP3, European F3 and FR3.5 who could step up with the right balance of reward to investment.

TV: There are no shortage of specialist sports and motorsport TV channels to provide world wide coverage. With more reasonable fees I am sure with John Malone’s connections he could arrange for the series to develop a following.

So, a word used here a lot is equitable. There are business models that share the wealth. NASCAR does a good job, and so do the NFL and MLB. Yes the investor needs a return, but so do the other investors who built tracks, cars and careers. The current business model of F1 is fatally flawed, so who would risk $10bn to buy it? Bernie is talking about retiring so who do we get then, a suit? We need a series promoter who actually does reinvest in the promotion of the sport year round to support the individual track promoters, build a renewable base of stars, and listen to their fan base, not their pockets.  

You have to be sorry for the young guns coming into F1 at the moment, it is like a revolving door. With the ban on testing they get no seat time before being thrown in at the deep end, and then if they do not perform straight away they are tossed out in favor of the next rising star with a bag full of money. Di Grassi is the latest that looks to be headed that way with D'Ambrosio getting to practice in the Virgin and reportedly bringing $5m with him to do it. Is this getting to be IRL? Seriously, Jerome is a very good young driver, but how long is he going to have to prove himself? This is getting ridiculous. HRT had Chandook and Senna, then "look at the size of my wallet" Yamamoto turns up, and now Christian Klein is in the car, with or without a sponsor? Petrov took over from Grosjean, who was supposed to be the next great French driver, and now he is under threat. As Steve Matchett said during this mornings practice from Singapore, how can a team set up a car when there is no continuity?

Let's compare the approach of Lotus, under whatever name combination. Tony Fernandes goes out and hires Mike Gascoyne, Trulli and Kovalainen, and puts a decent car together. Rehires the drivers for next year, no messing about with rent-a-rides, and moves from Cosworth power to Renault. Tony is obviously very serious about being a long term success and putting his money where his mouth is. Compare that with his airline rival, Sir Richard Branson, who owns Virgin. Puts a team together on the cheap, yes they have some experienced people from racing, but not the top of F1. Yes he has Glock, but where else was he going to go, and now more young guys. You do not get the feeling he is totally committed to this do you?

As I may have mentioned a while ago I was approached by the Singapore GP to put in a bid to redesign some of the corners to improve overtaking. Well, they decided they did not need my expertise, or maybe it was my cost to do it? Anyway, they have fiddled while Rome burned, a few bumps removed here, pit lane lowered half an inch? They changed that stupid chicane, something Hamilton and I both agree on, and made it worse! That chicane just turns the track into a one line track, so most of the problem with lack of overtaking is in the corners leading up to one where there is an opportunity, because you cannot get close enough. Instead of messing about with a Government style "request for a quote" they should have given all the respected track designers a stipend to come up with alternatives and then pick what looks the best to be refined. That way they would get a lot of different ideas, not just one.  But who asked my opinion?

Rain continues to be a threat, not while they are racing, as it seems to be a typical tropical 4pm shower, but because the track does not dry, or worse, does not dry evenly.

Unfortunately everyone seems in love with Singapore for the wrong reasons, just like Abu Dhabi. It's not about the backdrop, or the celebrities, or the rock and roll show, it's the racing stupid! This track has yet to show us it can deliver on that score.