From this day forth.....

[ADx_Wales]

.....ANYONE who says:

Theres no overtaking in F1
F1 is Boring
Schumachers going to be good this year
Hamilton is going to be good this year

Knows NOTHIING about F1

ABSOLUTELY NOTHING

[thehemogoblin]

.....ANYONE who says:

Theres no overtaking in F1
F1 is Boring
Schumachers going to be good this year
Hamilton is going to be good this year

Knows NOTHIING about F1

ABSOLUTELY NOTHING

After about lap 20, there was more Trulli Train than overtaking. F1 still requires rain for there to be passing.

[Ross Prawn]

Theres no overtaking in F1, when its dry.
F1 is Boring, on Tilke tracks
Schumachers going to be good this year, eventually
Hamilton is going to be good this year. He was. Poor strategy though

Knows NOTHIING about F1

ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

[Mister Fungus]

I'd rather say OP knows nothing about F1, yes.

Hamilton being 2 seconds a lap faster than Alonso and not being able to overtake, says it all really.

Great race, nonetheless.

[danardif1]

I'd rather say OP knows nothing about F1, yes.

Hamilton being 2 seconds a lap faster than Alonso and not being able to overtake, says it all really.

Great race, nonetheless.

I think Hamilton had zapped his tyres by that point anyway, and both Ferrari's were hanging on to those frankly shot tyres quite well... Lewis had his chances too, but like Brundle said he needed to wait through T1 and 2 and prepare the car for T3, rather than having a look in T1 and then losing ground down the straight...

[Tealy]

I still think Hamilton would have had Alonso if Webber hadn't taken him out but at least were seeing drivers take risks now. I think this season has quite a bit to offer and all we need now is to reduce the following distance in "dirty air".

[TomWazzleshaw]

...and all we need now is to reduce the following distance in "dirty air".

Which I presume can easily be done by removing the Double Deck Diffusers

[AndreaModa]

my bad, double post...

[AndreaModa]

.....ANYONE who says:

Theres no overtaking in F1
F1 is Boring
Schumachers going to be good this year
Hamilton is going to be good this year

Knows NOTHIING about F1

ABSOLUTELY NOTHING

Oh dear...

The first two I'll grant you, but every season has crap races, it just turned out that this year it was the first race. Everyone was conservative in Bahrain, not knowing how the race would pan out, plus combined with an awful circuit that has no justification of being on the calender. It's not even in a particularly prosperous country like Abu Dhabi. The sooner we get some decent tracks back on the calender the better.

Third, Schumacher has had two bad races, I criticised him in the ROTR thread, and he did have a pretty bad race, but it was much more positive than Bahrain where his finishing position disguised a bad weekend for him and the team. Merc called him in early to see if pitting for a second set of slicks would be beneficial to Rosberg so his race was more about his continued acclimatisation with the car. A couple more races and he should be up there, without the contact in the first corner, he would have been in Australia anyway, he got a very good start.

Finally Hamilton had a blinder of a race with some outstanding overtaking manouvers that may well end up being some of the best all season, especially the one on Rosberg around turn 11. Shame the yellows caused by Vettel prematurely ended what may have been a titanic scrap between him and Rosberg as the German would have had him on the brakes into 13. His tactical side leaves much to be desired with him seemingly having to rely on his crew to call the shots, but he is still quite clearly one of the most talented men in the field. Without Webber punting him off, he might have had a real shot at a podium in the last couple of laps.

[fjackdaw]

.....ANYONE who says:

Theres no overtaking in F1
F1 is Boring
Schumachers going to be good this year
Hamilton is going to be good this year

Knows NOTHIING about F1

ABSOLUTELY NOTHING

I think it's ADx_Wales who knows ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about F1. A bad strategy call and getting punted off by Mark Webber ruined Hamilton's day, but otherwise he drove a very exciting and aggressive race. I'm not a fan, but he's going to do great things this season, for sure.

Schumacher has competed in two races so far, we just don't know how the next 17 races will pan out for him. He's been away for three years, I sense he's just warming up.

Bahrain was a dry race on a boring track, Australia was a damp race on a good track, so it's too soon to call on overtaking/excitement quite yet. However, it was ominous that Hamilton, mega-quick on relatively fresh tires, just couldn't do anything about the struggling Ferraris. In the context of this race, it was just the tense exciting climax we needed, but I sense that if the race had been dry, we might have quickly got bored of these aero-trains throughout the duration.

[ADx_Wales]

Its the first time that a driver has won consecutive GPs in a specific nation (Jenson in Brawn '09 and McLaren '10) since Fernando Alonso (Monaco '06 with Renault and then '07 with McLaren)

In the 07 race it was the first sign of the rift between Hamilton and Alonso as Lewis was instructed to not challenge for the lead, which is understandable because its Monaco, but it would have been a good spectacle to see a Senna Mansell style duel right to the very end.

Senna and Mansell have had various duels in the past, most iconically the side-by-side image of the two heading down the Barcelona main straight, which may or may not have happened with the new STUPID chicane to "aid overtaking".

That was probably the only time the Barcelona race was ever exciting, maybe 92 in the rain, maybe even 97 when Olivier Panis managed to get up to 2nd on Bridgestone tyres, the first season the Bridgestone Tyre company were involved, and as we all know 2010 is their last year.

Kumho and Hankook have been rumoured to have taken interest in taking up the mantle of being Tyre suppliers for the future F1 seasons, it would be a boost for either Asian tyre manufacturer because they arent really known to the general road using public, who are more likely to see a Michelin tyre banner somewhere near the roadside.

As we all know Michelin pulled out in 2006, but they are mostly infamous for their demand to stop the 7 teams and 14 drivers from attempting to race around the Road Course at Indianapolis in 2005 due to a weakened side wall on all their tyres, which may or may not have primarily been down to a change of asphalt on the Oval part of the course, Bridgestone on the other hand were ready thanks to their communications with affiliate Firestone, who supply tyres to NASCAR and INDYCAR

Or I might be wrong, maybe i dont know anything about those two championships either.

[fjackdaw]

Its the first time that a driver has won consecutive GPs in a specific nation (Jenson in Brawn '09 and McLaren '10) since Fernando Alonso (Monaco '06 with Renault and then '07 with McLaren)

In the 07 race it was the first sign of the rift between Hamilton and Alonso as Lewis was instructed to not challenge for the lead, which is understandable because its Monaco, but it would have been a good spectacle to see a Senna Mansell style duel right to the very end.

Senna and Mansell have had various duels in the past, most iconically the side-by-side image of the two heading down the Barcelona main straight, which may or may not have happened with the new STUPID chicane to "aid overtaking".

That was probably the only time the Barcelona race was ever exciting, maybe 92 in the rain, maybe even 97 when Olivier Panis managed to get up to 2nd on Bridgestone tyres, the first season the Bridgestone Tyre company were involved, and as we all know 2010 is their last year.

Kumho and Hankook have been rumoured to have taken interest in taking up the mantle of being Tyre suppliers for the future F1 seasons, it would be a boost for either Asian tyre manufacturer because they arent really known to the general road using public, who are more likely to see a Michelin tyre banner somewhere near the roadside.

As we all know Michelin pulled out in 2006, but they are mostly infamous for their demand to stop the 7 teams and 14 drivers from attempting to race around the Road Course at Indianapolis in 2005 due to a weakened side wall on all their tyres, which may or may not have primarily been down to a change of asphalt on the Oval part of the course, Bridgestone on the other hand were ready thanks to their communications with affiliate Firestone, who supply tyres to NASCAR and INDYCAR

Or I might be wrong, maybe i dont know anything about those two championships either.

All very interesting... not sure what this is in relation to, though. Is this proving you know something about F1?

[mario]

.....ANYONE who says:

Theres no overtaking in F1
F1 is Boring
Schumachers going to be good this year
Hamilton is going to be good this year

Knows NOTHIING about F1

ABSOLUTELY NOTHING

I think it's ADx_Wales who knows ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about F1. A bad strategy call and getting punted off by Mark Webber ruined Hamilton's day, but otherwise he drove a very exciting and aggressive race. I'm not a fan, but he's going to do great things this season, for sure.

Schumacher has competed in two races so far, we just don't know how the next 17 races will pan out for him. He's been away for three years, I sense he's just warming up.

Bahrain was a dry race on a boring track, Australia was a damp race on a good track, so it's too soon to call on overtaking/excitement quite yet. However, it was ominous that Hamilton, mega-quick on relatively fresh tires, just couldn't do anything about the struggling Ferraris. In the context of this race, it was just the tense exciting climax we needed, but I sense that if the race had been dry, we might have quickly got bored of these aero-trains throughout the duration.

Good points - Hamilton did drive well, but the team did make a poor decision there (they should have known that, since passing is so difficult and Alonso - who always defends his position both quite well and quite aggressively - would not have yielded his position easily). He did allow himself to get a little too frustrated - but, considering how he would have been on the podium (since he was keeping up with Kubica quite nicely), it's understandable that in the heat of the moment he feels cheated.
As for Schumacher, well, firstly he is still getting up to pace, and the Mercedes W01 is clearly off the pace. The first corner accident shuffled him down the order, and he wasn't that lucky with the tyre stops either (although the most lucky was probably Ferrari - Alonso did gain a few positions thanks to the rule forbidding the teams from releasing a car too early). It must also be borne in mind that Mercedes basically used Michael as a guinea pig for Rosberg's tyre stop (by seeing how long it took him to get back up to speed) - after all, Alguersuari didn't stop again, so the decision by Mercedes put him back behind Jaime and forced him to overtake.

As for the excitement, just as I said that Bahrein wasn't the best judge of whether the season was going to be exciting, neither was today. OK, the weather did play some part (but not as much as had been feared, since the rain only struck once, and early on), and due to various factors (the proximity of the barriers, the higher tyre wear etc.) we always have a slightly mixed up race, which isn't always representative of the season as a whole. I think that we'll need a few more races to make a decent call, where the weather doesn't play a part (so that probably will rule out Sepang - unless they have accounted for the farce last year with the red flag situation and moved the start).

[TomWazzleshaw]

...(so that probably will rule out Sepang - unless they have accounted for the farce last year with the red flag situation and moved the start).

The start for the Malaysian Grand Prix has been moved forward an hour this year.

[Enforcer]

Huge sweeping assertions made on one race. Fabulous.

Honestly, ADX, what are the odds of both Hamilton and Schumacher being uncompetetive this season? 450,000/1?

[Cynon]

Firestone in NASCAR? I've been watching NASCAR for almost 20 years and I don't recall a single Firestone tire in NASCAR!

The aero rules don't encourage overtaking. Simple as that. F1 needs new aero rules, or, better yet, a spec chassis like the IRL has that actually allows cars to pass each other in dry races on Tilkedromes.

[danardif1]

Firestone in NASCAR? I've been watching NASCAR for almost 20 years and I don't recall a single Firestone tire in NASCAR!

The aero rules don't encourage overtaking. Simple as that. F1 needs new aero rules, or, better yet, a spec chassis like the IRL has that actually allows cars to pass each other in dry races on Tilkedromes.

There's actually a series that has great overtaking (that is also earned rather than being too easy) and exciting races right under F1's nose... It's called GP2, and it's like this because it uses a mix of wing-based downforce, coupled with mild ground effect that gives a cleaner wake for similar amounts of downforce that you would get with the big diffusers. There are no real safety reasons not to use Ground Effect anymore, and GP2 has proven that you can get great races without a technical deficit!

[RejectSteve]

The aero rules don't encourage overtaking. Simple as that. F1 needs new aero rules, or, better yet, a spec chassis like the IRL has that actually allows cars to pass each other in dry races on Tilkedromes.

There's actually a series that has great overtaking (that is also earned rather than being too easy) and exciting races right under F1's nose... It's called GP2, and it's like this because it uses a mix of wing-based downforce, coupled with mild ground effect that gives a cleaner wake for similar amounts of downforce that you would get with the big diffusers. There are no real safety reasons not to use Ground Effect anymore, and GP2 has proven that you can get great races without a technical deficit!

Dare we say it... spec floors? Teams can still design and construct their own cars on the visible end, giving us the technical exercise and vehicular diversity, along with standard floors and diffusers which allow LMP1 and LMP2 cars to race closely.

[mario]

The aero rules don't encourage overtaking. Simple as that. F1 needs new aero rules, or, better yet, a spec chassis like the IRL has that actually allows cars to pass each other in dry races on Tilkedromes.

There's actually a series that has great overtaking (that is also earned rather than being too easy) and exciting races right under F1's nose... It's called GP2, and it's like this because it uses a mix of wing-based downforce, coupled with mild ground effect that gives a cleaner wake for similar amounts of downforce that you would get with the big diffusers. There are no real safety reasons not to use Ground Effect anymore, and GP2 has proven that you can get great races without a technical deficit!

Dare we say it... spec floors? Teams can still design and construct their own cars on the visible end, giving us the technical exercise and vehicular diversity, along with standard floors and diffusers which allow LMP1 and LMP2 cars to race closely.

And not only that, but the GP2 cars run on the same circuits as the F1 cars, and are still able to pass (or at least that is the case for most circuits - even they can't pass that much when they go to Valencia).
Considering how the FIA have effectively made the front part of the floor a standard part anyway (due to the imposition of the flat floor regulations), it would not be that much of a leap forwards to make the floor an entirely standard part anyway. How popular that would be is another matter...
RejectSteve, I would say that drawing an analogy with the Le Mans prototype cars is not that appropriate in this case - remember that the prototype cars have covered wheels, and a large amount of the turbulence behind an F1 car is down to the open wheels (which heavily disrupt the flow, causing a lot of drag and turbulence). The Le Mans cars do generate a lot of downforce from the floors, but the Venturi tunnels that are used have a shallower ramp angle, which reduces the flow disturbance, and the floor area is also much larger (so they can increase the air volume flow rate under the car).
The GP2 cars are what we need to consider, and they are interesting. They do use ground effects, but not in the same way as cars like the Lotus 79 or Williams FW07. The analogy would be with the Lotus 78, which was the first car fitted with a Venturi tunnel, but had no side skirts. I believe that the current Indy cars also use open Venturi tunnels to generate downforce, which partially explains why those cars can follow more closely.

[danardif1]

And not only that, but the GP2 cars run on the same circuits as the F1 cars, and are still able to pass (or at least that is the case for most circuits - even they can't pass that much when they go to Valencia).
Considering how the FIA have effectively made the front part of the floor a standard part anyway (due to the imposition of the flat floor regulations), it would not be that much of a leap forwards to make the floor an entirely standard part anyway. How popular that would be is another matter...
RejectSteve, I would say that drawing an analogy with the Le Mans prototype cars is not that appropriate in this case - remember that the prototype cars have covered wheels, and a large amount of the turbulence behind an F1 car is down to the open wheels (which heavily disrupt the flow, causing a lot of drag and turbulence). The Le Mans cars do generate a lot of downforce from the floors, but the Venturi tunnels that are used have a shallower ramp angle, which reduces the flow disturbance, and the floor area is also much larger (so they can increase the air volume flow rate under the car).
The GP2 cars are what we need to consider, and they are interesting. They do use ground effects, but not in the same way as cars like the Lotus 79 or Williams FW07. The analogy would be with the Lotus 78, which was the first car fitted with a Venturi tunnel, but had no side skirts. I believe that the current Indy cars also use open Venturi tunnels to generate downforce, which partially explains why those cars can follow more closely.

Rather than being another spec-series, GP2 should be a travelling experiment for F1, and seeing the kind of racing we have from both evolutions of the Dallara GP2 car, and also from the Dallara (funny that they should be so involved...) IndyCar, which though being ugly still race brilliantly, we should be looking into what makes these cars both fast (GP2 cars only 7-10 seconds slower despite missing 200+bhp, and unpolished drivers) and able to pass each other when in the hands of a decent driver. What's also great about GP2 is that it tends to show what circuits aren't conducive to overtaking (Valencia being one of them, but even there they can follow each other closely...)

What F1 should do when the engine regs are due to change is do a complete overhaul of what F1 cars are and do... Open up engine regs, but limit fuel amount (say 200 litres for the race), look into re-introducing modern ground-effects and nullifying wing-borne aero (whilst not getting rid of it, being part of F1 for most of it's history). They should look into making these cars 'the future' again, rather than these outdated (ideas wise at least) models... Instead of crushing these cars into the track with their wings, make more efficient, both in drivetrain and aerodynamically/mechanically... We would (hopefully) get some more consistent good racing and a glimpse of the future, making F1 cars a proving ground for the future of cars we drive now again. We don't want manufacturer domination again, but to have the biggest car companies involved at some level (including VW, Toyota again (kings of the hybrid), Honda, Ford, Porsche, Peugeot/Citroen etc.), even in engines and drivetrains, would be beneficial to F1 and us as both motorsport fans and members of the world population.

[Faustus]

...and all we need now is to reduce the following distance in "dirty air".

Which I presume can easily be done by removing the Double Deck Diffusers

I'm afraid it can't, the problem is far more complex than that.

[Tealy]

...and all we need now is to reduce the following distance in "dirty air".

Which I presume can easily be done by removing the Double Deck Diffusers

I'm afraid it can't, the problem is far more complex than that.

What we need is a way to measure how much turbulance comes off of the back of an F1 car. Then we can bring out regs that restrict that without hindering new ideas. I'm all for the idea of using GP2 as a test series though, the only worry I have is that we may inadvertantly ruin another single-seater series

[mario]

And not only that, but the GP2 cars run on the same circuits as the F1 cars, and are still able to pass (or at least that is the case for most circuits - even they can't pass that much when they go to Valencia).
Considering how the FIA have effectively made the front part of the floor a standard part anyway (due to the imposition of the flat floor regulations), it would not be that much of a leap forwards to make the floor an entirely standard part anyway. How popular that would be is another matter...
RejectSteve, I would say that drawing an analogy with the Le Mans prototype cars is not that appropriate in this case - remember that the prototype cars have covered wheels, and a large amount of the turbulence behind an F1 car is down to the open wheels (which heavily disrupt the flow, causing a lot of drag and turbulence). The Le Mans cars do generate a lot of downforce from the floors, but the Venturi tunnels that are used have a shallower ramp angle, which reduces the flow disturbance, and the floor area is also much larger (so they can increase the air volume flow rate under the car).
The GP2 cars are what we need to consider, and they are interesting. They do use ground effects, but not in the same way as cars like the Lotus 79 or Williams FW07. The analogy would be with the Lotus 78, which was the first car fitted with a Venturi tunnel, but had no side skirts. I believe that the current Indy cars also use open Venturi tunnels to generate downforce, which partially explains why those cars can follow more closely.

Rather than being another spec-series, GP2 should be a travelling experiment for F1, and seeing the kind of racing we have from both evolutions of the Dallara GP2 car, and also from the Dallara (funny that they should be so involved...) IndyCar, which though being ugly still race brilliantly, we should be looking into what makes these cars both fast (GP2 cars only 7-10 seconds slower despite missing 200+bhp, and unpolished drivers) and able to pass each other when in the hands of a decent driver. What's also great about GP2 is that it tends to show what circuits aren't conducive to overtaking (Valencia being one of them, but even there they can follow each other closely...)

What F1 should do when the engine regs are due to change is do a complete overhaul of what F1 cars are and do... Open up engine regs, but limit fuel amount (say 200 litres for the race), look into re-introducing modern ground-effects and nullifying wing-borne aero (whilst not getting rid of it, being part of F1 for most of it's history). They should look into making these cars 'the future' again, rather than these outdated (ideas wise at least) models... Instead of crushing these cars into the track with their wings, make more efficient, both in drivetrain and aerodynamically/mechanically... We would (hopefully) get some more consistent good racing and a glimpse of the future, making F1 cars a proving ground for the future of cars we drive now again. We don't want manufacturer domination again, but to have the biggest car companies involved at some level (including VW, Toyota again (kings of the hybrid), Honda, Ford, Porsche, Peugeot/Citroen etc.), even in engines and drivetrains, would be beneficial to F1 and us as both motorsport fans and members of the world population.

On a purely subjective level, you could argue that the World Rally Championship has been the test bed for most modern developments in motoring (variable vane turbo chargers, combined supercharging and turbo charging etc.), since rally cars are ultimately direct derivatives of road going cars (as per the regulations - even if in the past those regulations were stretched quite heavily at times).
However, I do agree that if we want the manufacturers to become more interested in F1, then F1 needs to offer them something useful. The problem is that the last attempt - with KERS - was strangled off early on, when it became clear that the power boost was reduced to the point where it was of very limited benefit, and the agreement between the teams means that the system is currently not being used. And even allowing for that, the KERS system was actually fairly crude - Toyota complained that the systems it ran in their road cars was far more sophisticated, and the level of feedback is sill debatable. As things stand, Williams are the only team which is currently monetizing their efforts, through the link with the Porsche GT3 which is running at the Nurburgring 24h (with talk of a possible prototype - probably an adapted LMP2 car - using the Williams flywheel system).

Now, it is known that there is a possible switch to forced induction engines in the future, which is sensible - for a start, it looks as if most modern road cars are going down that route anyway. Now, if they could reduce the revs (say, to 11,000rpm) so pneumatic valves weren't necessary, and open up the regulations a little to allow for things like variable valve timing, then we could really see a flood of innovation in terms of power trains, and the manufacturers would be much more interested.
Perhaps, even if we did open up the engine format, we wouldn't see that much variety in engine form - for example, in the 1990's, the V10 quickly got the measure of V8's and V12's, with better power then the V8's but lower fuel consumption then the V12's - but freeing up the internals could change things quite a bit. That said, there would need to be some checks and balances - we wouldn't want to be in a situation where one manufacturer forces out all the others, otherwise we'd end up with a spec engine series.

The aerodynamics is more tricky - the very fact that the cars are so sophisticated in terms of aerodynamics means that they are so quick. So, cutting away the aerodynamics in some areas might make it easier to pass and improve the spectacle, but there is also the risk that it'll reduce the USP of F1 if the GP2 cars get a bit too close for comfort (or even the Indy cars - could you imagine how awkward that could be if it turned out that an Indy car was quicker round a track then a car which is supposed to be at the pinnacle of motorsport). One possible trick could be to encourage drag reduction, which could come via limiting the fuel available for the cars - although the manufacturers would probably choose to tinker with the engines instead of cutting downforce on the cars.
Equally, quantifying the turbulence is easier said then done - turbulent flows are still poorly understood, and most modern CFD turbulent models are either quite simplified (Reynolds Averaging techniques), or computationally too intensive to be practical outside of research institutions (Direct Numerical Solutions). If you really wanted to reduce the turbulence of an F1 car, you'd probably notice a major difference if you let them cover the wheels (which probably generate by far the most turbulence) - it'd also make the cars far more fuel efficient as well.

[danardif1]

Well what about setting a certain number of configurations for engines... say 2.4 V8, 2.0 V10, 1.5 L4 Turbo, 3.0 V6 etc. etc. and then saying, here's 150 litres of fuel for the race... make it work... you'd get differences in power, consumption, torque curves. Couple that to a GP2-style floor that takes the onus away (though not completely) from wing-based downforce and makes the cars easier to race with, the reintroduction of KERS (but with higher limits, perhaps different again for each powertrain?) and maybe also an allowance for HERS (Heat? Recovery...) or other cutting-edge technologies... Maybe costs will rise in the short term whilst these technologies are bred, but the economies of scale will be better in the long run because these are technologies that car firms and high-tech companies are working on now for the likes of you and me...

Companies like Toyota (I know, I know ), Honda and even Renault now are really getting some headway into hybrid technology, and it's very interesting to someone like me who enjoys the technical aspect of F1 and cars in general. All the big companies are investing in this, so why not pique their interest (not necessarily as full works teams, but perhaps on a technical partnership level, or powertrain supply etc.) by allowing for these exciting developments that these guys are working on.

People shouldn't think of these hybrid technologies sucking the life out of cars... they're putting it back in... this is just the 21st century equivalent to Mercedes putting fuel injection on their cars in 1954 and showing the way then, or Lotus sticking that first DFV on the grid in 67... we've just run out of room to work in with total internal combustion... there has to be a mix or some new ideas borne out of that original concept.

We may miss the sound of a V8 burbling away, but we've got to find more ideas to work with it now.

[mario]

Well what about setting a certain number of configurations for engines... say 2.4 V8, 2.0 V10, 1.5 L4 Turbo, 3.0 V6 etc. etc. and then saying, here's 150 litres of fuel for the race... make it work... you'd get differences in power, consumption, torque curves. Couple that to a GP2-style floor that takes the onus away (though not completely) from wing-based downforce and makes the cars easier to race with, the reintroduction of KERS (but with higher limits, perhaps different again for each powertrain?) and maybe also an allowance for HERS (Heat? Recovery...) or other cutting-edge technologies... Maybe costs will rise in the short term whilst these technologies are bred, but the economies of scale will be better in the long run because these are technologies that car firms and high-tech companies are working on now for the likes of you and me...

Companies like Toyota (I know, I know ), Honda and even Renault now are really getting some headway into hybrid technology, and it's very interesting to someone like me who enjoys the technical aspect of F1 and cars in general. All the big companies are investing in this, so why not pique their interest (not necessarily as full works teams, but perhaps on a technical partnership level, or powertrain supply etc.) by allowing for these exciting developments that these guys are working on.

People shouldn't think of these hybrid technologies sucking the life out of cars... they're putting it back in... this is just the 21st century equivalent to Mercedes putting fuel injection on their cars in 1954 and showing the way then, or Lotus sticking that first DFV on the grid in 67... we've just run out of room to work in with total internal combustion... there has to be a mix or some new ideas borne out of that original concept.

We may miss the sound of a V8 burbling away, but we've got to find more ideas to work with it now.

Oh, I'm not denying that for a short while you could end up with a mixture of various engines - however, very rapidly you would probably find that the teams converge to one particular design. The early 1990's saw it (with the V10 becoming the standard engine), the 1980's did (with a V6 Turbo the most successful format, firstly as the TAG Porsche engine, and then the Honda V6), the 1970's (with the Ford DFV pushing out the Repco V8 and the Matra and Alfa Romeo V12's). In the end, usually one engine design tends to be optimal - it may not be the best in any one area, but it has the best combination of characteristics. This is not to say that we wouldn't get benefits from it - with a fuel limit, you would probably end up with smaller capacity, but high boost pressure turbo engines (which can be made to be efficient then an equivalent normally aspirated engine) - which is the way that mass motoring is likely to go. Thus, the trickle down benefits would be there - but I don't think that you'd have a mass influx of manufacturers into the sport and suddenly have a dozen different engines (and even if you did, that would rapidly drop to a handful after a few years).

Where you're likely to get the bigger gains would be in KERS and HERS (after all, a lot of the energy that goes into the engine is simply ejected out the exhaust and radiators as heat), especially in terms of marketability to the manufacturers. It could also enhance the image of those devices - at the moment, quite a few people think that KERS systems are detrimental to a car, as they think that they are wasted weight. Take a look at the complains by the Top Gear trio, and those who slavishly worship every word they say without thinking.
Now, if you could develop a lightweight, durable KERS unit (like the Williams flywheel system), and if people saw a car with KERS breezing past everybody else, then the technology would become much more attractive and glamorous. Admittedly, I am a little biased towards Williams, but I do think that the flywheel system that they developed does have quite a lot of potential outside of the sport (since everybody ignores the fact that purely electrical hybrids have the problem of disposing of the batteries afterwards) - the fact that they are now actively marketing it indicates that they think it is economically viable.

The problem would be preventing costs from ballooning - yes, in the longer term, the manufacturer teams would be able to feed the results back into their road divisions and potentially recoup their investment. In the shorter term, though, if you end up in a manufacturing arms race, then you could see costs rocketing (take the $200 million/year that Mercedes High Performance Engine division and Ferrari's engine division spent each during the V10 era to try out out-do the other). Keeping that under control would be difficult - which is why I could see the FIA simply resorting to the tactics it uses now, and heavily restricting development. Whilst a budget cap in this area might be considered, given that global companies have so many divisions, funding could easily be hidden elsewhere (bear in mind that Deloittes failed to spot the financial difficulties HRT were in - accounting is a bit of a black art, in that you can always find a different figure depending on who asks the question - whereas as much as an engineer might like it, the laws of physics are not as accommodating...)