Final 2010 Entry List & 2011 Tender

[Dukeage]

I would stipulate that the chassis build must be done by an organization that has build cars for either GP2, ALMS, LMS or otherwise of a very high level at some point, has the money mainly ready to go, and the race team should be either done in house or to be contracted out to a capable organization, who have competed in a high level series recently. For example, Dome and WSR (possibly).

I would also announce the entries by April the previous year.

[Just_a_fan]

Simple: prevent Mosley from making politically expedient decisions behind closed doors and without transparency of process.

Hopefully Todt (and/or his successor) won't make the same mistake in the future...

Mentioning Todt's successor, I'm worried that his intention not to stand at the end of his term is just a way for Mosley to get back in to power. I really hope I'm wrong but...

[ISLAMATRON]

Yes it is all Mosley's fault that we have ONLY 3 new teams on the grid... how dare he bring new teams to the grid... we like it better when the manufacters pull out and we are left with the SMALLEST grids in F1 history.

I seem to remember Prodrive given a grid slot a couple years back... wow, they sure did a great job getting onto the grid... maybe they should have been given a second chance to flake out.

That last Lola attempt was phenomenal.

[RacingManiac]

There had to have been some standard and criteria that made USF1, Manor and Campos looking more attractive and creditable, than Prodrive, N. Technology and Lola and whoever else was also in the running. But whatever that standard was it was also clearly inadequate. Might have been that the first 3 did a better job with Powerpoint Engineering or something. But regardless the process was a failure. And I still don't know how Lotus just somehow got a spot without being there in the first place.

[The FOZ]

I seem to remember Prodrive given a grid slot a couple years back... wow, they sure did a great job getting onto the grid... maybe they should have been given a second chance to flake out.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Prodrive's application based upon running customer cars from McLaren? Which, after the application was granted, became against regulation?

There could be a few parallels drawn between that situation and this one - the teams apply when conditions were favorable, only to have them change significantly after the slots were granted.

While we do have new teams making the grid, I have my doubts as to the quality of cars they've produced. We've already seen significant hiccups with all the new teams, surely more time/a more stable set of rules early on would have benefitted them?

I'm not, however, saying USF1 would have made it had X or Y or Z not happened. Not in the least.

[astracrazy]

experience is a must in another series

team must already have some sponsorship funding (which ties in with the above, if a team is coming from a lower series then they will have sponsors). Yes i know Brawn didnt and atm sauber don't but they had funding from manufactures respectively.

must have made a profit/broken even in the previous year...or along those lines? Stable finances is perhaps what im getting at (this would prevent the campos situation of getting in then not having the finances.

[astracrazy]

I seem to remember Prodrive given a grid slot a couple years back... wow, they sure did a great job getting onto the grid... maybe they should have been given a second chance to flake out.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Prodrive's application based upon running customer cars from McLaren? Which, after the application was granted, became against regulation?

There could be a few parallels drawn between that situation and this one - the teams apply when conditions were favorable, only to have them change significantly after the slots were granted.

While we do have new teams making the grid, I have my doubts as to the quality of cars they've produced. We've already seen significant hiccups with all the new teams, surely more time/a more stable set of rules early on would have benefitted them?

I'm not, however, saying USF1 would have made it had X or Y or Z not happened. Not in the least.

according to wiki prodrive pulled out after something to do with williams challenging them on the fact they were entering with a customer car. they were due to race in 2008 where customer cars were not banned. it wasn't the fia's fault they never raced, more williams.

ps i quickly read wiki so how 100% that is im not sure

[WhiteBlue]

Islamatron is quite right. The 2010 selection was very successfull getting three new teams on board and an independent engine supplier who is likely to stay when the manufacturers are pulling out left right and center. The previous years no new teams were admitted and you have to go back to the unsuccessfull Super Aguri attempt to see what was wrong. New teams had no chances at all to survive at the cost level required three years ago. Considering we are in a massive recession the achievements of the 2010 selection look very impressive.

I'm no friend of making requirements like directors having prior racing experience. With that rule Briatore would never have been admitted and you cannot say that he was unsuccessfull as a team principal.

If I were Jean Todt I would continue the good job that was done and improve on the points that can be improved. With the Concord agreement in place the 2011 selection will be easy. The teams will have their input in the F1 commission to create criteria that they can agree with. The FiA needs to set the framework. Things like avoiding artificial entry barriers and reasonable time frames and making sure an independent body makes the selection based on the criteria set by the F1 commission are needed. And the FiA needs to make sure the championship is truly international. That means teams from other countries than the UK and continents than Europe must get chances to compete. I would even go so far to give bonus points to teams which are based in new countries and continents. It will be good for the sport to broaden the base not only driver wise but also team origine wise.

[ESPImperium]

If i were the FIA in the new selection process, id defer it till 2013 for the new engine that will come into effect then.

What id be after is that we get manufacturers and independants more or less equal some how. Where we have no more than 5 manufacurers (Definition: supplying engines/drivetrains and making their own chassis) in the sport, where they have to supply equal engined/drivetrains to only one independant. This is where Cosworth comes into effect for the other three teams. For the new engine, we must have a freeze on aerodynamic rules for at least 3 years, and allow the engine departments to develop their engines from 2013 to 2015 to get the engines to peak performance. The thing is that we must have manufactureres allong-side privateer teams. However, the fact we have 3 new teams on the grid this year is great, id have much prefered the selection of new teams to not include engine supply, as im sure that Toyota would have stayed arround if USF1 selected them over Cosworth as the Toyota/USA thing is marketing gold dust for Toyota.

Transparency in the tender process is needed, what we need is for the FIA to show each tender application in its entirety to us, leaving out comercially sencitive data, as per the teams want. What id also like to see is that any application should have at least 3 years experience in a lower formula, with the facilities set up and ready to be expanded. Any one that isnt experienced with financial support and facilities shouldnt be considered.

We need to have a thourgh and tough, but transparent and open tender process in place for the new team in 2011. Id also make it that they have to be able to test their car before the first race as well, as they need to be able to fit in the paddock, as well as the drivers knowlege of the car to be of standard to be able to go into the first race with no saftey issues, the same way there could be with Hispanica nee Campos in Bahrain.

Im not dicreeing that manufacturers are bad, and that Max had a thing to get them out of F1, but the fact theres 3 new teams for 2010 is a small feat of its own. What im trying to say, amongst my rambelings is that theres a ballance to be struck with Manufacturer and Privateer teams and supplyers in F1. And this is the big thing for the next 10 years in F1, we are at the start and its gonna be a long and tough road with new technology and rule changes etc... But what we need is a strong consistant leadership, Todt has done a good job so far from whhat Mosley left, but its only the start. What we need is some one young enough with fresh ideas, but is calm and measured in their apporach to the job in hand. Able to smooze the big wigs in public, but street fight if necacary in the murky back alleys.

Its all about ballance, and keeping everything in proportion. Yes we will loose allong the way, by the time F1 emerges from the depths, we will have a stronger and arguably better sport in the long run. And that should be the aim and goal that should be aimed for, from the FIA, FOM, FOTA, GPDA, World Media and even to us the fans.

[Belatti]

The previous years no new teams were admitted and you have to go back to the unsuccessfull Super Aguri attempt to see what was wrong.

I would not call Super Aguri unsuccessfull. They scored points and where better than Honda on their second year. And that success was their main problem. It made Honda cash go away and they could not find sponsors, even inside Japan.

[Dukeage]

I don't think the engine regulations themselves will be a major issue, provided they ensure that all teams will be able to get a supply. Ideally they would make a decision about the 2013 engine shortly - my vote is for 2000cc rev and pressure limited turbos ...

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

If i was the FIA I would implement topless grid girls, and reverse order grids.
The race would have 1 sprint of 12 laps followed by the real deal of 50.
KERS would be reintroduced with 110bhp instead of 80, and would be allowed for 10 seconds instead of 8.

Prior to the race every marques boss has to race the other in the firms top of the range model. My money is on the fat bloke from merc....

[ESPImperium]

The previous years no new teams were admitted and you have to go back to the unsuccessfull Super Aguri attempt to see what was wrong.

I would not call Super Aguri unsuccessfull. They scored points and where better than Honda on their second year. And that success was their main problem. It made Honda cash go away and they could not find sponsors, even inside Japan.

I have to aggree. For what was a $90 million per year budget, they scored more points to budget than Honda. They even found a 0.5second improvement on the RA106 in set up alone for their car the SA07 in set up refinements alone. Super Aguri ran out of money, altho when they withdrew before the Turkish GP in 2008 they had money, it was the Honda board that was one of the team gaurentors, the other being Aguri Suzuki himself, they turned up, could have done another 2 or 3 races with how much money they had to compete till then, and after that race pull out. It was Honda that revoked the entry.

The Super Aguri model was a wonderful one, get a 2-3 year old chassis, hook up to a up to date spec drive train, update to the regs of the day, compete. Learn on the road. Wonderfully simplistic and naieve sounding. Altho off the pace by arround 3.5 seconds (less than the current Virgin and Lotus) but the fact you could get competing for the $35million a season it cost for the first year of Super Aguri is a wonderful consept, but the last of a by-gone age.

I know we have had our debates over customer cars, but personally i liked the fact that a team could get going on a 2-3 year old design updated is such a novel idea. One thing i think we have seen the back of, but one thing id think about allowing again, as long as there was a consensus amungst the teams.

If im right, wasnt Prodrives attempt arround a 1 year old McLaren chassis with one year old Mercedes power. Thus an argument ensued, and the then Spyker team led by Colin Kolles threatened an official protest if they entered the 2008 season, and thus Prodrive pulled out. Prodrive with the year old gear would have been arround a second off the pace, but it was enough to be ahead of Spyker. Williams initially objected, but someone the pointed out the Williams herritage, where they started out, and thus shut up. The Spyker argument was the fact that it would have been Honda would have 2 chassis on the grid, Red Bull with 2, McLaren/Mercedes with 2 and 3 different Manufacturers as well as Williams would have been in front of them.

[alexbarwell]

To be fair, we can't rule out all hopeful entries as that is how some of the teams got going in the first place, but the likes of Stefan GP and the sparsity of much tangible from some new teams really suggests they were going nowhere fast, particularly as some of the teams turned down had quite a solid pedigree to start with.

[ESPImperium]

One way for Stefan GP that would be looked on favrouably by the FIA for entry in 2011 would to work with the next Tyre manufacturer thats taking over from Bridgestone next year.

However, the S-01 IP and cars now default back to Toyota as is normal in contracts like this.

The thing is that the Tyre manufacturer thats gonna take over from Bridgestone needs a team to run on its tyres for roughly 6 months before it comes into the sport. It also needs to allow the current teams access to those tyres, and posibly test on them at least once before the season is out, if Bridgestone are going to be gone before the start of 2011.

If it is to be Michelen that come in to F1 for the next 11 years as the sole supplyer, id expect them and the FIA to allow the teams to test at least once mid season with-out race drivers for a four day test, hence why it may be an advantage for teams to get an experienced guy on board for the test drive posistion. Of whitch i can only think of 3 teams with experience testers at the wheel, Mercedes with Heidfeld, Ferarri with Gene/Fisi/Badoer and McLaren with Paffett. Hence why i think Force India are putting in Di Resta in FP1 at 18 of the 19 races as to get him experience with the car for a posible test on a new tyre companies rubber.