Analysis: F1 Wants to Cut Costs but How?

Ralf Schumacher, fittingly enough as it turned out, wore contact lenses for Sunday's Australian Grand Prix.

The German's dramatic first corner crunch with Ferrari's Rubens Barrichello got the Formula One season off to a flying start, with Ralf lucky to land unscathed after his Williams became airborne in Melbourne.

Others made just as much of an impact, not least local debutant Mark Webber whose fifth place for Minardi sparked wild champagne celebrations. But before the race, much of the more serious paddock debate focused on the altogether less glamorous subject of saving money.

Formula One has never been conspicuously successful at belt tightening but some teams are feeling the squeeze and the FIA has suggested rule changes from 2003 to help cut costs. Considerably less sexy than well-endowed local web celebrity Sarah Jane, the 'world's most downloaded woman' who was prominent in Minardi's weekend activities, the dry debate over engine cuts is set to run for some time yet.

The planned changes, due to face a vote on March 19, would get rid of the special engines used only for 12 laps in qualifying and possibly abolish Friday free practice. Manufacturers would also have to supply two teams.

Divided

The last point would not affect Ferrari, Honda or Ford's Cosworth unit who already supply two teams each but the measures do not have universal appeal. BMW, who supply Williams, and McLaren's engine partners Mercedes do not want to work with anyone else and suggested in any case that the time frame was too tight.

"We cannot change to one engine per weekend in 2003," said BMW's engine supremo Mario Theissen. "The design for 2003 engines is under way already."

While Williams technical director Patrick Head saw manipulation to favour Ferrari and McLaren's Ron Dennis suggested it would be simpler to save money by chopping a race off the calendar, the noises from rivals were different.

"I think Ron is a sensible guy and the first thing he must clearly do is to think about the welfare of the Championship," said Eddie Jordan. "I logically can't see any downside (to the proposals). If you can, please tell me what it is. If someone can tell me where there is a downside in this project, then I'd like to hear it.

"My opinion is that if the manufacturers are coming in, it shouldn't be any different to the way that the tyre regulations are. If you want to come in, you have an obligation to supply. Unless you're completely crazy, you have to accept that suddenly in one swoop this knocks out all of the hideous amounts of money being spent on qualifying engines."

Jordan made the point that engines were becoming ferociously powerful and the FIA would have to act soon to cut dangerously rising speeds. He said the proposals would do that cheaply and effectively: "This is a system whereby the teams don't have to redesign a whole heap of cars when they clearly don't have the revenue and the manufacturers will be saved a huge amount of money in terms of cost and expenditure."

The stage is set for plenty more discussion at next week's Malaysian Grand Prix before any vote. The debate will not make good television, but the outcome could have a far greater impact on the sport's future than anything that happened on the track in Melbourne.