Radio silence would transform F1

Critics of Formula 1 always proffer quick-fix solutions to its perceived shortcomings. Be it less detailed technical regulations, more detailed technical regulations, somehow making aerodynamics irrelevant to a car moving at high speed through air (presumably by placing circuits in a vacuum), changing the tyres, engines etc, there is always some easy answer

The formula is simple. Do x, y and z and magically grand prix racing will be exactly as it was when it was at its best. Of course, in most people's minds that seems to be when they were in their teens. But it is rare for a single, simple change to have a dramatic effect. For that to happen, it has to influence a facet of grand prix racing so central to its nature that it can have an effect on a multitude of areas.

One of the major criticisms of contemporary F1 is that it has become too dry and technical, with drivers lapping to deltas, responding to instructions from the pit-wall and strategies carefully number-crunched by teams of specialists.

Setting aside the very valid argument that is to be had over whether grand prix racing should be so technical, not to mention the fact that it always has been, there is one simple way that could transform the nature of racing without even touching the cars.

Simply ban radios.

Well, it's not quite that simple. Related changes to prevent non-verbal communication of things like target times, traction metrics and who not to race would also have to be made, but robbing the drivers of all but information communicable by pitboard would make a vast difference. Plus, there will be all sorts of other unintended consequences, all of which could be considered as part of the associated rule changes.

So let's assume that the information flow to the driver is cut. What would be the consequences? First, a case study.

There is a debate in professional road cycling about the use of race radios. In the major events that comprise the top-tier UCI WorldTour, such as the Tour de France, there are criticisms that the sporting directors of teams micro-manage races by being in constant contact with their riders. But there are many professional races in which radios are not permitted.

Pitboards would be enough for F1 © XPB

A fantastic example of the kind of unpredictability that can be created came in last year's Roma Maxima one-day race. Italian Felippo Pozzato won a bunch sprint to the line, raising his arms aloft to celebrate victory.

This puzzled those watching, who had, 37 seconds earlier, watched France's Blel Kadri win having earlier mounted a solo breakaway. Without race radio, several in the chasing pack didn't know they were fighting for second.

The use of pitboards in racing would prevent this precise situation from arising, and even in cycling riders do usually get a feel for the shape of the race through various messages. But it is an illustration of how sporting drama can be generated by knocking out lines of communication.

Effectively, the driver would be on their own but for the most straightforward instructions. Tyre management would be based only on feel, on judgement and knowing who to race hard and who not to would be based on who has the clearest mental picture of the race situation.

The complexity of the 2014 engines does mitigate getting rid of radios, although the pitwall would still manage much of the energy and fuel flow from there. What they couldn't do is tell the driver when and when not to short-shift. One consequence is that some of the functions previously managed by the pitwall would be either delegated to a driver entirely or eliminated as too complex to be enacted without pitwall input.

It would become harder for teams and drivers to execute races to plan, which in itself would result in greater ebb and flow. There would be more aborted pitstop strategies as drivers have to head for the pits. Those behind behind the wheel would have to make the call as to whether they should keep persevering on a shot set of tyres or dive into the pits. Then, when interviewed afterwards, they can slate themselves if they get it wrong...

What it would definitely remove is the impression given by the radio transmissions included in the TV broadcasts that the drivers are little more than pawns being moved around an asphalt chessboard by an engineering team. While this perception is rather crude and belittles the skill of a remarkable group of drivers, it is something that does undermine the appeal of the sport to the 'casual fan' that everyone is always so desperate to attract.

Inevitably, over time some drivers would learn how to read the race better than others when left to their own devices, adding another variable into the mix in the races.

Radio ban could transform race strategies © XPB

There are downsides to such a move and it is not a fix-all panacea, but it does offer some interesting possibilities. Effectively, the technology on the cars would not be heavily restricted other than by the capacity of a driver, with only the information available to him in the cockpit, to manage the situation.

For many people, the drivers are the heart of the sport. They want to see the best taking on the best and winning or losing based upon their own initiative.

This does not mean a radio ban is automatically the right answer. But it's the kind of tangential rule change that has the power to transform the character of the racing far more than any number of arcane technical tweaks to the regulations.

There are legitimate concerns about safety, so it would be logical for an emergency channel to be available. Drivers could then be warned of any problems on track and also told to shut the car down should problems be detected.

This would be simple enough to achieve and provided the regulations govern what can and cannot be said and when, coded messages can be avoided. Likewise, you could argue that drivers should also be able to report to the pitwall any car problems, which could be achieved by one-way communication. This would be perfectly acceptable provided the pitwall can't talk back.

Getting rid of the radios would be a regressive step, meaning it is not necessarily right. But if people really do want to see the drivers being empowered and the masters of their own destiny, it's a measure that does have a lot going for it. Certainly, it's worth considering even though teams would, for good reasons, strongly object.

Properly implemented, it has the potential to transform F1.