The path F1 took to arrive at its vital crunch meeting

Tuesday's meetings of the strategy group and F1 commission in London will be key staging posts on the way to 2021. There's a lot of ground to cover, including revenue distribution, the putative cost cap, and governance - along with the sporting and technical regulations.

The latter remains the most intriguing aspect of 2021 and the area of most interest to fans. What will the F1 cars of the future look and sound like? So far we've learned very little, and that's because the details have yet to be confirmed.

The good news is that for the first time a concerted effort has been made to come up with a solution that ticks all the boxes - one that creates close racing for fans while also providing a challenge for drivers and engineers.

The man charged with guiding us to that nirvana is F1's managing director of motorsport, Ross Brawn. On his arrival at the organisation just over two years ago Brawn began to put together a team with the clear target of coming up with the ideal 2021 package.

In the past, changes were usually introduced to slow the cars down or head off expensive development routes, but there was no coherent long-term plan over the decades. That wasn't necessarily the fault of the FIA - it's just the way the system worked.

The approach of Brawn and his team of engineers has been to go back to basics. And crucially they've enjoyed a little help from fans, via extensive market research.

"We've got a lot of ex-team personnel in the organisation," Brawn says. "And we've got a lot of fresh new people, and that balance is important. Let's say the old stagers like me to give some reference and a lot of young, new people with fresh ideas.

"I don't engage in social media - it's not been part of my life. People here who are very engaged in that side understand what fans want, and it would be hopeless for me to set direction in that area.

"But we've got a lot of very young, smart people who are familiar with all that, and that's typical of what's needed."

Given that the rules are traditionally written by the FIA, there is some potential for conflict and for egos to be bruised. However, the governing body recognised that it would be churlish not to take full advantage of the resources that F1 is able to throw at the problem.

"The problem is if you leave F1 alone, it keeps moving in the wrong direction" Ross Brawn

Brawn and his crew have established a close working relationship with Nikolas Tombazis, the man whose job it is to write those rules.

"It's a good relationship because we know each other. I worked with Nikolas years ago, he worked here [at F1] as a consultant, and we were very pleased to see him move across to the role he has now because he's one of the architects of the programme that we have here. That was good.

"The resource can sit in lots of different places. When I joined F1 there was nothing, and building the resource within the F1 umbrella was the easiest way to do it, and manage it in London, because the staff that were needed were based here. And I think because there's a good relationship with the FIA, we manage it well."

Some may question why the F1 organisation is now steering the regulations, whereas in the Bernie Ecclestone era there was a clear division of responsibilities with the FIA.

Ecclestone was responsible for selling the show, and while he tossed out the odd idea - some of which were taken up - he had little formal influence on the rules.

However, Brawn points out that if it's your show to sell you want it to be a good one, and it was logical that Liberty took a more hands-on approach.

"I can see the argument that it could be an FIA initiative. But we don't want to put any difficult barriers as to who does what. It's been a very amicable arrangement, and they're happy that we've got this resource here, and they respect it. We are the biggest investor in the business - Liberty are the biggest investor in F1, effectively.

"We feel that our voice needs to be heard in terms of how the sport develops. But of course, there's quite a lot of overlap. The FIA are the sport's regulators, and F1 is their racing series. We own the commercial rights to that racing series.

"So it's for us to make sure that the racing series is successful, it has all the stars in it, and it has coverage that's broad enough to attract big investors in terms of manufacturers.

"We have a huge involvement in the sport, so I don't think it's alien or wrong for us to want to put resource into the sport to make sure it goes in the right direction."

Thus far we've seen little hard evidence of the work that's been going on behind the scenes. The one example to emerge is the 2019 aero package, focused mainly on simpler endplates, designed to help cars follow more closely.

There were differences of opinion on whether the changes should have been introduced or not. The engineers behind the 2021 aero work were understandably wary about one element being "cherry picked" from a much bigger package because they were reluctant to be judged on something that was going to be seen in isolation.

The view that prevailed was that it was better to try something new, see it if works, and at least start making the steps towards 2021.

Melbourne isn't a typical track so we'll have to wait for Bahrain and China to have a better idea of how successful the changes have been, but it's been an interesting test case for how Brawn's men can work in conjunction with the FIA and the teams themselves.

"It's a small case study if you like," he adds. "It will definitely be helpful to us to make sure the 2021 introduction and development will be successful. There was a strong argument for saying leave everything alone until 2021. The problem is if you leave F1 alone, it just keeps moving in the wrong direction.

"If we'd left it alone we'd have another two years of development along the lines which the cars were already going. So we had drivers saying 'I can't get behind another car, as soon as I get behind another car my tyres go off'. They were rubbishing the tyres, which was not fair, not correct. They were complaining about their ability to race properly.

"We've responded to that and made it clear that this is not the full response we know we can give, but it's worthwhile trying these changes. We'll see what the results are. We can look at the data to see what the benefits have been.

"There will be some changes which will come out in the next few months which I think are in the right direction" Ross Brawn

"These changes in 2019 don't have the benefit of the full change in the flow regime that is going to be achieved in '21. With the designs we have, we'll completely change the way the flow goes over the cars, and leave the car behind in a relatively virgin area so that it maintains the vast majority of its performance."

In the weeks after the 2019 front wing changes were signed off Brawn's team - with some R&D input from the teams - continued to make significant progress. As Brawn suggests, the key to the 2021 cars will be a completely different air flow pattern, especially underneath the car. Ground effect will be the focus, and in theory, following another car will be much easier.

"There was a limit to what we could do in '19. The cars still retain the same diffusers, the same floor fundamentally. For 2021, of course, we can take a fresh approach to the whole underside of the car.

"We're just limited in '19 in terms of what was achievable. It was felt that we should make a step, and certainly halt the progress in the wrong direction.

"I've heard comments like, 'We're getting performance back'. It wasn't about performance, it was about the nature of the performance. We can at least see the data, we can see the impact on the car following, and the impact the lead car has on the following car, so we'll be able to get some information from that.

"There are other considerations. Certainly, the team principals have been complaining bitterly about the lack of commercial space. Cleaning up the whole bargeboard area and the rear wing, etcetera - that was a secondary consideration, but one which they felt was important. So there have been a number of changes."

Brawn says the teams have been a huge help with the ongoing development work for 2021, although he concedes that it's in their interest to be on board.

"I have to repeat that the teams have been fantastic in their co-operation. They've all worked well as a collective, because all the work they do is presented and transparent to all the other teams, so no one can do some work they can keep for themselves.

"Now, there's no doubt in doing this work that you start to get a picture of what the cars are like. So I'm sure there's some ulterior motive. But we believe that that is not going to be any significant advantage for those with more resource than others. We're going to try and manage the release of the design of this car to make it as equitable as possible to all the teams."

Along with the aero, the power unit is the other key part of the 2021 package. The mantra from F1 and a key part of the overall plan unveiled in Bahrain a year ago was for "cheaper, simpler, louder" engines.

It was made clear that significant change would be coming, principally to tempt new entrants - in other words Porsche - to come in. The original ideas were watered down somewhat when it became apparent that nobody was coming any time soon.

The four current manufacturers rightly pointed out that they didn't want to invest in major changes for no obvious benefit. Brawn accepted their viewpoint.

"In that case, I was perhaps a bit more ambitious in terms of the changes that could have been made. But when the arguments were presented they were well presented, the models were well presented, and the examples were given. I think we will have cheaper, simpler, louder, it's just a question of degree.

"There's a very strong argument that we have four reasonably settled suppliers in F1. While there's people looking at coming in, they weren't as committed, so therefore let's consolidate what we have.

"The MGU-H was a big thing. I think if a manufacturer is coming in or not coming in just because it had or hasn't got an MGU-H, that seems a bit fickle."

Brawn is well aware that the manufacturers have to be kept happy: "The engine is a tricky one, more so perhaps than the car you're sensitive to outside suppliers, you're sensitive to engine suppliers. We don't want to lose a team, but if we lose a team then hopefully F1 is attractive enough to find replacements.

"If we lose an engine then anyone stepping in has a massive programme to fill their place. And if we lose an engine it impacts two or three teams. I think it was correct to push hard to see where we can get to.

"There will be some changes that you'll see - we're not going to talk about them now - which will come out in the next few months which I think definitely are strongly in the right direction."

It's already apparent that drivers will have more direct control over how they deploy power unit performance - as in the early days of KERS.

"I think you'll see some of that with the engine rules. That's definitely been a strong element. We're not going to do anything gimmicky... There are some elements that we'll introduce which will give more control to the drivers and less to the garage. And the nature of the cars, we want to have cars which can race each other more effectively."

While Brawn's argument appears logical, F1 is approaching a critical crossroads that will shape its 2021 rules. It will only be as agreed details emerge from this week's meetings that we'll see first signs of whether Brawn's approach has paid off.