Ruffling feathers on the F1 ladder

Gerhard Berger is on animated form. As president of the FIA's Single Seater Commission, he's invited AUTOSPORT to his Monaco office to explain the methodology behind his recent moves - particularly in Formula 3 - that frequently so irritate or infuriate those in the UK. You can't really call it a bridge-building exercise - his passion and zeal are too intense to placate those who have already decided on a 'them-and-us' stance - but it provides a great insight into the man and his ambitions.

Let's clear one thing up first. For years people have been ranting about the FIA not doing enough to clean up the cluttered junior ranks. Then, when Berger took over the Commission's presidency two and a half years ago from Barry Bland (a much more consensus-driven, subtle character than Berger), they complained about the radical measures the Austrian was taking to do just that.

While Bland's primary focus had been on finding a way forward with a new Formula 4 concept, to harmonise the baffling mixture of first-step-out-of-karting choices, Berger went straight for the middle category: F3. His first move was to reinstate the FIA F3 European Championship for 2012, piggybacking rounds of the F3 Euro Series and British F3. In '13, the Euro Series made way completely for the European Championship and British F3 was effectively squeezed out, downsizing to four rounds before refocusing on cheaper rules for '14, using the old production powerplants that had been replaced by bespoke racing engines in the FIA's series.

And this has caused the latest conflict. Rules emanating from the Commission, via the World Motor Sport Council, made it clear that national series (including British and German F3), should not 'use the names of F2/F3/F4 etc without strictly respecting the corresponding technical regulations of the FIA's Appendix J', and that this was 'to protect the F3 trademark in the interests of clarity and consistency'.

European F3, here at Pau, is booming...

The FIA made a 'concession for 2014 and 2015 [where] ASNs who wish to also include non-current cars in their grids [can do so] provided all cars comply with the relevant FIA regulations of the day', but that 'only cars from the 2008 and 2012 generations may be used'.

In other words, fine, go ahead, but if someone wants to enter a current car with the current FIA engine, they must be eligible for points, and no older cars allowed such as those used in the MSV F3 Cup. Two platforms of the new-era British F3 were kicked away.

"We faced a lot of different regulations in the world," says Berger. "Everybody used the name F3 because it's good to get a better price selling it to drivers. But now they are providing these different regulations to make it cheaper, and that leads completely in the wrong direction. It destroys the name F3, it destroys the championship, it destroys everything.

"Why is it like this? Because you have entrepreneurs trying to make their business, so they need the name F3 to ask for more money, and you have ASNs [national governing bodies] that are either not strong enough, caring enough or understanding enough.

"We need the ASNs to support us in our philosophy. They are facing a lot of national interests and being forced very much to change regulations. That means it needs a very hard line - a very clear hard line."

One of Berger's biggest frustrations is that the UK's ASN - the MSA - has more of a laissez-faire, hands-off approach to the sport than some of its equivalents. And British F3 promoter Stephane Ratel, whose SRO company kind of inherited the series several years ago and had no history in single-seaters, is happy to allow the F3 teams - under their FOTA umbrella - autonomy in deciding their rules for SRO to ratify.

Berger points to the example of Italy, where he advised the ASN to drop F3 at the end of 2012 and instead clear the path for F4 (the first group test for this very promising series took place last week). This it did.

...while British F3 struggles for numbers © LAT

"I'm very respectful of the British ASN," says Berger. "Of course, if I think they're doing things wrong I have to tell them. If they listen, fine; if they don't, I'm just trying to do my best. At the moment I think it's half-half: sometimes they listen, sometimes not.

"In all the other countries, I find a very strong ASN, especially with Hermann Tomczyk [of Germany's DMSB]. We don't agree all the time but I am very fine with this. But one thing is sure in Germany: a promoter is a promoter, and a rulemaker is a rulemaker, and they don't allow anybody to interfere.

"In Britain this is very soft: it looks like everybody is involved in the rules. The promoter is not just the promoter - he also makes the rules. Even further, the promoter is then connected with the teams and they make the rules in the way that, 'Well, which interests do we have today?' I don't see the ASN saying, 'I am the rulemaker here; who would like to have a championship with these rules? Ah, Stephane Ratel, you are interested. Fine. If you are happy to have these rules we are happy to have you as a promoter.'

"That's how it works in other places. In Germany it's like this. I like Stephane as a promoter, but I don't like to use him as a rulemaker. He just wants a full grid, so the teams tell him he needs this thing and this thing, and the whole thing becomes a mess. The ASN should make the rules, Stephane should provide the platform, and the teams deliver the cars if they want to do so."

The irony is that Berger's FIA championship supports the DTM, which since its revival in 2000 has been perhaps the only high-profile series in the world where the competitors - in the form of the manufacturers - successfully act as rulemakers through their roles on the organising ITR.

Berger says it wasn't a given that the championship would hop into bed with Formel 3 Vermarktungs, which is closely aligned with the ITR (F3V organises the series, the FIA and ITR jointly promote it, and the DMSB looks after logistics).

Formula Renault 2.0 is 'a very good formula', says Berger

Looking back to his early days at the Commission, Berger says: "I got a letter from British teams and a letter from German teams [in the Euro Series], all screaming for help, and I offered them the same kind of help. And I have to say the German organisation accepted the help more than the British. The Germans said, 'We just have 13 cars left, we are fine if you want to take over, and believe you're going to do the right things'.

"Everybody had the possibility, and there was a moment when we thought we were going to do it with Stephane Ratel, but finally the best offer on the table was the one of Wally Mertes [CEO of F3V]. 'Best offer' doesn't mean financial, it means the best to succeed on the project. There was television, enough track time, and clear acceptance that the FIA was doing the right thing.

"I know people think we're German-oriented [understandable when the ITR, F3V and DMSB are all involved, and Mercedes and VW supply more than 90 per cent of the engines]. Not at all! We could do all DTM supports, but we still chose to go to Silverstone, to Pau... we do that to be an international championship.

"When I started Mercedes was out [it had not bothered to start the homologation process on new engines], VW stopped, and now we have them back again."

So the European championship is strong, but the nationals are struggling. The British series kicked off for 2014 with seven cars, the German with 10. Berger wants strong national F3 to boost the category worldwide - he talks of 100 cars across European, Japanese, German and British "if everyone follows my advice" - but is worried that there may not be enough room in the marketplace.

"Honestly, the market commercially is so difficult at the moment," he says. "To raise money for a proper F3 season is very difficult. Maybe the market is just not there and then it would not be possible [for national F3]."

F3 is between a rock and a hard place here, as its very philosophy is to give drivers track time in cars that are more relevant to F1 - in development and learning - than any other.

Berger in his F3 days: Macau '83 © LAT

"We brought the engines down from €100,000 to €50,000," says Berger. "If we could change more to save money, we would give away some of the technology F3 is known for, where we teach guys for F1. Not much can be done any cheaper, except you use the material better."

Here, in other words, is his justification for national series using FIA rules: "A team like Fortec could run one weekend at Silverstone in a national race, and the next weekend, instead of sitting at home, they can do a European race at Imola."

On the question of European F3's sporting rules discouraging this (a driver is allowed just one engine per season) because the mileage would become too great, he retorts: "But you need another engine for Macau, you need another engine for testing, so at the end of the day all these teams have two engines. It's still cheaper than having another car."

Berger also explains why the pre-'08 cars were written out of national F3 rules (incidentally, the Australian and Brazilian series, perhaps geographically more immune, still have them, but there is ongoing dialogue with the FIA). He states that this - along with the obligation for new engines to be admitted - was clear to Britain's MSA well before the WMSC ratification last December: "Why not before 2008? Because we got from our Working Groups and the Safety Commission a strict no, because safety rules changed in a big way in 2008 - side-impact structure, wheel tethers, rollhoops.

"This was worked on over the whole of last year. John Ryan [of the MSA] was in discussions in every Commission meeting. He had his own arguments and he was part of the decision.

"British F3 is crucial for the whole scene, but it cannot work if there are discussions like, 'Ah, we didn't know the regulations and we need to make it like this'."

National F3's biggest rival is, arguably, Formula Renault 2.0, which is fighting fit across three series in Europe. "It's a very good formula," asserts Berger, "and we're happy to have them. After F4 you can go to Renault 2.0 or F3 nationally."

F4, of course, is the Commission's next step. Italy's championship will be the first conforming to the FIA's blueprint, and kicks off in the coming weeks. And Berger is confident that Britain, Germany, Australia and China will join in next year.

Berger with Todt, FIA colleagues and F3 ace Tom Blomqvist (second left)

Key to the concept are low-powered, monocoque cars, putting the FIA in opposition to the UK's existing BRDC F4 Championship for spaceframe racers. Berger states: "We're going for a very modern, highest-safety-standards monocoque."

But whether this is genuinely down to safety, or more to modern perception - particularly in the eyes of prospective drivers' parents - is unclear. After all, here's what the FIA Institute itself declared, in its magazine 'AUTO', after a series of safety tests on the current spaceframe Formula Ford EcoBoost cars (which should become FIA F4, but with monocoque chassis, in the UK next year): 'the result is a chassis that matches the safety levels of an F1 racer - for a fraction of the cost'.

Monocoques it is though, and here's where it gets complicated, as BRDC F4 promoter Jonathan Palmer owns the trademark to 'F4' in the UK. "I'll be honest on this - it's a bit confusing, just in Britain, not anywhere else in the world," sighs Berger. "I personally don't care about the name - it could be Formula Junior or whatever - but it was the wish of Jean Todt and the WMSC: 'We need a logical pyramid: F4, F3, F2'.

"I'm not too worried, because at the end of the day Jonathan can sort it out by himself. Once people see the car, the organisation, the safety difference between a composite monocoque and a tubeframe, things will automatically run in the right direction.

"Britain is going to be booming on [FIA] F4, especially as it looks like Ford's going to be the partner - that couldn't be better. And knowing that it's going to run on the weekends of Alan Gow's BTCC, the strongest platform in Britain, it's going to be a no-brainer. There'll be a full field and Britain's going to have a new, perfect way to build up young drivers.

"Back to the name, we have a similar situation in France [with the Autosport Academy-run F4 series]. But France has seen what we're doing and we've joined forces, and they're going to come into our regulations."

Revamped Formula Ford should be UK's FIA F4 offering © LAT

One cloud on the horizon for British F4 is that the UK - as in so many other matters that frustrate Berger - is out of kilter with the rest of the world, this time with age limits. The FIA concept is to allow a minimum age of 15, yet the MSA has stipulated 16 since 2012. Berger can't believe this when AUTOSPORT mentions it. "I don't think you're right," he remarks. "I would be surprised; it's in the FIA rules. If the MSA do something different again, then it's what I said before: they're wrong, I see no reason for it."

Perhaps the recalcitrance and eccentricities of the UK - and in the case of minimum age, it puts us at a disadvantage against, say, Italian F4 - are no surprise. After all, we steadfastly refuse to go metric, drive on the right, ditch our three-pin plugs or consider ourselves European, and regard those issuing directives from abroad with a suspicion befitting Captain Mainwaring in Dad's Army...

One thing these quirks should be sufficiently distant from is Formula 2: the top of the FIA's sub-F1 ladder. Todt's recent re-election manifesto spoke of a 'redefined F2 class we intend to create as the final stepping stone to truly top-flight competition'. This obviously impacts on Formula Renault 3.5, GP2 and, by connection, GP3 - the main rival to the FIA's F3 championship.

"Yes, we are talking about it but I have honestly put a handbrake on it for different reasons," says Berger. "We are halfway to 70 per cent to making F3 strong, and the next project is F4. Then I think the next thing is F2, but for the good of the sport we should not jump into something before we have a real concept that maybe forces things together and we make one thing out of three."

If, say, GP2 was to become the basis of the FIA's F2, it would create a sticky situation between GP3 (GP2's feeder series) and F3. But it's not one Berger is losing any sleep over. "The only thing I have in the radar [outside the FIA ladder] is Renault 2.0, because it fits. GP2 is a logical next step up for an F3 driver, but GP3... I don't even know who is there except Alex Lynn! I always say we should just concentrate on a perfect product for the young boys [F3], and if we do this then we're going to be successful anyway."

Berger's focus, for now, is on F3 and F4, and getting everyone to toe the line. Yes, you can question his methods - he admits he doesn't get it right all the time - but he had total chaos to clear up and at least he's making progress, even if he doesn't care how many feathers he ruffles. "We need Britain to understand that you need to be clear - you cannot do favours to everyone," he states. "Britain has failed for so many years. It's the strongest single-seater country in the world [historically], but it's a mess."