Flavio Briatore has said that he thinks Formula 1 needs re-designing.?

Rosbif and Christos seem to have covered all the technical bits so how about the drivers are made more accessible to their fans. I know a few of them come out and sign autographs on race weekends, but I think there should be more. They should ALL be made to do signing sessions because if nobody wanted to watch them there would be no racing in the first place:) I would definately like to see more teams on the grid too.

I need to give up work, all the good questions are answered before I get home, Christos and Rosbif have answered brilliantly, as usual. I will add, Like the 24-30 car rule, how about re intoducing the pre qualifying rule, bring the 8 slowest cars and let the 4 fastest race, something to watch on a Friday afternoon. Allow V12, V10 and V8 engine configurations, hp limited but the torque and sound differences will add some spice. And by my appointment, get Cosworth back!

The first thing I want to see is more teams and drivers, a grid of 30 cars. For that to happen major cost cutting is needed. This however is not possible with the introduction of new technologies such as KERS. The development of new technologies has always been one of F1s strongpoints and at the same time one of it's major weaknesses too. It's how we got TC, active suspension,fully auto gearboxes etc, because people stupidly insisted that F1 cars could not be crude and F1 had to be on the edge of technology. Of course one by one those gadgets having hurt the sport were abandoned. F1 should not be forced to develop new technologies on behalf of the automotive industry. "Green cars" sounds nice so if there's any "green" technology out there in the industry take it and use it otherwise wait till it shows up. I want F1 cars to be fast and difficult and different and engaging for the drivers and fans. That doesn't have to cost a lot. If every disappointed big manufacturer that leaves because they can't promote their road cars through Formula one is replaced by two private teams I'm happy with that. F1 may have a lot of appeal worldwide but it should not be about car maker fans, not people who are in it to cheer for BMW and Toyota, it should be about motor sport fans who love above all the racing and the drivers. EDIT:Technology and development are synonymous with F1. But back in the 70s the cost of free development was within reach of teams and technology had not reached a point where it took control of the car and off the driver's hands. Now it has done so and has got out of reach because of astronomical costs it has to be kept in check. Technologies that are outside the scope of racing and do the driver's job instead of him should be banned alltogether. Development of technologies that increase performance within certain regulations should be allowed but in a much stricter way than in the past so as to contain costs. I see no other way, what worked in the past will not necessarily work for a lifetime, had the powers that be of F1 not reacted to the new realities long time ago there would be no drivers in the cars anyway and F1 would be dead by now. But we need more, that's what this Q is about, F1 is always on the edge of trying to stay true to it's tradition and stay alive at the same time, always at the top of motorsport. Environmental concerns have created a sense of urgency but F1 is still very much alive and kicking and now is the best time to think of it's long term future. There's something missing, everybody knows that, people in the paddock included. EDIT2:Sam A, since you seem to know better than everyone else what F1 is... "what is the point of making manual gearboxes? slow the cars down? " It's that what it's all about? Speed? Slowing the cars down with manual gearboxes is the equivalent of increasing power by 50bhp, or downforce by 1%, or tire width by a couple of milimeters. The technology existed long time ago for F1 cars to exceed human limits of tolerance within a couple of corners, don't worry F1 cars can be as fast as they want to be. They've been trying to slow them down for 30 years now, didn't you notice? "do you guys have any idea why it's called formula one? because all of the teams have to follow a specific formula in preparing their car, and that is the only restriction. this creates an environment where super high technology is utilized to win. which is cool." That's deep. Super high technology allows for an on board computer to correct oversteer in thousands of a second, much quicker than any human being ever could. Is that F1? Like I said, maybe a few decades back the quest for speed did not interfere much with the drivers work, the only concern arising from development was that of cost, that is no longer the case, technology cannot be allowed to be implemented freely in a racing car any more, F1 or not. Yes, super high technology is cool. It stops being cool when: 1)You can't afford it 2)Rather than fulfill it's purpose of serving you you end up serving it. Special effects in a movie are a means to an end. They exist to give a better representation of reality, they do not exist to steal the show. Movies or computer games that are all effects and no substance are crap. Technology should serve F1, F1 does not exist to serve technology.

Christos and Rosbif are on the money here in my opinion. Not that I'm against technology, but I'd like to see a reduction in proven "common" technology such as TC. (thankfully already gone) If technology is to be implemented it should be new and have to be of benefit to the car industry in general which is where Rosbif's point about a fixed fuel tank comes into its own. If f1 cars could become more fuel efficient without a major loss of performance then the impact of that alone would be huge. That's about all I have to add that hasn't already been said. ***edit*** I'd like to make a point if I may about the "Hollywood" metaphor someone above made. Hollywood might spend more on films than anyone else but that might just be seen as hedging their bets. Hollywood doesn't understand the concept of quality control so in effect for every 1 classic film made we have to endure about 1000 complete turkeys. In fact, Asian film studios spend a lot less because less is available so the core of the films becomes about good story telling. Check out any film from Japan, Korea, Hong Kong and I guarantee that you won't be upset with your choice. This brings me back to F1. One of F1's true innovators wasn't one of the teams with a budget which could buy a third world country or two, it was Lotus, who had to rely on ingenuity and good solid engineering. Such was Colin Chapman's genius that any F1 car made today is literally the son of a Lotus.

I agree with most of rosbif's points but there's one part where I have to disagree. I'm talking about the point on eliminating the electronics sensors, not because it isn't cool, I think that it would be great if the drivers had to use their ability and sense the problems themselves but it would be harder for the mechanics to detect what causes a crash. We saw Glock's crash it was completely out of his control and the mechanics had to rely on the data of the electronics and telemetry to reconstruct the whole thing. They said that when the car is too badly damaged there is no other way. That's why I think that, in order to keep the high standards of safety, the electronic sensors should stay at least in a form that can be analysed after the race, or only after an accident. That would force the driver to use his own ability to sense the problems during the race. Now, I'm not an expert obviously so if it already works that way then cool.. But if it doesn't, it should! That's it, I think his answer is still perfect because it does offer solutions that would make F1 more exciting and the question was not about safety.

. Er......, ut-oh.........., am I having a flashback to my teens or did I really just see Bollywood mentioned in the F1 section?? WOW....that's ok, it wasn't a LSD induced close encounter....You really got it smokin' in here today Tilly, well done!! Some good answers too. I'm sorry, 3utkarsh but you may well love the driver aids, but I feel that most do not. The points made by Christos and Rosbif are well thought out as usual and make a lot of sense. Where is the sense of taking away the control of the driver? Mind-numbing perfect laps is no spectacle and if that is where your entertainment is centred, then probably the glamour is a good thing too. I couldn't care less if champagne is present or whether a girl or a moose is holding the driver's umbrella. For me, lairy racing angles, worn out driving gloves (caused by 2000 gear changes), close competition with unnaturally gifted drivers and sometimes wondering whether the technology will hold out to the end of the race is what i'm after. Yes technology is great, but so is clarity of vision in it's utilisation. This year has been great so far without TC, let's see more of less. Look to Rosbif and Christos for my suggestions also. EDIT: and Cavalino...excellent....GREAT QUESTION, either of these 3 have well thought out points, but I still can't fathom where Bollywood fits in. ...Although on a Bollywood side note, I do quite like that song "Chal tei, chal tei, mill gay a ta..." (the "walking, walking" song, but I guarantee I spelt it wrong) .

i totally agree with rosbif on reducing wings, add to that dropping the ride heights to team preference and allowing a much wider wheel base, a fat low car doesn't require as much aero grip and will improve passing dramatically, Ban carbon fiber, all body and suspension will need to be made of some metallic alloy, this will add weight strengthen suspension parts and cut costs big time, i totally disagree with banning refueling, pit stops are where the team acts like a team also adds a variable into the race, and i think f1 needs more variables rather than less, i think the points system needs to revert back to the old format or at the very least expand the gap between first and second another idea is to let the fans rate a track after two years, maybe put it on f1.com for a week as a vote, ......oh and actually listen to the fans opinion and take action accordingly new tracks aside from fia pit and hospitality standards mandate that any new track have at least 60ft (20 or so meters for those of you across the pond) of elevation change,

There are some very good answers already. I think: 1 More F1 drivers meet the fans sessions. I hardly hear of these and it would do a lot to promote the sport 2 Flav suggested a driver salary cap years ago. It would help cut costs but some drivers may not be happy about this 3 12 F1 teams instead of the current 10. So that makes 24 cars on the grid. 4 For countries tht buy rights to telecast F1, make sure the races are aired live. (Might sound crazy but some people don't take their rights seriously) 5 Another crazy idea... but underperforming drivers should know when to retire. Some of them just don;t know when to leave.... However, this has to be the driver's decision, so.... 6 Ensure that the commentators know their stuff. I've heard some really horrendous commentary which also included mispronounciation of drivers' names and at times, mistaken nationality 7 Revise pitting under safety car rules.

it dose you only have 5 drivers that can win