As many of you will know, I recently gave a talk at one of Brian's Fridays on the subject of Formula One and why it is so bad. It is a subject in which I continue to take an interest and this evening found myself doing a google search on general F1 related things. In the course of the search I uncovered the following:

Course Safety and Emergency Response in Motor Sport, Ben Chapman. This is a final year dissertation and seems reasonably comprehensive. The only thing lacking is a discussion of the impact of high speed, especially high-speed cornering on safey and, thus, regulation.

Putting the "Grand" Back into Grand Prix, Scott Russell (I think). Includes this quote:

Damning stuff, though I don't particularly like his solutions.

F1 = Fake? by Simon Lewis decries the recent rule changes. He says:

Quite.

Safe:How Safe Can Formula One Be? by Roger Horton. The author gets really quite philosophical:

Formula One ought to be one of the most exciting sports in the world. It has all the ingredients: speed, skill and technology. And yet, it's as boring as Hell.

Why is that?

Perhaps we should consider what an exciting Formula One would be like. It would be very fast. The technology would be inventive and cutting edge. Any team could harbour hopes of winning. And there would be lots of overtaking.

In addition it would be reasonably safe for driver and spectator. And it would be comprehensible.

Now, I can't fault Formula One on speed or safety - safety has improved massively over the years. It's just on everything else that it lets itself down.

There is almost no overtaking. As I understand it one of the principal reasons for this is the air flow at the back of a modern Formula One car. In years gone by this was relatively "clean" allowing pursuing cars to "slip stream". Nowadays, due to advances in aerodynamics, it is "dirty" meaning that the closer you get to the car in front the harder your own car becomes to control; so making overtaking difficult.

Technological innovation is appalling. F1 cars have barely changed in 10 years. And although changes have taken place, as I understand it most of them have been evolutionary rather than revolutionary.

Compare this with the period 1962-1982. Then you saw the introduction of spaceframe chassis, aerodynamic wings, side-pods, ground-effect aerodynamics and turbos. Tyrrell even experimented with a six-wheeler.

Many of the innovations of recent years such as: active suspensions, traction control, turbos and ground-effect aerodynamics have been banned. There are all sort of other rules. All of this hampers innovation.

This has had a serious knock-on effect. Whereas in 1982 McLaren, Renault, Williams, Ferrari and Brabham and a few others could all aspire to winning a Grand Prix, nowadays only Ferrari, Williams and McLaren can. For Williams and McLaren success typically only comes when Ferrari suffer a catastrophic disaster.

Blame the bans. Revolutionary technology is often cheap while evolutionary technology tends to be expensive. If the rules are so restrictive that you can only develop existing technology then that is bound to favour the richer teams.

Having said that, the bans have not been introduced entirely without reason. About 20 years ago Formula One technology outgrew the drivers. For 20 years it has been possible for a cornering Formula One car to produce such g-forces that the driver would become unconcious. That is not good. Ever since then the authorities have chosen to ban whatever technology threatens to make cars undrivable.

The final problem is comprehensibility. I cannot number the times when I have watched a Grand Prix where, say, David Coulthard has been in the lead, the cars have gone into the pits and Michael Schumacher has emerged in the lead. What happened there? Now, I wouldn't want to denigrate the very great efforts of those who work out pit stop tactics - but sport it ain't.

So, what would I do? I start with a caveat. I am not an F1 afficionado so I could easily be looking something obvious. But here are my ideas:

1. Introduce overtaking lanes. We have them on motorways - why not F1 tracks? Divide the track in two with a white line. Designate the faster lane as the slow lane and the slower lane as the overtaking lane. If you are unable to overtake you must drive in the slow lane. If you are able to overtake you may (though you don't have to) drive in the overtaking lane. If you touch the white line you suffer a 10 second stop-go penalty.

2. Ban the problem - not the technology. If g-forces are too high then ban high g-forces. Fit every car with a g-force meter (if such a thing exists.) Set a limit well within the ability of the human body to cope. If the limit is exceeded once again it's a 10-second stop-go penalty.

3. Ban pit stops. OK, there's a problem here: what if it rains? Well, in that case allow teams to change tyres. I am sure it is not beyond the ability of the organisers to work out if it is raining or not.