There is a section for comments and suggestions and here is what I wrote:
To promote innovation and differences between teams, I would like to see the rules package reduced. I support minimum weight and maximum fuel capacity rules but think the teams should be allowed to run any engine they please, like the World Endurance Championship. Fuel economy will still be important but teams should have more control over how they save that fuel. I also think that there should be a Factory and Satellite team system like MotoGP has, with Satellite teams being allowed more engines per season and more fuel capacity. Teams should be allowed to have active suspensions (road relevant) and ground effects but the front and rear wing sizes should be limited and be single plane only. This will permit cars to follow each other really closely and make passes. Refuelling should be permitted again but fuel flow should be by gravity feed, hand held tanks only (like NASCAR) and a maximum number of 6 mechanics allowed to work on the car at one time. I don't like how pitstops are done so fast that I can't see what happened.
I wonder if anybody will pay attention to this one. Maybe someone should forward this to Ross Brawn.
1. 5 litre V8's normally aspirated.
2. Single element wings
3. No restrictions on the under floor, loose the plank and flat floor.
4. Active suspension to avoid porpoising.
5. Fair money distribution. No bonuses.
6. No DRS
Drop the 5 litre V8 and Damon Hill will feel like shouting for Doc Brown!
I still stand by unrestricted DRS; unrestricted engine type (straight 4, V6, V7, V10... Whatever works); restricted fuel allowance (ever decreasing); smaller, simpler wings. Anything else goes...
More testing through the year at set times but only allow 'new parts' at the race following testing... E.g. you want to change the bargeboards, gotta wait until the race after the next test. I reckon six test weekends per season should be ok.
The aero problem isn't a problem if we allow driver controlled aero: Then you can accurately call them pilots (I hate that term).
The problem with aero is it is too restricted.
The dirty air is good if you want to win but leads to crap racing.
All of the design is maximising the effect if you're in front but there's no opening to have aero that gets over dirty air when you need it when behind. You'll never get rid of aero so free it up with driver control.
Personally I've always favoured the old WSR 3.5 system of giving each driver 60 seconds of DRS per race to use whenever they like. Means it can be used to overtake, defend, catch up etc and adds and extra tactical element of when to use it and finding yourself in a situation where you have none left.
I think there is something to be said for putting a limit of the maximum downforce that can be generated by an F1 car during any point of a race. This should be technically possible by including mandated pressure sensors in an appropriate location in the suspension. This won't prevent teams from spending half their budget on aerodynamics, but at least the focus should move to generating the maximum allowed downforce with minimal drag. (and hopefully a cleaner wake).
If you want to limit aero, provide standard front and rear wings, and floor. allow as much development elsewhere (engine, suspension sensors and control systems) and even aero around the car, but front, back, and bottom are fixed. I think it was Gary Anderson who proposed something similar a while ago.
Don't limit how much the teams can do, just where they can do it.
When I started following F1 the average wheekbase on cars was about 2,700 mm. It is now something a;ong the lines of 3.700 mm.
Wouldn't retrning to shorter wheelbases reduce the amount of dirty air, reduce the depency on front-wings, make cars more lively on the rear (thus pussing a bit more emphasis on mechanical rear grip traction) and quite simply significantly reduce cars' total lenghts and thus increasing the chances of overtaking at circuits reputed for being impossible to overtake on?