FIA's Fifteen Crucial Rally Issues

President of the FIA's World Rally Championship Commission (WRCC) Morrie Chandler was present in Rally Norway, and gave an insight into the status quo on world championship issues.

The Vision 2012 project was announced at the FIA's December World Motor Sport Council (WMSC). How will this work?

“The WRCC plans to present the first project document to the WMSC meeting in June 2007, and we expect to have the final document ready for approval at their October 2007 meeting. Vision 2012 covers technical, organisational and sporting aspects of world championship rallying. There are many areas to discuss. We must find out how manufacturers visualise the future of the cars they will build. We do not want to write rules for the type of cars they won't in fact be building. There is also a keen desire to make the regulations more simple and much more understandable, especially so the public knows how to understand our regulations.”

Is there a will at the FIA to reduce the size of the world championships?

“No, not at the moment. Teams would like it reduced, organisers do not! The calendar for 2007 and 2008 has been sorted. We have a draft calendar for 2009 which has not yet been accepted by the WMSC, but we are still currently pressing on with the 16 round championship. Last May there was a suggestion that this should be reduced to 14 but the WRCC voted against it, and it has not been discussed since.”

Are New Rallies Coming into the World Championship?

The earliest opportunity for any newcomer is 2009. Applicants have been told the costs of proceeding and the formalities involved, and none have so far asked to continue. There are currently no more Candidate events. Before a different event can be accepted, there are many factors to consider. How their event will fit into the current calendar. There must be geographical balance. A new event must not be effectively be a replica of what is already in the championship.

What is the period of contractual obligation for a rally entering the world championship? Do new organisers, for example Rally Norway, have the sort of 3-year agreement that organisers have had in the past?

No. The old three-year policy came in when there was a dramatic increase in the fee payable for running a world championship rally three years ago. The three year continuity agreement no longer operates, the system has expired. The change is because everyone now has to go through a constant observation process. At the moment, the idea of introducing what I hesitate actually to call a "second tier" system, let's say a strong support alternative, is to give a rally somewhere to go if they are not
that year in the championship. That will help quite a lot.

Has the FIA been reducing the pressure from potential candidate events by denying them security of tenure after they are selected?

We have about 24 events all wanting to be part of the WRC. If you give security of tenure to 16 of them, you are telling the others they are wasting their time. Personally, I feel that a system of guarantee for two years out of three could work, subject to maintaining proper quality of event. Unfortunately all 24 believe they are going to be the ones which are guaranteed a place in the series. Even now I do not think organisers understand the complexity of the whole problem.

What is the current status of the unsettled Cyprus/Poland/South Africa issue as to who runs the outstanding event in the 2008 calendar?

All are being observed this year and reports will go to the WRCC who will then select one of them. As Cyprus is not currently a regional event, it could become part of the Middle East Rally Championship (MERC) for 2007. There is a vacancy to be filled in the MERC. A decision about which of the three events will in the 2008 season can be expected after the last of these three has been run this year.

What is the status about Rally Australia which moves to another venue?

The FIA has received a letter from the Australian ASN stating that there is an arrangement to run their rally in a new venue and advising of their ability to run a world championship rally in 2008. This means they do not need first to run a Candidate event. We understand they have got a route but for various commercial reasons they are not yet ready to make a media announcement.

What is the FIA's relationship with the Intercontinental Rally Challenge (IRC)?

At the moment the IRC is an independent series of events, registered with the FIA. It is possible that we can tie the IRC in with the world championship, but nothing is in place for that as yet. We intend to talk with them and see whether we have common ground. IRC crept quietly out of the background, offering to help Super 2000 teams. Of course that was not really necessary because the FIA had already made provision for the S2000
cars to run in the WRC. I think we must learn more about IRC before going forward on that.

How long will we see World Rally Cars in world championship rallying?

The intent of the FIA is that the name "World Rally Car" will remain. It is not tied to a specific technical specification of these cars. Remember a Formula 1 car has retained its name for maybe 50 years but the formula has forever been changing. The idea is that the current formula will not be changed until 2012, and this is one reason why we are anxious to get the Vision 2012 agreed as soon as possible. It is possible that a change might come early. It depends how it all works.

In what sort of formula will future World Rally Cars run?

I think the designs will be scaled down dramatically from a cost point of view. The most important thing is that the FIA should not create an environment which give the manufacturers the chance to waste money. We want to make rules which for example will force manufacturers to build parts which are more reliable, and take away the urge to spend money replacing parts all the time. And if they save money, perhaps their budget will allow them to run a second team?

Would Super 2000 replace the World Rally Cars as we know them?

We don't know enough about the S2000 cars at the moment. The one thing we know is that we must not spoil the spectacle. We feel that some of the spectacle can be maintained through single supplier tyres, which will take away the relevance of tyres in the overall competition. We believe that FIA will be able to force the supplier to detune the performance of the tyres, have less road holding, cause the cars to slide a little more,
create a little more interest. Already the ban on the mousses will mean that drivers will have to drive round corners not through them. That alone will increase the element of driver skill and spectator entertainment.

Is the FIA looking to have two instead of three days rallies in future?

We are wondering if people like the Prime Minister here in Norway would be so enthusiastic if we reduce the opportunities of people to enjoy the sport and reduce attendance figures. Some events reckon they can organise a rally of the necessary lengths quite comfortably within two days and some have said the Sunday stages don't increase attendance figures so much. Maybe the decision on this could be down to the individual countries. This raises the question of the extent the FIA should dictate the format of rallies. Personally, I feel that events have become too structured, and that this reduces the amount of excitement and entertainment. We think that if individual organisers had more freedom and could introduce new ideas, it would become more entertaining. I was in favour of the change that Monte Carlo did this year. I hope this factor will emerge from Vision 2012.

What is the programme for introducing Group R? Will this run in parallel with the existing formulae?

The sport won't suddenly turn to Group R. It is intended to involve an evolutionary change. It is intended to start off slowly like Group N did in the early 80s. We know it will be hard to achieve a system in which the new Group competes fairly against the existing formulae. Judging from reactions how to achieve parity between S2000 and Group N, manufacturers seem to prefer adjustment to weights of car as a way to balance the competitive ability of formulae.

What is the FIA's position about encouraging alternative fuel cars, such as Diesels?

The FIA is interested in the eco-friendly movement generally. We are sure that by 2012, the sport needs to be eco-friendly in order to be acceptable in many countries. We do not think enough eco-technology is available yet in order to determine exactly the way to go. We know how many government level people are eager to see the sport go eco-friendly.

What is the future for SupeRally? Does the FIA want cars which do not compete the stages to be classified?

I think it is important for cars to be able to rejoin an event especially for spectators but we think they will not rejoin a rally unless there is some incentive. But do the teams always want to rejoin an event? We can't force any competitor to come back if he chooses to stop. There are always conflicting issues! The event-linking system as shown in Sweden led to Petter Solberg's car being withdrawn during an event. The trouble is that if you start to write a regulation you then have to police it! Then you have to have a suitable penalty. And that makes the sport even more complicated. One idea is having points at the end of legs. It was rejected some 18 months ago but this has got some benefits. It all leads us to simulation projects what-if this, what-if that, especially so we don't end up giving points to people who haven't been successful.

Martin Holmes