I write this column in a state of complete torture! Not due to publishing deadlines, but due to the compulsory shutdown that Formula 1 enforces. Just when the season was getting interesting – Mark Webber gaining a psychological edge over Sebastian Vettel, and the Ferraris finally getting it right, the F1 bandwagon decided to enter its annual summer break.

While the break isn’t entirely unusual, I must spare a few lines to share the reasoning behind it. Firstly, since the start of the 2010 Formula 1 season, all the teams, and their staff (and the cars), have traveled to nearly 12 countries – getting onto a flight almost every second week, and spending at least 4 days in a new country every fortnight. If this in itself wasn’t enough – post the race, team personnel make their way back to their respective factories almost immediately (the Monday after, they all report to work). So, the break ensures that their fatigue levels are in check, and, of course, that they get some time to spend with their families too.

The other known fact, of course, is to cut costs. Formula 1 team factories function on an almost 365-day basis. While their wind tunnel time is now restricted, non-stop development otherwise ensures that the teams are constantly spending money in updating their cars throughout the season. How else do you think Ferrari has suddenly been able to play catch up in the last two GPs?

However, the shutdown would mean that the teams can only carry out marketing and PR activities, and there can be no development or testing of the racing cars during this period. This break also allows the drivers to rest their bodies, which otherwise are used (and abused) in the F1 cockpit. An interesting fact though – Adrian Sutil chose to ‘rest’ himself by doing some high altitude cycling in Austria!

Financially though, the shutdown is a step in the right direction. There are no spends whatsoever. The operating costs of running an F1 team has been drastically reduced since the early 2000’s. Eight engines per season, extra mileage on gearbox usage, etc., have all contributed to reducing costs in Formula 1 – something I believe is critical for the sports long term future. In fact, one of the reasons to ban mid-race refueling was to save on the transport costs of the refueling rigs! So Formula 1 is increasingly getting cost conscious.

While these seemingly small decisions do go a long way in reducing spends – Formula 1 sometimes is known to be penny wise and pound foolish. Here are a few decisions that’ll help me prove my point:

Firstly, the f-duct has been banned for 2011. McLaren were the first to introduce this system in 2010, and the other teams didn’t take too long to copy their design. However, introducing a new component altogether meant that each team must have invested at least a couple of million dollars in getting it off the drawing board and fitting it onto the racing car – not to mention actually getting it to work thereafter. The ban, in short, will mean money (to the tune of millions) gone to waste!

However, the sponsors love the f-duct. Their reasons are completely different though. F1 cars barely have any flat surfaces, and the f-duct (an extension of the engine cover) would offer them just that – perfect for their logos.

Similarly, the double diffuser from last year will be banned. Yet again, millions of dollars would have been invested in changing the conventional diffuser design to accommodate the extra ‘hole.’ In fact, in 2010, teams have even spent extra money in exploring different variations of the double diffuser – for instance, the blown diffuser. All this again will be time and money down the drain when the ban comes into effect for next season. That it will make the cars nearly 2 seconds slower per lap doesn’t really matter – but it will surely mean a dead investment for the teams.

In an earlier column, I’d mentioned the return of the KERS system in 2011. While there is much clarity left on its implementation, I do foresee a considerable expenditure yet again to re-design the cars. Not only will there be a need to make space to fit the system, but also a need to change the distribution of the car’s front-rear weight ratio. All these are easier said than done, and will likely cost the teams millions of dollars in design and implementation. KERS was unanimously voted out for 2010, and then voted back in for 2011! But then, Formula 1 is extremely keen on showcasing its ‘green’ image – even if it comes at the cost of millions.

So, while I’ve gone and butchered the FOM and FIA’s cost-reducing and ‘green’ efforts, I do believe that restricting costs in Formula 1 is a very complex task. With the numerous automobile and auto ancillary brands involved – each with their own objective (and financial strengths), curtailing costs in Formula 1 can be a fantastic case study. Up for the challenge anyone? Do feel free to write to me.

Lastly, while eagerly waiting for the action to resume, which it will have done by the time you read this – my money for the title fight is on Mark Webber and Red Bull. McLaren and Ferrari have surely developed their cars better and faster through the season, however, the Red Bull’s are still the cars to beat. The long straights in Spa and Monza will be a worry for the team, but I don’t think they’ll be comprehensively out-paced.

While, at the start of the season, I thought that Sebastian Vettel would clinch his maiden title, I now believe that Mark Webber not only has the pace, but also the mental strength to out-think and out-run Vettel to the chequered flag. The season is only getting more interesting, so you better stay tuned in.