Typically, open,wheel has been used as a showcase for technology. Not that any of the technology is applicable or ever really makes it to your road car, (in fact it’s more likely the other way around) but motorsport is there to serve as a marketing tool to “look like a showcase” for the auto manufactures. This showcase hits the “techy” people demographic open wheel racing serves.

I would consider F1′s recent attempt to integrate KERS as a failure to be a good showcase for technology. I would attribute this to F1′s “critical mass”, and inability to implement change quickly across all teams. The teams and their investments have gotten so massive, they can not change direction quickly enough, nobody can agree, too many lawyers etc..

Given the IRL essentially has no mass at all, now would seem like an opportune time to grab the attention of the automakers as a means to showcase new technologies. Sorry, I’m not talking about turbo charged V8′s, V6′s or 4′s here, that is not where the auto industry is headed.

Any thoughts? Would you watch IRL if there were muliple mfg’s competing w/ Hybrids, or KERS etc?

(don’t get me wrong, I love the old TurboV8 days)

“Anybody could have come up with the DP01″? I have no clue what to do with that statement. The DP01 required some slightly lateral thinking, trying to maintain the high performance nature of open wheel racing but still attempting to allow cars to get up behind each other in corners and comlpete passes. Novel ideas, no?

Look, I’m not saying that we need to just re-invent the DP01 to run in IndyCar in 2011 or anything (that would be silly and counterproductive), just that we could use some extra brainpower mulling over the next generation of cars. You know, the generation of cars that every last one of us who cares enough about the sport to read blogs about it hopes is a friggin’ home run: fast, racy, competitive, cost effective. We all hope that there is more than one engine in 2012. What’s needed there is somebody who can build consensus among the manufacturers while not allowing any one maker to dictate rules which drive all the others away. Why precicesly does Honda appear to be insisting on V6s, while all of the other interested parties reportedly want 4 cylinders? Honda sells plenty of 4 cylinders in their street cars, too, and they even sell a turbo-4 in the Acura RDX. Last I checked, they have no production turbo-V6. So, what’s their angle? It sure isn’t “buy what we’re racing!” Even if Honda wants to bring a V6 and the others want vee- or inline-4s, why can’t we brew up an equivalency formula? It’s not 1976 anymore, so you don’t have to make guesses like they used to about boost levels for one type of engine versus another. There’s plenty of engine simulation software on the market (I used to work for a company that made one such program). Buy some and start cranking through the data! Honda wants an answer by Christmas? Great, that gives us five months to figure it out! Get on it! Now!

Not to mention that he is wrong. OWR cars have been racing on ovals in America for nearly 100 years. His remark was made all the more ridiculous, when, subsequently, the race turned out to be excellent—one of the better ovals on the schedule—and the fans turned out to be among the most knowledgeable OWR fans anywhere.

OTOH, if there is one thing an OWR car was never designed to do, it’s to be driven on the street. That doesn’t stop the league from racing them there, though, does it? It’s a good show; who cares if the cars aren’t ideally suited for it.

The IRL’s problem is not the specification of a chassis, and anybody could have come up with the DP01. It broke no new ground whatsoever. The IRL’s problem is thus: The IRL is an economy—it is an economy that has way too little value in it for teams to prosper as businesses.

In terms of competition, it is interesting to note that the last time Panther Racing saw the winner’s circle, it was at TMS with Tomas Scheckter and a Chevy engine. They need a partner that gives them an edge. They’re never going to get that edge with a single engine supplier, and they will be forever a bridesmaid.

But, the goal of having multiple manufacturers is really, ultimately, not about competition. It’s about bringing partners into the league, and thereby increasing the value of the Indy Car economy. It’s the same deal with title sponsors, etc.

I’d bet my teeth we’re going to have a single engine supplier in 2012, and that’s very bad news for the IRL. What is it, exactly, that the “Chief Steward” of Champ Car can do about that? I think the answer is “Nothing.”

As for Cotman, I seem to remember him being one of the principals in nailing down the specs for the ’07 Panoz ChampCar, and the guy who finally pushed through the mandate of road course standing starts. It’s those sorts of things that Robin’s basing his trumpeting on. I’m willing to let the Toronto Lights Fiasco go, as long as he’s learned from it (I don’t know that anybody else within The League was ready for such an event, either), and I’m more than happy to hear what TC’s got to say about the future of IRL racing as a whole.

That said, Cotman’s record as steward in CART etc. was good, and his sterness with both Ana Biatriz & the whole Sean Guthrie incidents this year do exactly what they should, penalize but also show other drivers by example that breaking the rules or codes of conduct/ethics are not going to be taken lightly or tolerated, even if you are the race winner.

Barnhart’s biggest problem right now is he is too personal with the drivers, and therefore is giving everyone too much leeway, too many warnings without action, so no one expects anything; and then when he finally enforces a rule they flip out (e.g. Helio at Detroit 2008). I’d say move Barnhart to a role of working on the new spec; the aspect of actually getting it done & tested and ready & then serving as a backup to Cotman in Race Control only. He clearly has a vast knowledge of the safety aspects and means well, he just doesn’t have the sternness necessary to be a referee.

Regarding Cotman I just don’t know enough about him. There is a big difference between “managing” (dealing with the personalities, politics, and operational day to day issues) and “leadership” (putting out a vision, and inspiring others to accomplish it). I think Cotman is a proven manager, as he’s had success all the way along the line, but does he have the leadership potential that Miller says he does? The only way to find out is to hand him the reins. Unfortunately, Miller is right. The more he campaigns for Cotman, the more he hurts his chances.

The bigger question is “Does IndyCar need better leadership, or better management”. Is it the “vision” of the future that is lacking, or the “execution” of that vision. Ultimately the series will need both to survive, but right now, which is in more demand?