FIA reveal plans to prevent Mercedes-like dominance and F1 team 'humiliation'

FIA single-seater director Nikolas Tombazis has explained how the motorsport governing body hopes to prevent any F1 engine manufacturers from being "humiliated forever" by the new-for-2026 power unit regulations.

The Greek engineer has also detailed why he does not believe any single OEM (original equipment manufacturer) will enjoy the same level of dominance that Mercedes did when F1 last changed its engine rules in 2014.

When the championship ushered in that rewrite of the rule book, the German marque was comfortably the class of the field, with its customer teams also enjoying a significant advantage.

It led to a period of unprecedented success for the Brackley-based squad, winning eight consecutive constructors' championships and seven drivers' crowns on the bounce; in the first three years, no other team was close to having a driver mount a title challenge, with Lewis Hamilton and Nico Rosberg left to fight amongst themselves.

However, Tombazis does not envisage history repeating itself in 2026 because the rules have been simplified this time around, as opposed to becoming more complex.

"I don't think we'll ever see such a dominant engine manufacturer again as we did in 2014," he told AMuS. "Back then, the powertrain became much more complex than its predecessor.

"This time, we're doing the opposite. We're simplifying the technology. Originally, we wanted to go even further, but we couldn't get it done. The new powertrains are simpler. They no longer have MGU-H, and there are stricter limits in some areas.

"On the other hand, we have newcomers among the manufacturers, and of course, there's always the risk that one of them will miss the mark with the first attempt, despite budget constraints and limited test bench time."

Preventing F1 teams being 'humiliated'

There are also provisions within the regulations to allow struggling OEMs to catch up with the competition, preventing any teams from being consigned to their fate if they have initially misjudged the new rules.

"Yes," Tombazis replied to being asked if manufacturers will be able to improve if they are too far behind, before explaining the measures: "We've introduced a programme for this that we call 'additional development opportunities for performance gaps'.

"It was in the rules from the beginning. In recent months, we've refined how we want to manage it. Essentially, we'll measure the average performance for each manufacturer every six races.

"For those below a certain level, there will be an upgrade option depending on how far behind. This can be represented at three different levels: more money for development; more dyno hours; more time for specification homologation. So, those who are behind have a chance to catch up."

However, when it was put to the 57-year-old that the new method sounded akin to the balance of performance system seen in endurance racing, he detailed why that was not so.

That's not the case," he stated in response. "The rules remain the same for everyone. No one gets more displacement or more fuel."

Tombazis drew on the painful experience Honda and McLaren endured in 2015 when the Japanese car giant returned to F1 to underline why it is important to prevent repeat suffering.

"If there were no budget cap, the lagging manufacturers would invest more money," he added. "When Honda entered in 2015 and was lagging behind, they had to invest a lot of money for a certain period of time to catch up. With a cost cap, there's a risk that you'll never be able to catch up. And no one wants to be humiliated forever. That wouldn't be fair either.

"We're currently working on the final adjustments to this system. The engine manufacturers have played along extremely well.

"There's also another initiative. If someone has major reliability issues at the beginning, they can also upgrade. It's pointless to leave someone out in the cold who has engine failure every weekend. These engines are expensive.

"In extreme cases, someone would quickly reach the limits of the cost cap if they didn't simultaneously scale back development. This proposal still has to be approved. One idea is that once a certain number of engines are used, additional units will be exempt from the budget cap."