Five things we've learned from first half of F1 season

This year's Formula 1 season introduced the biggest regulatory overhaul in the sport's history, with new aerodynamic and power‑unit rules. While the chassis regulations have largely proved successful – even if the cars are slightly slower than last year – the updated engines have not delivered the expected performance. The nominal 50‑50 split between internal‑combustion and electrical power (in practice closer to 53‑47) combined with the engine architecture has left the units power‑starved. When the battery is depleted, the cars produce only about 540 bhp – less than a Formula 3 car – yet retain considerable grip. The constant need to recharge the battery has neutralised many of the best corners on F1’s premier circuits, turning them into what Fernando Alonso has called “charging stations.” Conversely, the power shortage has sparked what some describe as “yo‑yo racing,” with cars repeatedly swapping positions over several laps. Drivers insist the overtakes are artificial, often occurring simply because one driver suddenly has an extra 350 kW (470 bhp) compared with a rival. Four‑time champion Max Verstappen voiced his frustration: “Sometimes people say: ‘Ah yeah, but this was a great race.’ I say: ‘Yeah, but it’s not truly realistic the way we are racing.’” He added: “And then you get to some tracks and you’re driving on not a lot of horsepower for F1 standards. And it’s a bit painful, which I could see coming already for years. So, it’s then, of course, not the most exciting.” He continued: “At one point I’m also a bit fed up with repeating myself, because it’s already hard enough just having to drive it.” Verstappen, Alonso and most of the other drivers raised these concerns early in the season. The sport acknowledged the problem and reacted. Rule tweaks aimed at alleviating the issue were introduced after just three races, and the power‑unit split will be adjusted to a 60‑40 ratio by 2028, with an interim step for the next campaign. These changes should markedly reduce the difficulties, though they will not eliminate them entirely. The FIA had been warned repeatedly in the years leading up to 2026 that this power‑shortage scenario would arise. The development has presented an easy target for FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem to propose a return to naturally aspirated V8 engines for 2031. The idea enjoys distinctly limited backing among F1 stakeholders; it lacks imagination and thorough analysis, brings its own set of problems, and effectively rolls the clock back 15 years. The core issue is not hybrid technology or turbocharging per se, but the absence of viable energy‑recovery pathways. F1 created the situation by removing the MGU‑H, which harvested energy from the turbo and exhaust, and by blocking recovery from the front axle. The series must pause, intelligently and rigorously assess what it wants from its future power units, then devise a package that satisfies manufacturers, remains road‑relevant, addresses climate concerns, avoids creating a noise hazard at the sport’s marquee events, reduces costs, grants drivers near‑full access to power, and provides a genuine platform for overtaking.