The cancellation of the Bahrain and Saudi Arabian Grands Prix in April due to the conflict in the Middle East has dramatically reshaped the Formula 1 calendar. The double postponement has created a month-long gap without racing, while also leaving several major questions over how the second half of the championship could be reorganised.
Formally, the two events were never officially cancelled by Formula 1, which simply stated that they would not take place in April. It is no secret that the shared objective remains finding a way to recover both races later in the season. Much will depend on how the conflict in the Middle East evolves and how quickly the situation stabilises, but several options remain under consideration, also reflecting the wishes of the race promoters themselves.
This was also confirmed by Liberty Media CEO Derek Chang, who during the recent shareholder meeting focused on financial results explained that Formula 1 leadership is “working day and night” to recover at least one of the two races. “We will act carefully. It may be possible to reschedule one race toward the end of the season,” Chang said.
In the most optimistic scenario, one of the two races between Bahrain and Saudi Arabia could be reintroduced by using the currently open slot between Baku and Singapore in September. At the moment, this appears to be the most realistic solution because it would not require major disruption to the existing calendar, although it would create three consecutive triple-headers in the final part of the season, placing even more pressure on teams from both a human and logistical standpoint.
The situation becomes far more complicated if the target is to recover both events. From late October onward, Formula 1 moves to the Americas, leaving no realistic room to reintroduce a Middle Eastern race in November. It would be easier on paper to add an event at the very end of the campaign, when the championship returns to the Middle East anyway, but even that option brings significant complications.
Under contract, Abu Dhabi must remain the final race of the season, meaning any additional Grand Prix would require pushing the season finale back by another week, bringing the championship dangerously close to the Christmas shutdown. It is also worth remembering that after the Yas Marina race, teams are already scheduled to remain in the Middle East for several extra days for a Pirelli tyre test session aimed at gathering development data for the 2027 season.
Not only would the calendar become longer, but Formula 1 would also face an unprecedented run of four consecutive race weekends alongside Las Vegas and Qatar, making an already exhausting period even more demanding. This is especially relevant because not all team personnel are subject to rotation. It is easy to understand why this remains more of a backup option for now, even if the financial return would provide a strong incentive for teams.
All of this is based on the most favourable assumption: that the conflict ends relatively soon. However, the situation remains extremely volatile, and it cannot be ruled out that even Qatar and Abu Dhabi later in the year could be called into question if no international resolution is reached.
On that front, Formula 1 has already confirmed it has contingency plans in place to avoid the calendar shrinking too dramatically, which could trigger wider consequences. “We have plans,” Formula 1 CEO Stefano Domenicali added. “The timelines and deadlines change depending on whether we are talking about recovering races that were not held in April, or dealing with what may or may not happen at the end of November or early December. We are coordinating with teams and promoters, because every decision creates a chain reaction.”
Organisational challenge: alternative logistics hubs must be found
But beyond the calendar itself, the organisational side is even more complicated than it appears. Because of the conflict, both Formula 1 teams and Pirelli—which was conducting a test session when the first missiles were launched—still have equipment stranded in Bahrain, where pre-season testing took place.
The bigger issue is that the Middle East serves as a crucial logistics hub for Formula 1 operations. Teams rely heavily on Dubai or Doha, helped by existing partnerships with Formula 1, as transit points for freight heading toward Asian race weekends. The disruption forced teams to find alternative solutions as early as the Japanese Grand Prix, which was already awkwardly separated from Australia and China on the calendar.
For this reason, when looking at the second half of the season, Singapore emerges as one of the most difficult races to manage, both in terms of equipment and personnel movement. Uncertainty over the development of the conflict means teams must completely rethink travel and freight routes, identifying alternative solutions that maintain both safety and operational efficiency.
Budget cap impact: freight costs count against teams
Efficiency is the key word here. Under Formula 1 regulations, while expenses such as hotels, flights, taxis and buses directly linked to travelling personnel are excluded from the budget cap, freight costs are treated very differently. Shipping race equipment falls within the spending cap, meaning any increase directly impacts team finances.
The conflict has already pushed transport costs significantly higher, and the need to avoid traditional transit hubs only adds further pressure, especially for smaller teams. “Transport costs have increased,” explained Haas Head of Car Engineering Hoady Nidd.
“For smaller teams this has an even bigger impact, not because the expenses are necessarily different compared to the bigger teams, but because they represent a much larger portion of our budget. Right now we are evaluating the rest of the year. There are also chain effects, not only for air freight. Our logistics department is working extensively on sea freight planning related to Bahrain and Jeddah as well.”
These factors help explain why inserting one of the postponed Grands Prix between Baku and Singapore—already seen as one of the toughest logistical stretches of the year—would still be extremely difficult. Every team operates multiple freight kits moving by sea depending on the scheduled destinations, but reintroducing one of those races would require a complete rethink of logistics planning, reallocating infrastructure to an unscheduled event.
This is manageable when teams have several months’ notice, but becomes vastly more difficult when uncertainty dominates planning. Added to that is the issue of moving equipment between consecutive races. For sustainability reasons, Formula 1 follows a strict freight chain, including shipment methods, to minimise unnecessary impact. In fact, for many teams, containers—including chassis—returned to the factory at least a week late following the Japanese Grand Prix.
The human factor: more than just a physical endurance test
There is also a far more delicate issue: the human one. Leading teams generally have larger staffing pools, allowing them to rotate personnel more frequently. Smaller teams do not enjoy that luxury. Their resources are more limited, rotations are harder to implement, and the addition of another Grand Prix would only further increase workload and stress levels.
Not every team member can be rotated. While some roles, such as mechanics, now benefit from structured rotation systems introduced in recent years to cope with the growing number of races, other positions require permanent presence. Race engineers, driver performance engineers, specialist technical staff, sporting directors and trackside operations personnel are all roles that cannot simply be swapped in and out.
To put it into perspective, adding another race would turn the second half of the season into 12 Grands Prix across just 16 weeks. For personnel required to attend every event, that would mean being away from home for nearly four months. It would be a brutal endurance test, both technically and personally, especially at the most demanding point of the season.
Leave a Reply