Support NeoGAF

[subzero9285]

http://drop.io/sidepodcast/asset/felipebaby-mp3 - :lol

Here's Rob Smedley's response to this.

http://drop.io/sidepodcast/asset/rob-mp3

 

[subzero9285]

Rossi aiming for first 2009 win

Valentino Rossi hopes he can raise his game at Jerez this weekend having not been quick enough to win either of the first two races of the 2009 MotoGP season.

The reigning champion finished second at both Losail and Motegi - having been unable to catch the dominant Casey Stoner in Qatar and then lost the lead to team-mate Jorge Lorenzo halfway through the Japanese Grand Prix.

Those defeats have frustrated Rossi, who does not think he can retain his title purely through consistency and is determined to resume winning.

"We've made a good start to the season with two podiums which shows we are consistent, but now we need to make the step up," he said.

"Motegi was a good race but we had one or two problems, which we need to fix."

He is optimistic that Jerez can be the scene of his breakthrough, especially as he has won five of the last eight MotoGP races held at the track.

"We have a lot of data from Jerez because we tested there twice in the winter so I hope that this will help us to find a good setting straight away," said Rossi.

"As a rule we are very strong at the track and it is always great fun riding there."

His team-mate Lorenzo heads to his home race full of confidence and leading the championship following his Motegi victory.

"My motivation is high because I am arriving as the world championship leader in my own home. I can't ask for more," said Lorenzo.

"I had a very good feeling in Japan, and I enjoyed riding the bike in every corner. I have to be careful however because I am still learning all the time how to ride with the new Bridgestone tyres."

Source

Hayden looking to improve

Nicky Hayden believes he has made great strides in acclimatising to Ducati in recent weeks and will be able to demonstrate that improvement at Jerez this weekend.

The former champion described his qualifying test at the track in March as "a disaster", but thinks he has become more comfortable in the team since then and will therefore be in much better shape for the race.

Hayden has only scored four points so far this year having had a massive qualifying crash at Losail and then been taken out by Yuki Takahashi on lap one in Japan last weekend.

"I can't deny that it's been a tough start to the season, especially in Japan, but we have to move on and look ahead," he said.

"Now we go to Jerez and even though we didn't have a great test there in March, things are different now.

"At Motegi I felt as though the communication within the team had improved, the work we're doing together as a group is becoming more smooth, so I'm looking forward to starting again at Jerez with a clear and positive mind."

He hopes that he can get maximum dry track mileage during the race build-up this time after the abundance of rain in the opening rounds.

"I don't even want to think about the possibility of it raining again there," Hayden said. "At the moment it looks like the forecast is good but it seems as though somebody upstairs likes seeing MotoGP riders in the wet.

"Joking aside, it would be nice to have a 'normal' weekend so that we can work properly on the bike. I want my season to finally get going."

Source

 

[subzero9285]

Horner: More to come from RBR

Red Bull Racing team principal Christian Horner insists there is still much more to come from his outfit following its latest showings.

Sebastian Vettel has moved into third place in the standings after winning the Chinese Grand Prix and finishing second in Bahrain.

The Shanghai victory was the first for Red Bull Racing, but championship leader Jenson Button reckons the Milton Keynes-based squad is now the team to beat despite the Brawn driver having won the last race at Sakhir.

Red Bull is yet to introduce a double-decker diffuser, as well as other updates, and Horner reckons there is still a lot of potential to be realised.

"I think that we have got a good car," said Horner. "We have got a lot of developments to come and we still have the double-diffuser to look forward to.

"So it is still early days, but we have clearly demonstrated in wet and dry conditions now what our potential is."

Horner added that is convinced Vettel could have won the Bahrain Grand Prix last Sunday if he hadn't been stuck behind Lewis Hamilton and Jarno Trulli for several laps.

"You will see on the race plot that we would have followed Jenson, and we had the overlap of about three or four laps on each stint," he added. "So I think we would have jumped him at the stop. It was hard to follow other cars as well, as it was doing quite a lot of damage to the tyres.

"We could see we had the pace, but well done to Jenson for making his opportunity work for him."

He added: "Toyota tried a different strategy, but we were very happy on the option. Sebastian was trying to look after them the best he could, behind Trulli and Hamilton. He did a brilliant job of doing that, so he could exploit the benefit from them in free air.

"Then on the prime at the end we had no real problem. We went out the pits 14 seconds behind the Brawn and with three laps to go we had closed it down to about nine seconds. Then obviously they turned their engines down."

Source


Mosley: McLaren penalty fair

FIA president Max Mosley doesn't consider McLaren's suspended three-race ban to be a lenient punishment for the team misleading the stewards at the Australian and Malaysian Grands Prix.

Speaking after today's World Motor Sport Council meeting, Mosley said that McLaren's attitude to proceedings had impressed him and that there was no need to punish the team further, especially as former sporting director Dave Ryan has now parted company with the team.

"I don't think so," he said when asked by the BBC if McLaren had got off lightly. "In the end there were decisions taken by the people who are no longer involved. That being the case, it would have been unfair to go on with the matter.

"We think it's entirely fair. They've demonstrated there's a complete culture change and under those circumstances it's better to put the whole thing behind us.

"Unless they do something similar, that's the end of the matter."

Mosley added that he was impressed with the attitude of team principal Martin Whitmarsh and the way he has conducted himself since the controversy.

"Martin Whitmarsh made a very good impression," said Mosley. "He's straightforward and wants to work with us. We're all trying to do the same thing, which is make the championship successful. Martin fully understands that and we reacted accordingly.

Bernie Ecclestone said that he was happy with the hearing, although he did suspect the punishment was lenient.

"Probably, yes," he said when asked if McLaren had got off lightly.

"It was fair, honest and straightforward. I thought Martin [Whitmarsh] was happy with that. He knew they did something wrong so they got a slap."

Source

 

[subzero9285]

Earnhardt Jr: Speed needs reviewing

Dale Earnhardt Jr has suggested that NASCAR should consider reviewing the speeds that cars are reaching in the draft at Talladega, to prevent a repeat of Sunday's last-lap crash at the track.

Seven fans were injured from flying debris when Carl Edwards' car crashed against the catch fencing following contact with Brad Keseloswski and Ryan Newman in the final yards of the Aaron's 499.

Keselowski and Edwards were running at nearly 200mph when the incident happened, using the momentum they had built from the previous lap when Keselowski pushed Edwards in a drafting tandem.

According to Earnhardt, the speeds reached by the cars on their own are fine, but they increase too much while drafting due to the aerodynamic characteristics of the current specification Sprint Cup car.

"NASCAR is really wanting to see cars run around 190mph," Earnhardt said. "We are doing 10 more miles an hour bumper to bumper like we are. That's where the threshold is for cars getting airborne, about 195mph.

"We have to think what we can do to get back under that threshold and not create this situation in the future. It's always been there, we have just been lucky."

Some pundits have suggested that Talladega needs to be reconfigured to reduce the risk of a fatal accident. There have been safety concerns at the track since its first race in 1969 when drivers went on strike because they considered it too dangerous.

Later, in 1987, Bobby Allison's car got airborne after blowing the right rear tyre, crashed into the fence and tore it apart. NASCAR then introduced restrictor plates to bring speeds down and improve safety.

But Earnhardt believes that changing the 2.66-mile oval's configuration is not a viable solution.

"People have talked about changing the track, but that's impossible to do. There's no way you can justify it under the current economic state of the sport.

"So the track is not going to change, they just need to look in some other areas. It's probably nothing really major that they need to do to keep us from having an accident again. But I really enjoyed the race other than that. I enjoy racing at Talladega."

The Hendrick Motorsport driver believes there is no need for NASCAR to be stricter in applying the rules for blocking and passing under the double-yellow line in restrictor plate races.

"I would advise against doing anything extra or being stricter," Earnhardt said. "You run the risk of taking the race out of the drivers' hands. I think we do a good job of policing it pretty much on our own now.

"I mean, it is a race. First and foremost, we're out there racing. Blocking, weaving, carrying on is part of the game."

Following Sunday's accident, NASCAR officials said they will take whatever measures are necessary to ensure races are safe, but no specific changes to either the racing rules or the cars were announced.

Source

 

[subzero9285]

Spies not giving up on title

Ben Spies admits he needs to now be 'perfect' if he is to catch Noriyuki Haga and win the World Superbike Championship in his rookie season.

With four Superpoles and four wins under his belt, including a dramatic last gasp triumph over arch-rival Haga at Assen, Spies has shown he has the pace to beat his nemesis in a straight fight.

However, three other failures to score at Phillip Island, Valencia and Assen have pushed Spies onto the back foot and moved him some 60 points behind Haga after eight races.

By way of reference, in recent years only Neil Hodgson in 2003 and Troy Bayliss in 2008 had larger margins over the second place rider at this point in the season and both went on to take a dominant title.

Still, Spies can take heart from the fact that fellow American Colin Edwards managed to break down a gap of 58 points at its height in beating Bayliss to the 2002 title.

“This is not how I like to run championships,” Spies admitted. “I've had three no points races and basically now it's coming down to I have to be perfect now and do nothing but win races to catch up in the championship.

Despite admitting the difficult of the extent of the task ahead, Spies is nonetheless proud of his performances as a WSBK rookie.

“Regardless of the hit we took today I'm still proud of the team and the way I've ridden as a rookie in this series. I still want to try to win this championship, but it's going to be tough. I've come back from big deficits before and that's what I'm going to have to do again. It's gotten pretty interesting pretty quickly.”

Source

 

[DrM]

FIA confirms £40m budget cap for 2010

The FIA has announced that Formula 1's cost cap will be increased to £40 million when it is introduced next season.

The original figure mooted was £30 million, but has been revised upwards following consultation with Formula 1 teams instigated by FIA president Max Mosley last week.

The FIA confirmed that the budget cap would run from January 1 to December 31, with the £40 million figure covering all team expenditure, with certain exceptions.

Most notable among these is that engine costs will not be included in the budget capped expenditure for 2010.

Also excluded from the budget cap are marketing and hospitality, driver pay, fines and penalties imposed by the FIA, anything that teams can demonstrate has no influence on its on-track performance and dividends paid from profits relating to participation in the championship.

The FIA will allow those teams that sign up to the budget cap to have increased technical freedom to make it easier to compete with the uncapped teams. This includes adjustable front and rear wings as well as an engine that can run without a rev limit.

In addition, the budget cap teams will be allowed unlimited testing outside of the racing season, and will not be restricted by the wind tunnel scale and speed stipulations

The budget cap will be monitored by a new Costs Commission that will be set up to ensure that teams are adhering to the regulations. A chairman and two commissioners will be appointed to the body by the WMSC for a term of three years.

It was also stipulated that one of the commissioners should be an expert in finance and the other someone with high-level experience in motor sport.

The governing body also annouced that the maximum number of cars permitted to enter the championship has been increased to 26, from 24.

Source

They are insane. No rev limits for teams under budget cap? Adjustable front and rear wings? Unlimited testing for poor ones?

Refuelling ban confirmed for next season

The FIA has confirmed a ban on refuelling from the 2010 season, the governing body citing cost-saving reasons for its introductions

"It was confirmed that from 2010, refuelling during a race will be forbidden in order to save the costs of transporting refuelling equipment and increase the incentive for engine builders to improve fuel economy (to save weight)," said the FIA in a statement following a meeting of the World Motor Sport Council.

The governing body also confirmed that tyre blankets will be banned from 2010 and that the ban on other tyre-heating devices will be maintained.

Source

New teams to get financial support

The FIA World Motor Sport Council has announced that financial support will be given to new teams entering Formula 1 next year.

Bernie Ecclestone's Formula 1 Management (FOM) has agreed to make an annual payment of $10 million to each new team as well as offering free transportation of two chassis, plus 10,000kg of freight, to each race.

It will also offer 20 economy class air tickets for each new team for events held outside Europe.

The number of cars permitted to enter the world championship has been raised from 24 to 26 cars, leaving the door open for three new teams to join in 2010. A number of operations have already expressed a serious interest, including the new USF1 operation and British race car manufacturer Lola.

Applications for new teams will be open on May 22-29, with the FIA publishing the list of accepted entrants on Friday June 12.

The FIA will select the successful candidates based on their ability to qualify as a genuine constructor, as well as their ability to demonstrate they will have the required facilities, financial resources and technical expertise to be competitive in F1.

The applicants will be expected to declare whether they want to compete under the newly-confirmed £40 million budget cap, although it is unlikely that any of the teams would choose not to do so.

Source

 

[Karakand]

hold me avaya

 

[subzero9285]

More on the budget cap

FIA's budget cap Q & A

Why does Formula One need cost capping?

Formula One faces a period of great uncertainty during this harsh recessionary period. Funding a team is increasingly seen as a discretionary spend for the majority of team owners and sponsors. To ensure a healthy grid all are agreed that costs need to be cut.

Two main philosophies have emerged, either i) reduce activity levels through very restrictive technical rules, plus a degree of standardization if required; or ii) restrict the money that teams are allowed to spend (cost capping).

The FIA believes that unfettered technical competition is part of Formula One's DNA, and would like to see this flourish, but in an environment of strong, responsible and innovative management, not a spending race. For these reasons cost capping is preferred.

What is covered by the cost cap?

Everything except:

• Marketing and promotion - we want Formula One teams to look good and to entertain their partners. We want manufacturers to show off their cars at exhibitions and city centre displays, and we want teams and their sponsors to promote Formula One through inclusion in advertising campaigns.

• Drivers and young driver programmes - Formula One is the pinnacle of motor racing. Fundamental to this is attracting the world's best drivers. Moreover we wish to encourage continued investment in young driver programmes.

• Engine costs – In order to attract manufacturer owned teams to take up the cost capping option, the FIA have decided to exclude engine costs for 2010 (only).

Furthermore, we are allowing manufacturers to honor existing supply arrangements, provided there is no element of subsidy that could have a cartel-like affect on the engine market.

How did the FIA arrive at the £40m figure?

We arrived at the figure by analysing both revenues and costs in Formula One.

We know what the FOM (Formula One Management) revenue is likely to be in the future, and we have some understanding of realistic sponsorship revenues during the recession. Taken together,it's possible to project total external revenues for all finishing positions in the Championship. At £40m we believe that 70 per cent of the grid can generate a profit. This transforms the business case for owning a Formula One team, for both manufacturers and private investors. The desired net result is to have a very healthy commercial environment for present and new owners.

We also had a good look at costs, and believe that £40m in combination with greater technical freedom will allow engineers to create Formula One cars even more interesting and exciting than today's cars.

Will the £40m cap for 2010 be changed for future years?

As set out in the Regulations, the cap for future years will be decided by the FIA. In setting future years' limits, the FIA will have regard to the progress of the project and the feedback from all stakeholders to the sport.

How does the FIA intend to police the cost cap?

Throughout the construction of the Regulations we have worked with expert forensic accountants.

The Regulations allow for the establishment of a Costs Commission to monitor and assist teams in complying with the Regulations. The Costs Commission will appoint auditors, and other financial experts as required, in order to do this.

A key factor is that all cost capped teams are businesses engaged in exactly the same activities and this enables consistent interpretation of the principles of the regulations. It is difficult to hide engineering activity or to falsify accounts consistently, given the traceability of transactions in today's world and the access and inspection powers which the Costs Commission will have. The penalties for defrauding the FIA with regard to any willful transgression of any Regulation or any subversion of an investigation are well established.

Is a Costs Commission really needed?

The emphasis is on teams to demonstrate compliance, and to pro-actively seek clarification and interpretation of the Regulations. As the Cost Cap Regulations are new the FIA has decided to provide an appropriate resource, staffed with a small number of financial and technical experts, to deal with such issues, and to monitor compliance, such that the Regulations are effective.

Who pays for the Costs Commission, auditors and other experts, and doesn't this just add costs, rather than removing them?

The cost capped teams will each pay an equal contribution to cover these costs. The costs involved will represent a tiny fraction of the costs saved in Formula One.

What is the penalty if a team exceeds the cost cap?

This depends on the case. The International Sporting Code covers transgressions in the same manner as for the technical or sporting regulations. There are no 'fixed penalties'. The Cost Commission will judge the degree of misdemeanor and advise the FIA , who will determine any penalty.

What measures are there to prevent teams spending money this year on a car that will compete under cost cap in 2010?

The teams must demonstrate that they have adhered to the spirit of the regulations and spend no more than 50% of the value of the 2010 cap on the development of the 2010 car (in 2009). Furthermore, there are limits on the value of stock of car parts which can be carried into 2010.

How will you stop manufacturer backed teams from running hidden F1-related projects in their parent companies?

The question is actually asking 'how will we stop manufacturer teams from cheating'. The principles of determining a fair market value for all activities which are undertaken for the benefit of a team (whether a manufacturer or not) are clearly set out in the Regulations.

No team would wish to be exposed as cheating, so we expect a healthy amount of self-policing. However, the rules are clear on this point, such activities must be declared and appropriately valued. Bear in mind the access that the costs commission and auditors have and their ability to compare reported costs across all cost capped teams.

Will teams be allowed to buy parts from other teams/manufacturers?

Yes, according to the FIA regulations, but one should bear in mind that contractual arrangements with the Commercial Rights Holder will place restrictions on such activities. Inter-team transactions are covered by the regulations.

How many teams do you expect to take up the budget option?

All those who wish to transform the commercial basis of participation for their owners and investors. The FIA believes that cost capping will prove attractive, and it hopes that over time all teams will join. So far, interest has been extraordinarily high from both existing teams and potential new entrants.

If a team decides not to become cost capped now, can it do so at a later date?

Yes, a team will be able to opt to become cost capped in advance of each year of its participation in the Championship.

Are you worried that F1 will effectively become a two-tier championship?

There is one set of Technical Regulations and as always there are choices for all teams as to how they decide to attack the Championships.

 

[Zhuk]

I personally am against the new regulations, cost cutting in F1 has been ongoing for a few years in most teams and the sport was well on its way to becoming mean on lean. Furthermore, I hate the fact that there will be no refueling, fuel and pit strategies to me play a great part of the sport and I will sorely miss it. I also like the current size of the field, 26 cars in my opinion does not improve the quality of the sport at all.

I'm sick and tired of F1 being tinkered with by idiots at the FIA who don't really understand what the fans and teams want, I can't wait for the day that FOTA grow some balls and start up a new sport instead.

 

[GitarooMan]

The no refueling thing is so, so lame, I can't believe they are going to go through with it. What if the cars just spread out, the races are going to be incredibly boring.

 

[SpoonyBard]

The no refueling thing is so, so lame, I can't believe they are going to go through with it. What if the cars just spread out, the races are going to be incredibly boring.

There's still tyre changes, like in the early '90s.

 

[Ghost]

Seems like they are simplifying race strategy so Ferrari can have a chance again next season

 

[Xirj]

The no refuellin is really odd. Yes it will suck for the teams because of the added weight but I think the greater penalty will be that the car will have drastic changes in dynamics towards the end of the race. It will be much much lighter and teams are going to have to figure out how to adjust properly with their adjustable downforce throughout the stages of the race.

 

[jey_16]

those budget caps are too low....how can the teams even pay for unlimited testing and the wind tunnel while running a race team and fit under that cap, development costs are incredibly high

no tyre warmers :lol....imagine how cold the tyres will be at the start of the race, it will be carnage and how much money is this going to save anyway? refueling ban is a joke as well, all the strategy will basically be gone

its bad enough that we have this eight engine rule and rev limits, these cars should be pushing the edge of development

they are ruining this sport....are these rules locked in? or can the teams challenge them

 

[Big Takeover]

Quite obviously, 40m pounds gets you vastly different things depending on location, and exchange rate. So who's going to be the first team to move operations to India? I suppose it will take Team China, or Team Mexico to win a few World Championships first.

 

[Ghost]

Quite obviously, 40m pounds gets you vastly different things depending on location, and exchange rate. So who's going to be the first team to move operations to India? I suppose it will take Team China, or Team Mexico to win a few World Championships first.

FIA would love the teams moving to China and India, they are two of the only remaining growth markets for cars.

 

[arena08]

Quite obviously, 40m pounds gets you vastly different things depending on location, and exchange rate. So who's going to be the first team to move operations to India? I suppose it will take Team China, or Team Mexico to win a few World Championships first.

I would hope that they see some sense and alter it according to currency strengths etc. But this is the FIA so who knows.

 

[DarkJediKnight]

The no refuellin is really odd. Yes it will suck for the teams because of the added weight but I think the greater penalty will be that the car will have drastic changes in dynamics towards the end of the race. It will be much much lighter and teams are going to have to figure out how to adjust properly with their adjustable downforce throughout the stages of the race.

Don't forget, movable aero is coming back under the 40mil cap so that should help. I wish they would go back to active suspensions.

 

[cilonen]

Two good articles I read today:

'Understanding the power plays in F1'
http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns21428.html

This is pretty much why there's likely to be a breakaway series in 2012.


And Jake Humphrey's Bahrain 'Day in the Life' bog with photos
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/jakehumphrey/2009/04/my_bahrain_grand_prix_photo_di.html

I think Jake's been good as the BBC front man so far this season.

 

[DrM]

FIA increases minimum car weight

The weight of Formula 1 cars will be increased from the 2010 season under new technical regulations, the FIA announced on Thursday.

The ruling body said the minimum weight for cars from next season will be 620kg, rather than the current 605kg.

The move is aimed at not putting heavier drivers at a disadvantage due to the introduction of KERS, which has hindered taller drivers like BMW Sauber's Robert Kubica.

Pole Kubica has raced with KERS just once this year, as the increased weight did not allow him to play with ballast and thus improve his car's balance.

But the technical rules published by the FIA on Thursday moved to solved that, increasing the cars' minimum weight by 15kg.

Source

Mclaren & Williams are against two-tier (over/under budget cap) championship

McLaren reluctant about two-tier series

McLaren team principal Martin Whitmarsh says Formula 1 teams would like to find a solution to reduce the budgets through dialogue between them and the FIA.

The governing body confirmed on Thursday the introduction of a £40 million budget cap from the 2010 season.

Those teams adhering to it will be allowed more technical freedom, meaning the championship would become a two-tier series, an idea that has been criticised by some of the current teams.

FIA president Max Mosley had said last month that the Formula One Teams' Association's response to the budget cap idea had been "weak", and FOTA said last week its response to the FIA was not ready yet.

The governing body, however, today confirmed the introduction of the cap from 2010 onwards.

While supporting that FIA's push to reduce costs, Whitmarsh suggested teams are unhappy about the idea of a two-tier series.

The McLaren boss insisted dialogue between the teams and the FIA is the solution to find a compromise that would make all parties happy without having two types of cars on the grid.

"As a member of FOTA, Vodafone McLaren Mercedes is of course supportive of FOTA's recent efforts to reduce costs in Formula 1," said Whitmarsh. "Equally, we recognise the excellent work done recently by the FIA in the area of cost-reduction.

"Having said all that, we understand that some teams' operational budgets may still be unnecessarily high in the challenging global economic situation in which we now find ourselves.

"Nonetheless, we believe that the optimal solution - which may or may not include a budget cap, but which ideally would not encompass a two-tier regulatory framework - is most likely to be arrived at via measured negotiation between all parties.

"We at Vodafone McLaren Mercedes are happy to contribute to that process as and when required."

Source

Williams also against two-tier series

Team boss Frank Williams says Formula 1 should operate under a single set of rules and not become a two-tier series.

The FIA on Thursday confirmed the introduction of an optional £40 million budget cap from the 2010 season, with those teams adhering to it being allowed more technical freedom.

The move would mean two different kinds of cars on the grid, an scenario that has led to criticism of the rules.

Williams admitted on Thursday that his team was in favour of introducing a budget cap, but said he was against having a championship with two sets of regulations.

"Williams has supported the introduction of a budget cap since the idea was first put forward early in 2008," said Williams. "Since then FOTA has made tremendous steps forward on costs but the rationale for a budget cap has also grown even stronger.

"We would like to see all the teams operating to one set of regulations and under a budget cap in 2010 and that is the position we will be advocating within FOTA when we meet next week.

"We understand that this will represent a serious challenge for some of the teams but we expect that FOTA will work together to find a unified and constructive way to take the FIA's initiative forward."

McLaren team boss Martin Whitmarsh had earlier said his team was also against a two-tier series.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/74955

 

[arena08]

I don't understand the constant need to the FIA to change the rules all the time. The racing is good, why can't they leave it as it is and change accordingly instead.

 

[Aegus]

The no refueling thing is so, so lame, I can't believe they are going to go through with it. What if the cars just spread out, the races are going to be incredibly boring.

Or we could have awesome races ala Mansell/Senna in Monaco.

 

[cilonen]

I don't understand the constant need to the FIA to change the rules all the time. The racing is good, why can't they leave it as it is and change accordingly instead.

!) they get off on the power trip.

2) to fuck with the teams and remind them who's boss.

3) because they can.

4) 2, 3 then 1 in that order.

5) something about safety.

 

[arena08]

I find it mad. F1 and football (soccer) are the two sports I really follow. The deliberation and debate over the slightest rule change in football is sometimes farcical, but at least you know what you're getting. It seems like every week there are a whole host of rule changes in F1. If the sport is to properly develop the rules must be clear and concrete. And surely two old blokes can't have the rulebook in their pockets changing what they want for their own enjoyment.

 

[SupahBlah]

I don't understand the constant need to the FIA to change the rules all the time. The racing is good, why can't they leave it as it is and change accordingly instead.

To make it look like they're doing something?

I'd love all the teams to breakaway and start their own competition.

 

[Steppenwolf]

The budget limit is not a bad thing per se imo. Infact i think its a necessity or otherwise we would have a field of 14-16 cars or so in the future. What i absolutely hate however is that they want to have two different rulesets. Thats just killing the sport.

 

[avaya]

I will say this first. I would actually pay someone to kill Posion Dwarf and the hideous Nazi fuck.

What I am pleased about is that McLaren AND Williams have already told him to GTFO. McLaren in not so many words because they have to be careful because the man is an utter shit. A shit beyond words.

Luca has yet to say anything. BMW got our back.

To put things into some perspective the worst team on the grid (not by much over Ferrari at the moment :lol ) is Force India. Mallya spent $150mn last year.

ONE FIVE ZERO HUNDRED MILLION.

A team like Super fucking Aguri spent $45mn in the last season they competed. Why do we want to equalise all the teams to this shoddy level of performance?

£40mn/$60mn as a figure is ridiculous amount. He can fuck right off.

Wha this also does is make your Chief Accountant the most important member of the fucking team. What a fucking joke that is. How the fuck is this in any way enforceable?

It is all just a powerplay so the "Commerical Rights Holder" (hint hint Poison fucking Dwarf, I hope his wife literally takes everything) can increase and guarantee his revenue stream and the odious twat in charge of the FIA can continue his demented 1970's return wish which involves the removal of all the manufacturers. FUCK YOU.

I don't want to watching fucking LOLA. I don't want to watch fucking iSport. I don't want to watching fucking ProDrive. These were all reprobate organisations who couldn't play with the big boys. Can't hack it? Then fuck off.

The breakway series is on now. It is soooo on now. What would it look like I hear you ask? Well How's about Ferrari, McLaren, Williams, BMW, Toyota and Renault racing at Spa, Silverstone, Suzuka and Monza for a fucking start.

 

[marvelharvey]

Or we could have awesome races ala Mansell/Senna in Monaco.

Speaking of which, today is the 15th Anniversary of Senna's death RIP

One thing I never knew until last week was that Senna planned to make a post-race tribute to Ratzenberger (who'd died the previous day) and had tucked an Austrian flag behind his seat, ready to wave on the slow down lap. A true gentleman*

*when he wasn't deliberately knocking his competitors off the track

edit: Nobody's died since, so safety has come a long way since the days of 3-5 deaths per year being common place.

edit2: Has anyone found those sedatives for Avaya yet?

 

[DrM]

2010 technical regulations
2010 sporting regulations

Insane stuff.

Short summary for first link:
- budget cap teams (BCT) with unlimited engine revs, others on 18.000 rpm
- no transmission restriction for BCT, 4WD is possible
- increased KERS output power fot BCT to 120 kw (other 60 kw), energy released is limited to 800 KJ (400 KJ), KERS usage is limited to speeds under 300 km/h
- no engine & gearbox restrictions for BCT (ok, overclock this one to 25000 rpm, we'll use new one on next race :lol )
- no refuelling and no tyre warmers
- Front wing adjustment from 6° to 10° for BCT
- Rear wing adjustment possible for BCT
- 6 more cars on the grid, unlimited wind tunnel testing for BCT

 

[Ghost]

Short summary for first link:
- no engine & gearbox restrictions for BCT (ok, overclock this one to 25000 rpm, we'll use new one on next race :lol )

Don't think their £40 million will go very far if they are blowing engines every week.

 

[Steppenwolf]

Those freedoms are fucking insane. They need to make the sport slower not faster or we will see dead drivers again in the near future.

No tyre warmers can be seen as a safety risk also.

 

[Burai]

Whilst I don't agree with a lot of the changes made over the years, these budget-related changes are absolutely essential for the survival of the sport. Absolutely essential.

What avaya wants is just a complete fantasy in the real world. A sport where the only way you can enter is by buying the remnants of a team that's just folded until you yourself go bankrupt is absolutely and utterly unsustainable.

It's not about being someone that can't play with the big boys. Not when the big boys are shedding sponsors left and right. We're in a situation where not only is there no money to set up a team and run a £150m-a-year season, we're getting to a stage where those that currently do can't afford to do it either. BMW lost all of their sponsors over the winter, Renault are about to lose theirs, Panasonic only changed their mind about pulling out until Toyota reduced their budget for the year. Had Panasonic bolted, Toyota would have followed Honda. Williams were on the verge of bankruptcy following the loss of their Icelandic sposors. Under the budget cap, they stand to make a profit of $10-15m a season.

As for the breakaway, good luck with that. We saw what happens when the inmates run the asylum in CART. The people love to work together when they are fighting the man. But when the people ARE the man, everyone brings their own agendas to the table.

 

[DrM]

Don't think their £40 million will go very far if they are blowing engines every week.

From yesterday's news on Autosport

Most notable among these is that engine costs will not be included in the budget capped expenditure for 2010.

 

[Ghost]

:lol I forgot about that.

Yeah you're right it's going to be a clusterfuck.

 

[Burai]

Those freedoms are fucking insane. They need to make the sport slower not faster or we will see dead drivers again in the near future.

No tyre warmers can be seen as a safety risk also.

The freedoms are good because they are limited by budget. Just because you can build a 300 MPH monster, doesn't mean that a team could afford to do so. A high revving engine comes with it's own downsides - heat, fuel consumption, higher wear on parts. And all of that has to be covered in the £40million.

What we're going to see is a return to smart engineering, where you can't just spend your way out of a problem.

And there are plenty of other motor sports that don't use tyre warmers. Christ, I remember when F1 didn't use tyre warmers either. It wasn't that long ago either.

 

[subzero9285]

Full McLaren verdict published

World Motor Sport Council - Decision
01/05/2009

Re: Article 151(c) and 152 International Sporting Code – Vodafone McLaren Mercedes
29 April 2009

The World Motor Sport Council (“WMSC”) met on 29th April 2009 to consider a charge that Vodafone McLaren Mercedes (“McLaren”), a competitor in the FIA Formula One World Championship, had breached Article 151(c) of the International Sporting Code (“ISC”), which prohibits "any fraudulent conduct or any act prejudicial to the interests of any competition or to the interests of motor sport generally".

1 Background

1.1 During the closing laps of the 2009 Australian Grand Prix, an incident occurred which required that the safety car be deployed. At the time of deployment, driver No. 1 Lewis Hamilton (for McLaren) was placed fourth and driver No. 9 Jarno Trulli (for Panasonic Toyota Racing (“Toyota”)) was placed third.

1.2 While running behind the safety car, Trulli left the track and Hamilton passed to take third place. Hamilton subsequently moved off the racing line to the right of the track and Trulli repassed, taking back third place.

1.3 Article 40.7 of the 2009 Formula One Sporting Regulations sets out the rules governing overtaking while running behind the safety car. Article 40.7 reads, in relevant part, as follows: “All competing cars must […] reduce speed and form up in line behind the safety car no more than ten car lengths apart and overtaking, with the following exceptions, is forbidden until the cars reach the Line after the safety car has returned to the pits. Overtaking will be permitted under the following circumstances: […] - .

1.4 In light of Article 40.7 and the fact that Hamilton and Trulli had passed each other while running behind the safety car, the matter was referred to the Stewards of the Meeting (“Stewards”) by the FIA Race Director. As part of their investigation of the incident, the Stewards summoned Trulli and Hamilton and their respective team managers to a hearing on 29th March 2009 at which the FIA Race Director was also present (“29th March Hearing”).

1.5 At the 29th March Hearing, the Stewards and the Race Director asked questions regarding Trulli’s passing of Hamilton. Trulli stated that Hamilton had moved off the racing line to the right of the track and had begun to travel very slowly. As a result, Trulli pulled up alongside Hamilton to see whether Hamilton would wave him through. There being no response, Trulli proceeded to pass Hamilton.

1.6 Hamilton was asked by the Stewards why he had moved off his line and whether there was a problem with his car. He informed the Stewards that there were no problems with his car and that he had drifted right because he was checking his lap time and was concerned that his tyres were cold. Hamilton was then asked whether he had consciously let Trulli pass. He said “no”. He was asked if he had been told to let Trulli through, at which point his Team Manager, Dave Ryan, interjected and answered “no”. There were further exchanges, with the Stewards posing similar questions but Hamilton and his Team Manager were clear in their insistence that Hamilton had not slowed down and had not let Trulli through.

1.7 The Stewards considered the evidence, including the McLaren representatives’ statements, and issued a decision, penalising Trulli for overtaking while behind the safety car in breach of Article 40.7 and imposing a drive-through penalty. Since the race was already finished, the drive-through penalty was converted into a penalty of 25 seconds to be added to Trulli’s elapsed race time. As a result of the penalty, Trulli was demoted from third place to twelfth place and Hamilton was moved from fourth place to third place.

1.8 From the release of the aforementioned decision until the reconvening of the Stewards in Malaysia on 2nd April 2009, no McLaren representative contacted the FIA, its Race Director or the Stewards in relation to that decision. During this time, the official result of the Australian Grand Prix was understood to be that Hamilton had been placed third and that Trulli had been placed twelfth.

1.9 Late on Sunday evening, after the official result had been published, it came to the attention of the Chairman of the Stewards and the FIA Race Director that there existed a press interview given by Hamilton in which he stated that he had been told by McLaren to let Trulli pass. Based on this information, a recording of the pit-to-car radio exchanges between Hamilton and McLaren was retrieved and examined by the Stewards and the FIA Race Director. Having been informed by Hamilton that Trulli had left the track and that Hamilton had passed to take third position, the team instructed Hamilton as follows:

“Lewis, you need to allow the Toyota through. Allow the Toyota through now.”

1.10 Hamilton responded: “OK.”

1.11 Having listened to the press interview and the pit-to-car radio exchanges, the Stewards reconvened on Thursday 2nd April 2009 in Malaysia (“2nd April Hearing”) where Hamilton and Trulli and their respective team managers were interviewed again. Trulli confirmed his statement from the 29th March Hearing (see section 1.5).

1.12 Hamilton and his Team Manager were played recordings of the press interview and the pit-to-car radio exchanges evidencing that Hamilton had been instructed to let Trulli pass and had done so. Notwithstanding the clear content of the recordings, Hamilton and his Team Manager reconfirmed their statements that Hamilton had not consciously let Trulli pass and that McLaren had not instructed Hamilton to let Trulli pass. The Race Director and the Stewards then gave Hamilton and his Team Manager a further opportunity to correct the statements they had made at the 29th March Hearing. They declined to do so.

1.13 The Stewards found McLaren’s explanations inadequate and concluded that – at the 29th March Hearing – there had been a deliberate and successful attempt to mislead the Stewards. This had led to Hamilton being moved incorrectly from fourth to third and to Trulli being unfairly penalised.

1.14 The Stewards therefore issued new decisions – Decisions Nos. 76 and 77 – respectively excluding Hamilton and McLaren from the race classification for the Australian Grand Prix and reinstating Trulli and Toyota in third place.

1.15 In comments to the press immediately after the release of Decisions Nos. 76 and 77, the McLaren Team Principal stated that McLaren stood by the representations made to the Stewards by Hamilton and his Team Manager.

1.16 Hamilton held a press conference on 3rd April 2009 at the Malaysia Grand Prix. In that press conference, Hamilton reversed the position he had taken at the 29th March Hearing and the 2nd April Hearing, apologised to the Stewards, the FIA and the public for having provided misleading information to the Stewards on both occasions, but pointed out that, during both hearings, he had been acting under instructions from his team. Subsequently, the McLaren Team Principal also apologised and announced the suspension of the McLaren Team Manager.

1.17 The FIA Observer presented to the FIA President on 7th April 2009 a report titled: “Report of the Hamilton/Trulli incident during the 2009 Australian Formula One Grand Prix and subsequent issues” (“FIA Observer’s Report”), outlining the above facts.

1.18 In response, the FIA decided to summon McLaren before the WMSC to answer charges that, in breach of Article 151(c) ISC, it:

(a) on 29th March 2009, told the Stewards of the Australian Grand Prix that no instructions were given to Hamilton to allow Trulli to pass when both cars were behind the safety car, knowing this statement to be untrue;

(b) procured its driver Hamilton, the current World Champion, to support and confirm this untrue statement to the Stewards;

(c) although knowing that as a direct result of its untrue statement to the Stewards, another driver and a rival team had been unfairly penalised, made no attempt to rectify the situation either by contacting the FIA or otherwise;

(d) on 2nd April 2009, before the Stewards of the Australian Grand Prix (meeting in Malaysia), made no attempt to correct the untrue statement of 29th March but, on the contrary, continued to maintain that the statement was true, despite being allowed to listen to a recording of the team instructing Hamilton to let Trulli pass and despite being given more than one opportunity to correct its false statement; and

(e) on 2nd April 2009, before the Stewards, procured its driver Hamilton to continue to assert the truth of the false statement given to the Stewards on 29th March, while knowing that what he was saying to the Stewards was not true.

1.19 In its written response to these charges, McLaren accepted that, both at and between the 29th March Hearing and the 2nd April Hearing, McLaren had acted in breach of Article 151(c) ISC. McLaren’s Team Principal expressed McLaren’s, and his personal, unreserved apology to the WMSC, the Stewards, the FIA and Formula One competitors and fans. In addition, in a separate letter to WMSC members, the McLaren Team Principal admitted that McLaren’s conduct regarding these matters was “wholly unacceptable” and expressed his sincere apologies.

1.20 At the WMSC meeting on 29th April 2009, the McLaren Team Principal again admitted that McLaren had been in breach of Article 151(c) ISC and offered representations for the purposes of mitigation (see section 2.7).

2 WMSC’s Assessment

2.1 The WMSC has carefully considered the FIA Observer’s Report, McLaren’s written submissions of 14th April 2009 and its representations in mitigation at the WMSC meeting on 29th April 2009. The material facts of the case, being the deliberate and successful attempt to mislead the Stewards at the 29th March Hearing and the failure, when confronted with incontrovertible evidence at the 2nd April Hearing, to correct the position adopted, are not in dispute. In addition, McLaren has admitted that its conduct amounted to a breach of Article 151(c) ISC.

2.2 Under Article 152 ISC, seventh paragraph, the WMSC: “may, upon the proposal and report of the FIA observer […] directly inflict a penalty which will take the place of any penalty which the stewards of the meeting may have pronounced”.


2.3 The WMSC considers that McLaren’s course of conduct as set out in section 1 of this Decision amounted to a serious breach of Article 151(c). By making deliberately misleading representations to the Stewards, and then failing to correct those misleading representations, McLaren gained illegitimate advantage and caused the unfair imposition of a penalty upon a fellow competitor. The WMSC wishes to emphasise that it finds this latter element particularly reprehensible.


2.4 In addition, by its course of conduct, McLaren has brought the sport into disrepute. The WMSC considers – and McLaren has accepted – that sole responsibility cannot lie with the Team Manager who misled the Stewards and who procured Hamilton to do likewise. Rather, the course of conduct occurred over such a period of time that the WMSC finds that McLaren’s management either were aware or should have been aware that the Stewards had been misled.


2.5 In light of the foregoing, the WMSC considers that pursuant to Article 151(c) and 152 ISC, seventh paragraph, the Stewards’ Decision No. 76, which excluded Hamilton and McLaren from the race classification for the 2009 Australian Grand Prix, should be replaced with this Decision, which imposes a more severe penalty.


2.6 In short, the WMSC considers that the penalty must be of a magnitude that reflects accurately the severity of the offence and effectively deters McLaren – and other competitors in the FIA Formula One World Championship – from deliberately misleading the Stewards in the future. However, the penalty imposed must also take into account other relevant factors.


2.7 In determining the sanction to be imposed on McLaren, the WMSC considered a number of factors presented by McLaren in mitigation. These factors (together, “Mitigating Factors”) included the following:

* (a) that the McLaren Team Principal admitted all material facts, including the making of deliberately misleading statements to the Stewards and the subsequent failure to correct such misleading representations;

* (b) that the McLaren Team Principal accepted in written submissions that McLaren’s course of conduct in the matter had been unacceptable and offered an unreserved apology both personally, and on behalf of McLaren, to all affected parties;

* (c) that the McLaren Team Principal has assured members of the WMSC that there has been a change in culture within McLaren and that the course of conduct – or similar – will not be repeated;

* (d) that, on realising his mistakes, Hamilton held a press conference at which he apologised for his actions; and

* (e) that McLaren promptly suspended, and subsequently terminated the employment of, its Team Manager, who misled the Stewards and who procured that Hamilton did likewise.


2.8 However, in addition to considering the existence of Mitigating Factors, the WMSC also considered whether there were aggravating factors suggesting that the level of any penalty should be increased. In this instance, the WMSC recalls that McLaren has recently breached Article 151(c) of the International Sporting Code (see Decision of the WMSC 13 September 2007).

2.9 Recidivism is a strong indicator that the sanction previously imposed was not sufficiently deterrent and recidivism is thus a circumstance which may justify an increase in the severity of the penalty which might otherwise be imposed. The purpose of taking recidivism into account in setting a penalty is to induce teams which have demonstrated a tendency towards infringing the rules in the past to change their conduct in the future. The WMSC therefore also takes into account, as an aggravating factor, McLaren’s 2007 breach of Article 151(c) ISC.

3 Decision


3.1 The WMSC finds Vodafone McLaren Mercedes in breach of Article 151(c) ISC in relation to each of the five counts identified in the FIA’s summons to Vodafone McLaren Mercedes, reproduced at 1.18 (a) to (e) above.

3.2 Pursuant to Article 151(c) ISC and 152 ISC, seventh paragraph, the WMSC therefore replaces the sanction imposed by Decision No. 76 of the Stewards with the following:


(a) the exclusion of the driver Lewis Hamilton and the competitor Vodafone McLaren Mercedes from the race classification for the 2009 Australian Grand Prix; and


(b) the suspension of the competitor Vodafone McLaren Mercedes from three rounds of the FIA Formula One World Championship.


Exceptionally, and in light in part of the Mitigating Factors (including the open and honest way in which the Vodafone McLaren Mercedes Team Principal addressed the WMSC and the change in culture which he made clear had taken place), penalty (b) shall be suspended for twelve months from the date of this Decision. In the event that, during the period of suspension of penalty (b), either: (i) further facts emerge that are relevant to the WMSC’s assessment of the gravity of Vodafone McLaren Mercedes’ breach; or (ii) Vodafone McLaren Mercedes commits a further breach of Article 151(c), the WMSC may implement penalty (b) in relation to the breach set out in this Decision.


3.3 Vodafone McLaren Mercedes is reminded of its right of appeal. In the event that an appeal is lodged with the FIA International Court of Appeal, the effect of this Decision will not be suspended pending the outcome of that appeal.

Source

 

[subzero9285]

Senna remembered

Michael Schumacher may statistically be the greatest Grand Prix driver who ever lived, but to many who watched Ayrton Senna's career no-one can equal the brilliant Brazilian. Senna's greatness does not lie in statistics, impressive though his career record is. It is embodied in the irresistible force with which he dominated an era of Formula One. Senna's death on 1 May 15 years ago changed F1 forever, but his life also had an indelible effect.

In many ways, it was a negative one. Senna's single-minded pursuit of success led to an uncompromising driving style that verged on dangerous, an approach since followed with conspicuous success by Schumacher. But, to many, Senna also redefined what was possible in an F1 car. He had a rage to win married to an ability that some would argue has never been equalled.

Senna dominated his cars every bit as forcefully as he did his rivals, employing a unique driving style to drag them to levels of performance their designers scarcely believed possible. Perhaps the ultimate example of this was in qualifying for the Monaco Grand Prix in 1988, when Senna was in his first year at McLaren-Honda as team-mate to Alain Prost. Then it was Prost who the other drivers measured themselves against, and establishing primacy over the Frenchman was initially Senna's number one goal.

Monaco, where Senna went on to win a record six times, gave him a chance to demonstrate his superiority. In qualifying, he set pole position with a lap 1.4 seconds faster than Prost managed in an equal car, and afterwards spoke in ethereal terms of an almost supernatural experience in reaching beyond his conscious self while driving. The rivalry between Senna and Prost grew into the bitterest the sport has ever seen, and each man to a degree became defined by it. But Senna had marked himself out as something special long before he went head-to-head with his greatest rival. His potential was obvious even before he reached F1.

In 1983, the Williams team gave the then up-and-coming Formula Three driver a test in their Grand Prix car, and within 40 laps he had taken it around Donington Park faster than its regular drivers, including reigning world champion Keke Rosberg. Unfathomably, team owner Frank Williams did not offer Senna a contract, and it was to take him another decade before he had the chance to sign him again.

Instead, Senna moved to the midfield Toleman team and immediately made waves, being denied victory in torrential rain at Monaco, his sixth Grand Prix, only when the race was stopped before half distance because of the poor conditions. His ability was already frightening his rivals, to the point that one said it was appropriate Senna's name had laxative connotations because that was the effect he had on him. At the end of the year, showing the single-mindedness which was to become familiar, Senna walked out on a three-year contract with Toleman and joined Lotus, then one of the top teams.

Ayrton Senna barges Alain Prost out of the 1990 Japanese Grand Prix Senna and Prost fought out a battle of such intensity that onlookers feared for their lives His first win came in only his second race with them, Senna using all his peerless ability in the rain to make his rivals look flat-footed at the 1985 Portuguese Grand Prix. Five more wins followed in three years at Lotus, but Senna saw the team's decline coming before most, and moved in 1988 to form a super-team with Prost at McLaren.

For three years - two as team-mates and one after Prost left to join Ferrari - the two fought out a battle of such intensity that onlookers feared for their lives. It certainly drove Senna to new extremes. After one particularly frightening incident, Prost told Senna that if he wanted the title badly enough to die for it, he could have it. Senna did sometimes appear to be putting his ambition ahead of his instinct for survival, most notably at the Japanese Grand Prix in 1990, when Senna secured the second of his three titles by driving into the back of Prost's Ferrari at 160mph, taking them both out of the race. Throughout all this, Senna's breathtaking talent was in vivid relief. But if his driving was captivating enough, he was equally remarkable out of the car.

Senna was blessed with the good looks of a romantic hero, and his dark eyes were mirrors to a soul of complexity and surprising vulnerability. This combination was made all the more powerful by his willingness to discuss the risks inherent in his job. Deeply religious, Senna seemed sometimes to be overwhelmed by fatalism about the danger of his chosen profession. His charisma was magnetic - he could hold in spellbound silence a room of hundreds of hard-bitten journalists - and his intellect, expressed with poetic eloquence in several languages, was formidable. "You are doing something that nobody else is able to do," he said. "(But) the same moment that you are seen as the best, the fastest and somebody that cannot be touched, you are enormously fragile. Because in a split second, it's gone. "These two extremes are feelings that you don't get every day. These are all things which contribute to - how can I say? - knowing yourself deeper and deeper. These are the things that keep me going."

When Senna joined Williams for the 1994 season, his position as the king of F1 was unquestioned. The team had dominated F1 in 1992 and '93, and Senna was expected to canter to the title. But Williams' car initially had a serious design flaw, and only Senna's super-human ability put it on pole for the first race in Brazil. In the race, though, he was flat beaten by Schumacher's superior Benetton, and Senna suffered the ignominy of spinning in his chase of the German. Senna was killed in an accident that will never be fully explained Anyone wondering how much of that performance Senna dragged from within only had to look at his team-mate Damon Hill, whom Senna had lapped by half distance.

Senna went to Imola trailing Schumacher in the championship and desperately needing to win. Already it was clear that one of F1's great rivalries was in the offing, the young pretender challenging the supremacy of the veteran master, who was determined to hang on to his position. But as Senna headed into the Tamburello corner at 190mph, with Schumacher just over a second behind, something went wrong. The Williams speared off the road and hit a concrete wall, still travelling at 137mph. As fate would have it, a front wheel was knocked back towards the cockpit and Senna's helmet visor was pierced by a suspension arm. If the wheel had missed him, he would have stepped from the wreck unhurt.

CAREER STATISTICS
Wins: 41
Poles: 65
Drivers' titles: 1988,'90, '91
Teams: Toleman, Lotus, McLaren, Williams
Born: 21/3/60 (Sao Paulo, Brazil
Died: 1/5/94 (Imola, Italy)

Source


Crash theory

Accident mystery

The causes of Ayrton Senna's fatal crash in the San Marino Grand Prix on 1 May, 1994 will probably never be known. Italian prosecutors blamed steering failure, but the Williams team’s two design chiefs were acquitted at the original trial and a subsequent appeal. Here, we reveal what Williams discovered from the car’s on-board computer.

Fateful decision

The crash happened on the second lap after a re-start. Senna took a tighter line at Tamburello to ease the car’s travel over bumps that upset it on the first lap. But at 191mph, he was going faster than the previous lap. Combined with the altered trajectory, that more than doubled the cornering forces on the car from 1.5G to 3.27G.

Problems start

The car’s rear tyres began to slide as it hit the first of two sets of bumps. This happened, Williams say, because the airflow under the car was disrupted, combined with the higher G-forces. The cornering speed of F1 cars is strongly dependant on aerodynamics. Any disruption dramatically reduces grip, and can cause a loss of control.

Senna reacts

Just under 0.15secs after the car started to slide, the throttle reduced from fully open to 40% and the force going through the steering reduced. Williams say this was Senna lifting off and trying to correct the slide. The reaction time elapsed from the moment the car hit the bump is what would be expected of a driver of Senna’s ability.

The crucial moment

Just 0.04secs after Senna responded to the initial slide, the car hit the second bump. This resulted in a sudden loss of front-end grip which, in combination with the rear tyres sliding, meant the car suddenly turned right. This is crucial in undermining the steering-failure theory, as in that case the car would have continued straight on.

Senna senses trouble

Just 0.18secs after the car hit the second bump, Senna lifted off the accelerator as he began to try to slow it down from 191mph. By now, he almost certainly knew he was not going to be able to keep the car on the track and so was determined to reduce his speed as much as possible before the car ran off the circuit onto rough ground.

Time running out

Four-hundredths of a second later, with the car already heading alarmingly quickly towards the outside of the track, the Williams’ Renault engine was no longer accelerating after its throttle dampeners had done their work.

Braking hard

It took 0.27secs more for the brakes to start to slow the car – a delay accounted for by Senna’s reactions and pressure build-up in the system. The car decelerates at more than 4G while on the track, losing 54mph before impact. The braking discounts one outlandish theory – that Senna passed out briefly because he was holding his breath.

Out of time

Just 1.9secs after the start of the chain of events that caused the crash, Senna ran out of time and the Williams smashed into the concrete wall on the outside of the Tamburello corner at 137mph. The right front wheel was knocked back towards the cockpit and a suspension arm pierced Senna’s helmet visor, inflicting the fatal injury.

Did the steering fail?

The prosecutor argued that a steering-column modification was not carried out with enough care and that the new piece fatigued and broke. Williams agree there was a partial stress fracture, but say their data prove the column (inset) was working and that it broke on impact. The judge said the prosecution failed to prove its case.

 

[subzero9285]

Montezemolo: Budget cap will harm F1

Ferrari president Luca di Montezemolo has warned FIA president Max Mosley that the introduction of a budget cap in 2010 could lead to an "unfair" and "biased" championship that could damage the sport.

In a letter written to the governing body on Thursday,di Montezemolo wrote that the sport could be seriously damaged by the introduction of the new rules.

Mosley told the team principals in a letter of his own, however, that he remained steadfastly convinced the sport must respond to the global economic crisis or face an uncertain future.

The governing body confirmed on Thursday that teams will be able to adhere to a £40 million budget from the 2010 season. In exchange for the limited budget, those teams would be allowed more technical freedom, including movable wings or engines without a rev limit.

The move has not been well received by some teams who believe a two-tier series is not good for the future of Formula 1.

Although Ferrari refused to make any comments on Thursday following the confirmation of the rules, it has been revealed that di Montezemolo wrote a letter to Mosley expressing his concerns about the budget caps.

"All aspects of the new regulations should be carefully reviewed," di Montezemolo wrote. "Limiting, for the time being, my comments to the cost cap issue, as you know I have always been concerned about the introduction, mainly because I consider that there are serious technical difficulties in making sure that any cap can be
realistically monitored.

"Additionally, any controversy on the actual respect of the cost cap would undermine the image of Formula 1 and could seriously damage any involved team.

"There are on the other hand doubts as to whether or not two categories of teams should be created which will inevitably mean that one category will have an advantage over the other and that the championship will be fundamentally unfair and, perhaps, even biased.

"In any event this would create confusion in the public's mind which would seriously lower the value of Formula 1. I do not think that this is appropriate knowing what Formula 1 represents for its players and for the public."

The Ferrari president also expressed concern about the timing and the way the rules have been introduced, as he believes there is "no extreme urgency" for the move.

Di Montezemolo also points out that, according to the Concorde Agreement, the FIA cannot pass any rules without the approval of the F1 commission.

Mosley, replying in another letter also seen by AUTOSPORT, told di Montezemolo that the sport must act urgently in order continue in its current form given the world's financial crunch.

The FIA president also wrote that teams have been aware of the introduction of the budget cap for quite some time, adding that Ferrari has "chosen not to engage with us on cost-cap rules during the past six weeks."

"The car industry and financial services are the two main sources of Formula 1 income. Both are in serious difficulty. We cannot just sit and wait, hoping nothing bad will happen. We have already lost one manufacturer," wrote Mosley

"Despite my repeated requests, not a single manufacturer has given us a legally-binding undertaking that it will continue in Formula 1. We may also lose another manufacturer team at any moment.

"We already know that current levels of expenditure are unsustainable for the independent teams. If we are to reduce the risk of the Formula One World Championship collapsing, we have to allow new teams in. We also have to reduce costs drastically.

"The matter is therefore extremely urgent, because a new team needs to know if it is to be ready to compete in 2010. It is already a very late start."

Source

 

[Steppenwolf]

The freedoms are good because they are limited by budget. Just because you can build a 300 MPH monster, doesn't mean that a team could afford to do so. A high revving engine comes with it's own downsides - heat, fuel consumption, higher wear on parts. And all of that has to be covered in the £40million.

What we're going to see is a return to smart engineering, where you can't just spend your way out of a problem.

And there are plenty of other motor sports that don't use tyre warmers. Christ, I remember when F1 didn't use tyre warmers either. It wasn't that long ago either.

They are all whining and bitching now but in the end they all will still operate on a highly professional level. They will have a budget like in the early/mid 90's so what. Development was quick and effective back then alrteady.

Don't think the cars will be significantly slower because a team has 200 million less to spent. Thats a difference of maybe a second or two. With the new freedoms they will still create cars that go faster then today every year and imo the cars are too fast already. The new rules this year did nothing to slow them down.

 

[Burai]

The new rules weren't supposed to slow them down, but to make following in the wake of the car in front easier. Which it succeeded in doing.

The thing about racing cars is that they'll always get faster, regardless of how you try to neuter them. Engineers always find a way. Take NASCAR for example. Those cars are practically spec, yet still they get faster and faster to the point where they need to look at revising the restrictor plate to slow them down again at Talledega.

I'm not saying that the cars will get slower because of the budget cap, but I wouldn't worry too much about speeds running away. There are plenty of other things to think about besides speed - reliability, for example. and the general running of a team too.

There's also the small matter of developing next year's car too, all under the same budget whilst trying to push the current car forward. It's going to be absolutely fascinating to see how the teams approach it. Will we maybe see a successful car carry on and evolve for years much like the Lotus 72 did for the best part of a decade and how the Cosworth DFV engine carried on for 19 years.

 

[cilonen]

It is all just a powerplay so the "Commerical Rights Holder" (hint hint Poison fucking Dwarf, I hope his wife literally takes everything) can increase and guarantee his revenue stream and the odious twat in charge of the FIA can continue his demented 1970's return wish which involves the removal of all the manufacturers. FUCK YOU.

I don't want to watching fucking LOLA. I don't want to watch fucking iSport. I don't want to watching fucking ProDrive. These were all reprobate organisations who couldn't play with the big boys. Can't hack it? Then fuck off.

The breakway series is on now. It is soooo on now. What would it look like I hear you ask? Well How's about Ferrari, McLaren, Williams, BMW, Toyota and Renault racing at Spa, Silverstone, Suzuka and Monza for a fucking start.

I'm so with you. I don't want to go back to the days of shitty teams having to pre-qualify - although now it'll be worse, they'll just get free passes in to the weekend.

 

[Dead Man]

I'm so with you. I don't want to go back to the days of shitty teams having to pre-qualify - although now it'll be worse, they'll just get free passes in to the weekend.

I didn't mind the pre qualifying, it just meant the racing wasn't going to be insanely spread out since the slowest car had to be within 107% of the fastest.

 

[Burai]

They won't let them in the race if they are ridiculously slow.

The ironic thing now is that although people refer to Force India as shit, they are only 2.5 seconds off the pace in qualifying. 10 years ago, that would have gotten you onto the third row of the grid.

 

[cilonen]

Oh a while back, after Melbourne, someone mentioned they really wanted some Brawn GP merchandise, and I said I suspected it would all be Virgin branded by the next race.

Well, I was certainly wrong about the branding; and in town today I was passing by the gallery/studio of a motorsport artist who tends to have cool memorabilia and a few die-casts in the store and he had Brawn GP merchandise in the window! - Black Polo, White Tee and White cap - he'd gone for a break and locked up though so I couldn't buy any; it all had had 'Official Brawn GP' tags - the polo carried the Henri Lloyd crest embroidered in white on the upper left sleeve also. Looked really smart and might well pop back tomorrow to try and catch him open.

 

[Burai]

According to Grand Prix Legends, the merchandise is out in June:

http://www.grandprixlegends.com/Info/brawn-gp-merchandise.html

God knows what your man is selling. I can't imagine it's hard to get a load of Henri Lloyd polos embroidered with a 2-colour logo.

The Virgin thing is exactly as I expected it would be. Branson trying to get a shitload of credit and publicity for very little money. I remember last year Martin Brundle didn't even want to talk to ING's marketing person on the grid, in spite of them title-sponsoring Renault for three years and spending £100million per year between sponsoring races and Renault.

Branson give Brawn £60,000 for minor sponsorship for four races and the BBC are taking his balls in their mouths and hailing him as the saviour of the team.

 

[subzero9285]

Round Three

Circuit

2008 recap

Honda's Dani Pedrosa powered to victory in front of his home crowd at the Spanish MotoGP in Jerez. Pedrosa took the race lead early on, after starting from second on the grid and finished ahead of Valentino Rossi. Pedrosa passed pole sitter Lorenzo on the first corner and was never seriously challenged in the rest of the race. Lorenzo grabbed third place, while Casey Stoner finished 11th after twice running in to the gravel trap.


Championship standing

News


Rossi tops first practise

Valentino Rossi was quickest in Friday practice for the Spanish Grand Prix at Jerez.

Yamaha's world champion beat Loris Capirossi to the top spot by 0.364 seconds, with Casey Stoner 0.621s down on his title rival in third.

Stoner had briefly been fastest in the early moments of the session, before the Ducati rider was deposed by Rossi.

Yamaha then established a one-two-three sweep for much of the afternoon, with Rossi ahead of his factory squad team-mate and championship leader Jorge Lorenzo, and Tech 3's Colin Edwards moved up to third.

As the session neared its end, Stoner edged back up to second place, but he would loose this spot in the closing minutes as Capirossi buoyed Suzuki by grabbing second and ending the day as Rossi's closest challenger.

Lorenzo remained fourth, with Edwards falling to sixth at the end as Honda's Andrea Dovizioso improved.

LCR Honda's Randy de Puniet took a promising seventh, ahead of Chris Vermeulen on the second Suzuki.

Marco Melandri again impressed for Hayate Kawasaki by beating last year's Jerez winner Dani Pedrosa (Honda) to ninth.

It was another poor session for Stoner's team-mate Nicky Hayden. The former champion continued to struggle with the factory Ducati and was back in 17th place, 2.3s off the pace.

Source


Pos Rider Bike Time Gap
1. Valentino Rossi Yamaha 1m39.647s
2. Loris Capirossi Suzuki 1m40.011s + 0.364s
3. Casey Stoner Ducati 1m40.268s + 0.621s
4. Jorge Lorenzo Yamaha 1m40.441s + 0.794s
5. Andrea Dovizioso Honda 1m40.601s + 0.954s
6. Colin Edwards Tech 3 Yamaha 1m40.703s + 1.056s
7. Randy de Puniet LCR Honda 1m40.866s + 1.219s
8. Chris Vermeulen Suzuki 1m41.063s + 1.416s
9. Marco Melandri Hayate Kawasaki 1m41.182s + 1.535s
10. Dani Pedrosa Honda 1m41.208s + 1.561s
11. James Toseland Tech 3 Yamaha 1m41.461s + 1.814s
12. Sete Gibernau Hernando Ducati 1m41.531s + 1.884s
13. Alex de Angelis Gresini Honda 1m41.557s + 1.910s
14. Mika Kallio Pramac Ducati 1m41.584s + 1.937s
15. Toni Elias Gresini Honda 1m41.736s + 2.089s
16. Yuki Takahashi Scot Honda 1m41.898s + 2.251s
17. Nicky Hayden Ducati 1m41.916s + 2.269s
18. Niccolo Canepa Pramac Ducati 1m42.063s + 2.416s


Melandri confident of progress

Marco Melandri is confident that his progress on the sole Hayate Kawasaki will continue after his sixth position at last weekend's Japanese MotoGP race.

The Italian nearly equalled the two fifth positions the works team had throughout the whole of 2008.

The former 250cc champion is working on engine braking electronics to settle the bike into the corners at Jerez, getting a ninth place in this afternoon's free practice.

"We improve but we still have to work," said Melandri. "We try to modify (the bike) but we have many things to set up the engine braking system. We try to disconnect one system to understand if it's working and then we understand we have to modify the one we disconnect. We now know where we have to work."

Asked if he felt rejuvenated after last weekend's result, he said: "It was nice last week to be back. It was great to overtake and have fun, so I feel confident day by day.

"Here it is going to be very hard race because the tyres drop down after a few laps because it's quite hot, but I think we can improve a lot with the bike we have now with the set-up. I'm happy because the team is working good and they are good guys. We have fun."

He added: "Everyone just wants to improve day by day now - it's like a family. We have no press guy, nothing, so it's fun. Every time I go in the garage I suggest something to my crew chief and he's the owner; we can do anything we want!"

After a terrible 2008 as team-mate to Casey Stoner in the Ducati team, Melandri was written off by many, but this doesn't bother him.

"No, I don't care. They (Ducati) know about things. They look at the standings and they have the answer for themselves. I don't need to call anybody."

Source


Rossi: Casey is the main threat

Valentino Rossi believes Casey Stoner will be his key rival for victory on Sunday, despite his Yamaha team-mate Jorge Lorenzo leading the world championship following his win in Motegi last weekend.

The eight-time world champion was fastest in first practice for the Spanish Grand Prix at Jerez, while the Australian was third quickest six tenths behind. The pair were split by Suzuki's Loris Capirossi.

"It is early to say, for sure, it is possible for everybody to improve," Rossi said on Friday. "I think Stoner remains the main rival, but Loris is not normally very fast on Friday, so he, for me, looks to be coming strong for Sunday.

"I was also surprised by Dani (Pedrosa), who is normally fast here but today was quite slow (10th) so... for me the strongest remains Stoner for Sunday."

Rossi explained that changes to the fork settings had revitalised his factory Yamaha M1 and boosted his confidence ahead of a race he counts as one of his favourites.

"Today was very good," he said. "I am so happy because in the first two races we had some problems with the front, the balance of my bike was not 100 per cent, like last year. Today we made some modifications with the settings and it looks like they work. I was able to enter the corner better and I am able to use these tyres better.

"We have to improve again for tomorrow, especially the rear grip, but I am very fast so I am happy.

"We are fast today because the modifications work well so it is possible to push hard from the beginning. For sure it is very important to stay in front from the first lap, like usually Stoner does."

Rossi's Friday pace was enough for him to concede he is focussed on scoring his first victory of the year on Sunday: "Yes, the target is that one for sure and we have to try because this racetrack is fantastic for me. I like it a lot.

"It looks like we have a good weekend with the weather, so it is possible to improve the setting," he added. "In Motegi with the weather we had two or three mistake. Now we are more confident with the bike so now we are more confident for sure."

Speaking of the sunny weather forecast, the opposite of which has so badly compromised proceedings in the first two races of the season Rossi said: "This situation compared to the first two races is like paradise when you ride the bike.

"If it is possible to decide then maybe it is better to have five degrees less than today, but anyway, we are everybody with the same tyres so we will see."

Source


Q&A with Valentino Rossi

Valentino Rossi starts the European MotoGP season still chasing his first win of the year, having finished second to Casey Stoner in Qatar and his own Yamaha team-mate Jorge Lorenzo in Japan last weekend.

Now he is gunning for his sixth victory in the top class at Jerez on Sunday, he told the press why he is looking forward to racing at one of his favourite tracks again and why he has no qualms about taking the fight to Lorenzo if he has to. AUTOSPORT was there to hear what he had to say.

Q. For some people this is the 'real' start of the season, this is such a big grand prix for you isn't it.

Valentino Rossi: I agree because Jerez is always fantastic. The track I like a lot but the atmosphere around the circuit is completely different compared to Qatar and Motegi. We hope also the weather will be different because we fight a lot against the water in the first two races! This time the forecast is okay, so it is possible to make a normal weekend, because the first two races of the season were very strange. Qatar, and also Motegi, it was difficult to work with the bike together with the new rules with less time on the track.

So the test here was okay, I won a lot of times on this track and had big battles with Sete (Gibernau) and others. I think it is possible to do a bit better than the first two races, but anyway 40 points is so important, we are close to the top and we are happy with our performance.

Q. You haven't won a race, but you are right in there as we come into Europe. That's very important isn't it?

VR: Yes. Taking 40 points in the first two races is crucial for the championship, because of the strange situation. We have tried to make the best of it. I preferred the Motegi race compared to Qatar because I was just 1.3s behind the victory and it was a better fight and better to enjoy. In Qatar I was all alone in the race, in the night, so it was quite scary!

For sure Jorge and Dani will have extra motivation in front of all their fans, but we try to fight.

Q. You said in Japan, probably four people can win the championship this year. That's good isn't it?

VR: Yes. I am in a good shape, Yamaha is so competitive and we work well with the team. I assumed already that Jorge, with more experience on the Bridgestone tyres, would come back and fight for victories. Stoner is always impressive and strong and Dani (Pedrosa) demonstrated in Japan that if his knee is fit then it is possible to battle every Sunday for the championship. So I think it will be very interesting going to the end.

Q. We hear you are coming to the TT in the Isle of Man this year, what do you make of that?

VR: Dainese organised it for me. For the motorcycle fan it is great to go to the TT one time to understand it. It is like something unreal when you see it on the television so I am very curious to understand it live, and what it means to be there.

Q. If you find yourself going into the last corner fighting for the lead with your team-mate Jorge Lorenzo, like you did racing against Sete in 2005, would you make the same manouvre?

VR: With Sete, that race was unforgettable from the first lap we start to fight, but especially the last lap and a half it all happened. I was able to overtake on the last time and I took a small advantage but I made a small mistake on the back straight. Sete came back on me and we nearly touched at the hairpin before two or three overtakes to the last hairpin so it was not just one braking (manouvre). It was a very hard fight.

If with Lorenzo it happens the same, then..... Yes.

I want to say that time with Sete, I didn't enter in the corner to touch him. I entered to try and overtake and win the race, but unfortunately Sete doesn't crash and anyway he finished second.

But anyway we are ready for a battle and we wait for the battle and if it's possible for a race with a rival at the same level like that time with Sete with three or four overtaking in the last lap. It was great. In the last lap - it was great. I think it was our sport. If you look at the races of ten years ago it happened 100 times in one race. I like to run like this. Sometimes you win sometimes you lose.

Q&A with Casey Stoner

Casey Stoner ran away with the MotoGP season opener in Qatar, but could only manage fourth in Japan a week ago. Now he arrives at Jerez, where he has never finished on the podium in any category.

After practice, he told the assembled media how he was feeling about the weekend ahead, and the changes in MotoGP for 2009. AUTOSPORT was there to hear his thoughts.

Q. How was the first day for you?

Casey Stoner: It seemed to go alright. We had a technical problem with one of the bikes, so we weren't able to run that through the session, and we need these sessions to get as much time on track as we can.

We were trying to make some big changes on the other bike, and unfortunately there wasn't enough time to make big changes so we just made little ones, really just moved the problem we had around, we didn't really fix it. Tomorrow, with the solutions that we made and came up with, we should be a fair bit more confident.

Q. What is the difference between today and the IRTA test, when you were fastest?

CS: Not a lot of difference. The temperature's a little bit different, the track feels good and the bike feels good. I just had a couple of little problems where we were losing the front end and we can't really understand why, so I think there must be something a little bit different from when we were here at the test and we need to sort the problems. Also, we had a little bit too much pressure in the front tyre. It was what was recommended, but unfortunately with these temperatures the pressure went too high so I had a smaller contact patch, so I was losing confidence at the front.

Q. Can you catch the gap to the Yamahas that was there in Japan?

CS: We didn't have a gap in Japan, we just had a problem at the start of the race.

Q. Is that issue fixed?

CS: We had a problem with the front brakes that was nothing to do with my team. It was the manufacturer's problem, I think. Towards the end of the race it came good and I was running the same lap times as the guys at the front. So I think if we had been there at the beginning of the race, we'd have been there at the end.

Q. The problems at Motegi were completely related to the brakes?

CS: We've run many, many tyres and never had that problem. There must have been some particular problem with the brake discs or pads.

Q. Is your setting completely different on the two bikes today?

CS: The setting is completely different and we wanted to try the other but we couldn't use the second bike because we had a technical problem. Tomorrow should be a little bit better. The main problem we had today was the front end. We kept closing the front end in a lot of corners. I really didn't want to crash, so we'll just try to solve the problem, but there's not enough time to make really big changes during the sessions now. So we were making a lot of small changes, but they don't really make the difference where we need it. Hopefully the weather will be alright tomorrow.

Q. Did you just use the harder tyre today?

CS: Yeah, just one set for the whole session. The feeling of the tyres wasn't too bad. Because of the temperatures the pressures got a little bit high and I think that's why I was closing the front.

Q. In general, are you happy with the single tyre regulations?

CS: Some people are using it as a safety problem. I think that's absolute bullcrap, because nobody is finding it a safety issue. The amount of tyres we have for a weekend is plenty. We're in a difficult moment with this financial crisis, and we've made these rules for a reason - and then everybody wants to go up and change them.

I think bringing back the one hour sessions is a better idea, because everyone's going out and doing the same number of laps anyway. We're trying to panic and get in as many as we can, and we're doing the same amount of laps as we would have in a one hour session. As for the tyres, we've seen no problem.

If everyone's running around on tyres that are destroyed, then you've got to set your bike up to make it last the race or suit a certain tyre. We've done two races and already the rules have changed a couple of times - they're (apparently) going to bring the (one hour) sessions back, they're trying to change the amount of tyres that are allowed, and I just don't think it's necessary. It's worked well for the first couple of races, so why change it?

Q. Would you like to have the Friday morning session back?

CS: For me it's a better idea, even if we went to 45 minutes for four of them instead of three one-hour sessions. Everyone's here, everyone's ready, and on Friday morning we're all sitting around doing nothing.

Q. So all the riders want the Friday session back?

CS: Everyone wants the Friday session back. Everyone's flying here, we all arrive on the same day, we have the press conference on Thursday and everyone has to be here, but we're only getting on track on Friday afternoon, so it's a waste of time. I'm not the one doing the numbers, but for me it's a waste of money as well. We're sitting here not doing anything, we've got the track running, and everybody is ready for it. For sure I've seen a lot less spectators here than I have in the past on a Friday. This is having an impact, for sure.

Q. If you went back to four practice sessions, would you limit the laps or leave it how it is?

CS: I'd leave it at 45 minutes, so you'd still have the laps free

Q. How much of an impact on your set-up programme does losing that session have?

CS: A big impact for everybody. The racing's going to be a lot more spread out this year because nobody has the opportunity to change their bike or set-up during the session because it just wastes time and you just need to do laps. If something happens like at Motegi, where you have one wet, one dry session and the other one's cancelled, it completely screws your weekend. We have to make do with what it is, but nobody really has the opportunity to make the settings that they need to to run at the front.

Q. Have you talked about this in the safety commission?

CS: Yep.

Q. Have you made a proposal to Dorna?

CS: We've put it forward, that's about as far as we can go with it. I think it's more a decision for the MSMA rather than the safety comission. It's not a safety issue. Just like the tyres for me is not a safety issue. They're trying to make it one, but it's not, it's for the sport. So it's not really our department.

Q. If you fix the problems today, how confident are you that you can get back to the pace you had at the test here?

CS: As long as I get into the mid-1m39s I'm going to be pretty happy, and I don't think we're too far away from that. We know of one or two problems that would have improved it immediately. Then we just need to improve a little bit more, and maybe from myself as well. As long as we can get back to what we were doing in the test, I'm going to be happy. If we can come away from this weekend with a good result, not like last year, then we'll be happy.

 

[subzero9285]

'F60B' makes debut

Ferrari's heavily revised F60 formula one car made its track debut on Friday. The single seater, up to 15 kilograms lighter than the original 2009 version according to Italian reports, is being tested in a straight line by the Spaniard Marc Gene.

The saved weight, in all areas including the material used for the seat belts, will benefit Ferrari's use of KERS, culminating in what Ferrari hopes is a lap-time advantage of several tenths. It is also believed that the car, being called the F60B in the press, features a double-decker diffuser. The aerodynamic test at Vairano, Italy, will be completed on Saturday.

Source

 

[avaya]

It doesn't matter what anyone thinks about the cap.

The pure fact of the matter is this: A budget cap is not enforceable. The loopholes in GAAP rules (which won't even be the same for all the teams :lol ) make the FIA regulations look perfect.

I can not believe that anyone is sitting here seriously thinking that the FIA will now attempt to do the job of the FSA/SEC. Those organisations struggle with it every day. How the fuck is the FIA going to do?

Fair-value accounting for assets/services for which there is no secondary market is the primary reason we are in the shitty economic mess we are in now. Now you want to try and put that into place in F1? Are you fucking insane? Have people lost their goddam minds?

You can not in anyway realistically cap spending. It is impossible. Especially if you have manufacturers involved. Every champsionship will be contested in the courts.

If £40mn is enough to compete? Why don't you just spend £40mn and get lapped. Twice. Telling teams who have invested for years on securing infrastructure and expertise to get to where they are now that their investment is now worhtless is unfair and complete farce.

Luca has veto power over this due to the agreement signed in 2005. He will not let this pass over his dead body. Max is trying to call his bluff. Mosley is a dead man.

Breakaway will always come down to Ferrari vs. Monaco. Where will the money go? Oh I wonder. It is not even a contest. McLaren will be coming with us. So that's 2 down. BMW will lose interest if there isn't some of note to compete against, same for Toyota and Renault.

Mosley and Ecclestone are going to lose this war. They won FISA/FOCA against Balestre now they are going to lose.

 

[duckroll]

The tech cap in place now for engines is already hurting F1 imo. Any real budget caps that are mandated by regulations instead of simply agreed on within FOTA for economic reasons, is going to make F1 suck more. I watch F1 because it's the highest end of racing technology and skill.

I'm getting annoyed with the shitty steward decisions and retarded rules as it is, so maybe it'll be for the best if Mosley and Ecclestone decide to be super retards and chase all the top teams away. That way we can have a new championship run by someone else, and F1 can go fuck itself.

Also, the retarded fucking idea of giving the driver's championship to whoever wins the most races = LOLZ. That's another retarded nail in the dumbass coffin.

 

[cilonen]

More political intrigue from Grandprix.com, following up on an article in the FT quoting Spanky as saying "F1 could live without Ferrari" - the main thrust being that with McLaren humbled, Ferrari are now looking to be the big target because too much power lies with them and the FOTA.

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns21432.html

Now that McLaren has been humbled, Ferrari is the team that looks likely to move into the FIA firing line.

The FIA does not like the idea that it can be pushed around by a Ferrari-led Formula One Teams Association - and vice versa. Hey presto! Up pops a story in the Financial Times (just where Ferrari does not want to see it) suggesting that F1 could live without Ferrari.

The team has been to the brink with the FIA before, notably in the mid 1980s when Enzo Ferrari and Jean-Marie Balestre (the then head of the sporting arm of the FIA) got into a fight over the future engine rules. In July 1985 Ferrari threatened to withdraw from F1 and switch to Indycar racing. To push the point Enzo Ferrari sent his sporting director Marco Piccinini to visit an Indycar race at Michigan. Balestre said he would not be swayed by Ferrari threats. A month later Indycar team owner Jim Trueman and his crew chief Steve Horne visited Maranello and in the months that followed the Italian team recruited a design team and built a Ferrari Indycar. This was completed by July 1987 by which time the two parties had come to their senses and hammered out a suitable compromise.

The FIA knows that Ferrari is a much stronger brand than F1. The Prancing Horse is far more evocative than the rather pedestrian F1 logo. Ferrari is by far the most popular team in F1. McLaren attracts fans with its glitzy technology, Williams gets support because of the passion of its owners, Minardi was very popular because of its underdog status but the only team that fans go wild for is Ferrari - and it does not matter who is driving. It is not only red-blooded Italians who follow Ferrari. It has the same following all over the world. Why? Because Ferrari has a great heritage in competition. It is a team of legend. The Ferrari brand relies not on the fact that rich people by the road cars it builds - that is true of many companies - but rather because there is a mystique about Ferrari which people want a part of. Ferrari has long represented Italian pride and style, the red cars being a symbol of all that Italy does well.