| wvallwheeldrive | 05-24-2006 11:12 AM |
i think McLaren will be even farther off the map next year
| artkevin | 05-24-2006 11:38 AM |
Yeah, Macca needs to work on getting a car w/ speed and constencey and stop worrying so much about poaching people from other teams or series. How much would it suck to be Gary Paffet or PDLR to put your heart and soul into testing hoping that you can *maybe* get a drive and then a year in advance you have no chance of getting a ride. I hope they can get it together and give Lewis Hamilton a drive and Alonso will have a car worth a damn next year. I am not a fan of what they have done to the drivers market over the past few seasons (JPM, Kimi, Freddy).
When RD says F1 is cut throat it seems more and more like he is cut throat and others are following his lead (a la Button-gate).
When RD says F1 is cut throat it seems more and more like he is cut throat and others are following his lead (a la Button-gate).
| wvallwheeldrive | 05-24-2006 11:48 AM |
Mclaren needs to get off the a$$ and fix there problems the should have won the drivers, and constuctors championships last year but the car was the week link. Any who i the think they have 2 lead drivers on that team and Kimi imho is the best driver in F-1
| Ferg | 05-30-2006 03:17 PM |
Not much news aside from some political rangling, and oh yeah, JV is the next American Idol.
[QUOTE]McLaren, Toyota left out of F1 Commission
By Adam Cooper Tuesday, May 30th 2006, 15:50 GMT
McLaren and Toyota are two of the teams that have been squeezed out of the voting process within the new 2008 F1 Commission, which is being finalized today by a fax vote of World Motor Sport Council members.
The F1 Commission is the body that approves measures agreed by the Technical Working Group and the new Sporting Working Group, and then submits them to the World Motor Sport Council for final ratification.
As part of the wholesale changes to the sport for 2008, the F1 Commission is being restructured.
That process had to be finalized as soon as possible, as the Commission will have to act on the 2008 technical regulations before June 30.
Since their own next meeting is not until July 5, the WMSC members were asked this week to vote by fax to finalize the composition of the new Commission.
Only six of the 12 teams (including new entrant Prodrive) will be allowed a vote, rather than all of them, as was the case in the past.
FIA president Max Mosley told autosport.com in Monaco that the teams have not been chosen purely in terms of their positions in the world championship, but on a national basis, via their entrants' licenses.
"We need to do it now by fax, rather than on July 5 at the next meeting," Mosley said. "Because any change to the sporting rules that affects the design of the cars for 2008 has to be made before June 30. What we're proposing is one team from each country. The FIA tradition is country by country."
Licenses tend to reflect the nationality of the team owner, rather than where the actual race team factory is based. That's relevant mainly because national anthems played for the winning constructor on the podium have to be that of the license.
For example, Toyota's top management would not be very happy to win a race and have the German anthem played, and the same goes for Honda, Super Aguri and Renault with regard to Britain, and BMW with Switzerland.
At the moment, six countries enter F1 teams, but Mosley said that Red Bull Racing will apply for an Austrian license, bringing the total to seven, leaving the split between the countries as follows:
Great Britain: McLaren, Williams and Prodrive;
Italy: Ferrari and Toro Rosso;
Japan: Honda, Toyota and Super Aguri;
France: Renault;
Germany: BMW;
Russia: Midland F1;
Austria: Red Bull Racing.
Mosley said that where there is more than one team from each country, "I think we would have to take the most senior team. For example, Honda is probably the senior Japanese team."
Mosley did not mention who would get the British vote, but autosport.com understands that Williams will be given priority, leaving McLaren out in the cold.
It's not clear what definition of the word "senior" is being used, because McLaren are ahead of Williams in the championship and have also been in the sport for longer.
However, Williams are already a member of the Permanent Bureau, which is a sort of sub-division of the Commission that votes on certain matters, such as the recent Yuji Ide situation.
It thus seems that the six teams who get the crucial votes will be Williams, Ferrari, Honda, Renault and BMW, with Austria's Red Bull taking precedence over Russia's MF1 for the final slot.
Apart from McLaren, that leaves Toyota, Toro Rosso, Super Aguri, Midland and Prodrive without a direct vote, although obviously Toro Rosso are in effect represented by Red Bull Racing.
The lack of participation by Mercedes and Toyota in the voting process will clearly be a major blow to both manufacturers, who by coincidence are also two of the less FIA-friendly teams in the paddock.
The other votes within the F1 Commission are held by the FIA and FOM, plus five race promoters.
Although no confirmation was forthcoming from the FIA, autosport.com understands that the five promoters will be Australia, Brazil, Hungary, Monaco and Spain.
In the past, there were also representatives of sponsors, tyre suppliers and engine manufacturers on the Commission, but they have now all been dropped.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Villeneuve to release new album
By Jonathan Noble Tuesday, May 30th 2006, 12:16 GMT
Jacques Villeneuve could find himself set for a new career as a music star after he releases an album later this year.
Amid the uncertainty of last winter, when he was not sure if he would be retained by Sauber-BMW or not, Villeneuve put F1 to the back of his mind as he spent time in a recording studio in Paris.
The album that came out of that work is set to be released later this year, although the release date and title have not yet been confirmed.
Half of the album is Villeneuve's own songs, while the other half is a mixture of songs written by friends or song that he likes.
One of the album's tracks, a duet with his sister Melanie, is about their father Gilles, who was killed at the 1982 Belgian Grand Prix.
"Everyone sings in the shower, or strums a guitar," explained Villeneuve in a recent interview with Auto Hebdo. "Basically this just goes a bit further, through wishing to and curiosity.
"I have always loved music, my grandfather was a piano tuner, my father Gilles played piano and trumpet, my sister is a good musician too... it's in the genes! I have written music for a long time, and I knocked the dust off this last winter.
"I had some time too. Even so, to record an album in a month is quick. I had to immerse myself completely in the work - even though it was during Christmas and New Year."
When asked what kind of reaction he was expecting from the album, he said: "No idea. I did not record this album to this end but for my own enjoyment, to hear what my songs were like played by good musicians and to put it on disc.
"Sometimes we are proud of a song that we consider beautiful, but will it be accepted as such by others? Friends and family will say that it is great, but for others I do not know.
"Perhaps sporting colleagues will say that I am an excellent musician and singer, while the singers will say that I am excellent driver!"[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]McLaren, Toyota left out of F1 Commission
By Adam Cooper Tuesday, May 30th 2006, 15:50 GMT
McLaren and Toyota are two of the teams that have been squeezed out of the voting process within the new 2008 F1 Commission, which is being finalized today by a fax vote of World Motor Sport Council members.
The F1 Commission is the body that approves measures agreed by the Technical Working Group and the new Sporting Working Group, and then submits them to the World Motor Sport Council for final ratification.
As part of the wholesale changes to the sport for 2008, the F1 Commission is being restructured.
That process had to be finalized as soon as possible, as the Commission will have to act on the 2008 technical regulations before June 30.
Since their own next meeting is not until July 5, the WMSC members were asked this week to vote by fax to finalize the composition of the new Commission.
Only six of the 12 teams (including new entrant Prodrive) will be allowed a vote, rather than all of them, as was the case in the past.
FIA president Max Mosley told autosport.com in Monaco that the teams have not been chosen purely in terms of their positions in the world championship, but on a national basis, via their entrants' licenses.
"We need to do it now by fax, rather than on July 5 at the next meeting," Mosley said. "Because any change to the sporting rules that affects the design of the cars for 2008 has to be made before June 30. What we're proposing is one team from each country. The FIA tradition is country by country."
Licenses tend to reflect the nationality of the team owner, rather than where the actual race team factory is based. That's relevant mainly because national anthems played for the winning constructor on the podium have to be that of the license.
For example, Toyota's top management would not be very happy to win a race and have the German anthem played, and the same goes for Honda, Super Aguri and Renault with regard to Britain, and BMW with Switzerland.
At the moment, six countries enter F1 teams, but Mosley said that Red Bull Racing will apply for an Austrian license, bringing the total to seven, leaving the split between the countries as follows:
Great Britain: McLaren, Williams and Prodrive;
Italy: Ferrari and Toro Rosso;
Japan: Honda, Toyota and Super Aguri;
France: Renault;
Germany: BMW;
Russia: Midland F1;
Austria: Red Bull Racing.
Mosley said that where there is more than one team from each country, "I think we would have to take the most senior team. For example, Honda is probably the senior Japanese team."
Mosley did not mention who would get the British vote, but autosport.com understands that Williams will be given priority, leaving McLaren out in the cold.
It's not clear what definition of the word "senior" is being used, because McLaren are ahead of Williams in the championship and have also been in the sport for longer.
However, Williams are already a member of the Permanent Bureau, which is a sort of sub-division of the Commission that votes on certain matters, such as the recent Yuji Ide situation.
It thus seems that the six teams who get the crucial votes will be Williams, Ferrari, Honda, Renault and BMW, with Austria's Red Bull taking precedence over Russia's MF1 for the final slot.
Apart from McLaren, that leaves Toyota, Toro Rosso, Super Aguri, Midland and Prodrive without a direct vote, although obviously Toro Rosso are in effect represented by Red Bull Racing.
The lack of participation by Mercedes and Toyota in the voting process will clearly be a major blow to both manufacturers, who by coincidence are also two of the less FIA-friendly teams in the paddock.
The other votes within the F1 Commission are held by the FIA and FOM, plus five race promoters.
Although no confirmation was forthcoming from the FIA, autosport.com understands that the five promoters will be Australia, Brazil, Hungary, Monaco and Spain.
In the past, there were also representatives of sponsors, tyre suppliers and engine manufacturers on the Commission, but they have now all been dropped.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Villeneuve to release new album
By Jonathan Noble Tuesday, May 30th 2006, 12:16 GMT
Jacques Villeneuve could find himself set for a new career as a music star after he releases an album later this year.
Amid the uncertainty of last winter, when he was not sure if he would be retained by Sauber-BMW or not, Villeneuve put F1 to the back of his mind as he spent time in a recording studio in Paris.
The album that came out of that work is set to be released later this year, although the release date and title have not yet been confirmed.
Half of the album is Villeneuve's own songs, while the other half is a mixture of songs written by friends or song that he likes.
One of the album's tracks, a duet with his sister Melanie, is about their father Gilles, who was killed at the 1982 Belgian Grand Prix.
"Everyone sings in the shower, or strums a guitar," explained Villeneuve in a recent interview with Auto Hebdo. "Basically this just goes a bit further, through wishing to and curiosity.
"I have always loved music, my grandfather was a piano tuner, my father Gilles played piano and trumpet, my sister is a good musician too... it's in the genes! I have written music for a long time, and I knocked the dust off this last winter.
"I had some time too. Even so, to record an album in a month is quick. I had to immerse myself completely in the work - even though it was during Christmas and New Year."
When asked what kind of reaction he was expecting from the album, he said: "No idea. I did not record this album to this end but for my own enjoyment, to hear what my songs were like played by good musicians and to put it on disc.
"Sometimes we are proud of a song that we consider beautiful, but will it be accepted as such by others? Friends and family will say that it is great, but for others I do not know.
"Perhaps sporting colleagues will say that I am an excellent musician and singer, while the singers will say that I am excellent driver!"[/QUOTE]
| Ferg | 06-01-2006 12:19 PM |
Midland about to fold...
[QUOTE]Midland on the verge of selling F1 team
By Jonathan Noble & Anthony Rowlinson Thursday, June 1st 2006, 16:14 GMT
Midland owner Alex Shnaider is on the verge of selling his Formula One team to a group of Dutch investors, autosport.com has learned.
Michiel Mol, who founded the Dutch Internet firm Lost Boys, has made an offer worth more than 100 million Euro to buy the team from Shnaider. The Dutchman is already closely involved with Midland through his backing of Christijan Albers.
Talks between Mol and Shnaider initially took place after the Spanish Grand Prix, and continued in Monaco last weekend where the offer to buy the team was lodged.
Shnaider has spent the time since then deliberating about whether to accept the offer and, although no final decision has been made, the indications are that he is likely to accept it.
An announcement could be made as soon as next weekend's British Grand Prix.
Midland spokesman Ron Fine told autosport.com that although Shnaider was keen to remain in F1, the size of the offer for the team was something that could not simply be overlooked.
"Alex has not come to a decision yet," said Fine. "Nothing is final and there is no conclusion, but if this was purely a business decision he would have sold already. Alex has an emotional attachment to the team. He wants to see the team achieve its goals
"However, the offer would allow Alex to make a significant return on his investment and leave the team in good hands. These investors have a passion for F1 and they love the sport.
"Alex sees the potential of MF1 and the team have been improving all the time. If the offer had not been made then he would not be considering selling."
News of the possible Dutch takeover comes after months of speculation suggesting that Shnaider was looking to offload the team, even though he remained adamant that he was in F1 for the long-term.
Shnaider told Autosport recently that his involvement in Formula One was based purely on financial reasons - but because he had a passion for the sport.
"We don't have to be in F1," he said. "But we're in because we want to be. I love the sport, so in a way I am indulging my passion. I can tell you now that I am not making any money out of it. I don't see how it is possible"
The news of the Dutch interest comes at the same time that Midland have begun a recruitment drive for staff to help with their new wind tunnel.
A full-page advert in this week's Autosport has positions available for senior aerodynamicists, aerodynamicists, wind tunnel engineers, model makes and other support staff. [/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Midland on the verge of selling F1 team
By Jonathan Noble & Anthony Rowlinson Thursday, June 1st 2006, 16:14 GMT
Midland owner Alex Shnaider is on the verge of selling his Formula One team to a group of Dutch investors, autosport.com has learned.
Michiel Mol, who founded the Dutch Internet firm Lost Boys, has made an offer worth more than 100 million Euro to buy the team from Shnaider. The Dutchman is already closely involved with Midland through his backing of Christijan Albers.
Talks between Mol and Shnaider initially took place after the Spanish Grand Prix, and continued in Monaco last weekend where the offer to buy the team was lodged.
Shnaider has spent the time since then deliberating about whether to accept the offer and, although no final decision has been made, the indications are that he is likely to accept it.
An announcement could be made as soon as next weekend's British Grand Prix.
Midland spokesman Ron Fine told autosport.com that although Shnaider was keen to remain in F1, the size of the offer for the team was something that could not simply be overlooked.
"Alex has not come to a decision yet," said Fine. "Nothing is final and there is no conclusion, but if this was purely a business decision he would have sold already. Alex has an emotional attachment to the team. He wants to see the team achieve its goals
"However, the offer would allow Alex to make a significant return on his investment and leave the team in good hands. These investors have a passion for F1 and they love the sport.
"Alex sees the potential of MF1 and the team have been improving all the time. If the offer had not been made then he would not be considering selling."
News of the possible Dutch takeover comes after months of speculation suggesting that Shnaider was looking to offload the team, even though he remained adamant that he was in F1 for the long-term.
Shnaider told Autosport recently that his involvement in Formula One was based purely on financial reasons - but because he had a passion for the sport.
"We don't have to be in F1," he said. "But we're in because we want to be. I love the sport, so in a way I am indulging my passion. I can tell you now that I am not making any money out of it. I don't see how it is possible"
The news of the Dutch interest comes at the same time that Midland have begun a recruitment drive for staff to help with their new wind tunnel.
A full-page advert in this week's Autosport has positions available for senior aerodynamicists, aerodynamicists, wind tunnel engineers, model makes and other support staff. [/QUOTE]
| Ferg | 06-01-2006 12:22 PM |
Schumacher flies at Barcelona.
[QUOTE]Schumacher breaks Barcelona record
Thursday, June 1st 2006, 16:07 GMT
Ferrari driver Michael Schumacher broke the unofficial record of the Barcelona circuit on the second day of testing of the week at the Spanish track.
The German's lap of 1:13.471 beat Jenson Button's record of 1:13.552, the Briton's time set early in 2005.
Despite Schumacher's impressive time, the day was one of mixed fortunes for Ferrari following a heavy accident by test driver Luca Badoer.
The Italian driver lost control of his 248 F1 at the fast third turn, going off and crashing heavily against the tyre barriers. The accident forced the session to be stopped.
Badoer was uninjured, but the damaged the car sustained on the right side was enough to make sure he was unable to return to action. He managed just 27 laps and finished as 10th fastest.
A total of 17 drivers took to the track today, with only the Midland and Super Aguri teams absent from the Circuit de Catalunya.
More to follow...
Today's times:
Pos Driver Team Time Laps
1. M.Schumacher Ferrari (B) 1:13.471 82
2. Kovalainen Renault (M) 1:14.174 120
3. Zonta Toyota (B) 1:14.696 106
4. Rosberg Williams-Cosworth (B) 1:14.731 87
5. Fisichella Renault (M) 1:14.854 112
6. Trulli Toyota (B) 1:15.131 102
7. de la Rosa McLaren-Mercedes (M) 1:15.238 84
8. Villeneuve BMW-Sauber (M) 1:15.526 111
9. Button Honda (M) 1:15.590 109
10. Badoer Ferrari (B) 1:15.637 27
11. Montoya McLaren-Mercedes (M) 1:15.652 61
12. Heidfeld BMW-Sauber (M) 1:15.783 125
13. Barrichello Honda (M) 1:15.826 96
14. Klien Red Bull-Ferrari (M) 1:15.871 65
15. Doornbos Red Bull-Ferrari (M) 1:17.018 115
16. Wurz Williams-Cosworth (B) 1:17.188 83
17. Jani Toro Rosso-Cosworth (M) 1:17.224 92
All Timing Unofficial
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Schumacher breaks Barcelona record
Thursday, June 1st 2006, 16:07 GMT
Ferrari driver Michael Schumacher broke the unofficial record of the Barcelona circuit on the second day of testing of the week at the Spanish track.
The German's lap of 1:13.471 beat Jenson Button's record of 1:13.552, the Briton's time set early in 2005.
Despite Schumacher's impressive time, the day was one of mixed fortunes for Ferrari following a heavy accident by test driver Luca Badoer.
The Italian driver lost control of his 248 F1 at the fast third turn, going off and crashing heavily against the tyre barriers. The accident forced the session to be stopped.
Badoer was uninjured, but the damaged the car sustained on the right side was enough to make sure he was unable to return to action. He managed just 27 laps and finished as 10th fastest.
A total of 17 drivers took to the track today, with only the Midland and Super Aguri teams absent from the Circuit de Catalunya.
More to follow...
Today's times:
Pos Driver Team Time Laps
1. M.Schumacher Ferrari (B) 1:13.471 82
2. Kovalainen Renault (M) 1:14.174 120
3. Zonta Toyota (B) 1:14.696 106
4. Rosberg Williams-Cosworth (B) 1:14.731 87
5. Fisichella Renault (M) 1:14.854 112
6. Trulli Toyota (B) 1:15.131 102
7. de la Rosa McLaren-Mercedes (M) 1:15.238 84
8. Villeneuve BMW-Sauber (M) 1:15.526 111
9. Button Honda (M) 1:15.590 109
10. Badoer Ferrari (B) 1:15.637 27
11. Montoya McLaren-Mercedes (M) 1:15.652 61
12. Heidfeld BMW-Sauber (M) 1:15.783 125
13. Barrichello Honda (M) 1:15.826 96
14. Klien Red Bull-Ferrari (M) 1:15.871 65
15. Doornbos Red Bull-Ferrari (M) 1:17.018 115
16. Wurz Williams-Cosworth (B) 1:17.188 83
17. Jani Toro Rosso-Cosworth (M) 1:17.224 92
All Timing Unofficial
[/QUOTE]
| platypus | 06-01-2006 12:38 PM |
[quote]
Michiel Mol, who founded the Dutch Internet firm Lost Boys, has made an offer worth more than 100 million Euro to buy the team from Shnaider. The Dutchman is already closely involved with Midland through his backing of Christijan Albers.
[/quote]
Would this be the same "Lost Boys" as was on the Minardis in years past?
Michiel Mol, who founded the Dutch Internet firm Lost Boys, has made an offer worth more than 100 million Euro to buy the team from Shnaider. The Dutchman is already closely involved with Midland through his backing of Christijan Albers.
[/quote]
Would this be the same "Lost Boys" as was on the Minardis in years past?
| rupertberr | 06-01-2006 12:52 PM |
[QUOTE=platypus]Would this be the same "Lost Boys" as was on the Minardis in years past?[/QUOTE]
Yes, I think that's the same one. Cool an all Dutch team. Paint it orange and bring out the cheese.
Lets see Jan Lammers behind the head set, Albers, Doornbos and Verstappen as drivers and Bleekmolen taking care of sponsorship.
I have some Dutch relations. Their nuts. :devil: :alien: :banana: :disco:
Yes, I think that's the same one. Cool an all Dutch team. Paint it orange and bring out the cheese.
Lets see Jan Lammers behind the head set, Albers, Doornbos and Verstappen as drivers and Bleekmolen taking care of sponsorship.
I have some Dutch relations. Their nuts. :devil: :alien: :banana: :disco:
| StuBeck | 06-01-2006 02:20 PM |
That is a great name for an IT company btw, Lost Boys :)
I think the only reason he is thinking about selling the team is simply because of the offer, he would make his money and its probably more than the team is really worth or what it will be worth in the future when costs go down.
I think the only reason he is thinking about selling the team is simply because of the offer, he would make his money and its probably more than the team is really worth or what it will be worth in the future when costs go down.
| TimStevens | 06-01-2006 02:28 PM |
Any updates on F1 in HD? This weekend I was kinda hoping to get some full-screen F1 action, but as usual was sorely disappointed. It'd at least give CBS something over Speed...
| KAX | 06-01-2006 04:39 PM |
[QUOTE=TimStevens]Any updates on F1 in HD? This weekend I was kinda hoping to get some full-screen F1 action, but as usual was sorely disappointed. It'd at least give CBS something over Speed...[/QUOTE]
Yeh i was hoping CBS would have it on their HD coverage, but it all depends on the country its in. The ones filming the race are in control of whether its HD or not.
Yeh i was hoping CBS would have it on their HD coverage, but it all depends on the country its in. The ones filming the race are in control of whether its HD or not.
| artkevin | 06-01-2006 05:01 PM |
Has anyone noticed that the CBS picture looks grainy? When I watch the rebroadcast on Speed it looks fantastic.
Back at Imola I guess FOM boosted the singal half way through practice or something. Bob, Steve and David all noticed it at one time.
Back at Imola I guess FOM boosted the singal half way through practice or something. Bob, Steve and David all noticed it at one time.
| Ferg | 06-02-2006 12:22 PM |
GPDA lean on Schumacher while testing for Silverstone continues in Spain.
[QUOTE]GPDA want Schumacher to come clean
By Jonathan Noble Friday, June 2nd 2006, 15:15 GMT
Formula One drivers will demand that Michael Schumacher comes clean about what really happened in Monaco Grand Prix qualifying at a meeting at Silverstone next week, autosport.com can reveal, as the controversy over the incident continues to rumble on.
Amid pressure from some of his rivals who want him to stand down from his role as president of the Grand Prix Drivers' Association (GPDA) after he was judged to have deliberately stopped his car on the track in the closing minutes of Monaco qualifying, fellow drivers now want to give Schumacher the chance behind closed doors to fully explain what happened.
It is understood that the matter will be brought up at the GPDA's next meeting, which is scheduled to take place at the British Grand Prix.
Several drivers are still upset about the safety implications of Schumacher's actions, and are believed to feel uncomfortable that the GPDA's mandate in pushing for improved safety in the sport may be compromised by being represented by a driver who put other drivers' safety at risk by deliberately stopping his car on the track to impede his rivals.
Although initial speculation that there was a petition among drivers to force Schumacher to step down from his role in the GPDA appears to be wide of the mark, high level sources have revealed that a group of drivers are pushing for action to be taken.
And despite Schumacher's protestations of innocence in public about what happened, and his wish to put the matter behind him, rival drivers want to give him the chance of be honest about the events in qualifying so they can judge the situation for themselves.
Jarno Trulli, who is a GPDA director, quelled talk about an official push for Schumacher's removal from his role within the body at next week's meeting, but did admit that there would be a demand for answers about the Rascasse incident.
Speaking to autosport.com, he said: "Yes, there will be a meeting of drivers at Silverstone and the question will be raised about Michael.
"As a GPDA member, myself as well as other drivers want to ask him, with no polemics, no speculation and simply a discussion between drivers.
"I feel the same as I did in Monaco. It is obvious; he may say whatever he wants to you, but he cannot do that to other drivers."
Some drivers are less accommodating than Trulli, however, and believe Schumacher's actions alone have left his position as president of the GPDA untenable. Sources within the body have suggested that an informal motion will be put forward in the meeting asking Schumacher to consider stepping down.
One source said: "We will not force him to stand down, but we will ask him. We hope he has enough sense to understand why we feel like this."
Schumacher said on Friday, however, that he was not moved by suggestions that his rivals wanted to talk to him about the Monaco incident.
"I do not think the drivers will have to speak to me about this, because perhaps if they have to speak to anyone it would be the stewards," he said. "They spoke to me already and everything has been done. It is not the drivers' job to speak to me about this."
Whatever the proceedings in the meeting, it is likely to lead to further controversy within the GPDA.
McLaren test driver Pedro de la Rosa said at Monaco that if Schumacher did not step down from his role as president of the GPDA then he would leave the body.
"In my opinion I don't see how he can remain a GPDA director, but this is only my opinion, not the opinion of the organisation," he said. "We will have to discuss this matter at the next meeting [at Silverstone]. But if he remains as a director, then I cannot continue to do so."[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Schumacher stays on top at Barcelona
Friday, June 2nd 2006, 16:20 GMT
Michael Schumacher ended his week's testing for Ferrari on the top of the timesheets with the quickest time at Barcelona on Friday, although he could not quite match his earlier record pace.
The seven-time world champion set his best lap of 1:14.119 early in the morning, as he spent much of the day focusing on long-run work for tyre supplier Bridgestone.
His only drama came at 5.30pm when he went off the track at Turn 7 and ended up in the gravel at Turn 8.
Behind Schumacher, Robert Kubica was a surprise second for BMW-Sauber as he focused on developments, tyre evaluation and set-up work for next weekend's British Grand Prix.
Renault duo Giancarlo Fisichella and Heikki Kovalainen were third and fourth fastest as they put their full focus into preparation work for Silverstone.
Jarno Trulli continued to put mileage on Toyota's new TF106B to end up fifth fastest, while teammate Olivier Panis brought out a red flag at 4.30pm when his car stopped on the track.
Honda endured another difficult day as both test drivers James Rossiter and Anthony Davidson brought out the red flag after identical accidents.
Rossiter went off the track at Turn 4 just before 10am, just touching the wall and causing very slight damage to his car. Davidson then had a carbon copy accident at 2.55pm before eventually ending up 10th fastest on the timesheets, just ahead of Rossiter.
The other red flag was caused by Red Bull Racing's David Coulthard, whose car stopped at Turn 10 at 4.30pm.
Today's times:
Pos Driver Team Time Laps
1. M.Schumacher Ferrari (B) 1:14.119 112
2. Kubica BMW-Sauber (M) 1:14.136 133
3. Fisichella Renault (M) 1:14.504 118
4. Kovalainen Renault (M) 1:14.505 122
5. Trulli Toyota (B) 1:15.010 104
6. de la Rosa McLaren-Mercedes (M) 1:15.122 98
7. Montoya McLaren-Mercedes (M) 1:15.177 113
8. Rosberg Williams-Cosworth (B) 1:15.229 85
9. Doornbos Red Bull-Ferrari (M) 1:15.508 102
10. Davidson Honda (M) 1:15.524 139
11. Rossiter Honda (M) 1:15.629 107
12. Heidfeld BMW-Sauber (M) 1:15.674 80
13. Coulthard Red Bull-Ferrari (M) 1:15.807 125
14. Liuzzi Toro Rosso-Cosworth (M) 1:16.489 121
15. Panis Toyota (B) 1:16.532 87
All Timing Unofficial[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]GPDA want Schumacher to come clean
By Jonathan Noble Friday, June 2nd 2006, 15:15 GMT
Formula One drivers will demand that Michael Schumacher comes clean about what really happened in Monaco Grand Prix qualifying at a meeting at Silverstone next week, autosport.com can reveal, as the controversy over the incident continues to rumble on.
Amid pressure from some of his rivals who want him to stand down from his role as president of the Grand Prix Drivers' Association (GPDA) after he was judged to have deliberately stopped his car on the track in the closing minutes of Monaco qualifying, fellow drivers now want to give Schumacher the chance behind closed doors to fully explain what happened.
It is understood that the matter will be brought up at the GPDA's next meeting, which is scheduled to take place at the British Grand Prix.
Several drivers are still upset about the safety implications of Schumacher's actions, and are believed to feel uncomfortable that the GPDA's mandate in pushing for improved safety in the sport may be compromised by being represented by a driver who put other drivers' safety at risk by deliberately stopping his car on the track to impede his rivals.
Although initial speculation that there was a petition among drivers to force Schumacher to step down from his role in the GPDA appears to be wide of the mark, high level sources have revealed that a group of drivers are pushing for action to be taken.
And despite Schumacher's protestations of innocence in public about what happened, and his wish to put the matter behind him, rival drivers want to give him the chance of be honest about the events in qualifying so they can judge the situation for themselves.
Jarno Trulli, who is a GPDA director, quelled talk about an official push for Schumacher's removal from his role within the body at next week's meeting, but did admit that there would be a demand for answers about the Rascasse incident.
Speaking to autosport.com, he said: "Yes, there will be a meeting of drivers at Silverstone and the question will be raised about Michael.
"As a GPDA member, myself as well as other drivers want to ask him, with no polemics, no speculation and simply a discussion between drivers.
"I feel the same as I did in Monaco. It is obvious; he may say whatever he wants to you, but he cannot do that to other drivers."
Some drivers are less accommodating than Trulli, however, and believe Schumacher's actions alone have left his position as president of the GPDA untenable. Sources within the body have suggested that an informal motion will be put forward in the meeting asking Schumacher to consider stepping down.
One source said: "We will not force him to stand down, but we will ask him. We hope he has enough sense to understand why we feel like this."
Schumacher said on Friday, however, that he was not moved by suggestions that his rivals wanted to talk to him about the Monaco incident.
"I do not think the drivers will have to speak to me about this, because perhaps if they have to speak to anyone it would be the stewards," he said. "They spoke to me already and everything has been done. It is not the drivers' job to speak to me about this."
Whatever the proceedings in the meeting, it is likely to lead to further controversy within the GPDA.
McLaren test driver Pedro de la Rosa said at Monaco that if Schumacher did not step down from his role as president of the GPDA then he would leave the body.
"In my opinion I don't see how he can remain a GPDA director, but this is only my opinion, not the opinion of the organisation," he said. "We will have to discuss this matter at the next meeting [at Silverstone]. But if he remains as a director, then I cannot continue to do so."[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Schumacher stays on top at Barcelona
Friday, June 2nd 2006, 16:20 GMT
Michael Schumacher ended his week's testing for Ferrari on the top of the timesheets with the quickest time at Barcelona on Friday, although he could not quite match his earlier record pace.
The seven-time world champion set his best lap of 1:14.119 early in the morning, as he spent much of the day focusing on long-run work for tyre supplier Bridgestone.
His only drama came at 5.30pm when he went off the track at Turn 7 and ended up in the gravel at Turn 8.
Behind Schumacher, Robert Kubica was a surprise second for BMW-Sauber as he focused on developments, tyre evaluation and set-up work for next weekend's British Grand Prix.
Renault duo Giancarlo Fisichella and Heikki Kovalainen were third and fourth fastest as they put their full focus into preparation work for Silverstone.
Jarno Trulli continued to put mileage on Toyota's new TF106B to end up fifth fastest, while teammate Olivier Panis brought out a red flag at 4.30pm when his car stopped on the track.
Honda endured another difficult day as both test drivers James Rossiter and Anthony Davidson brought out the red flag after identical accidents.
Rossiter went off the track at Turn 4 just before 10am, just touching the wall and causing very slight damage to his car. Davidson then had a carbon copy accident at 2.55pm before eventually ending up 10th fastest on the timesheets, just ahead of Rossiter.
The other red flag was caused by Red Bull Racing's David Coulthard, whose car stopped at Turn 10 at 4.30pm.
Today's times:
Pos Driver Team Time Laps
1. M.Schumacher Ferrari (B) 1:14.119 112
2. Kubica BMW-Sauber (M) 1:14.136 133
3. Fisichella Renault (M) 1:14.504 118
4. Kovalainen Renault (M) 1:14.505 122
5. Trulli Toyota (B) 1:15.010 104
6. de la Rosa McLaren-Mercedes (M) 1:15.122 98
7. Montoya McLaren-Mercedes (M) 1:15.177 113
8. Rosberg Williams-Cosworth (B) 1:15.229 85
9. Doornbos Red Bull-Ferrari (M) 1:15.508 102
10. Davidson Honda (M) 1:15.524 139
11. Rossiter Honda (M) 1:15.629 107
12. Heidfeld BMW-Sauber (M) 1:15.674 80
13. Coulthard Red Bull-Ferrari (M) 1:15.807 125
14. Liuzzi Toro Rosso-Cosworth (M) 1:16.489 121
15. Panis Toyota (B) 1:16.532 87
All Timing Unofficial[/QUOTE]
| meebs | 06-02-2006 03:35 PM |
With all the smack Schumi's getting, you know he's going to stick out at least another year until the dumb double rear wing era arrives just to spite people... now where's Kimi going to sit? :(
| Ferg | 06-02-2006 03:47 PM |
I've got my fingers crossed that the CDG wing [i]never[/i] makes it onto a Grand Prix machine, at least outside of testing anyways.
For those that forgot what it looks like...
[IMG]http://www.pbase.com/image/51210832/original.jpg[/IMG]
*shiver*
For those that forgot what it looks like...
[IMG]http://www.pbase.com/image/51210832/original.jpg[/IMG]
*shiver*
| OnTheGas | 06-02-2006 04:00 PM |
Centerline Downwash Generating Wing
�
�
Ferg - Thanks for posting that CDG Wing illustration...
I missed this off-season story, so pardon the dumb question, but is the goal of this wing to reduce rear downforce?
In otherwords, what is end goal(s) of the CDG wing?
I missed this off-season story, so pardon the dumb question, but is the goal of this wing to reduce rear downforce?
In otherwords, what is end goal(s) of the CDG wing?
| Ferg | 06-02-2006 04:04 PM |
Here's the original story from when the FIA annouced the wing. There's been plenty of debate over it's merits sicne then, most of it way over my non-technical head. :)
[QUOTE]FIA unveils radical rear wing concept
By Jonathan Noble Monday, October 24th 2005, 08:05 GMT
Motor racing's governing body has unveiled a radical double rear-wing concept that they want Formula One cars to run with in 2007 in a bid to improve overtaking.
After months of research and development work with technology partner AMD to look at ways of overcoming the difficulties current F1 cars have in overtaking, the FIA have come up with what they have termed the Centreline Downwash Generating (CDG) wing.
It is hoped that this CDG wing will help F1 cars follow each other much more closely than they currently can. The extreme-looking rear wing is designed to create a wake that gives the car behind it more downforce and reduced drag when running close to a car in front.
The FIA want the CDG concept to form part of the 2008 Formula One technical regulations - along with wider track cars and slick tyres.
However, they are also hoping that the CDG idea will win the support of teams so that the plans can be introduced as early as the start of the 2007 season.
FIA president Max Mosley said: "This new research is important for the future of Formula One. By introducing the CDG wing we can give motor sport fans exactly what they have asked for, wheel-to-wheel racing with much more overtaking.
"It is our hope that the teams will collaborate with us in the optimisation of this radical new idea so that the aerodynamic benefits can be introduced into Formula One in 2007 rather than having to wait until 2008."
The CDG idea will be presented to the teams at this afternoon's meeting of the Formula One Commission in London, where discussions are taking place regarding changes to next year's sporting regulations as well as future technical regulations.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]FIA unveils radical rear wing concept
By Jonathan Noble Monday, October 24th 2005, 08:05 GMT
Motor racing's governing body has unveiled a radical double rear-wing concept that they want Formula One cars to run with in 2007 in a bid to improve overtaking.
After months of research and development work with technology partner AMD to look at ways of overcoming the difficulties current F1 cars have in overtaking, the FIA have come up with what they have termed the Centreline Downwash Generating (CDG) wing.
It is hoped that this CDG wing will help F1 cars follow each other much more closely than they currently can. The extreme-looking rear wing is designed to create a wake that gives the car behind it more downforce and reduced drag when running close to a car in front.
The FIA want the CDG concept to form part of the 2008 Formula One technical regulations - along with wider track cars and slick tyres.
However, they are also hoping that the CDG idea will win the support of teams so that the plans can be introduced as early as the start of the 2007 season.
FIA president Max Mosley said: "This new research is important for the future of Formula One. By introducing the CDG wing we can give motor sport fans exactly what they have asked for, wheel-to-wheel racing with much more overtaking.
"It is our hope that the teams will collaborate with us in the optimisation of this radical new idea so that the aerodynamic benefits can be introduced into Formula One in 2007 rather than having to wait until 2008."
The CDG idea will be presented to the teams at this afternoon's meeting of the Formula One Commission in London, where discussions are taking place regarding changes to next year's sporting regulations as well as future technical regulations.[/QUOTE]
| KAX | 06-02-2006 05:54 PM |
yeh, basically itll allow the air to go back down to the ground giving the car behind more downforce while following closely, allowing cars to follow closer and get a run through the corner to pass on the following straight.
why dont you guys like them? hell if it works, itll make the races great to watch.
why dont you guys like them? hell if it works, itll make the races great to watch.
| JoD | 06-02-2006 10:51 PM |
For you Kimi, JPM, McLaren fans - they have some absolutely gorgeous wallpapers up on the McLaren website. I've posted the link below for those who are interested...
[URL]http://www.mclaren.com/interactive/wallpapers.php[/URL]
[URL]http://www.mclaren.com/interactive/wallpapers.php[/URL]
| KAX | 06-03-2006 12:08 AM |
yay, ive been checking after every race for a wallpaper for my new comp. i had last years Monaco pick so why not go with this years? Looks great, with Kimis alternate helmet design. I had to resize it to fit my 1280x800 monitor, but thats easy considering the black bars at the top and bottom.
| OnTheGas | 06-03-2006 02:33 AM |
CDG Wing
�
�
[QUOTE=KAX]yeh, basically itll allow the air to go back down to the ground giving the car behind more downforce while following closely, allowing cars to follow closer and get a run through the corner to pass on the following straight.
why dont you guys like them? hell if it works, itll make the races great to watch.[/QUOTE]
Well yeah, if it works, I would like them... I'm no aero expert, but despite AMD's input (Ferrari's technical partner, BTW), I'm wondering how effective that would be.
My limited understanding of aero basics is that less wing all around, combined with more bottom-side venturi aerodynamics would provide us w/cars least susceptible to aero tubulence when following another car.
So, while I like the end goal, I'm skeptical of the effectiveness of the CDG wing(s?). I do hope I'm wrong, and that they are successful.
why dont you guys like them? hell if it works, itll make the races great to watch.[/QUOTE]
Well yeah, if it works, I would like them... I'm no aero expert, but despite AMD's input (Ferrari's technical partner, BTW), I'm wondering how effective that would be.
My limited understanding of aero basics is that less wing all around, combined with more bottom-side venturi aerodynamics would provide us w/cars least susceptible to aero tubulence when following another car.
So, while I like the end goal, I'm skeptical of the effectiveness of the CDG wing(s?). I do hope I'm wrong, and that they are successful.
| KAX | 06-03-2006 02:44 AM |
if their models are correct then itll work. i dont think people should be putting bets on them this far ahead and chosing already. Im up for trying, obviously there will have to be real-life tests made before the FIA mandates it as a rule to see if it works. But i think you guys should give it a chance before you cast it aside.
| bitterWRX | 06-03-2006 02:56 AM |
I agree with KAX. I see nothing wrong with this wing setup. Autosports will always evolve, and it'll be interesting to see where this takes F1.
| Wr4wrX | 06-03-2006 06:06 AM |
Does anybody know what part of the track this is? I've always wondered where this Gucci store was.
[IMG]http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41698000/jpg/_41698058_button_guc416.jpg[/IMG]
Edit: Whoops, meant to post this in the Monaco thread. Oh well, not like the Monaco thread has anything to do with Monaco anymore... :rolleyes: :D
[IMG]http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41698000/jpg/_41698058_button_guc416.jpg[/IMG]
Edit: Whoops, meant to post this in the Monaco thread. Oh well, not like the Monaco thread has anything to do with Monaco anymore... :rolleyes: :D
| ptclaus98 | 06-03-2006 11:13 AM |
Don't mean to be a n00b, but who is Johnnie Walker?
| KAX | 06-03-2006 11:17 AM |
its an alchohol company that makes whiskey. and mclarens sponsor
| bitterWRX | 06-03-2006 04:40 PM |
[QUOTE=Wr4wrX]Does anybody know what part of the track this is? I've always wondered where this Gucci store was.
[IMG]http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41698000/jpg/_41698058_button_guc416.jpg[/IMG]
Edit: Whoops, meant to post this in the Monaco thread. Oh well, not like the Monaco thread has anything to do with Monaco anymore... :rolleyes: :D[/QUOTE]
If I had my guess, I would say it's somewhere between Casino Sqaure and Grand Hotel Hairpin. I think it's during the downhill towards the Mirabeau.
[IMG]http://www.fia.com/resources/images/2147374622__mon_circuit.gif[/IMG]
[IMG]http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41698000/jpg/_41698058_button_guc416.jpg[/IMG]
Edit: Whoops, meant to post this in the Monaco thread. Oh well, not like the Monaco thread has anything to do with Monaco anymore... :rolleyes: :D[/QUOTE]
If I had my guess, I would say it's somewhere between Casino Sqaure and Grand Hotel Hairpin. I think it's during the downhill towards the Mirabeau.
[IMG]http://www.fia.com/resources/images/2147374622__mon_circuit.gif[/IMG]
| Ferg | 06-06-2006 08:39 AM |
Williams drop Cossie for Toyota.
[QUOTE]Williams to switch to Toyota engines
By Anthony Rowlinson & Jonathan Noble Tuesday, June 6th 2006, 10:47 GMT
Williams will switch to Toyota engines next year after agreeing a three-year deal with the Japanese car manufacturer, autosport.com can reveal.
Talks between Williams and Toyota have been ongoing for several months while the team weighed up whether to switch engine suppliers. In the end, the possibility of linking up with a major carmaker proved the deal clincher and will see Williams end their current partnership with Cosworth after just one season.
Sources close to the team have made it clear, however, that their decision was not because they were unhappy about what Cosworth had supplied this year.
"Cosworth's performance on the budget they have is remarkable," said the source.
It is understood that the deal between Williams and Toyota was agreed after the Monaco Grand Prix, although an announcement is not expected to be made until the Canadian Grand Prix later this month.
The contract is understood to run for two years with an option for a third season.
Williams and Toyota technical staff have held meetings regarding the technical issues of the partnership since the season-opening Bahrain Grand Prix, just in case a commercial deal was struck.
Team boss Frank Williams has made no secret of the fact this season that his team were looking at other engine options, and explained that his final decision would not just be made on who had the most powerful power-unit.
"The engine choice is both technical and commercial," Williams said at the San Marino Grand Prix. "Who has got the best chance of winning, versus what else comes with the engine?"
Toyota's decision to supply Williams means that Midland will have to seek an alternative engine supplier for next season, with Cosworth being an obvious candidate.
John Howett, team principal at Toyota, said at the Monaco Grand Prix that he felt it was not ideal for his team if their customer team were fighting at the back of the field.
"For sure it would be better for us to have a more competitive team as partner," he said. "But at this stage, no one can say what will happen to Midland anyway."[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Williams to switch to Toyota engines
By Anthony Rowlinson & Jonathan Noble Tuesday, June 6th 2006, 10:47 GMT
Williams will switch to Toyota engines next year after agreeing a three-year deal with the Japanese car manufacturer, autosport.com can reveal.
Talks between Williams and Toyota have been ongoing for several months while the team weighed up whether to switch engine suppliers. In the end, the possibility of linking up with a major carmaker proved the deal clincher and will see Williams end their current partnership with Cosworth after just one season.
Sources close to the team have made it clear, however, that their decision was not because they were unhappy about what Cosworth had supplied this year.
"Cosworth's performance on the budget they have is remarkable," said the source.
It is understood that the deal between Williams and Toyota was agreed after the Monaco Grand Prix, although an announcement is not expected to be made until the Canadian Grand Prix later this month.
The contract is understood to run for two years with an option for a third season.
Williams and Toyota technical staff have held meetings regarding the technical issues of the partnership since the season-opening Bahrain Grand Prix, just in case a commercial deal was struck.
Team boss Frank Williams has made no secret of the fact this season that his team were looking at other engine options, and explained that his final decision would not just be made on who had the most powerful power-unit.
"The engine choice is both technical and commercial," Williams said at the San Marino Grand Prix. "Who has got the best chance of winning, versus what else comes with the engine?"
Toyota's decision to supply Williams means that Midland will have to seek an alternative engine supplier for next season, with Cosworth being an obvious candidate.
John Howett, team principal at Toyota, said at the Monaco Grand Prix that he felt it was not ideal for his team if their customer team were fighting at the back of the field.
"For sure it would be better for us to have a more competitive team as partner," he said. "But at this stage, no one can say what will happen to Midland anyway."[/QUOTE]
| StuBeck | 06-06-2006 04:30 PM |
It makes sense, while the Cosworth was being talked about highly before the season, it has no reliability whatsoever, I think they're just too small. The second red bull team might move up to the v8's next year though and I can see midland switching if Cosworth is cheaper.
| BriDrive | 06-06-2006 04:49 PM |
I hope Cosworth can keep in the game one way or another until the 2008 "engine freeze or no freeze" dilemma is hammered out with everyone.
It'd be a shame to see such a historic entity get squashed out of just about all remaining motorsport venues for keeps.........
It'd be a shame to see such a historic entity get squashed out of just about all remaining motorsport venues for keeps.........
| Ferg | 06-09-2006 11:25 AM |
News round ups...
[QUOTE]Mosley still hopeful about CDG wing
By Jonathan Noble Friday, June 9th 2006, 12:47 GMT
FIA president Max Mosley is still hopeful the radical Centreline Downwash Generating (CDG) wing will be introduced in Formula One.
The CDG wing was unveiled by the FIA last year, in the hope that, if introduced, will help reduce downforce and boost overtaking in Formula One.
A meeting of the technical directors late last year, however, resulted in them voting against the radical wing being introduced as early as 2007. The idea, however, was well received and some technical directors accepted it just needed more development.
Work on the wing has continued since last year, and Mosley is still optimistic the device will be used in the near future.
"The wing is currently being discussed by the aerodynamicists," Mosley told a press conference ahead of the British Grand Prix. "If it is working as it is supposed to work, it reduces the drag of the car behind and gives it more downforce and greatly facilitates overtaking.
"If it doesn't work as it should work, like it did when they did the quarter scale, it reduces drag even more and the cars behind car overtake even more. It is a matter for the experts, any change to the regulation will required unanimous support for the teams.
"It looks at the moment quite promising for the split wing, the CDG wing, but we are open. We want to see two things, less downforce, with wide tyres they can have the downforce they have now, and we want to see overtaking.
"At the moment my money would be on the CDG wing but in the end the aerodynamicists will decide."[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]FIA presses ahead with engine freeze plan
By Jonathan Noble Friday, June 9th 2006, 11:49 GMT
The FIA has decided to press ahead with plans for a full engine freeze in Formula One from 2008, even though the manufacturers had hoped to reach a compromise deal this weekend.
FIA president Max Mosley said in a press conference at the British Grand Prix on Friday that the failure of the manufacturers to find an agreement over plans to revise the rules has left the governing body with no choice but to implement their original plans.
"With the regulations that are published it is clear that the engines have to be homologated for a period of three years," he said. "There have been some discussions about whether this can be relaxed for a period of time....but there is no consensus.
"We intend to stick to the regulations as they are and they were published on March 28. The reason is to limit development costs on the engine."
Mosley said the FIA had investigated the costs of the alternative 'Maranello Agreement' proposal but believes that it would prove more expensive than the current plans for the three-year engine freeze.
"When the calculations were done it was still going to cost 15 million Euro per year more rather than the completely static engine. The current engines are good, they are running at 19,500rpm, they are very reliable and a more than powerful enough.
"So we will implement the engine rule as published and we will be sealing some two race engines."
He added: "There is no further discussion on the homologation point."
Mosley's comments come on the back of BMW motorsport director Mario Theissen saying that he was hopeful a compromise deal could be agreed this weekend.
"I hope and I am confident, because we had some talks with the FIA in Monaco and it sounds to me like if there is a joint proposal from the manufacturers that achieves the target set, which is cost-cutting, then the FIA would be open to take this," Theissen told autosport.com.
"And I am pretty sure the proposals of the manufacturers will achieve the target - and it will include some sort of homologation."
Mosley added that he hoped at the end of the three-year engine freeze period that a completely new set of engine regulations will be introduced.
"We want a different engine formula where the limit of power was not the capacity of engine, but to limit the power by the amount of energy consumed," he said. "There are all sorts of ways of doing that and this is precisely the area where the manufacturers are investigating for road cars.
"We want the manufacturers to propose the formula."
Mosley said it was logical for the homolgated engines to come in next year but that the FIA would not try to impose them, and that it would be up to the teams.
"It will make no sense at all to run in 2007 developing the engines only to come back to the May 2006 spec in 2008, but we cannot impose that. It has to be agreed by the F1 Commission, but I would be surprised if the F1 Commission would not agree.
"It is not for me to say, it is a decision for the teams but I would be surprised if they did not do that."[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Mosley maps out energy-saving future
By Alan Baldwin Friday, June 9th 2006, 13:41 GMT
Formula One's governing body envisaged a leaner and greener future for the sport on Friday with an energy-saving revolution planned for the next five years.
International Automobile Federation (FIA) president Max Mosley told a news conference at the British Grand Prix that a three-year freeze on engine development would come into force as previously announced from 2008.
"The freeze is done, its in the regulations, no further discussion," he said.
That measure has been opposed by some manufacturers, with reports this week suggesting that Toyota and Honda could pull out in protest.
However Mosley said more manufacturers could be drawn in to the sport if the engine rules were nailed down, with costs substantially reduced and technology of clear benefit to the ordinary road user.
The Briton said the FIA wanted a new 'fuel efficiency engine' for 2011 after the introduction in 2009 of a lightweight system harnessing wasted energy from the brakes to provide extra horsepower in short bursts.
"Saving fuel, saving energy is absolutely fundamental," declared Mosley.
He said the new engine for 2011 would be limited not by capacity, as at present with the 2.4 litre V8 unit, but by the amount of energy consumed.
"For that we would need the major car manufacturers to propose the formula," he added.
"Our only conditions would be that it must be a racing engine as we all understand the term...and the research to improve that racing engine would have to be directly relevant to the research to improve fuel efficiency for road cars.
"Those would be the two conditions that we would set, but how it was done would be completely a matter for the manufacturers," said Mosley.
"Then, instead of spending a fortune to try and get another few horsepower out of a fixed capacity engine which helps nobody and leads nowhere and is completely sterile, they would be doing research which improves fuel efficiency which is directly relevant to road cars."
Mosley said that if the manufacturers failed to come up with an acceptable proposal in the time available, the existing engine freeze could be extended.
"The fuel efficiency engine for 2011 ideally should be done quickly because in that way the manufacturers who have large teams of people doing engine research could keep those teams together," he added.
"We would like to see a proposal quite quickly."
The introduction of the energy storage and recovery device, weighing no more than 20kg, for 2009 would require the drafting of a regulation before the end of the year.
The FIA president again criticised manufacturers for spending 'unsustainable' sums, which he put at between 100 to 200 million euros a year, on engines.
"Once we've got this nonsense, this huge expenditure, stopped I think we may well see at least one new manufacturer coming in," Mosley added.
"At the moment it is difficult for people to justify coming in (to Formula One) when they've got all sorts of problems with the company if they are going to spend the sort of money being spent at the moment."[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Mosley still hopeful about CDG wing
By Jonathan Noble Friday, June 9th 2006, 12:47 GMT
FIA president Max Mosley is still hopeful the radical Centreline Downwash Generating (CDG) wing will be introduced in Formula One.
The CDG wing was unveiled by the FIA last year, in the hope that, if introduced, will help reduce downforce and boost overtaking in Formula One.
A meeting of the technical directors late last year, however, resulted in them voting against the radical wing being introduced as early as 2007. The idea, however, was well received and some technical directors accepted it just needed more development.
Work on the wing has continued since last year, and Mosley is still optimistic the device will be used in the near future.
"The wing is currently being discussed by the aerodynamicists," Mosley told a press conference ahead of the British Grand Prix. "If it is working as it is supposed to work, it reduces the drag of the car behind and gives it more downforce and greatly facilitates overtaking.
"If it doesn't work as it should work, like it did when they did the quarter scale, it reduces drag even more and the cars behind car overtake even more. It is a matter for the experts, any change to the regulation will required unanimous support for the teams.
"It looks at the moment quite promising for the split wing, the CDG wing, but we are open. We want to see two things, less downforce, with wide tyres they can have the downforce they have now, and we want to see overtaking.
"At the moment my money would be on the CDG wing but in the end the aerodynamicists will decide."[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]FIA presses ahead with engine freeze plan
By Jonathan Noble Friday, June 9th 2006, 11:49 GMT
The FIA has decided to press ahead with plans for a full engine freeze in Formula One from 2008, even though the manufacturers had hoped to reach a compromise deal this weekend.
FIA president Max Mosley said in a press conference at the British Grand Prix on Friday that the failure of the manufacturers to find an agreement over plans to revise the rules has left the governing body with no choice but to implement their original plans.
"With the regulations that are published it is clear that the engines have to be homologated for a period of three years," he said. "There have been some discussions about whether this can be relaxed for a period of time....but there is no consensus.
"We intend to stick to the regulations as they are and they were published on March 28. The reason is to limit development costs on the engine."
Mosley said the FIA had investigated the costs of the alternative 'Maranello Agreement' proposal but believes that it would prove more expensive than the current plans for the three-year engine freeze.
"When the calculations were done it was still going to cost 15 million Euro per year more rather than the completely static engine. The current engines are good, they are running at 19,500rpm, they are very reliable and a more than powerful enough.
"So we will implement the engine rule as published and we will be sealing some two race engines."
He added: "There is no further discussion on the homologation point."
Mosley's comments come on the back of BMW motorsport director Mario Theissen saying that he was hopeful a compromise deal could be agreed this weekend.
"I hope and I am confident, because we had some talks with the FIA in Monaco and it sounds to me like if there is a joint proposal from the manufacturers that achieves the target set, which is cost-cutting, then the FIA would be open to take this," Theissen told autosport.com.
"And I am pretty sure the proposals of the manufacturers will achieve the target - and it will include some sort of homologation."
Mosley added that he hoped at the end of the three-year engine freeze period that a completely new set of engine regulations will be introduced.
"We want a different engine formula where the limit of power was not the capacity of engine, but to limit the power by the amount of energy consumed," he said. "There are all sorts of ways of doing that and this is precisely the area where the manufacturers are investigating for road cars.
"We want the manufacturers to propose the formula."
Mosley said it was logical for the homolgated engines to come in next year but that the FIA would not try to impose them, and that it would be up to the teams.
"It will make no sense at all to run in 2007 developing the engines only to come back to the May 2006 spec in 2008, but we cannot impose that. It has to be agreed by the F1 Commission, but I would be surprised if the F1 Commission would not agree.
"It is not for me to say, it is a decision for the teams but I would be surprised if they did not do that."[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Mosley maps out energy-saving future
By Alan Baldwin Friday, June 9th 2006, 13:41 GMT
Formula One's governing body envisaged a leaner and greener future for the sport on Friday with an energy-saving revolution planned for the next five years.
International Automobile Federation (FIA) president Max Mosley told a news conference at the British Grand Prix that a three-year freeze on engine development would come into force as previously announced from 2008.
"The freeze is done, its in the regulations, no further discussion," he said.
That measure has been opposed by some manufacturers, with reports this week suggesting that Toyota and Honda could pull out in protest.
However Mosley said more manufacturers could be drawn in to the sport if the engine rules were nailed down, with costs substantially reduced and technology of clear benefit to the ordinary road user.
The Briton said the FIA wanted a new 'fuel efficiency engine' for 2011 after the introduction in 2009 of a lightweight system harnessing wasted energy from the brakes to provide extra horsepower in short bursts.
"Saving fuel, saving energy is absolutely fundamental," declared Mosley.
He said the new engine for 2011 would be limited not by capacity, as at present with the 2.4 litre V8 unit, but by the amount of energy consumed.
"For that we would need the major car manufacturers to propose the formula," he added.
"Our only conditions would be that it must be a racing engine as we all understand the term...and the research to improve that racing engine would have to be directly relevant to the research to improve fuel efficiency for road cars.
"Those would be the two conditions that we would set, but how it was done would be completely a matter for the manufacturers," said Mosley.
"Then, instead of spending a fortune to try and get another few horsepower out of a fixed capacity engine which helps nobody and leads nowhere and is completely sterile, they would be doing research which improves fuel efficiency which is directly relevant to road cars."
Mosley said that if the manufacturers failed to come up with an acceptable proposal in the time available, the existing engine freeze could be extended.
"The fuel efficiency engine for 2011 ideally should be done quickly because in that way the manufacturers who have large teams of people doing engine research could keep those teams together," he added.
"We would like to see a proposal quite quickly."
The introduction of the energy storage and recovery device, weighing no more than 20kg, for 2009 would require the drafting of a regulation before the end of the year.
The FIA president again criticised manufacturers for spending 'unsustainable' sums, which he put at between 100 to 200 million euros a year, on engines.
"Once we've got this nonsense, this huge expenditure, stopped I think we may well see at least one new manufacturer coming in," Mosley added.
"At the moment it is difficult for people to justify coming in (to Formula One) when they've got all sorts of problems with the company if they are going to spend the sort of money being spent at the moment."[/QUOTE]
| Ferg | 06-09-2006 01:05 PM |
More from Max on what the future will hold for F1. There are some very interesting directions being proposed...
[QUOTE]Transcript of Mosley's press conference
Friday, June 9th 2006, 16:46 GMT
I'd like to thank you all for taking the time to come and I'd like to talk a little bit about the future Formula One engine regulations. First of all, the regulations that have been published state very clearly that engines will be homologated for three years, in 2008, 2009 and 2010.
There have been some discussions about whether the homologation should be relaxed to some degree, but in actual fact we've reached a situation where there are at least three and possibly more views on this.
Some teams think we should stick with completely homologated engines, with no changes at all. Some people like the so-called Maranello agreement and some would like a more liberal agreement than Maranello, but there is no consensus. Under those circumstances the 12 teams who have entered the championship from 2008 have done so under the regulations as published, so we intend to stick quite simply to the rules as they are, and as they were approved by the World Motorsport Council on March 22.
I would remind you that the reason for homologation was that we want to eliminate engine development costs where the major manufacturers are spending between 100 and 200 million euros per year. Indeed more than that in some cases - and that is quite clearly unsustainable when the outcome of all that expenditure is just to make the engines run 200-300rpm faster each year. It's not sustainable and can't continue.
For that reason we proposed the homologation and that will continue. I should point out that under the Maranello agreement, which is the slight relaxation, when the calculations were done the engines were still going to cost well over 15 million euros per year more than the completely static, homologated engine.
On any count homologation seems a sensible thing to do. The engines are very good. They are running at 19,000rpm plus they are very reliable by any historic standards, and amazingly so when you consider they are all new this year. They are also, as I say, more than powerful enough, to the point that I think we've all been surprised by them.
So, the first point I wanted to make is that we will implement the homologation rule as published. That means we will be sealing a number of two-race engines � in fact we have already sealed some of them. We will be sealing more once they have done two races and those will be the spec engines. Each manufacturer will be required to supply us with a complete dossier on these engines so that we will know what the spec is.
That brings us to development and technology, what about them? What we wish to do, and at the moment it is only an idea rather than a regulation, and it need not be a regulation until the end of 2006 in order to be introduced in 2009, is to bring into Formula One a technology that two teams were working on in the mid-1990s, but which we prohibited at the time on the grounds of costs and safety � primarily safety. That was energy storage devices.
At that time one team was working on, I believe, a hydraulic system and another on an inertia system. And since then of course there have been a number of electrical systems for storing energy. What it comes down to is this. In the next 30-50 years it is absolutely certain that every vehicle on the public road will be fitted with a device that will enable it to recover all the energy released when the brakes are applied and store it and use it again to drive and accelerate the vehicle.
At the moment all the braking energy is dissipated through heat as is all the energy when you lift off and the car is simply driving the engine. The heat from that, of course, goes out through the cooling system. The only exception to that is when some of the energy is recovered in hybrid systems, but very little, and it is stored in a battery at a very low rate. One shouldn't confuse what I'm about to say with hybrid systems. It is a completely different basic technology and will be part of a more complex system eventually on road cars.
What we're talking about is really something quite simple, a simple principle, but I emphasise that this is not yet proposed as a regulation. We want to sit and talk to the teams and manufacturers about it to find the best solution. What we have in mind is this: that every car can be fitted with equipment, which must weigh no more than 20 kilos and will store energy when the car brakes and enable the energy to be used when the car accelerates again.
The technology we would like in that 20-kilo piece of equipment will be completely free, so that people can choose whether they want a hydraulic, inertia or electrical system, or some other technology or branch of those technologies. It's completely free.
On the basis of what is known at the moment, this would enable a car to store about 400 kilojoules � that's with currently available technology. That translates to 60bhp for about nine seconds. Now that would enable a car, having stored that energy, to have an extra 60bhp available for overtaking.
The braking period for an F1 car is very short, so it would probably take a full lap to store enough energy for this overtaking manoeuvre. Depending on how well the systems was engineered, it would probably be available on every single lap. And of course if would be available to both the overtaker and the overtaken, which has all sorts of interesting implications.
Compared for example with the suggestion of a push-to-pass button on an F1 engine as they are at the moment, if you allowed 1,000rpm for push-to-pass it would give about 40bhp for however long you allow the 20,000rpm.
We're talking about 60bhp for nine seconds. We believe that when fully developed this system will enable a car to have about 900 kilojoules, enough for about 120bhp for about 10 seconds. To put that in perspective, 900kJ is a two-ton road car stopping from 108km/h and going all the way back up to 108km/h again without using any petrol.
This is quite clearly something that is and will be developed for the road and all the major manufacturers are working on different systems at this time. By allowing it in F1 we will be accelerating its introduction. We'd like to do that for 2009 but must sort out the detail of the regulation with the teams and manufacturers. This will be a technology that everyone can understand, the public can understand and it will be directly relevant to road cars and a technology for the future of road cars.
At end of the homologation period, that's to say the end of 2010 going into 2011, we would like to introduce a different engine formula where the limit on power was not through engine capacity, the traditional means, which is completely out of date and old-fashioned, but to limit power by the amount of energy consumed. There are all sorts of ways of doing that and this is precisely the area where all manufacturers are working with their road cars.
Saving fuel and saving energy is absolutely fundamental to them. For that we would need the major road car manufacturers to propose the formula. Our only conditions would be, first, that it must be a racing engine as we all understand the term. It must sound and feel like a racing engine.
Secondly, any research to improve that racing engine would have to be directly relevant to research to improve fuel efficiency in road cars. Those are the two conditions we would set for how it was done but other than that this new formula would be a matter for the manufacturers.
Then, quite suddenly, instead of spending fortunes trying to get another few horsepower out of a fixed capacity, which helps no one, leads nowhere and is completely sterile research, we'd be doing research that relates to fuel efficiency and is thus directly relevant to road cars. That would be for 2011 and that would be on a proposal from the manufacturers.
Should the manufacturers not be able to come up with a sensible proposal to achieve that, there would be nothing to prevent us extending the homologation for another year or two years or however long it took.
It would be very simple to do that, but if we are going to have a very high-technology F1, which I think we'd all agree we have to have, then that technological research should be devoted to areas that are relevant to road cars and actually contribute something to society rather than yearly sterile research for another 200-300rpm from a fixed-capacity engine.
That briefly and I hope reasonably clearly is what we are proposing, in fact what we are going to do. The homologation is done, it's in the regulations and there will be no further discussion on the homologation point.
Before the end of 2006, we need to agree a regulation for the energy recovery and storage device if we want to introduce it in 2009, because of agreements currently in force. Ideally, the fuel efficiency engine for 2011 should be done quickly, because that way manufacturers who have large teams of people doing engine research could keep those teams together. That's a matter for them, but we would like to see a proposal quite quickly. Whether they are willing and able to do that remains to be seen. So there you are.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Transcript of Mosley's press conference
Friday, June 9th 2006, 16:46 GMT
I'd like to thank you all for taking the time to come and I'd like to talk a little bit about the future Formula One engine regulations. First of all, the regulations that have been published state very clearly that engines will be homologated for three years, in 2008, 2009 and 2010.
There have been some discussions about whether the homologation should be relaxed to some degree, but in actual fact we've reached a situation where there are at least three and possibly more views on this.
Some teams think we should stick with completely homologated engines, with no changes at all. Some people like the so-called Maranello agreement and some would like a more liberal agreement than Maranello, but there is no consensus. Under those circumstances the 12 teams who have entered the championship from 2008 have done so under the regulations as published, so we intend to stick quite simply to the rules as they are, and as they were approved by the World Motorsport Council on March 22.
I would remind you that the reason for homologation was that we want to eliminate engine development costs where the major manufacturers are spending between 100 and 200 million euros per year. Indeed more than that in some cases - and that is quite clearly unsustainable when the outcome of all that expenditure is just to make the engines run 200-300rpm faster each year. It's not sustainable and can't continue.
For that reason we proposed the homologation and that will continue. I should point out that under the Maranello agreement, which is the slight relaxation, when the calculations were done the engines were still going to cost well over 15 million euros per year more than the completely static, homologated engine.
On any count homologation seems a sensible thing to do. The engines are very good. They are running at 19,000rpm plus they are very reliable by any historic standards, and amazingly so when you consider they are all new this year. They are also, as I say, more than powerful enough, to the point that I think we've all been surprised by them.
So, the first point I wanted to make is that we will implement the homologation rule as published. That means we will be sealing a number of two-race engines � in fact we have already sealed some of them. We will be sealing more once they have done two races and those will be the spec engines. Each manufacturer will be required to supply us with a complete dossier on these engines so that we will know what the spec is.
That brings us to development and technology, what about them? What we wish to do, and at the moment it is only an idea rather than a regulation, and it need not be a regulation until the end of 2006 in order to be introduced in 2009, is to bring into Formula One a technology that two teams were working on in the mid-1990s, but which we prohibited at the time on the grounds of costs and safety � primarily safety. That was energy storage devices.
At that time one team was working on, I believe, a hydraulic system and another on an inertia system. And since then of course there have been a number of electrical systems for storing energy. What it comes down to is this. In the next 30-50 years it is absolutely certain that every vehicle on the public road will be fitted with a device that will enable it to recover all the energy released when the brakes are applied and store it and use it again to drive and accelerate the vehicle.
At the moment all the braking energy is dissipated through heat as is all the energy when you lift off and the car is simply driving the engine. The heat from that, of course, goes out through the cooling system. The only exception to that is when some of the energy is recovered in hybrid systems, but very little, and it is stored in a battery at a very low rate. One shouldn't confuse what I'm about to say with hybrid systems. It is a completely different basic technology and will be part of a more complex system eventually on road cars.
What we're talking about is really something quite simple, a simple principle, but I emphasise that this is not yet proposed as a regulation. We want to sit and talk to the teams and manufacturers about it to find the best solution. What we have in mind is this: that every car can be fitted with equipment, which must weigh no more than 20 kilos and will store energy when the car brakes and enable the energy to be used when the car accelerates again.
The technology we would like in that 20-kilo piece of equipment will be completely free, so that people can choose whether they want a hydraulic, inertia or electrical system, or some other technology or branch of those technologies. It's completely free.
On the basis of what is known at the moment, this would enable a car to store about 400 kilojoules � that's with currently available technology. That translates to 60bhp for about nine seconds. Now that would enable a car, having stored that energy, to have an extra 60bhp available for overtaking.
The braking period for an F1 car is very short, so it would probably take a full lap to store enough energy for this overtaking manoeuvre. Depending on how well the systems was engineered, it would probably be available on every single lap. And of course if would be available to both the overtaker and the overtaken, which has all sorts of interesting implications.
Compared for example with the suggestion of a push-to-pass button on an F1 engine as they are at the moment, if you allowed 1,000rpm for push-to-pass it would give about 40bhp for however long you allow the 20,000rpm.
We're talking about 60bhp for nine seconds. We believe that when fully developed this system will enable a car to have about 900 kilojoules, enough for about 120bhp for about 10 seconds. To put that in perspective, 900kJ is a two-ton road car stopping from 108km/h and going all the way back up to 108km/h again without using any petrol.
This is quite clearly something that is and will be developed for the road and all the major manufacturers are working on different systems at this time. By allowing it in F1 we will be accelerating its introduction. We'd like to do that for 2009 but must sort out the detail of the regulation with the teams and manufacturers. This will be a technology that everyone can understand, the public can understand and it will be directly relevant to road cars and a technology for the future of road cars.
At end of the homologation period, that's to say the end of 2010 going into 2011, we would like to introduce a different engine formula where the limit on power was not through engine capacity, the traditional means, which is completely out of date and old-fashioned, but to limit power by the amount of energy consumed. There are all sorts of ways of doing that and this is precisely the area where all manufacturers are working with their road cars.
Saving fuel and saving energy is absolutely fundamental to them. For that we would need the major road car manufacturers to propose the formula. Our only conditions would be, first, that it must be a racing engine as we all understand the term. It must sound and feel like a racing engine.
Secondly, any research to improve that racing engine would have to be directly relevant to research to improve fuel efficiency in road cars. Those are the two conditions we would set for how it was done but other than that this new formula would be a matter for the manufacturers.
Then, quite suddenly, instead of spending fortunes trying to get another few horsepower out of a fixed capacity, which helps no one, leads nowhere and is completely sterile research, we'd be doing research that relates to fuel efficiency and is thus directly relevant to road cars. That would be for 2011 and that would be on a proposal from the manufacturers.
Should the manufacturers not be able to come up with a sensible proposal to achieve that, there would be nothing to prevent us extending the homologation for another year or two years or however long it took.
It would be very simple to do that, but if we are going to have a very high-technology F1, which I think we'd all agree we have to have, then that technological research should be devoted to areas that are relevant to road cars and actually contribute something to society rather than yearly sterile research for another 200-300rpm from a fixed-capacity engine.
That briefly and I hope reasonably clearly is what we are proposing, in fact what we are going to do. The homologation is done, it's in the regulations and there will be no further discussion on the homologation point.
Before the end of 2006, we need to agree a regulation for the energy recovery and storage device if we want to introduce it in 2009, because of agreements currently in force. Ideally, the fuel efficiency engine for 2011 should be done quickly, because that way manufacturers who have large teams of people doing engine research could keep those teams together. That's a matter for them, but we would like to see a proposal quite quickly. Whether they are willing and able to do that remains to be seen. So there you are.[/QUOTE]
| Ferg | 06-09-2006 01:13 PM |
Q&A with Max about the new regs...
[QUOTE][B]Q. (Alberto Antonini � Autosprint) Does the energy storage problem mean we are looking at twin-engined Formula One cars in future � with a combustion engine and an electrical engine?
[/B]
Max Mosley: This would be energy that is entirely recovered under braking, even to the extent that we'd be quite happy for them to put the device at the front of the car and take the energy from the front wheels. All you would do is store the energy and that would be regulated by the ECU, then the driver would release the energy by pressing a button. The principle is simple but the device would be complex.
[B]Q. (Alberto Antonini � Autosprint) The second question is, looking back to the first issue you had with the regulation thing for next year, the freeze on the engine, is Formula One prepared to face a future where some of the manufacturers may actually pull out, as Honda and Toyota have threatened to do in the past? Are you looking at that perspective? Can you afford that?[/B]
MM: I think we are completely prepared to face the possibility if somebody did want to pull out because the truth of it is that all we are doing is moving the research from a completely sterile area which serves no manufacturer any purpose, trying to make an engine run 19,500 instead of 19,200 or 19,800 instead of 19,500, completely sterile.
No road car engine will ever run at those sort of speeds because it's not efficient. So what they would be doing is pulling out at exactly the moment when we are moving all the research effort and the technology of Formula One into an area which is directly relevant to an area where they are already doing research themselves, in the factory, independent of Formula One, in contrast to making the current engines run faster which is only for Formula One and has no other relevance.
Now if they use the new rules as an excuse to pull out, I think one could only conclude that the true reason for pulling out would be something quite different. It wouldn't be because there was no technology.
[B]Q. (Joe Saward � F1 Grand Prix Special) The manufacturers at the moment are spending billions and billions of dollars developing systems along the lines of what you're talking about. This is completely against any cost-cutting theories you've had in the past. What do you have to say about that and secondly, you talk about no consensus; the sporting working group voted eight in favour of rejecting engine homologation, which was a majority. How do you overcome that?[/B]
MM: Well, on the first point, manufacturers are not currently spending billions on these systems. They have research going on but not to any extent. If you talk to the CEO he will know that they are looking at these technologies but not in any detail. They are not really spending very much. What will happen, it will be exactly like what happened when we started Euro NCAP for road safety.
A man in one particularly manufacturer was in charge of the safety of the vehicles and he was suddenly promoted, suddenly became more important � he told me this himself � was running a big department and the manufacturer used what he was doing as a very major sales point and has done so with success. It will simply accelerate the introduction of these technologies and make those departments more effective.
I suspect that there are a number of people working in very small... in fact I know� in small companies developing these technologies on very modest budgets and it may well be that such companies may give the same sort of lessons to the manufacturers as Keith Duckworth did when he invented the four valve technology and made that work with the FVA and the DFV.
But the small inventor may suddenly come into his own, and one or two of the teams may already be in touch with them. On your point about the sporting working group, of the eight people you mention, one and possibly two did not want the Maranello agreement because they did not want to relax the homologation. If you're in any doubt about that, a few inquires around the paddock will show you that that's the case.
The truth of it is that some of the people who were against Maranello were against Maranello because they wanted more liberty, but some of the people who were against Maranello because they didn't want that much freedom, they didn't want to spend the 15 million a year that Maranello would have cost as opposed to a straightforward homologation.
[B]Q. (Burkhard Nuppeney � All Media) When you have the homologation for 2008 until 2010, does it make any sense to run next year with developed engines instead of already running the engines which will be run from 2008 to 2010? Who is going to decide this question and how do you see this?
[/B]
MM: The answer is that it would make no sense at all to run in 2007 developing the engines only to come back to the May 2006 spec in 2008 but we can't impose that, that has to be agreed by the Formula One Commission, but I would be very surprised if the Formula One Commission did not agree, having got the freeze for 2008, 2009, 2010, also to agree it for 2007, because it would save everybody a fortune and avoid a great deal of unnecessary expenditure.
[B]Q. (Burkhard Nuppeney � All Media) Would you say that the chance that we would see the homologated engine next year already is pretty�
[/B]
MM: It's not for me to say, it's a decision for the teams, but I would be surprised if they don't agree to do that.
[B]Q. (Burkhard Nuppeney � All Media) When you say this new system from 2011 onwards, you say we need a decision which has to be made very quickly, what is in your mind when you talk of quickly? Is it within this year, within the next one and a half years, end of next year; what do you think about that?[/B]
MM: Just to be clear, the 2009 energy storage, that has to be done this year because of the agreements. The regulation has to be ready before the 31st of December. The fuel efficiency engine, if I can call it that, for 2011, the only urgency is that if the agreement were reached, the rules were agreed in the next month, for the sake of argument, then no manufacturer would feel tempted to re-deploy the engine experts that are currently working on developing existing engines.
They could put them straight on to a long term programme to get a fuel efficiency engine in. And of course, if somebody came and said we'd like to have the fuel efficiency engine a year earlier, and everybody agreed, there would be no difficulty about that. So I think it would be a pity if they re-deploy the people that are currently working on the engines into other jobs and then start working on the fuel efficiency engine. That's why it would be urgent, but not for any other reason.
[B]Q. (Burkhard Nuppeney � All Media) Is there any deadline by which this process has to be finished or started?[/B]
MM: No, none whatever: no deadline for 2011 because as far as we're concerned, if we arrive in 2010 and we still don't have a proposal, we will simply � it probably won't be me then, it will be somebody else � but the World Motor Sport Council will simply extend the homologation, I would guess.
[B]Q. (Jonathan Gill � Auto Express) Max, what happens if a new manufacturer wants to come in with an engine; how do they have that homologated?
[/B]
MM: We allow them in on what we call the 'fair and equitable' principle. There's a clause in the rule which says that new engines can come, or engines can come after June 2006, if it's fair and equitable. We would simply make sure that the engine, both from its duty cycle, its power and all its other characteristics, fell within the spectrum of the existing engines. Obviously you can't let somebody come with a miracle engine, it would be completely unfair, and I would not be at all surprised if we didn't get one or two.
I think once we've got this� I would say� the nonsense that's going on at the moment, this huge expenditure stopped, I think we may well see at least one new manufacturer coming in. It's just that at the moment, it's difficult for people to justify coming in when they've got all sorts of problems in the company, if they're going to spend the sort of money that's being spent at the moment.
[B]Q. (Michael Schmidt � Auto Motor und Sport) Both the energy storage system and fuel efficiency system will be quite expensive developments. How will you make sure that the private teams get them for a reasonable price?
[/B]
MM: First of all, we may find that it won't be a major manufacturer, it might be quite a small company that comes up with the ace system and at quite modest cost, but that remains to be seen. But one of the suggestions that's being made about the rule, is that there should be a rule that anyone can purchase the system from anyone, for example, like a selling plate.
You would say the system must not cost more than, for the sake of argument, two hundred and a fifty thousand dollars, just to take a figure, and that whoever is using the system, must be prepared to sell it to any other team for that figure. And that would do two things: it would make it available to the small team, it would also put a price cap on the cost of the unit.
It would be quite difficult to spend several million on a unit if you have to sell it for, say, a quarter of a million. But that is the sort of point that will be discussed very much when we're finalising a rule for proposal to the World Motor Sport Council.
[B]Q. (James Allen � ITV) You've always been very specific about the budgets and how crazy it is, so what budget levels are you working on? You've just mentioned about the energy storage and what it might cost in the short term, and what budgets are you working on for the fuel efficiency engine for 2011, and also in all of this, from a public point of view, how important is it that racing engines scream and make a really good noise?[/B]
MM: Well, on the last point, it's vital. I did say that one of the conditions is that it has to be a racing engine and a racing engine is not something which is incredibly efficient but only runs along at 300 rpm and is eight litres or whatever�it's got to be a racing engine and of course it's got to be relevant to what they're doing, but I think both those things are possible. On the budget for energy storage systems, people who are developing systems privately are working with tens of thousands of pounds a year.
The major manufacturers � I don't know what they're spending, but I suspect they're not nearly as expensive as the engines because the problems with these things are that, If you've got a new piston, for example, you have to build an entire engine. You then have to run that engine for 1300 kilometres on the dynamometer, then you have to do all sorts of things to validate it, then you change another small part of the engine � something to do with the valve or whatever � and then you've got to repeat the entire process.
Then you've got to put both of these components together and repeat the process again. That's why the development budget on these current engines�it varies a lot on what people spend, but they're spending between 100 and over 200 million euros whereas the actual engine costs about, depending on who you talk to, about 200,000 � 250,000 Euros a year. If you use 50 engines a year then you're doing well.
Well, that's somewhere between 10 and 12 million a year. The other 100-200 million is all on development. If you stop the development then that money won't be spent. On just a fraction of that money you could do an awful lot of research into energy storage where we're talking about a relatively small 20 kilos with all the bits and pieces and devices.
[B]Q. Again, on the budgets, do you have any concerns about drivers just going around for ten minutes in qualifying just burning up fuel?[/B]
MM: Good point. A suggestion has been put about that we should chop five minutes off. If you take five minutes off, then if you think about it, a driver can do one run with his full tanks to get the feel of the car on its full tanks, then he can do one run with new tyres to try and get a time, and a third one, also on new tyres to try to get a time. Obviously you've got to change the tyres, but that can all be done in 15 minutes.
It would be 15 minutes of non-stop action. The original reason for the 20 minutes and the fuel is to make sure they ran. We didn't want any more to have the whole of the world watching and have an empty track, so we knew that by making them run that they would use the fuel, but what's emerged is that in the pattern of how the people do this is that we could do the whole thing in 15 minutes. It would be very tight � it would be absolutely marginal for all the teams and it would make mistakes possible � but it could be done in 15 minutes, but a very tight 15 minutes. Now, whether people would want to do that, I don't know. Ask the teams. It would have to be a unanimous agreement, but that's a suggestion that's been put forward.
It could be done immediately if the teams agree but it requires unanimous agreement and experience indicates that it won't be that immediate. There are people who don't agree. Some of the promoters say �no, it's fantastic having all the cars running round � it's part of the show, so even if all the teams agree, we might not get the Formula One Commission agreeing, so it could happen. Please don't take that as something that's going to happen � I was just saying that that was a suggestion and probably, if we were starting again now, we'd have just done the 15 minutes.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE][B]Q. (Alberto Antonini � Autosprint) Does the energy storage problem mean we are looking at twin-engined Formula One cars in future � with a combustion engine and an electrical engine?
[/B]
Max Mosley: This would be energy that is entirely recovered under braking, even to the extent that we'd be quite happy for them to put the device at the front of the car and take the energy from the front wheels. All you would do is store the energy and that would be regulated by the ECU, then the driver would release the energy by pressing a button. The principle is simple but the device would be complex.
[B]Q. (Alberto Antonini � Autosprint) The second question is, looking back to the first issue you had with the regulation thing for next year, the freeze on the engine, is Formula One prepared to face a future where some of the manufacturers may actually pull out, as Honda and Toyota have threatened to do in the past? Are you looking at that perspective? Can you afford that?[/B]
MM: I think we are completely prepared to face the possibility if somebody did want to pull out because the truth of it is that all we are doing is moving the research from a completely sterile area which serves no manufacturer any purpose, trying to make an engine run 19,500 instead of 19,200 or 19,800 instead of 19,500, completely sterile.
No road car engine will ever run at those sort of speeds because it's not efficient. So what they would be doing is pulling out at exactly the moment when we are moving all the research effort and the technology of Formula One into an area which is directly relevant to an area where they are already doing research themselves, in the factory, independent of Formula One, in contrast to making the current engines run faster which is only for Formula One and has no other relevance.
Now if they use the new rules as an excuse to pull out, I think one could only conclude that the true reason for pulling out would be something quite different. It wouldn't be because there was no technology.
[B]Q. (Joe Saward � F1 Grand Prix Special) The manufacturers at the moment are spending billions and billions of dollars developing systems along the lines of what you're talking about. This is completely against any cost-cutting theories you've had in the past. What do you have to say about that and secondly, you talk about no consensus; the sporting working group voted eight in favour of rejecting engine homologation, which was a majority. How do you overcome that?[/B]
MM: Well, on the first point, manufacturers are not currently spending billions on these systems. They have research going on but not to any extent. If you talk to the CEO he will know that they are looking at these technologies but not in any detail. They are not really spending very much. What will happen, it will be exactly like what happened when we started Euro NCAP for road safety.
A man in one particularly manufacturer was in charge of the safety of the vehicles and he was suddenly promoted, suddenly became more important � he told me this himself � was running a big department and the manufacturer used what he was doing as a very major sales point and has done so with success. It will simply accelerate the introduction of these technologies and make those departments more effective.
I suspect that there are a number of people working in very small... in fact I know� in small companies developing these technologies on very modest budgets and it may well be that such companies may give the same sort of lessons to the manufacturers as Keith Duckworth did when he invented the four valve technology and made that work with the FVA and the DFV.
But the small inventor may suddenly come into his own, and one or two of the teams may already be in touch with them. On your point about the sporting working group, of the eight people you mention, one and possibly two did not want the Maranello agreement because they did not want to relax the homologation. If you're in any doubt about that, a few inquires around the paddock will show you that that's the case.
The truth of it is that some of the people who were against Maranello were against Maranello because they wanted more liberty, but some of the people who were against Maranello because they didn't want that much freedom, they didn't want to spend the 15 million a year that Maranello would have cost as opposed to a straightforward homologation.
[B]Q. (Burkhard Nuppeney � All Media) When you have the homologation for 2008 until 2010, does it make any sense to run next year with developed engines instead of already running the engines which will be run from 2008 to 2010? Who is going to decide this question and how do you see this?
[/B]
MM: The answer is that it would make no sense at all to run in 2007 developing the engines only to come back to the May 2006 spec in 2008 but we can't impose that, that has to be agreed by the Formula One Commission, but I would be very surprised if the Formula One Commission did not agree, having got the freeze for 2008, 2009, 2010, also to agree it for 2007, because it would save everybody a fortune and avoid a great deal of unnecessary expenditure.
[B]Q. (Burkhard Nuppeney � All Media) Would you say that the chance that we would see the homologated engine next year already is pretty�
[/B]
MM: It's not for me to say, it's a decision for the teams, but I would be surprised if they don't agree to do that.
[B]Q. (Burkhard Nuppeney � All Media) When you say this new system from 2011 onwards, you say we need a decision which has to be made very quickly, what is in your mind when you talk of quickly? Is it within this year, within the next one and a half years, end of next year; what do you think about that?[/B]
MM: Just to be clear, the 2009 energy storage, that has to be done this year because of the agreements. The regulation has to be ready before the 31st of December. The fuel efficiency engine, if I can call it that, for 2011, the only urgency is that if the agreement were reached, the rules were agreed in the next month, for the sake of argument, then no manufacturer would feel tempted to re-deploy the engine experts that are currently working on developing existing engines.
They could put them straight on to a long term programme to get a fuel efficiency engine in. And of course, if somebody came and said we'd like to have the fuel efficiency engine a year earlier, and everybody agreed, there would be no difficulty about that. So I think it would be a pity if they re-deploy the people that are currently working on the engines into other jobs and then start working on the fuel efficiency engine. That's why it would be urgent, but not for any other reason.
[B]Q. (Burkhard Nuppeney � All Media) Is there any deadline by which this process has to be finished or started?[/B]
MM: No, none whatever: no deadline for 2011 because as far as we're concerned, if we arrive in 2010 and we still don't have a proposal, we will simply � it probably won't be me then, it will be somebody else � but the World Motor Sport Council will simply extend the homologation, I would guess.
[B]Q. (Jonathan Gill � Auto Express) Max, what happens if a new manufacturer wants to come in with an engine; how do they have that homologated?
[/B]
MM: We allow them in on what we call the 'fair and equitable' principle. There's a clause in the rule which says that new engines can come, or engines can come after June 2006, if it's fair and equitable. We would simply make sure that the engine, both from its duty cycle, its power and all its other characteristics, fell within the spectrum of the existing engines. Obviously you can't let somebody come with a miracle engine, it would be completely unfair, and I would not be at all surprised if we didn't get one or two.
I think once we've got this� I would say� the nonsense that's going on at the moment, this huge expenditure stopped, I think we may well see at least one new manufacturer coming in. It's just that at the moment, it's difficult for people to justify coming in when they've got all sorts of problems in the company, if they're going to spend the sort of money that's being spent at the moment.
[B]Q. (Michael Schmidt � Auto Motor und Sport) Both the energy storage system and fuel efficiency system will be quite expensive developments. How will you make sure that the private teams get them for a reasonable price?
[/B]
MM: First of all, we may find that it won't be a major manufacturer, it might be quite a small company that comes up with the ace system and at quite modest cost, but that remains to be seen. But one of the suggestions that's being made about the rule, is that there should be a rule that anyone can purchase the system from anyone, for example, like a selling plate.
You would say the system must not cost more than, for the sake of argument, two hundred and a fifty thousand dollars, just to take a figure, and that whoever is using the system, must be prepared to sell it to any other team for that figure. And that would do two things: it would make it available to the small team, it would also put a price cap on the cost of the unit.
It would be quite difficult to spend several million on a unit if you have to sell it for, say, a quarter of a million. But that is the sort of point that will be discussed very much when we're finalising a rule for proposal to the World Motor Sport Council.
[B]Q. (James Allen � ITV) You've always been very specific about the budgets and how crazy it is, so what budget levels are you working on? You've just mentioned about the energy storage and what it might cost in the short term, and what budgets are you working on for the fuel efficiency engine for 2011, and also in all of this, from a public point of view, how important is it that racing engines scream and make a really good noise?[/B]
MM: Well, on the last point, it's vital. I did say that one of the conditions is that it has to be a racing engine and a racing engine is not something which is incredibly efficient but only runs along at 300 rpm and is eight litres or whatever�it's got to be a racing engine and of course it's got to be relevant to what they're doing, but I think both those things are possible. On the budget for energy storage systems, people who are developing systems privately are working with tens of thousands of pounds a year.
The major manufacturers � I don't know what they're spending, but I suspect they're not nearly as expensive as the engines because the problems with these things are that, If you've got a new piston, for example, you have to build an entire engine. You then have to run that engine for 1300 kilometres on the dynamometer, then you have to do all sorts of things to validate it, then you change another small part of the engine � something to do with the valve or whatever � and then you've got to repeat the entire process.
Then you've got to put both of these components together and repeat the process again. That's why the development budget on these current engines�it varies a lot on what people spend, but they're spending between 100 and over 200 million euros whereas the actual engine costs about, depending on who you talk to, about 200,000 � 250,000 Euros a year. If you use 50 engines a year then you're doing well.
Well, that's somewhere between 10 and 12 million a year. The other 100-200 million is all on development. If you stop the development then that money won't be spent. On just a fraction of that money you could do an awful lot of research into energy storage where we're talking about a relatively small 20 kilos with all the bits and pieces and devices.
[B]Q. Again, on the budgets, do you have any concerns about drivers just going around for ten minutes in qualifying just burning up fuel?[/B]
MM: Good point. A suggestion has been put about that we should chop five minutes off. If you take five minutes off, then if you think about it, a driver can do one run with his full tanks to get the feel of the car on its full tanks, then he can do one run with new tyres to try and get a time, and a third one, also on new tyres to try to get a time. Obviously you've got to change the tyres, but that can all be done in 15 minutes.
It would be 15 minutes of non-stop action. The original reason for the 20 minutes and the fuel is to make sure they ran. We didn't want any more to have the whole of the world watching and have an empty track, so we knew that by making them run that they would use the fuel, but what's emerged is that in the pattern of how the people do this is that we could do the whole thing in 15 minutes. It would be very tight � it would be absolutely marginal for all the teams and it would make mistakes possible � but it could be done in 15 minutes, but a very tight 15 minutes. Now, whether people would want to do that, I don't know. Ask the teams. It would have to be a unanimous agreement, but that's a suggestion that's been put forward.
It could be done immediately if the teams agree but it requires unanimous agreement and experience indicates that it won't be that immediate. There are people who don't agree. Some of the promoters say �no, it's fantastic having all the cars running round � it's part of the show, so even if all the teams agree, we might not get the Formula One Commission agreeing, so it could happen. Please don't take that as something that's going to happen � I was just saying that that was a suggestion and probably, if we were starting again now, we'd have just done the 15 minutes.[/QUOTE]
| Ferg | 06-09-2006 01:14 PM |
...and the rest
[QUOTE][B]Q. (Paolo Ianieri � La Gazzetta dello Sport) A homologated engine � the ones who are at the back now will have no chance just to fill the gap. Next year, for the three years of the homologated engine, if they are behind now, they have no chance to make evolutions now.[/B]
MM: All they can do for next year is ask the Formula One Commission � you have to go through the procedures. If the Formula One Commission agrees that an homologated engine will be used next year. I think that all sense and reason says that is the thing to do � there's no sense in developing an engine for next year that isn't going to be used any more.
All sense and reason says we should do that and I'm sure that the Formula One Commission will agree, but we first have to go to the Formula One Commission, then we have to go to the World Council and that will be done, and I would hope we could do that reasonably quickly because the sooner we have certainty about all these things, the sooner we stop spending, and the manufacturers stop spending collectively about 20 million Euros every week � that's what they're spending on engine development. The sooner they stop, the more money will be saved.
[B]Q. (Declan Quigley � Setanta Sports) Max, can you tell us about your new rear wing? I hear it hasn't done well in the wind tunnel.
[/B]
MM: The wing is currently being assessed by the aerodynamicists, but what seems to happen is this. It seems to be working as it is supposed to work � this is a very amateurish reply, but forgive me � the way its supposed to work is that it reduces the drag of the car behind and also, it gives it more downforce and greatly facilitates overtaking. If, on the other hand, it doesn't work as it should work, which happened, for example when they did the quarter-scale wind-tunnel test, it actually reduces the drag even more and the simulations indicate that it facilitates overtaking even more, so that you could even overtake � with cars being equal � on a straight as short as 500 metres, depending on the speed of the corner leading on to the straight, but it's a matter for the experts.
Any change to the wing requires the unanimous agreement of the teams as its part of the Technical Regulations. All we're talking about is the correct way to achieve this, and it looks at the moment quite promising for the spilt wing, the CDG wing. We are absolutely open � all we want to see is two things; less downforce relative to the tyres because they can't have the downforce they've got now on the new, bigger 2008 tyres and we want to see overtaking � most importantly overtaking. My money would be on the CDG wing but clearly the aerodynamicists of the teams are going to decide.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE][B]Q. (Paolo Ianieri � La Gazzetta dello Sport) A homologated engine � the ones who are at the back now will have no chance just to fill the gap. Next year, for the three years of the homologated engine, if they are behind now, they have no chance to make evolutions now.[/B]
MM: All they can do for next year is ask the Formula One Commission � you have to go through the procedures. If the Formula One Commission agrees that an homologated engine will be used next year. I think that all sense and reason says that is the thing to do � there's no sense in developing an engine for next year that isn't going to be used any more.
All sense and reason says we should do that and I'm sure that the Formula One Commission will agree, but we first have to go to the Formula One Commission, then we have to go to the World Council and that will be done, and I would hope we could do that reasonably quickly because the sooner we have certainty about all these things, the sooner we stop spending, and the manufacturers stop spending collectively about 20 million Euros every week � that's what they're spending on engine development. The sooner they stop, the more money will be saved.
[B]Q. (Declan Quigley � Setanta Sports) Max, can you tell us about your new rear wing? I hear it hasn't done well in the wind tunnel.
[/B]
MM: The wing is currently being assessed by the aerodynamicists, but what seems to happen is this. It seems to be working as it is supposed to work � this is a very amateurish reply, but forgive me � the way its supposed to work is that it reduces the drag of the car behind and also, it gives it more downforce and greatly facilitates overtaking. If, on the other hand, it doesn't work as it should work, which happened, for example when they did the quarter-scale wind-tunnel test, it actually reduces the drag even more and the simulations indicate that it facilitates overtaking even more, so that you could even overtake � with cars being equal � on a straight as short as 500 metres, depending on the speed of the corner leading on to the straight, but it's a matter for the experts.
Any change to the wing requires the unanimous agreement of the teams as its part of the Technical Regulations. All we're talking about is the correct way to achieve this, and it looks at the moment quite promising for the spilt wing, the CDG wing. We are absolutely open � all we want to see is two things; less downforce relative to the tyres because they can't have the downforce they've got now on the new, bigger 2008 tyres and we want to see overtaking � most importantly overtaking. My money would be on the CDG wing but clearly the aerodynamicists of the teams are going to decide.[/QUOTE]
| StuBeck | 06-14-2006 09:03 AM |
It looks like Klien is out at Red Bull, whoever has the most points at the end fo the year stays, and Coultard has 7 versus Klien's 1. Klien hasn't shown in the past two years he has the ability to put together a race and score points.
| TimStevens | 06-14-2006 09:06 AM |
Well, that's assuming Coulthard stays. The Ferrari talk took me off-guard this past weekend, and I don't think that's necessarily a reality, but if he's actually talking to Ferrari something else might develop.
| Ferg | 06-14-2006 09:48 AM |
Here's what DC had to say last Thursday when confronted with the rumors during the FIA presser..
[QUOTE][B]Q. An interesting story today in Autosport suggesting that you're in contact, in discussion with Ferrari. What have you got to say about that?[/B]
DC: Well, it's inevitable that everyone has to know what the market-place offers. If you look at Ferrari from the outside, they've got one driver scoring serious points and the other one not. Any team needs to have two drivers in a position to capitalise and as I say, I didn't score over 500 points by accident.
[B]Q. So you have been in contact with them.[/B]
DC: That's none of your business. As I said, everyone talks to everyone at this stage of the season so I'm sure that even Jenson, although we believe he's contracted to Honda, I'm sure he's probably talking to someone as well.[/QUOTE]
More silly season "news"...
[QUOTE]Fisichella hints at 2007 Renault line-up
By Pablo Elizalde Wednesday, June 14th 2006, 11:22 GMT
Giancarlo Fisichella says he will partner Kimi Raikkonen or Heikki Kovalainen if he stays at the Renault team next season.
Fisichella's contract comes to an end this year and the Roman is still hopeful of staying at the French squad next year, although he admits he still doesn't know where his future lies.
The Renault driver, however, says that if he stays in the team, he will be partnered by a Finnish driver.
"I don't know who would be my teammate next year in Renault, but I know that he will be a Finn: Raikkonen or Kovalainen," the Italian told Gazzetta dello Sport.
Kovalainen is the team's test driver and Renault boss Flavio Briatore said last year the highly-rated Finn would land a race seat in 2007.
McLaren driver Raikkonen has also been linked with Renault as he continues to evaluate his options for the future now that his current contract expires. Raikkonen has also been linked with the Ferrari team.
Renault are yet to announce their drivers for 2007, with both their seats up for grabs following the announcement that world champion Fernando Alonso will move to McLaren.
Fisichella is still hoping to keep his seat, but the Italian says it's too early to know.
"I will know (my future) soon. The driver market is warming up," said the Italian. [/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Webber keeping the faith in Williams
By Jonathan Noble Tuesday, June 13th 2006, 09:22 GMT
Mark Webber insists that he is not losing faith in Williams, despite a disappointing weekend at Silverstone and increased speculation about a possible move to Renault next year.
The Australian failed to make it through the first session of qualifying at the British Grand Prix as the FW28 struggled for speed, just two weeks after his hopes of a podium finish in Monaco were wrecked by an exhaust failure. He retired on the first lap of the race after a collision with Ralf Schumacher.
It is the team's inconsistent pace, allied to the reliability problems that have cost Webber several podiums, that has led to speculation the Australian may be looking elsewhere next year.
Renault are still pinning their hopes on luring a driver in the calibre of Kimi Raikkonen or Michael Schumacher as a replacement for Fernando Alonso, but Webber is being touted as another target.
The Australian has insisted that he still sees potential at his current team - and autosport.com understands that a future decision is not necessarily his because the option on his future contract is held on Williams' side.
"You always think that it's greener on the other side," he said when asked whether he still wanted to remain at Williams next year. "But everyone goes through their pain. This weekend has been bad for us - we might be in better shape in Montreal.
"Next year there is potential for Williams to do strongly - but we're only on 10 points. We really need to start in Canada. It's going to be a tough season, but I feel for all the guys. We've had a lot of things we've had to get over. But we've still got to get everything together."
Webber's links with Renault come through his management deal with Briatore, but senior figures at the Anglo-French team privately believe that he deserves a chance on his talent alone. He was their test driver in 2001.
One high-level Renault figure told autosport.com: "There is a suspicion that Mark could be a Division One driver - up there with Kimi Raikkonen, Fernando Alonso and Michael Schumacher. He has not proven it yet, but there is a chance. We would love to work with him again."
Webber himself has said that he enjoyed his working relationship with Briatore and engineering director Pat Symonds, both of whom have praised his efforts over recent weeks.
"First of all, I've got massive respect for Pat Symonds, when I was testing there he was very good. Flavio as well - he's a real pro as well.
"For both those guys to say things, it's nice for me to hear. I do my best every weekend and I feel that I've driven very well. A **** day in F1 isn't the end of your career. I pretty much nailed everything I wanted to do this year."
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE][B]Q. An interesting story today in Autosport suggesting that you're in contact, in discussion with Ferrari. What have you got to say about that?[/B]
DC: Well, it's inevitable that everyone has to know what the market-place offers. If you look at Ferrari from the outside, they've got one driver scoring serious points and the other one not. Any team needs to have two drivers in a position to capitalise and as I say, I didn't score over 500 points by accident.
[B]Q. So you have been in contact with them.[/B]
DC: That's none of your business. As I said, everyone talks to everyone at this stage of the season so I'm sure that even Jenson, although we believe he's contracted to Honda, I'm sure he's probably talking to someone as well.[/QUOTE]
More silly season "news"...
[QUOTE]Fisichella hints at 2007 Renault line-up
By Pablo Elizalde Wednesday, June 14th 2006, 11:22 GMT
Giancarlo Fisichella says he will partner Kimi Raikkonen or Heikki Kovalainen if he stays at the Renault team next season.
Fisichella's contract comes to an end this year and the Roman is still hopeful of staying at the French squad next year, although he admits he still doesn't know where his future lies.
The Renault driver, however, says that if he stays in the team, he will be partnered by a Finnish driver.
"I don't know who would be my teammate next year in Renault, but I know that he will be a Finn: Raikkonen or Kovalainen," the Italian told Gazzetta dello Sport.
Kovalainen is the team's test driver and Renault boss Flavio Briatore said last year the highly-rated Finn would land a race seat in 2007.
McLaren driver Raikkonen has also been linked with Renault as he continues to evaluate his options for the future now that his current contract expires. Raikkonen has also been linked with the Ferrari team.
Renault are yet to announce their drivers for 2007, with both their seats up for grabs following the announcement that world champion Fernando Alonso will move to McLaren.
Fisichella is still hoping to keep his seat, but the Italian says it's too early to know.
"I will know (my future) soon. The driver market is warming up," said the Italian. [/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Webber keeping the faith in Williams
By Jonathan Noble Tuesday, June 13th 2006, 09:22 GMT
Mark Webber insists that he is not losing faith in Williams, despite a disappointing weekend at Silverstone and increased speculation about a possible move to Renault next year.
The Australian failed to make it through the first session of qualifying at the British Grand Prix as the FW28 struggled for speed, just two weeks after his hopes of a podium finish in Monaco were wrecked by an exhaust failure. He retired on the first lap of the race after a collision with Ralf Schumacher.
It is the team's inconsistent pace, allied to the reliability problems that have cost Webber several podiums, that has led to speculation the Australian may be looking elsewhere next year.
Renault are still pinning their hopes on luring a driver in the calibre of Kimi Raikkonen or Michael Schumacher as a replacement for Fernando Alonso, but Webber is being touted as another target.
The Australian has insisted that he still sees potential at his current team - and autosport.com understands that a future decision is not necessarily his because the option on his future contract is held on Williams' side.
"You always think that it's greener on the other side," he said when asked whether he still wanted to remain at Williams next year. "But everyone goes through their pain. This weekend has been bad for us - we might be in better shape in Montreal.
"Next year there is potential for Williams to do strongly - but we're only on 10 points. We really need to start in Canada. It's going to be a tough season, but I feel for all the guys. We've had a lot of things we've had to get over. But we've still got to get everything together."
Webber's links with Renault come through his management deal with Briatore, but senior figures at the Anglo-French team privately believe that he deserves a chance on his talent alone. He was their test driver in 2001.
One high-level Renault figure told autosport.com: "There is a suspicion that Mark could be a Division One driver - up there with Kimi Raikkonen, Fernando Alonso and Michael Schumacher. He has not proven it yet, but there is a chance. We would love to work with him again."
Webber himself has said that he enjoyed his working relationship with Briatore and engineering director Pat Symonds, both of whom have praised his efforts over recent weeks.
"First of all, I've got massive respect for Pat Symonds, when I was testing there he was very good. Flavio as well - he's a real pro as well.
"For both those guys to say things, it's nice for me to hear. I do my best every weekend and I feel that I've driven very well. A **** day in F1 isn't the end of your career. I pretty much nailed everything I wanted to do this year."
[/QUOTE]
| TimStevens | 06-14-2006 09:51 AM |
Well, either DC is holding out for more $$, more of something else, or is moving on.
| Ferg | 06-14-2006 09:57 AM |
You're right Tim, it's got to be for more $$$... I just can't imagine DC, at this point in his career, wanting to start all over with another team, especially with a Newey chassis at his disposal for next season if he sticks with RBR.
If the rumors about JPM moving to Red Bull next season prove to be true, it could also be a case of David just wanting to secure his position in the team. A DC/JPM lineup seems like it would be pretty volitile given their recent history.
If the rumors about JPM moving to Red Bull next season prove to be true, it could also be a case of David just wanting to secure his position in the team. A DC/JPM lineup seems like it would be pretty volitile given their recent history.
| enduroshark | 06-14-2006 10:07 AM |
I don't know about DC moving from Red Bull. I just have a feeling that Red Bull will eventually make the jump to the top, like Williams and McLaren have done from their privateer roots.
| meebs | 06-14-2006 01:09 PM |
DC will not go anywhere if he can help it.
All signs seem to be pointing to Kimi wearing Blue and Yellow next year (while collecting his little bonus) and maybe the next, and then moving to Ferrari after Schu finally ends it. What would be suprising is seeing JPM ending up at Renault as well. Is Fizzi even that great of a number 2? Supposedly Flav will leave if he can't win.
All signs seem to be pointing to Kimi wearing Blue and Yellow next year (while collecting his little bonus) and maybe the next, and then moving to Ferrari after Schu finally ends it. What would be suprising is seeing JPM ending up at Renault as well. Is Fizzi even that great of a number 2? Supposedly Flav will leave if he can't win.
| Ferg | 06-14-2006 01:17 PM |
Now who's going to get the second Renault engine next year....
[QUOTE]Renault keen to supply a second team
By Anthony Rowlinson Wednesday, June 14th 2006, 16:31 GMT
Renault are set to supply a second team with their coveted Formula One engine next year, according to this week's Autosport.
The French squad have not supplied two teams with a Renault-badged engine since 1997, when it supplied Williams and Benetton, but they have been approached by a number of independent teams about a 2007 customer deal.
Renault team principal Flavio Briatore said: "We are keen to supply a second team and we have ample capacity at Viry [Renault's engine headquarters] to supply it. With homologated engines coming in, supplying a second team has to be the way to go.
"It would offset a lot of the cost. We would be willing to talk to anyone and the engines would be available for a very reasonable price."
Renault's RS26 2.4-litre V8, designed under the guidance of engine technical chief Rob White, has proven to be one of the best engines in F1 this year. Renault are the only team not to have suffered an engine failure this season and the V8 is fully competitive in terms of power, compared with rival motors.
Technical director Bob Bell admitted: "There have been plenty of people knocking on the door and asking for our engines. There seems to be a bit of flux amongst the teams that might need an engine and we are always willing to talk to people."
A customer engine deal would be likely to cost around $15m per season, although if homologated 'frozen spec' engines have been introduced by 2007 that figure could be considerably reduced.
With Williams having agreed a three-year deal with Toyota from next season, the remaining candidates for an engine deal are Red Bull Racing, Scuderia Toro Rosso, Midland and Super Aguri.
Red Bull Racing currently have a Ferrari customer engine contract for next year, while Red Bull's junior team Toro Rosso have a 2007 Cosworth contract.
Autosport understands, however, that the contracts are interchangeable between the two teams, potentially allowing next year's STR-02, which is likely to be a developed version of this year's RB2 car, to use the Ferrari engines around which the chassis was designed.
Under that scenario, Red Bull could be in the market for another engine if they did not wish to renew a partnership with Cosworth - the engine manufacturer they dumped in favour of Ferrari at the end of last season.
Midland will also be seeking a new engine partner to replace Toyota, who have been their supplier since 2005. Toyota boss John Howett said the team had neither the desire nor the capacity to supply more than one team in addition to their factory squad.
There has also been speculation that Super Aguri, set up with Honda backing to provide a race seat for Takuma Sato, may yet split with Honda. Super Aguri managing director Daniel Audetto has close links with Briatore and is said to have had outline talks about a future Renault engine supply.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Renault keen to supply a second team
By Anthony Rowlinson Wednesday, June 14th 2006, 16:31 GMT
Renault are set to supply a second team with their coveted Formula One engine next year, according to this week's Autosport.
The French squad have not supplied two teams with a Renault-badged engine since 1997, when it supplied Williams and Benetton, but they have been approached by a number of independent teams about a 2007 customer deal.
Renault team principal Flavio Briatore said: "We are keen to supply a second team and we have ample capacity at Viry [Renault's engine headquarters] to supply it. With homologated engines coming in, supplying a second team has to be the way to go.
"It would offset a lot of the cost. We would be willing to talk to anyone and the engines would be available for a very reasonable price."
Renault's RS26 2.4-litre V8, designed under the guidance of engine technical chief Rob White, has proven to be one of the best engines in F1 this year. Renault are the only team not to have suffered an engine failure this season and the V8 is fully competitive in terms of power, compared with rival motors.
Technical director Bob Bell admitted: "There have been plenty of people knocking on the door and asking for our engines. There seems to be a bit of flux amongst the teams that might need an engine and we are always willing to talk to people."
A customer engine deal would be likely to cost around $15m per season, although if homologated 'frozen spec' engines have been introduced by 2007 that figure could be considerably reduced.
With Williams having agreed a three-year deal with Toyota from next season, the remaining candidates for an engine deal are Red Bull Racing, Scuderia Toro Rosso, Midland and Super Aguri.
Red Bull Racing currently have a Ferrari customer engine contract for next year, while Red Bull's junior team Toro Rosso have a 2007 Cosworth contract.
Autosport understands, however, that the contracts are interchangeable between the two teams, potentially allowing next year's STR-02, which is likely to be a developed version of this year's RB2 car, to use the Ferrari engines around which the chassis was designed.
Under that scenario, Red Bull could be in the market for another engine if they did not wish to renew a partnership with Cosworth - the engine manufacturer they dumped in favour of Ferrari at the end of last season.
Midland will also be seeking a new engine partner to replace Toyota, who have been their supplier since 2005. Toyota boss John Howett said the team had neither the desire nor the capacity to supply more than one team in addition to their factory squad.
There has also been speculation that Super Aguri, set up with Honda backing to provide a race seat for Takuma Sato, may yet split with Honda. Super Aguri managing director Daniel Audetto has close links with Briatore and is said to have had outline talks about a future Renault engine supply.[/QUOTE]
| meebs | 06-14-2006 01:22 PM |
Williams! It would be cool to see the old Williams - Benneton rivalry again! ;)
| Ferg | 06-14-2006 01:23 PM |
Agreed!
Williams-Renault just sounds so much better than Williams-Toyota, or Williams-Lexus as the case may be.
Williams-Scion?
Williams-Renault just sounds so much better than Williams-Toyota, or Williams-Lexus as the case may be.
Williams-Scion?
| Ferg | 06-14-2006 01:26 PM |
Someone forgot to put fuel in JVs car again...
[QUOTE]Villeneuve goes quickest at Monza
Wednesday, June 14th 2006, 16:44 GMT
Canadian Jacques Villeneuve set the pace on the second day of testing at the Monza circuit, where seven Formula One teams were in action today.
On a hot day, with temperatures reaching 35 degrees Celsius, the BMW driver posted a best time of 1:23.370 to finish ahead of the Williams of Nico Rosberg. Villeneuve was also the busiest man on track, covering a massive 125 laps of the Italian circuit.
Teammate Nick Heidfeld showed BMW are looking good for the Canadian and US Grands Prix by posting the third quickest time after 99 laps. Unlike his teammate, however, the German driver did not enjoy a trouble-free day, stopping on track early in the session.
Italian Giancarlo Fisichella, quickest on the first day of the test, was fourth fastest today, ahead of teammate Heikki Kovalainen, as the Renault team continued with their preparation work for the Canadian and United States Grands Prix.
Kovalainen caused one red flag when he stopped before noon.
Anthony Davidson and Honda teammate Jenson Button followed the Renaults with the sixth and seventh fastest times.
Button had a productive day, covering 123 laps, but the Briton's session was not without trouble. Button had a massive engine failure late in the afternoon, the marshals needing almost 20 minutes to clear the track.
Toyota's Jarno Trulli, 11th quickest, caused another two red flags, the first one when he stopped very early in the morning and the second when he went off the track at the second chicane.
Red Bull drivers Robert Doornbos and David Coulthard caused the other two stoppages during the day. The duo were joined by Toro Rosso driver Tonio Liuzzi, who shared the car with Doornbos, the Italian driving in the afternoon only.
Today's times:
Pos Driver Team Time Laps
1. Villeneuve BMW-Sauber (M) 1:23.370 125
2. Rosberg Williams-Cosworth (B) 1:23.429 75
3. Heidfeld BMW-Sauber (M) 1:23.512 99
4. Fisichella Renault (M) 1:23.664 96
5. Kovalainen Renault (M) 1:23.689 113
6. Davidson Honda (M) 1:23.989 118
7. Button Honda (M) 1:24.392 123
8. Wurz Williams-Cosworth (B) 1:24.402 93
9. Speed Toro Rosso-Cosworth (M) 1:24.625 76
10. Coulthard Red Bull-Ferrari (M) 1:24.806 78
11. Trulli Toyota (B) 1:25.013 62
12. R.Schumacher Toyota (B) 1:25.025 55
13. Doornbos Red Bull-Ferrari (M) 1:26.307 14
14. Liuzzi Red Bull-Ferrari (M) 1:27.597 14
All Timing Unofficial[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Villeneuve goes quickest at Monza
Wednesday, June 14th 2006, 16:44 GMT
Canadian Jacques Villeneuve set the pace on the second day of testing at the Monza circuit, where seven Formula One teams were in action today.
On a hot day, with temperatures reaching 35 degrees Celsius, the BMW driver posted a best time of 1:23.370 to finish ahead of the Williams of Nico Rosberg. Villeneuve was also the busiest man on track, covering a massive 125 laps of the Italian circuit.
Teammate Nick Heidfeld showed BMW are looking good for the Canadian and US Grands Prix by posting the third quickest time after 99 laps. Unlike his teammate, however, the German driver did not enjoy a trouble-free day, stopping on track early in the session.
Italian Giancarlo Fisichella, quickest on the first day of the test, was fourth fastest today, ahead of teammate Heikki Kovalainen, as the Renault team continued with their preparation work for the Canadian and United States Grands Prix.
Kovalainen caused one red flag when he stopped before noon.
Anthony Davidson and Honda teammate Jenson Button followed the Renaults with the sixth and seventh fastest times.
Button had a productive day, covering 123 laps, but the Briton's session was not without trouble. Button had a massive engine failure late in the afternoon, the marshals needing almost 20 minutes to clear the track.
Toyota's Jarno Trulli, 11th quickest, caused another two red flags, the first one when he stopped very early in the morning and the second when he went off the track at the second chicane.
Red Bull drivers Robert Doornbos and David Coulthard caused the other two stoppages during the day. The duo were joined by Toro Rosso driver Tonio Liuzzi, who shared the car with Doornbos, the Italian driving in the afternoon only.
Today's times:
Pos Driver Team Time Laps
1. Villeneuve BMW-Sauber (M) 1:23.370 125
2. Rosberg Williams-Cosworth (B) 1:23.429 75
3. Heidfeld BMW-Sauber (M) 1:23.512 99
4. Fisichella Renault (M) 1:23.664 96
5. Kovalainen Renault (M) 1:23.689 113
6. Davidson Honda (M) 1:23.989 118
7. Button Honda (M) 1:24.392 123
8. Wurz Williams-Cosworth (B) 1:24.402 93
9. Speed Toro Rosso-Cosworth (M) 1:24.625 76
10. Coulthard Red Bull-Ferrari (M) 1:24.806 78
11. Trulli Toyota (B) 1:25.013 62
12. R.Schumacher Toyota (B) 1:25.025 55
13. Doornbos Red Bull-Ferrari (M) 1:26.307 14
14. Liuzzi Red Bull-Ferrari (M) 1:27.597 14
All Timing Unofficial[/QUOTE]
| JoD | 06-14-2006 01:30 PM |
[QUOTE=Ferg]Someone forgot to put fuel in JVs car again...[/QUOTE]
:lol: Nice one Ferg!
:lol: Nice one Ferg!
| nKoan | 06-14-2006 01:54 PM |
[QUOTE=Ferg]Agreed!
Williams-Renault just sounds so much better than Williams-Toyota, or Williams-Lexus as the case may be.
Williams-Scion?[/QUOTE]
Yes, because when I think Scion, I think Grand Prix heritage :lol:
I think, though, that if Williams went with Toyota engines at the end of the season, they would certainly give the Toyota factory team a run for their money :lol:
Williams-Renault just sounds so much better than Williams-Toyota, or Williams-Lexus as the case may be.
Williams-Scion?[/QUOTE]
Yes, because when I think Scion, I think Grand Prix heritage :lol:
I think, though, that if Williams went with Toyota engines at the end of the season, they would certainly give the Toyota factory team a run for their money :lol:
| meebs | 06-14-2006 02:28 PM |
[QUOTE=nKoan]Yes, because when I think Scion, I think Grand Prix heritage :lol:
I think, though, that if Williams went with Toyota engines at the end of the season, they would certainly give the Toyota factory team a run for their money :lol:[/QUOTE]
I don't think re-badging the team for Canada and the USGP would be such a far-fethched idea... :o
I think, though, that if Williams went with Toyota engines at the end of the season, they would certainly give the Toyota factory team a run for their money :lol:[/QUOTE]
I don't think re-badging the team for Canada and the USGP would be such a far-fethched idea... :o
| StuBeck | 06-14-2006 06:02 PM |
Flav is in for the next couple of years I thought. I really think Fisi is out at the end of the year, Heikki and Kimi will drive for them with JPM and Alonso at McLaren. Klien will get kicked out and Luizzi might go to Red Bull. Speed is still a question mark, I think it depends on how much he pimps himself this year at Indy, if there is actually a response from the public about him. Remember, Danica had no following until Indy.
| KAX | 06-14-2006 06:11 PM |
[QUOTE=StuBeck]Flav is in for the next couple of years I thought. I really think Fisi is out at the end of the year, Heikki and Kimi will drive for them with JPM and Alonso at McLaren. Klien will get kicked out and Luizzi might go to Red Bull. Speed is still a question mark, I think it depends on how much he pimps himself this year at Indy, if there is actually a response from the public about him. Remember, Danica had no following until Indy.[/QUOTE]
Yeh, i think Speed is a good plug for advertising in america and brings Red Bull and Toro Rosso good support (just look at the first few races and see how many people rooted for speed). They shouldnt get rid of him after one poor season. But hell have to really show next season or he might not get another ride at all.
Yeh, i think Speed is a good plug for advertising in america and brings Red Bull and Toro Rosso good support (just look at the first few races and see how many people rooted for speed). They shouldnt get rid of him after one poor season. But hell have to really show next season or he might not get another ride at all.
| Ferg | 06-14-2006 06:18 PM |
Speed should be pretty secure until they find a more talented American to take his place...or until Gerhard has had enough.
| StuBeck | 06-14-2006 06:44 PM |
The problem with Speed is has he really brought more fans in? Sure, I cheer for him, but if he isn't bringing in new people into F1 and Red Bull there is little reason to keep him in the team if he isn't bringing results. I hope he stays (hell, it'd be awesome if he went to the senior team) but I'm just trying to go from a purely analytical approach. I'll have a much better clue after the USGP though.
| 0BlueSTi4 | 06-14-2006 07:10 PM |
[QUOTE=Ferg]
[IMG]http://www.pbase.com/image/52904775/original.jpg[/IMG]
[/QUOTE]
Oh no its powered by Intel :( you know what that means: "intel inside idiot outside" ;)
[IMG]http://www.pbase.com/image/52904775/original.jpg[/IMG]
[/QUOTE]
Oh no its powered by Intel :( you know what that means: "intel inside idiot outside" ;)
| Ferg | 06-14-2006 07:15 PM |
[QUOTE=StuBeck]I hope he stays (hell, it'd be awesome if he went to the senior team) but I'm just trying to go from a purely analytical approach. I'll have a much better clue after the USGP though.[/QUOTE]
I guess the good news then is that if he sticks with STR for '07 he will be in the senior team by default..in the sense that next year's Toro Rosso will be this year's Red Bull chassis...
I'm so confused :huh:
I guess the good news then is that if he sticks with STR for '07 he will be in the senior team by default..in the sense that next year's Toro Rosso will be this year's Red Bull chassis...
I'm so confused :huh:
| finnRex | 06-14-2006 08:40 PM |
[QUOTE=KAX]Yeh, i think Speed is a good plug for advertising in america and brings Red Bull and Toro Rosso good support (just look at the first few races and see how many people rooted for speed). They shouldnt get rid of him after one poor season. But hell have to really show next season or he might not get another ride at all.[/QUOTE]
I agree that he is a good plug for advertising, but I don't think that the American public will turn to watch F1 unless there's an American WINNING races, not just driving.
Mika
I agree that he is a good plug for advertising, but I don't think that the American public will turn to watch F1 unless there's an American WINNING races, not just driving.
Mika
| artkevin | 06-14-2006 09:25 PM |
Agreed Mika.
We need him to be in the top ten all of the time with a shot of a win every once in a while. Think Button. If we don't see him all over the late night talk shows and the Today Show and the like the week before the USGP- Red Bull, STR, and F1 in general are missing the American boat.
We need him to be in the top ten all of the time with a shot of a win every once in a while. Think Button. If we don't see him all over the late night talk shows and the Today Show and the like the week before the USGP- Red Bull, STR, and F1 in general are missing the American boat.
| finnRex | 06-14-2006 10:09 PM |
I'd have to say that for the public to care, he'd have to be a title contender. Unfortunately, Americans don't follow Americans outside of their normal life(in this case of sports, NASCAR, football, baseball, etc.) unless they are at the top of the talent level. I think that Speed would have to be a top 3 man to get recognition from the rest of the public. This, of course, is not counting the folks who are already into F1.
All of this, of course is my honest(not always oh so humble;) ) opinion.
Mika
All of this, of course is my honest(not always oh so humble;) ) opinion.
Mika
| Ferg | 06-14-2006 10:16 PM |
I think you're spot on Mika.
I'll go you one further though...I think it will take an American actually taking the Driver's Championship before this country as a whole takes notice of F1..and then I'd only give it a 50/50 chance. :(
Then again, I'm in a really pessimistic mode today!
I'll go you one further though...I think it will take an American actually taking the Driver's Championship before this country as a whole takes notice of F1..and then I'd only give it a 50/50 chance. :(
Then again, I'm in a really pessimistic mode today!
| StuBeck | 06-14-2006 11:03 PM |
[QUOTE=Ferg]I guess the good news then is that if he sticks with STR for '07 he will be in the senior team by default..in the sense that next year's Toro Rosso will be this year's Red Bull chassis...
I'm so confused :huh:[/QUOTE]
Confused about what?
STR won't be the senior team since they'll be running an 07 chassis. I doubt STR will be able to run the Red Bull chassis either, it was a wierdass loophole that let STR run the chassis this year. I think with the extra time they'll be able to make their own.
I'm so confused :huh:[/QUOTE]
Confused about what?
STR won't be the senior team since they'll be running an 07 chassis. I doubt STR will be able to run the Red Bull chassis either, it was a wierdass loophole that let STR run the chassis this year. I think with the extra time they'll be able to make their own.
| StuBeck | 06-14-2006 11:04 PM |
[QUOTE=finnRex]I agree that he is a good plug for advertising, but I don't think that the American public will turn to watch F1 unless there's an American WINNING races, not just driving.
Mika[/QUOTE]
Yep, that's what I'm fearing. An American in F1 hasn't seemed to help, hopefully having him for the USGP will create more interest.
Mika[/QUOTE]
Yep, that's what I'm fearing. An American in F1 hasn't seemed to help, hopefully having him for the USGP will create more interest.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét