Just read that Renault may buy Lotus and keep the Lotus name for 2016! This is due to the current sponsorship deals that Lotus have and the Merc engine would also stay! This might help Renault take a year out of public engine development. In fact I wonder what the rules are regarding an engine manufacturer leaving for a season and then coming back? Would they be able to come back with a brand new engine or would they have to use the last season engine. This might provide Renault with some interesting options. Any thoughts?
http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2015/09/red-bull-teams-set-to-move-to-ferrari-power-for-2016/ James Allen seems certain Red Bull and Toro Rosso will be running Ferrari engines again next season. There was some talk that Vettel might take Newey to Ferrari, it seems he's taken the entire brand with him. Incidentally, Vettel's win for Toro Rosso is the only win for a Ferrari customer in F1 history, doesn't bode all that well for Red Bull. Next season could be more interesting, this year's Ferrari engine in last year's Red Bull would've been an excellent package.
I think Red Bull would be MENTAL to go the customer route. What on earth are they doing? Unless they are buying themselves some time until a suitable works engine partner makes the right offer?
In the short term what other option do they have? Look at what is happening at Honda after McL pushed them into running an engine 1 year earlier than they wanted to. It would appear that to produce a good power unit takes a lot more work than engine manufacturers realised.Mind you after all the Red Bull staff they pushed on Renault Red Bull should have some good info on what is fundamentally wrong with the Renault Power Unit.
In relation to engine supply, I think there should be a rule that prevents engine variants in different teams. As an engine supplier or works team, if you develop or change your engine, that variant has to be available to every team they supply. I understand that the counter argument will be testing the unit, but if your prepared to put it in the championship leaders car or Vettel's car then it should be available to all customers.
I wonder if a way to equalise things and maybe reduce budgets is at the end of the season all technical details including engine, fuels lubricants etc of every car is passed to all teams. While a team might be leading 1 year as they have discovered an advantage all teams would have the info for the next season. Smaller teams might benefit form last years designs. Then again by end of season most teams will have their cars designed. OK so teams might winge about intellectual property but it the info can only be used in F1 it shouldn't be too much of an issue. Also engine suppliers should be required to give identical power units and associated maps, control systems etc to all teams they supply at the same time. Mind you I read that the fuel can add 40hp if the engine is optimised for it!! So maybe we have to go with a ISO standard compliant unleaded fuel spec? How to reduce budgets while giving engineers possibilities to come up with innovations?????
Interesting what you say about the benefits of different fuel suppliers and obviously the associated teams oil/fuel sponsor. I posted on the F1 power unit thread that McLaren were losing 40 bhp to Merc (when running the same engines) because they used different fuels/oils. I'm not sure on making intellectual data available - especially as they could be totally different the following year anyway - I respect the competition differences. However, controlled fuel would be a cost saving and another variable that is levelled - especially for smaller teams.
I wonder what the contracts with fuel/lubricant suppliers actually look like? Do the teams pay for fuel and hope the supplier is optimising it for their engine, or do the suppliers earn their spot on the livery by making the best fuel they can?
I read that Ferrari and Merc are trying to get the rules amended to enable last years engines to be allowed. Manor had an exception this year to run last years Ferrari engine. If the rule is passed it has been suggested that the Ferrari engine that RedBull will be using will be the 2015 engine not the 2016!!!!!!
So we know Haas have a very close relationship with Ferrari, but it's allegedly closer than I thought. Rumour is Haas will be sacking 70 aerodynamicists on October 31st. Coincidentally, Ferrari are hiring 70 aerodynamicists November 1st. Haas are buying every part they can from Ferrari, and their aero team has been at Maranello all year, with no testing limits in place. An aero team effectively provided by Ferrari in the first place, who will return to work for Ferrari. Effectively, Ferrari have had unlimited development of their 2016 aero, which will be a massive boost. I suspect Haas will have a car resembling what the shared aero team have come up with by the end of October, just without the refinements Ferrari make over the winter. I really think Ferrari are going to have a monster of a car next season. Mercedes are going to have a serious challenge to stay on top. And Haas will make the top 6 in the constructors I reckon.
If Mercedes have a marginally better PU (than Ferrari) and Ferrari have marginally better aero (than Merc) next season it could be an interesting season. Bit of cat and mouse at different circuits. If only the cars could follow better.
Surely they can't do this. Any team could just set up a relationship with another company to do unlimited aero on their behalf, the 2015 F1 teams are the only companies in the world with restrictions placed on them relating to F1, couldn't any team invite a company to use their facilities, "Oh McVities were here using our windtunnel to validate the aerodynamics of their latest biscuit". Or is it more that Ferrari's engineers have been testing in Haas facilities? In which case their development will only be as good as Haas's facilities.
Haas are doing all their aero work at Maranello, although they do have a wind tunnel. And I think that was the argument that Mercedes and Red Bull made, that they could just set up a shell company to do research for a theoretical F1 entry.
