Just been reading that. Think it's about time Bernie got wheeled off to the old folks home. So, we have learnt that corruption is good, Hitler got stuff done and that democracy is bad. And this man is in charge of one of the biggest sports in the world!?
Wow, who in their right mind would allow Bernie to run a $12billion company?????? ok so more like $5billion if you look at debts etc but still, Bernie? In a just world the serious fraud squad would look into Bernie but he has too much money!!!!!!
A question about the 2015 tokens. It would appear that Renault have not yet spent any of their 2015 allowance of 32 tokens so far. I think Honda and Merc have used all theirs and maybe Ferrari have a couple left. No it looks possible that during 2016 each Power Unit manufacturer will have 32 tokens to use in season again. When do the 32 2015 tokens have to be used by? If they don't use them are they allowed to carry them over? It looks to me like Renault may have to homologate a 2015 engine with all 32 tokens added at the end of the 2015 season and that engine may never have actually run on a track!!!! How stupid is that? Plus the same situation may happen in 2016! That is if Red Bull threaten to block in season development unless they get 2016 Ferrari engines!!!!! This just gets madder by the day.......
Yeah I think this is probable, I think part of it is to spite Red Bull (or possibly that Red Bull don't want to help Renault by running upgrades, which seems less likely; another thing to consider is that they're planning on buying Lotus, providing upgrades to Toro Rosso could cost them prize money, maybe at one point in the season they even felt the works Red Bull team could be there for the taking too), and some of it might be that the changes they want to make require more tokens than they have left (assuming some tokens have been laid aside for developments they would've introduced this season if they wanted to help Red Bull). Let's say they needed 40 tokens to make the changes they want, the obvious thing to do would be to use 32 now and then use 8 at the start of next season, but if the upgrade sees a pretty major overhaul to the engine layout it may be that they're unable to run the engine unless all 40 tokens are used at once, maybe a change in packaging for example means the power unit won't physically fit together unless all tokens are used. In which case they'll likely spend the tokens on an upgrade which can't run, finish the season with the older design and then complete the development in time for pre-season testing. I doubt they carry over.
His career turned out pretty similar to his Dad's in the end. Didn't look that way when he scored a podium in his first race. I wonder where he'll go next, I'm a little surprised they didn't keep him on for next year, they're rumoured to be running a GT car in WEC next season, he would've been a handy driver to have on board. I can't see him getting on the F1 grid next season, McLaren say they didn't want to hold him back but his chances of getting a drive would've been greater with their backing than without it I'm sure.
According to the autosport article about his departure, Magnussen is on the final shortlist of 3 or 4 names for both the Lotus/Renault and the Manor drives, so maybe all is not lost yet. As for Ecclestone well at least people seem to be having some success removing Blatter. We're stuck with Bernie until he dies.
Lol. As if Blatter didn't have enough credibility problems - he's now received an endorsement from Bernie!
It's Bernie and Max that created the F1 we have today! Todd doesn't seem to make any changes as he says he will only make changes when everyone agrees and that won't happen. I love the bit about F1 should not be an engineering dominated competition then Max says it should be about the cleverest engineer not the richest engineer. If we think about modern road cars they have a huge amount of driver aids like auto gearboxes, abs, brake force distribution, stability control, traction control to name but a few. While fixed budgets would be great I don't believe they could ever be policed properly. Personally I would love the regs to be opened up to allow engineering innovation but at the end of the season the engineering details should be made public! As for an independent engine supplier that would be good. Problem is cost and thus profit. With the complexities of the power unit an independent company would have to invest huge amounts to make a competitive engine. Currently no one in their right mind would invest in developing a PU as they keep talking and making rule changes. So the investment required would be hugely risky. We need more innovation and for the innovation to be public. Being an engineer I am probably biased but the driver can only drive what the engineers build for them. You only have to watch a teams 2 drivers to see which one can extract the better times.
I understand your point, but there is a difference in having a well engineered designed car as opposed to cars which are effectively that complex they have to be run by engineers. I'm all for the creativity of engineers in design.
Interesting. I sort of consider the driver to be part of the team that races. i.e. without the support of the engineers the driver wouldn't be driving. As you say cars being run by engineers not drivers is not good but in this day and age things have become so sophisticated they are run by computers. I know this is taking things to extreme but in years gone by drivers have had to actually maintain fuel pressure with a manual pump, adjust the ignition timing etc. but now all the above is done by computers. Some sports have co drivers to give them routes or in power boat racing the co driver controls the engines. Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't want robots driving. I do like to see drivers batting but wouldn't want all cars to be same chassis and PU. I suppose it is a difficult balance between drivers and the height of technology.
The problem in F1 is exclusivity, commercial contracts and vetoes. AFAIC if you homologate an engine (PU or w/e), you shouldn't have a say in who buys one, as long as they have the cash and no debt with you. RBR have a big staff which people like to mention, but if you're not competitive how do you pay them? Do you continue to throw money away? Renault have done a crap job for years, it was only Newey's idea's for the exhaust that made their underpowered engine competitive. Now they're being told "sorry, you're a threat to us so we're vetoing you, despite it probably being against the law (not sure on company law, but I'm pretty sure letting personal agenda's influence policies on publicly traded companies to the detriment of the balance sheet is a no-no.)
I know the PU regs have attracted a lot of criticism in the last couple of years, and I do agree that drivers get too much help (from technology and over the radio). But I think engineering excellence can (and must) still be part of F1, with 1 major exception - I still think the biggest problem is the impact of aero. Aero has a huge impact on: costs for the teams (and smaller teams can't buy their aero like they can buy their PUs) PU design, power, and reliability (aero packaging vs heat dissipation, and the associated problems) overtaking (hence the DRS workaround) I shudder a bit when Bernie talks about a wholesale re-write of the regs, because I can only see it benefiting the teams that already have the most bargaining power. They'll do whatever they can to influence the regs in their favour. F1 has cycles, and I still think the next cycle should reduce aerodynamic grip and increase mechanical grip. This would still allow engineering innovation and excellence, but it could come from smaller specialist companies, as well as the big boys. With less restrictive packaging and less aero downforce, we might not have seen such bad mismatches in PU performance And overtaking should become easier. They could still keep DRS to make it easier still, and this might reduce the current situation with tyre specs, that nobody is happy with. Like any other solution it will have its holes, and I'm sure I've missed some important considerations. But surely it's worth a try?
Aero is kind of a problem, but as they say, you can't unlearn it, it's always going to play a part now. F1's been changing the regs to reduce aero for years now, and while downforce levels do drop off, its importance remains because it's one of the few areas where developments is still relatively unrestricted. I think the only way you can reduce the importance of aero is to increase the importance of other areas of development, particularly powertrain development. While engine development is so restricted the teams will plough more and more money into aero development because it's where they'll see the biggest gains. If teams could focus on improving their hybrids, they'd focus more on just producing a stable, efficient aero package. At the moment they pile on as much downforce as possible and it's a big performance differentiator meaning they lose tonnes of laptime when following other cars.
