Four one-day aerodynamic tests are allowed per year, but may be substituted for four hours of full-scale wind-tunnel testing
So basically Marussia are going to turn up to shakedown their car in free practice at Australia. Well done FIA.
It's the FIA's fault they're letting them turn up with a potentially dangerous car and preventing them from having any chance of a separate private test (such as has already been granted to other teams) by closing off the loophole in this particular way.
I actually agree with this. It's a bit strange that you have to pass 18 crash tests, but you can potentially start a grand prix having completed just a single full lap (a qualify run within 107%) in that machine. There should be a rule that the cars have to have some sort of shake down of a certain mileage away from a grand prix event before they can race. If I was Heikki Kovalainen on the grid at the Australian grand prix, I'd feel a lot safer if the car behind had done 200km of testing with a roll hoop which couldn't quite withstand whatever massive load they apply to it, instead of a really strong roll hope and dodgy brakes because it hasn't been tested properly.
I would have thought that, seeing as it's the first race of the year, the FIA will enforce the 107% rule quite strongly, seeing as they have no evidence the cars are capable of going fast enough if they haven't achieved it in Free Practice. Seeing as Marussia and HRT are likely to be running shakedowns in free practice, they may not get a quick enough lap time in then, so could easily miss out.
They do have 3 practice sessions before qualifying to test the car, plus there are lots of tests they can do on rigs back at the factory. I didn;t think we did tabloid hysteria on here, or have we got some closet Sun readers among us?
They did with HRT last year so I imagine they will again this year if the cars consistently are outside 107% in all the practice sessions as well.
I said potentially. If they went out on the Friday and suffered a hydraulic problem on the installation lap or the driver inexplicably flicks it in the wall a la Chandhok last year they could easily miss the Friday. Look at the problems some of the top teams have suffered and lost large chunks of test time with. Also rigs, in terms of testing suspension, brakes etc are nothing like on track testing, engine testing can be fairly effective, but the critical things like 'is a wheel going to fly off in the braking zone' can't ve accurately tested. I'm also not sure what the RRA allows either, or whether Marussia and HRT would even have sophisticated test equipment necessary. How was my post hysterical? Do you not find it ridiculous that the teams have to under go incredibly stringent crash tests, but don't actually have to run the thing before they race it?
Wasn't aimied just at you AG, there was a whiff of hysteria earlier on too On your second point, it depends what you think is best. Have a car that may potentially break when driving it and be sure that if you crash you'll be okay, or drive a car that may still break such is the nature of an F1 car, then have the roll hoop detach itself from the during teh accident/ I'll have the safe car please
The thing is, the most dangerous situation in my opinion is when cars collide with other cars, when the driver is more likely to be struck by something. So I think the cars should be tested first in the safety of a test session, where all they're really likely to hit is a nice soft stack of tyres. Accidents will obviously happen, but one of the benefits of testing is that you can confine a large majority of them which are down to teething problems to a safe environment. I'm not sure what Marussia failed on, but they could just have fell a few KG's short of a load totalling several tonnes, and have been prevented from testing as a result. Not having a proper shakedown is riskier in my opinion, than making sure the side of the cockpit can withstand those extra few kilos.
I'm not blaming any team. If "blame" is applicable at all, it should be directed to the FIA's apparent willingness to facilitate the whims of individual competitors, rather than sticking to a set of rules which consistently applies to all. Historically, Ferrari have been the biggest beneficiaries of such whimsy and it should therefore come as no surprise that another team (Red Bull for instance?) wants to play the same cards, since it would appear to at least be a possibility. But this should not be the case! What should matter is that the FIA do not continue to grant 'special status' or anything which may remotely suggest it, to any team at any time. All teams should be subject to identical rules all of the time, not 'the same rules but exceptions can be made every now and then if Ferrari want something'; or 'we've always allowed the red team a bit of extra so why not Red Bull too?'. Rules should be rules. The End.
Barcelona Test II Line-Up Red Bull Mark Webber - March 1st and March 3rd Sebastian Vettel - March 2nd and March 4th McLaren Jenson Button - March 1st and March 3rd Lewis Hamilton - March 2nd and March 4th Ferrari Felipe Massa - March 1st and March 3rd Fernando Alonso - March 2nd and March 4th Mercedes Nico Rosberg - March 1st and March 3rd Michael Schumacher - March 2nd and March 4th Lotus Romain Grosjean - March 1st-2nd Kimi Raikkonen - March 3rd-4th Force India Paul di Resta - March 1st and March 3rd Nico Hulkenberg - March 2nd and March 4th Sauber Sergio Perez - March 1st and March 3rd Kamui Kobayashi - March 2nd and March 4th Toro Rosso Jean-Eric Vergne - March 1st-2nd Daniel Ricciardo - March 3rd-4th Williams Pastor Maldonado - March 1, March 2 (PM), March 3 (AM) Bruno Senna - March 2 (AM), March 3 (PM), March 4 Caterham F1 Heikki Kovalainen - March 1st-2nd Vitaly Petrov - March 3rd-4th HRT TBC, although HRT has confirmed to Crash.net that both Pedro de la Rosa and Narain Karthikeyan will be at Barcelona's Circuit de Catalunya and that the team is working '24/7 to have everything ready for the tests'. Marussia Won't run after new car failed final crash test
