timefactors watches



TZ-UK Fundraiser
Page 17 of 30 FirstFirst ... 7151617181927 ... LastLast
Results 801 to 850 of 1496

Thread: Formula 1 2018

  1. #801
    Has Toto Wolff still got a stake in Williams?

  2. #802
    Craftsman ziphos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Warwickshire
    Posts
    295
    Quote Originally Posted by adrianw View Post
    Has Toto Wolff still got a stake in Williams?
    No, there was an announcement quite a while back that he had sold his stake in Williams. Can't remember who he sold it to.

  3. #803
    Master petethegeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Worcestershire
    Posts
    1,585
    Quote Originally Posted by ziphos View Post
    Can't remember who he sold it to.
    Brad Hollinger - https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/12...illiams-shares

  4. #804
    Grand Master JasonM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cambridgeshire
    Posts
    11,565
    Good to see 3 different teams in the top 3 positions starting the race. Hope its a good one.
    Cheers..
    Jase

  5. #805
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonM View Post
    Hope its a good one.
    Alas not. I knew I should have watched paint dry instead.

    Thatís a couple of hours of my life Iím not going to get back

  6. #806
    Quote Originally Posted by noTAGlove View Post
    Alas not. I knew I should have watched paint dry instead.

    Thatís a couple of hours of my life Iím not going to get back
    Yup have to agree

  7. #807
    Master Lampoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Lincs. The bit with hills.
    Posts
    3,870
    Crikey, that was dull. I await someone else to tell us how little we know and that it was techinically and strategically fascinating.

  8. #808
    Grand Master Foxy100's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Die FuchsrŲhre
    Posts
    12,700
    I had it on on Radio 5 and that Jolyon Palmer is a very good commentator, better than Coulthard. He has a bright future doing that if the F1 career doesn't come back.
    You can live in your car but you can't drive your house.

  9. #809
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Sheffield, UK
    Posts
    469
    Agreed - dull as dishwater.

  10. #810
    I expect the race to be shortened by 2 laps after the premature waving of the chequered flag.

  11. #811

    Formula 1 2018

    Quote Originally Posted by Lampoc View Post
    I await someone else to tell us how little we know and that it was techinically and strategically fascinating.
    You first have to get the right amount on your brush. Not too much nor too little. Apply to the wall in even strokes and then watch as it carefully. About an hour focussed on the wall, you can watch the colour of the paint dull a little as it dries. Absolutely fascinating.

    As for Montreal GP, now that was just p1ss poor boring.

  12. #812
    Kimi said it was a boring race, Clare Williams made herself look an idiot after her driver crashed, but she will have to ask his daddy for some more cash.

    Canada is usually a good race, this wasn't

    I think they should start awarding points for overtakes

  13. #813
    Awful race, very disappointing. Great win for Vettel though.

  14. #814
    Quote Originally Posted by watchcollector1 View Post
    Awful race, very disappointing. Great win for Vettel though.
    This
    Andy

  15. #815
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Leicester England
    Posts
    361
    Missed todayís race, sounds like that was for the best.

  16. #816
    Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Southampton, UK
    Posts
    3,250
    Yawn-fest and wish I hadnít stayed up so late to watch the highlights

  17. #817
    Quote Originally Posted by mtagrant View Post
    Yawn-fest and wish I hadnít stayed up so late to watch the highlights
    Me too. Awfully dull, possibly even more so than Monaco.

    Can we also have some competition for Pirelli?

  18. #818
    Quote Originally Posted by dkpw View Post

    Can we also have some competition for Pirelli?
    I can't see it happening, and IMO it wouldn't be for the best if another tyre brand came onboard either. As it stands the Pirelli tyres are spec'd by request of the FIA with no biased input from any individual team, unlike the Ferrari/Bridgestone years when the two quite clearly worked together at the expense of the other Bridgestone and Michelin shod outfits. As it stands there are three "levellers"; the teams all race at the same circuits on the same tyres and to the same rules, the team that extracts the best performance from their tyres is the team with the fastest car.

    As has been said, not the most exiting of races, especially so as Canada usually provides us with something higher up on the entertainment scale. What it did do, and very successfully at that, is demonstrate how difficult it is for any one particular team (of the top three) to dominate and that there are very fine margins this season between relative success and failure. It would be foolish to expect every race to be a thriller - not that I would be complaining if they were - however with the podium finishers seemingly becoming increasingly unpredictable it's looking like it could be an absolute thriller of a season.
    Last edited by CardShark; 11th June 2018 at 02:24.

  19. #819
    Master subseastu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Ashby, uk
    Posts
    1,026
    I thought Christian Horner said something interesting towards the end of the race about wanting to go 2 or 3 stop racing again. Presumably so teams won't have to manage tyres but go out and race the nuts off the cars as meant to be. The tyres would all degrade reasonably quickly forcing everyone into 2 or 3 stops regardless so the race would be a series of sprints effectively. I think I like the idea.

  20. #820
    Master blackal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Scottish Borders
    Posts
    2,123
    Itís only 2 weeks since Monaco was being callled irrelevant and Ďnot fit for purposeí while holding up the Canadian GP as being the best!

    I had thought of watching it- on that basis.

  21. #821
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Southern Spain
    Posts
    21,046
    Quote Originally Posted by mtagrant View Post
    Yawn-fest and wish I hadnít stayed up so late to watch the highlights
    HŪghlights?? Were there?!!
    When the going gets tough, the DAF gets going.

  22. #822
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Winchester
    Posts
    967
    Quote Originally Posted by adrianw View Post
    Clare Williams made herself look an idiot after her driver crashed, but she will have to ask his daddy for some more cash.
    I thought that too!

  23. #823
    Mark Hughes' report on the events of the weekend, for those sufficiently interested:

    https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/r...378YTL,14I9Z,1
    Although no trees were harmed during the creation of this post, a large number of electrons were greatly inconvenienced.

  24. #824
    Quote Originally Posted by Backward point View Post
    Mark Hughes' report on the events of the weekend, for those sufficiently interested:

    https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/r...378YTL,14I9Z,1
    But didn't mention the elephant in the room once

  25. #825
    Quote Originally Posted by adrianw View Post
    But didn't mention the elephant in the room once
    I have been an avid F1 fan since 1994 but I am now finally thinking about giving up with it. Yesterdays race was terrible - as bad as Monaco in fact where we were at least expecting it to be crap. Three DRS zones and still nobody could get close enough to even have a look at a pass. Melbourne was equally bad and Barcelona not much better (although I was there so the great atmosphere made up for a boring race).
    Do you think Ross Brawn will introduce some aero changes to improve the actual racing next year?

  26. #826
    Quote Originally Posted by sandman View Post
    I have been an avid F1 fan since 1994 but I am now finally thinking about giving up with it. Yesterdays race was terrible - as bad as Monaco in fact where we were at least expecting it to be crap. Three DRS zones and still nobody could get close enough to even have a look at a pass. Melbourne was equally bad and Barcelona not much better (although I was there so the great atmosphere made up for a boring race).
    Do you think Ross Brawn will introduce some aero changes to improve the actual racing next year?


    This years cars are wider, heavier, running much more aero, especially from the front wing, this has all added up to being where they all are, they are stuck with current car until 2021 with some revisions in 2019. They need to reduce the aero, narrow the front wing, stop using tyres that can last the whole race and maybe introduce mandatory pit stops. but they all know this, they need to revise the rules for next year and develop new cars (if necessary give financial help to the back of the grid) but I get the impression Ferrari and Mercedes wont agree on anything.

  27. #827
    Quote Originally Posted by adrianw View Post
    This years cars are wider, heavier, running much more aero, especially from the front wing, this has all added up to being where they all are, they are stuck with current car until 2021 with some revisions in 2019. They need to reduce the aero, narrow the front wing, stop using tyres that can last the whole race and maybe introduce mandatory pit stops. but they all know this, they need to revise the rules for next year and develop new cars (if necessary give financial help to the back of the grid) but I get the impression Ferrari and Mercedes wont agree on anything.
    So its just minor revisions for 2019? Thats disappointing - we could have another 2 years of this before we see any major improvements. Would narrowing the front wing (and reducing downforce on the front wheels) not make it even harder to follow the car in front though? Less downforce = more understeer = greater tyre derogation?
    If they cant find a way to allow a car to be driven round a corner and maintain a 0.5s gap to the car in front I think they should look at increasing the braking distances to encourage more overtaking in the braking zones. Narrower tyres and smaller brake discs perhaps.

  28. #828
    Quote Originally Posted by CardShark View Post
    I can't see it happening, and IMO it wouldn't be for the best if another tyre brand came onboard either. As it stands the Pirelli tyres are spec'd by request of the FIA with no biased input from any individual team, unlike the Ferrari/Bridgestone years when the two quite clearly worked together at the expense of the other Bridgestone and Michelin shod outfits. As it stands there are three "levellers"; the teams all race at the same circuits on the same tyres and to the same rules, the team that extracts the best performance from their tyres is the team with the fastest car.

    As has been said, not the most exiting of races, especially so as Canada usually provides us with something higher up on the entertainment scale. What it did do, and very successfully at that, is demonstrate how difficult it is for any one particular team (of the top three) to dominate and that there are very fine margins this season between relative success and failure. It would be foolish to expect every race to be a thriller - not that I would be complaining if they were - however with the podium finishers seemingly becoming increasingly unpredictable it's looking like it could be an absolute thriller of a season.
    Thanks for your thoughts on the tires. Perhaps the FIA could work with another company on the same independent basis as Pirelli, although I suppose there would be financial reasons for not doing so.

  29. #829
    In 2008 the FIA decided that, in order to allow cars to follow each other closely and overtake, the front wings would be wider, to try to reduce the loss of downforce when following in the turbulent wake of another car, and the rear wings should be smaller and narrower so that they would create less turbulence.

    And now, the FIA is suggesting that the front wings should become narrower (and create an "inwash" effect, diverting the air towards the underfloor and around the front of the sidepods) rather than the current designs which create "outwash", diverting the air around the outside of the front wheels and then merging it with air coming through inside the front wheels and diverted by ever more intricate barge boards and brake ducts.

    Only time will tell if "inwash" front wings will allow one car to follow another and not suffer instability and drag from turbulent air, but McLaren experimented with an "inwash" front wing when the regulations changed for 2009, and abandoned it at the earliest opportunity.
    Although no trees were harmed during the creation of this post, a large number of electrons were greatly inconvenienced.

  30. #830
    Grand Master JasonM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cambridgeshire
    Posts
    11,565
    Quote Originally Posted by Backward point View Post
    In 2008 the FIA decided that, in order to allow cars to follow each other closely and overtake, the front wings would be wider, to try to reduce the loss of downforce when following in the turbulent wake of another car, and the rear wings should be smaller and narrower so that they would create less turbulence.

    And now, the FIA is suggesting that the front wings should become narrower (and create an "inwash" effect, diverting the air towards the underfloor and around the front of the sidepods) rather than the current designs which create "outwash", diverting the air around the outside of the front wheels and then merging it with air coming through inside the front wheels and diverted by ever more intricate barge boards and brake ducts.

    Only time will tell if "inwash" front wings will allow one car to follow another and not suffer instability and drag from turbulent air, but McLaren experimented with an "inwash" front wing when the regulations changed for 2009, and abandoned it at the earliest opportunity.
    Perhaps Williams forgot to do so
    Cheers..
    Jase

  31. #831
    Quote Originally Posted by Backward point View Post
    In 2008 the FIA decided that, in order to allow cars to follow each other closely and overtake, the front wings would be wider, to try to reduce the loss of downforce when following in the turbulent wake of another car, and the rear wings should be smaller and narrower so that they would create less turbulence.

    And now, the FIA is suggesting that the front wings should become narrower (and create an "inwash" effect, diverting the air towards the underfloor and around the front of the sidepods) rather than the current designs which create "outwash", diverting the air around the outside of the front wheels and then merging it with air coming through inside the front wheels and diverted by ever more intricate barge boards and brake ducts.

    Only time will tell if "inwash" front wings will allow one car to follow another and not suffer instability and drag from turbulent air, but McLaren experimented with an "inwash" front wing when the regulations changed for 2009, and abandoned it at the earliest opportunity.
    Good explanation,

    it would be good to see proper airflow pictures of one of the front running cars, showing laminar airflow, vortex generators, the air attaching and then re-attaching etc etc, this would show how much of this stuff is deliberate to disrupt the car behind and how much is to generate downforce.

  32. #832
    Quote Originally Posted by dkpw View Post
    Thanks for your thoughts on the tires. Perhaps the FIA could work with another company on the same independent basis as Pirelli, although I suppose there would be financial reasons for not doing so.
    A tyre war would only increase development costs for the tyre manufacturers. Pirelli, as a sole supplier, don't have any competition therefore aren't in a battle with anyone else, introduce a competitor and costs will escalate as each supplier will want to beat the other. As I have already said, I actually prefer a single tyre supplier anyway as it plays a part in levelling the field.

    Quote Originally Posted by adrianw View Post
    Good explanation,

    it would be good to see proper airflow pictures of one of the front running cars, showing laminar airflow, vortex generators, the air attaching and then re-attaching etc etc, this would show how much of this stuff is deliberate to disrupt the car behind and how much is to generate downforce.
    The cars aren't designed with intentionally disrupting the air flow for cars behind in mind, only to maximise each individual car's aero performance which would include trying to negate the effects of following another car, potentially with the negative knock-on effects of running in still air. Mercedes, for example, have long been rumoured to bias their aero concept towards "clean" air, couple this with what has been an engine advantage and they'll find it easier to qualify at the front and then stay there as no-one would be infront of them. Whilst this doesn't prove the theory, Lewis Hamilton did publicly state after the race that he thought that the current generation of cars were "crap" with regards to the ease of following another car around the circuit.

    It may be possible to introduce technical regulations, such as the '19 changes, to try to minimise this disrupted airflow however any race series that depends upon downforce suffers from the same issues, it's just magnified in F1 due to the high speeds and even higher dependency on grip generated by airflow. I welcome any changes that could genuinely improve the spectacle, however I do fear for how successful any well intended changes actually are.
    Last edited by CardShark; 11th June 2018 at 16:03.

  33. #833
    Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    South Coast
    Posts
    1,685
    Avoided the result and sat down excited to watch the highlights on all4, I actually had a little snooze over the last few laps; a shame, Canada normally gives a good show. A shame Hamilton didnít have the tyre performance (or whatever was letting him down), as I was hoping to see a bit of battling at least.

    With regard to the amended aero regs, interesting to hear Christian Horner bemoan this with a Ďitíll cost us a load more moneyí; what a laugh! Like they arenít constantly running supercomputers and wind tunnels tweaking the design for every last bit of performance anyway!
    Yes itís a redesign, but means nothing in the terms of staffing etc.

  34. #834
    Quote Originally Posted by CardShark View Post
    A tyre war would only increase development costs for the tyre manufacturers. Pirelli, as a sole supplier, don't have any competition therefore aren't in a battle with anyone else, introduce a competitor and costs will escalate as each supplier will want to beat the other. As I have already said, I actually prefer a single tyre supplier anyway as it plays a part in levelling the field.

    Exactly. A tyre war would be a senseless waste of resources, and increase costs even further. Besides, there are restrictions on testing, and any competition between tyre suppliers demands intensive testing.

    Pirelli have done an excellent job for Formula 1. The original brief demanded that they provide tyres which degraded quite rapidly, which can't have been too attractive. Imagine that you're a global, highly regarded tyre manufacturer and you're asked to make tyres which wear out rapidly in front of a world-wide television audience of 16bn potential customers 20 times per year. To make things worse Pirelli came in for some bad press a few years ago because tyres were failing spectacularly, but this was because the teams were abusing them - running them in the wrong direction as the sidewall deformed differently at speed and helped to reduce the gap between the tyre wall and floor for an aerodynamic benefit.

    It all comes down to aerodynamics.

    A previous post asks whether aerodynamic devices have been used to "spoil" the air for a following car. Basically, the air which comes out behind a Formula 1 car is hot, and very, very turbulent, so no additional spoiling is needed. However, back in the days when they had BMW power and plenty of it, Williams introduced a sort of saw-tooth edged Gurney flap which attached to the trailing edge of their rear wing to introduce even more turbulence. Not surprisingly, it wasn't long before it was banned.
    Although no trees were harmed during the creation of this post, a large number of electrons were greatly inconvenienced.

  35. #835
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Leeds, West Yorkshire, UK
    Posts
    777
    I thought of an idea today. In nearly all other forms of motorsport including lower series of single seaters, you have 2 classes (or more).

    Perhaps in F1 you could have 2 classes as follows:
    1) Uncapped budget, as much testing as you like, and less restrictive rules on bodywork and engine so the top teams could innovate.
    2) Budget cap as currently proposed.

    If that was similar to this season, you would have Alonso winning the Tier 2 championship.

    The innovation from Tier 1 would filter down to the budget capped teams. Through staff changes and through openly using theory budget to purchase the IP of the best ideas.
    Tier 2 would get a different form of innovation i.e. the do more with less type of innovation.

  36. #836
    It would end up being like LaMans, how many laps would it take before the quicker class lapped the slower cars, on some circuits it could be dangerous.

  37. #837
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Mid Glamorgan
    Posts
    3,142
    Quote Originally Posted by adrianw View Post
    It would end up being like LaMans, how many laps would it take before the quicker class lapped the slower cars, on some circuits it could be dangerous.
    They do already. The top six lapped the rest of the grid yesterday.

  38. #838
    Quote Originally Posted by Backward point View Post
    ....Williams introduced a sort of saw-tooth edged Gurney flap which attached to the trailing edge of their rear wing to introduce even more turbulence. Not surprisingly, it wasn't long before it was banned.
    I wasn't aware of that. Very crafty.

    If anyone has a spare 10min this is a great video explaining the braking systems used on a modern F1 car.

    https://www.motorsport.com/f1/video/...raking-110624/

  39. #839
    Quote Originally Posted by jaytip View Post
    They do already. The top six lapped the rest of the grid yesterday.
    On some circuits it would be every few laps, what would happen at Monaco or Singapore?

  40. #840
    Quote Originally Posted by Backward point View Post
    A previous post asks whether aerodynamic devices have been used to "spoil" the air for a following car. Basically, the air which comes out behind a Formula 1 car is hot, and very, very turbulent, so no additional spoiling is needed. However, back in the days when they had BMW power and plenty of it, Williams introduced a sort of saw-tooth edged Gurney flap which attached to the trailing edge of their rear wing to introduce even more turbulence. Not surprisingly, it wasn't long before it was banned.
    In GT racing we spent time at Mira finding the optimum configuration for maximum downforce and minimum drag whilst dumping it on the car behind. Simon Macbeath did an article in Racecar engineering about how we did it.

  41. #841
    Quote Originally Posted by ViperStripes View Post
    I thought of an idea today. In nearly all other forms of motorsport including lower series of single seaters, you have 2 classes (or more).

    Perhaps in F1 you could have 2 classes as follows:
    1) Uncapped budget, as much testing as you like, and less restrictive rules on bodywork and engine so the top teams could innovate.
    2) Budget cap as currently proposed.

    If that was similar to this season, you would have Alonso winning the Tier 2 championship.

    The innovation from Tier 1 would filter down to the budget capped teams. Through staff changes and through openly using theory budget to purchase the IP of the best ideas.
    Tier 2 would get a different form of innovation i.e. the do more with less type of innovation.
    Dont think Alonso would be racing if it was in Tier 2, he already bemoaned the fact that he had a GP2 engine for a couple of seasons.

  42. #842
    Master
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Herts
    Posts
    1,218
    Tbh the cost cutting still doesn't work. No one can actually audit the spends apart from some visible things. The engines limit just causes daft penalties for drivers that no one likes. Testing limits mean any new suppliers or teams are handicapped from catching up. Pirelli only get limited testing to sort tires out. Wind tunnel testing limits probably mean Williams and McLaren, for instance, have no way to catch up this season. The big teams will still spend a fortune on design and computer simulation bring constant new updates that other teams can't. Etc etc. You can tell from the Renault powered teams that aero/car design does in fact have a big impact on performance rather than just engine and the big three no doubt have a massive spend there. I bet the new proposed engines still cost just as much money as the current ones, with the R&D being added in, the only difference being a reset that may let other engine suppliers catch Mercedes.

  43. #843
    ^^^^^

    You're spot on. Throw into the argument the fact that cost cutting can't equalise the existing infrastructure of the various teams, and you're starting with an uneven playing field. And as soon as a deadline is put in place for cost-capping and budget monitoring the "haves" will start a spending race the like of which has never been seen before to get as much kit in place before the cap comes into force.

    Wind tunnels, CFD and simulators have all become essential in all forms of professional motorsport. Monitoring their use won't be easy, although the FIA has supposedly introduced limits on wind tunnel usage and computing power, these are little more than gentlemen's agreements. Formula 1 is an exercise in profligacy, and it's a way of life. Ferrari, Mercedes, Renault and Honda all have infinite resources available to develop power units, and wind tunnels for developing road cars, and those used in other forms of competitions. How will the FIA prevent their respective F1 teams from using the parent company's facilities?

    Cost capping is a stick which the FIA likes to wave around occasionally. It's an empty threat.
    Last edited by Backward point; 13th June 2018 at 06:07.
    Although no trees were harmed during the creation of this post, a large number of electrons were greatly inconvenienced.

  44. #844
    Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Warwickshire
    Posts
    1,515
    [QUOTE=Backward point;4791492

    It all comes down to aerodynamics.

    A previous post asks whether aerodynamic devices have been used to "spoil" the air for a following car. Basically, the air which comes out behind a Formula 1 car is hot, and very, very turbulent, so no additional spoiling is needed. However, back in the days when they had BMW power and plenty of it, Williams introduced a sort of saw-tooth edged Gurney flap which attached to the trailing edge of their rear wing to introduce even more turbulence. Not surprisingly, it wasn't long before it was banned.[/QUOTE]

    Iíve often wondered if .todayís aerodynamics was designed to have a deliberate spoiler effect to disadvantage following cars. Thanks for the clarification.

  45. #845
    Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Warwickshire
    Posts
    1,515
    Quote Originally Posted by Backward point View Post

    It all comes down to aerodynamics.

    A previous post asks whether aerodynamic devices have been used to "spoil" the air for a following car. Basically, the air which comes out behind a Formula 1 car is hot, and very, very turbulent, so no additional spoiling is needed. However, back in the days when they had BMW power and plenty of it, Williams introduced a sort of saw-tooth edged Gurney flap which attached to the trailing edge of their rear wing to introduce even more turbulence. Not surprisingly, it wasn't long before it was banned.
    Iíve wondered, on more than one occaision whether modern aerodynamics had been developed with a view of disadvantaging a following car. Thanks for the clarification.

  46. #846
    Master
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Herts
    Posts
    1,218
    F1 Aero explained well





    Edit: Plus the slipstream behind the car. Which completes the picture. It is more that cars are designed to maximise their own airflow rather than adding in elements to further hinder people behind. It just naturally happens.

    Last edited by reecie; 13th June 2018 at 17:07.

  47. #847
    This intentional spoiling of airflow to the car behind isn't something that I've read about and it isn't spoken about on race weekends, it's certainly not something that's publicly spoken about anyway - does it really go on nowadays? Airflow is naturally disturbed and spoiled anyway, it wouldn't surprise me if teams try to figure out ways of sneakily creating more disruption than would otherwise be however it's very much on the QT if they are. If it's going on now wouldn't it be banned just as the aforementioned Williams Gurney flap was?

  48. #848
    Quote Originally Posted by CardShark View Post
    This intentional spoiling of airflow to the car behind isn't something that I've read about and it isn't spoken about on race weekends, it's certainly not something that's publicly spoken about anyway - does it really go on nowadays? Airflow is naturally disturbed and spoiled anyway, it wouldn't surprise me if teams try to figure out ways of sneakily creating more disruption than would otherwise be however it's very much on the QT if they are. If it's going on now wouldn't it be banned just as the aforementioned Williams Gurney flap was?
    Proving it would be the issue,

  49. #849
    Grand Master PickleB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    M25 J6 UK
    Posts
    12,480
    I've seen Le Mans mentioned in admiring tones, so I thought I'd post a link to 24 Hours at Le Mans...drawing attention to its mentions of funding and sponsorship. I've no dog in the fight or bone to pick with any series, but...'plus Áa change', as they say.

    Quote Originally Posted by PickleB View Post
    My apologies...I've only just realised that 24 Hours at Le Mans should carry a health warning...'Contains cigarette advertising.'

    Those were the days...
    Last edited by PickleB; 14th June 2018 at 21:33.

  50. #850
    If cigarette advertising means a lovely colour scheme such as the Rothmans tribute on a couple of the GT Porsches, long may it continue. They also have a couple of cars in the iconic "Pink Pig" scheme, and their pits have been decorated to resemble the old brick pits at the Nurburgring. You have to love Le Mans. They even have one current and several former Grand Prix drivers competing this year, including Jan Lammers, who is apparently competing in his 24th Le Mans. Thirty years ago he was awarded "Honorary Brit" status when he shared the winning TWR Jaguar with Andy Wallace and Johnny Dumfries.

    Back to the bubble that is Formula 1, and with no race this weekend the main subject of gossip is the driver-go-round for next season, and in a year when Honda appear to have made some real progress with their power unit, with the Toro Rosso cars showing up near the top of the speed trap figures, the power-unit-go-round as well.

    Drivers first, although the two factors are intertwined. Daniel Ricciardo appears to be a man in demand, although probably not by Ferrari or Mercedes. Which are probably the two teams which he would like to join, the obstacle in each case being the incumbent number one driver, neither Hamilton nor Vettel wanting to give up their preferred status. At the moment, Hamilton doesn't have a contract for 2019, because he hasn't signed one, although chances are that he will. And once he has, the door at Mercedes is likely to close, and the team will retain Valtteri Bottas.

    Ferrari at this stage will probably retain the services of Kimi Raikkonen, who has proven himself to be the ideal wingman for Vettel, although he needs to come out of the trap better in the second half of the season, having lost at least one place in just about every race this year before reaching Turn 1. Waiting in the wings, and proving that he's becoming the real deal with every race is Charles Leclerc, and it's only a question of time before he's slotted in to the second Ferrari.

    The current talk amongst those who are paid to know about these things is that Red Bull will announce a Honda engine deal at the Austrian Grand Prix, the race after next. The latest Honda upgrade introduced at Montreal is reckoned to be worth 0.2 - 0.3 of a second per lap, with improved reliability, and it would appear that the unhappy relationship between Red Bull and Renault will be terminated. The Honda deal also comes with a cash injection, which although Red Bull don't appear to be short of money, will no doubt be welcomed - the Red Bull energy drinks company were able to reduce their sponsorship payments to the team during 2012 and 2013 as they received so much from the FOM TV money payments, so the racing team may be less of a financial drain if it can support itself on more prize money and donations from Honda. Assuming that it can continue to run at the front with Honda power.

    Staying with power unit suppliers, there must be concern at Mercedes. Their two customer teams, Williams and Force India, each have their own problems which are diluting their efforts from the actual business of racing. Williams have fundamental problems with the design of their car, and Force India are believed to have financial issues, although to be fair, they've supposedly had financial issues for about the last three seasons, and continue to punch above their weight. Part of the problem for both teams is that even performing under par they're usually in the midfield, but this season there aren't any "bad" teams out there, so whereas in the past they were never likely to finish last in the Constructors' Championship and would therefore receive a share of the TV rights money, in 2018 they are being outperformed by the likes of Sauber, Toro Rosso and Haas. While Williams have Lance Stroll and Sergey Sirotkin paying the bills they may be able to continue (and don't forget that Bottas' move to Mercedes paid for their engine supply last season), unless a major sponsor appears before the end of this season things may be tight next year. Force India seem to be perpetually up for sale, but the team itself doesn't have much in the way of infrastructure, most major functions being outsourced. This may be attractive to a potential buyer, or make the team intrinsically worthless, with only its' FIA Grand Prix entry as a viable asset.

    As always with these matters, time will tell.
    Although no trees were harmed during the creation of this post, a large number of electrons were greatly inconvenienced.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •