The interesting thing about Brawn at Honda is how one person can make so much difference. How did he do it? He can't do it all himself by a long way. Presumably he recruited a few key people. In the end all he can do is allocate resources and take a direct technical interest in what he sees as the critical areas? Comments?
F1 2009
- Thread starter Freewheel
- Start date
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
Brawn is an excellent engineer and if the reports I read are accurate a good motivator.
But Honda have been working on the new chassis since the rule changes were announced. So it hasn't happened overnight.
I would not write off Mclaren a big improvement in the last race and there is a long way to go.
Once Ferrari stop doing the Italian thing running around flapping their collective hands I bet they will quickly be back on the pace also.
As you say Honda had prioritsed design of the 09 car over development of the 08. What I find puzzling is that the car must have been designed for the Honda engine package and yet they are using the Mercedes. Honda would have had the engines all ready to go so why didn't they give them to Brawn ( like the rest of the team) and so earn themselves some benefit from all that investment in the event of teams success?
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
Press release from Red Bull.
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD></TD></TR><TR><TD id=fet>BAHRAIN GRAND PRIXVIEW
<SMALL>21 April 2009 | 11:24pm</SMALL>
Tuesday, 21 April 2009
A couple of days after our one-two finish in China, we quizzed Red Bull Racing's chief technical officer, Adrian Newey on the significance of this maiden victory.
Adrian, a couple of days later, how does it feel?
AN: Waking up on a Monday morning with a one-two always puts a smile on your face.
The result is a great confidence boost for everyone at the factory - knowing we can put a
car on the grid that can finish first and second, and do so from the front, not inheriting the
result because of others having problems. It really is a great reward for all the hard work
put in, not just by ourselves, but also by Renault and all our other technical partners.
Where did you watch the race?
AN: I watched it in my kitchen at home, part of the time with my wife Marigold. But she
found it too stressful watching with me and went off to another room, later my daughter
joined me. Within a few minutes of the finish our neighbours came round and, despite the
early hour, we had a celebratory drink. It would have been nice to have been in China, but I'm just very pleased for everyone that we got the result we deserved.
With technical problems earlier in the weekend, were you worried the cars might not
get to the flag?
AN: We were reasonably confident that we'd fixed what appeared to be a problem with a
batch of drive shaft parts. But, you cannot take reliability for granted, so the last half hour
of the race seemed to last forever!
How has the RB5 evolved since the start of the season?
AN: We had an aero-update, consisting of a new diffuser and modified front wing for the
final pre-Melbourne test, which brought a reasonable step in performance. Then, for China we had further new parts that brought a small performance gain. In dry qualifying, we were behind the Brawns in Melbourne and Malaysia, but much closer in China, looking at fuel-corrected lap times. Our set-up in China was pretty similar to that in Malaysia, so the rest of the performance might be circuit specific, when you are looking at gaps of just a few tenths, as has been the case between McLaren and Ferrari for example in past years.
The China result came without a double-diffuser, so is this issue less important than people think?
AN: There is no doubt that a double-diffuser does give performance. How much performance depends on how you interpret the regulations and how you adapt it to suit
your own car, so that some teams will get more out of it than others. It is worth doing for
everyone on the grid. Our challenge is to adapt one to work on our car.
When will the RB5 appear with a double diffuser?
AN: As has been speculated, given the design of RB5, it's not the easiest task getting it to
fit the car and while we work on this one item, we also need to keep working on the general development of the car, to ensure we don't fall behind in other areas. The unique
feature of the Red Bull cars is the pullrod rear suspension, which is a good solution when
you don't have a double-diffuser. But getting it to work with the diffuser will be more difficult. We won't have a double-diffuser before Monaco.
Looking at the first three races, what has struck you about them?
AN: The most obvious change is just how different the grid order is compared to the last few seasons. The big teams like Ferrari, BMW and McLaren are currently on the back foot, but they won't stay there of course. I think that's refreshing and healthy for Formula One. It creates more interest, seeing different teams and drivers at the front.
If this weekend in Bahrain is completely dry, can we expect to see the current series
leaders back out in front?
AN: It's difficult to know, as circuit specific advantages come into play. From our point of view, we don't really know yet what the different strengths and weaknesses of our own car are, compared to those of our competitors at individual tracks.
You mentioned the big teams will fight back. With their greater resources, do you expect them to come steaming past you?
AN: I hope not! With a big regulation change like this, it is an opportunity for teams that have fewer resources, but are intelligent in the way they think about the implication of the
regulations and how to implement them, to come up with clever design and a good car. When the regulations are stable for a while then teams with more resources have a greater ability to evaluate more options and so have an advantage. That's not to say a smaller team couldn't keep its advantage and rules for the future are aimed at restricting development still further in order to reduce the 'arms race' that has characterised F1 over the past few years.
How does this win compare to other significant victories in your career?
AN: The first point to make is that this is not our first win, Red Bull Technology had a winning car design last year, operated very well by Scuderia Toro Rosso to win in Monza. Emotionally, for everyone here in Milton Keynes, it's been extremely pleasing. I was already very excited and happy after Monza last year and this one in China was special because we managed to get a one-two finish and do pretty much the same in qualifying. The other element that makes this win special is that there's been a big regulation change and we have shown that, as a team we have understood that set of rule changes, producing a car that is reasonably well adapted to them right from the start. It makes it extremely satisfying because, with the new rules, we have been working on our own as a group for almost nine months, without really knowing what other teams are doing and not knowing where your product is going to rate when compared to them, as all the reference points and base lines have changed.
But now you have to rethink the design of RB5 to take into account the Paris decision
about the diffuser. Do you feel it's a shame you have to take a metaphorical hacksaw to
your original concept for the car?
AN: It will certainly involve a lot of work! The challenge now is to try and integrate the new diffuser into the rest of the car. But I don't regard it as a shame, I see it as another challenge. Unfortunately, it will involve some more late nights! That's Formula One: you can't afford to sit around and feel sorry for yourself, you just have to get on with it.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD></TD></TR><TR><TD id=fet>BAHRAIN GRAND PRIXVIEW
<SMALL>21 April 2009 | 11:24pm</SMALL>
Tuesday, 21 April 2009
A couple of days after our one-two finish in China, we quizzed Red Bull Racing's chief technical officer, Adrian Newey on the significance of this maiden victory.
Adrian, a couple of days later, how does it feel?
AN: Waking up on a Monday morning with a one-two always puts a smile on your face.
The result is a great confidence boost for everyone at the factory - knowing we can put a
car on the grid that can finish first and second, and do so from the front, not inheriting the
result because of others having problems. It really is a great reward for all the hard work
put in, not just by ourselves, but also by Renault and all our other technical partners.
Where did you watch the race?
AN: I watched it in my kitchen at home, part of the time with my wife Marigold. But she
found it too stressful watching with me and went off to another room, later my daughter
joined me. Within a few minutes of the finish our neighbours came round and, despite the
early hour, we had a celebratory drink. It would have been nice to have been in China, but I'm just very pleased for everyone that we got the result we deserved.
With technical problems earlier in the weekend, were you worried the cars might not
get to the flag?
AN: We were reasonably confident that we'd fixed what appeared to be a problem with a
batch of drive shaft parts. But, you cannot take reliability for granted, so the last half hour
of the race seemed to last forever!
How has the RB5 evolved since the start of the season?
AN: We had an aero-update, consisting of a new diffuser and modified front wing for the
final pre-Melbourne test, which brought a reasonable step in performance. Then, for China we had further new parts that brought a small performance gain. In dry qualifying, we were behind the Brawns in Melbourne and Malaysia, but much closer in China, looking at fuel-corrected lap times. Our set-up in China was pretty similar to that in Malaysia, so the rest of the performance might be circuit specific, when you are looking at gaps of just a few tenths, as has been the case between McLaren and Ferrari for example in past years.
The China result came without a double-diffuser, so is this issue less important than people think?
AN: There is no doubt that a double-diffuser does give performance. How much performance depends on how you interpret the regulations and how you adapt it to suit
your own car, so that some teams will get more out of it than others. It is worth doing for
everyone on the grid. Our challenge is to adapt one to work on our car.
When will the RB5 appear with a double diffuser?
AN: As has been speculated, given the design of RB5, it's not the easiest task getting it to
fit the car and while we work on this one item, we also need to keep working on the general development of the car, to ensure we don't fall behind in other areas. The unique
feature of the Red Bull cars is the pullrod rear suspension, which is a good solution when
you don't have a double-diffuser. But getting it to work with the diffuser will be more difficult. We won't have a double-diffuser before Monaco.
Looking at the first three races, what has struck you about them?
AN: The most obvious change is just how different the grid order is compared to the last few seasons. The big teams like Ferrari, BMW and McLaren are currently on the back foot, but they won't stay there of course. I think that's refreshing and healthy for Formula One. It creates more interest, seeing different teams and drivers at the front.
If this weekend in Bahrain is completely dry, can we expect to see the current series
leaders back out in front?
AN: It's difficult to know, as circuit specific advantages come into play. From our point of view, we don't really know yet what the different strengths and weaknesses of our own car are, compared to those of our competitors at individual tracks.
You mentioned the big teams will fight back. With their greater resources, do you expect them to come steaming past you?
AN: I hope not! With a big regulation change like this, it is an opportunity for teams that have fewer resources, but are intelligent in the way they think about the implication of the
regulations and how to implement them, to come up with clever design and a good car. When the regulations are stable for a while then teams with more resources have a greater ability to evaluate more options and so have an advantage. That's not to say a smaller team couldn't keep its advantage and rules for the future are aimed at restricting development still further in order to reduce the 'arms race' that has characterised F1 over the past few years.
How does this win compare to other significant victories in your career?
AN: The first point to make is that this is not our first win, Red Bull Technology had a winning car design last year, operated very well by Scuderia Toro Rosso to win in Monza. Emotionally, for everyone here in Milton Keynes, it's been extremely pleasing. I was already very excited and happy after Monza last year and this one in China was special because we managed to get a one-two finish and do pretty much the same in qualifying. The other element that makes this win special is that there's been a big regulation change and we have shown that, as a team we have understood that set of rule changes, producing a car that is reasonably well adapted to them right from the start. It makes it extremely satisfying because, with the new rules, we have been working on our own as a group for almost nine months, without really knowing what other teams are doing and not knowing where your product is going to rate when compared to them, as all the reference points and base lines have changed.
But now you have to rethink the design of RB5 to take into account the Paris decision
about the diffuser. Do you feel it's a shame you have to take a metaphorical hacksaw to
your original concept for the car?
AN: It will certainly involve a lot of work! The challenge now is to try and integrate the new diffuser into the rest of the car. But I don't regard it as a shame, I see it as another challenge. Unfortunately, it will involve some more late nights! That's Formula One: you can't afford to sit around and feel sorry for yourself, you just have to get on with it.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
RED BULL CONSIDERING MERCEDES ENGINES
<HR style="COLOR: #666666; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #666666" SIZE=1><!-- / icon and title --><!-- message -->FROM AUTOSPORT:
Red Bull Racing team principal Christian Horner is in no rush to extend the team's race-winning partnership with Renault into 2010, as it weighs up an engine deal with Mercedes for next season.
Despite claiming a 1-2 victory in the Chinese Grand Prix, this week's AUTOSPORT magazine exclusively reveals that the team is understood to be well down the line in negotiations with Mercedes, despite not having ruled out continuing with Renault.
"It's way too early to be talking about engines for next year," Horner told AUTOSPORT. "Hopefully Renault will still be around. The engine is performing well and, having been permitted the equalisation adjustments at the end of last year, I think it is comparable with the other engines in F1.
"You've probably still got Mercedes as the strongest engine, but I don't think the Renault gives anything away to its rivals."
Mercedes has ruled out supplying more than three teams with engines, and with a firm commitment to both works team McLaren and Force India, Red Bull would have to replace Brawn GP as the German manufacturer's second customer.
Horner added that there is no rush to finalise its engine supplier, as it is possible to modify a car design for an alternative engine at relatively short notice.
"As Ross Brawn has proved, you can change engines at the last minute - they're such simplistic blocks these days," said Horner.
For an in-depth analysis of why Red Bull Racing is keen on Mercedes engines.Ends.
Hmmmm, could this be the first hint of Renault quitting in 2010?
<HR style="COLOR: #666666; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #666666" SIZE=1><!-- / icon and title --><!-- message -->FROM AUTOSPORT:
Red Bull Racing team principal Christian Horner is in no rush to extend the team's race-winning partnership with Renault into 2010, as it weighs up an engine deal with Mercedes for next season.
Despite claiming a 1-2 victory in the Chinese Grand Prix, this week's AUTOSPORT magazine exclusively reveals that the team is understood to be well down the line in negotiations with Mercedes, despite not having ruled out continuing with Renault.
"It's way too early to be talking about engines for next year," Horner told AUTOSPORT. "Hopefully Renault will still be around. The engine is performing well and, having been permitted the equalisation adjustments at the end of last year, I think it is comparable with the other engines in F1.
"You've probably still got Mercedes as the strongest engine, but I don't think the Renault gives anything away to its rivals."
Mercedes has ruled out supplying more than three teams with engines, and with a firm commitment to both works team McLaren and Force India, Red Bull would have to replace Brawn GP as the German manufacturer's second customer.
Horner added that there is no rush to finalise its engine supplier, as it is possible to modify a car design for an alternative engine at relatively short notice.
"As Ross Brawn has proved, you can change engines at the last minute - they're such simplistic blocks these days," said Horner.
For an in-depth analysis of why Red Bull Racing is keen on Mercedes engines.Ends.
Hmmmm, could this be the first hint of Renault quitting in 2010?
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
LUCA di MONTEZEMELO Interview 4/26 At Bahrain
<HR style="COLOR: #666666; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #666666" SIZE=1><!-- / icon and title --><!-- message -->Q. What is your explanation for the start of the season and the difficult situation Ferrari finds itself in?
Luca di Montezemolo: Listen. First of all it is not so easy. I was thinking this morning in my car coming here from the airport that my first race as Ferrari team manager was at Silverstone in 1973. You were too young!
Jody Scheckter was in the middle of a big crash and Jackie Stewart was in the lead. At that time, at that race, Ferrari started with Jacky Ickx in 16th and Arturo Merzario 18th. So in my life, I've seen a lot of difficult moments. This is part of competition, this is part of sport.
We have won eight world championships in the past 10 years. In the last two years we won three titles out of four, and we lost the other one at the last curve, of the last lap of the last race. So we have to look ahead.
But to answer to your question - I want to understand why we are there. Why we are in the middle of a black tunnel. And the main reasons are three.
Number one, we have seen very bad written rules. They are what I call grey rules, with different interpretations. And if teams that have won the last three world championships, like Renault, McLaren and Ferrari, an important team and car manufacturer like BMW and even Red Bull, have done one interpretation, it means that at least the rules are not clear. So very unclear rules means different interpretations, means different cars in the field.
Second, is KERS. KERS represents a lot of money. It represents something that has been introduced to have a link between Formula 1 and advanced research for road cars in terms of energy, and in terms of green [technology] and in terms of innovation as I like. And we have done immediately the KERS, even if KERS means a lot of money, it means a problem with the safety, it means reliability and it means to project a completely different car – as McLaren has done and as a lot of other teams have done.
But we have been surprised to see KERS was just a suggestion, not a real world. And today we are facing a very strange and in my opinion not positive situation. We have three different F1 on the grid – we have F1 competition cars with KERS, F1 competition between cars with no KERS and a different floor, and third competitors with no KERS and no floor. I think this is bad, and it is one of the reasons why unfortunately we are not competitive and we are forced to invest time, and extra money in such a difficult moment, to do a heavy modification to our car.
The other reason is that we have started to work in a hard way to the new car late. And this was a pity, particularly in a year in which the rules have been completely new. It is not, in other words, an evolution of last year's car, and this is a second reason why we have not been competitive.
And the last reason is that I feel inside the team there has been a little bit too much of a presumptuous approach. Sometimes to put the head down in the ground is useful to looking ahead, but I must say that sometimes having your whole head, feet, everything in the ground, even more underground, is better. So I think these are the main reasons.
We are working hard and I have a big confidence in my team. I am sure that we will go back very soon – not immediately, but very soon.
Q. You are a patient man – but how long can you be patient before something has to change in the team?
LdM: Of course I am totally unhappy, but stability of the team and confidence of the team for me since 1992 was my main goal and I will continue. This team is exactly the same team that was very close, crossed the line not 20 years ago but a few months ago winning the championship, so there is no problem.
When I know the reason I am confident, and when I don't know the reason I am worried. I know the reason, my people know the reason – and they are fully committed, so I am very confident. But then I am very upset for other reasons that are nothing to do with the team.
Q. What has the present situation done for unity within FOTA?
LdM: Well, I think that unity of FOTA is crucial. I think it is very good and we will have a meeting in London on May 6 to discuss. I call your attention to the fact that we are at the end of April and we don't know exactly next year's rules. For me, for us, stability is important to maintain costs down because we have done so many changes in the last year, so we need stability for the future.
Some teams have taken the opportunity of very badly written rules for an interpretation. Somebody asked for a different interpretation, but it doesn't mean that we are all together.
And until I will spend time, not for so long because I have too many things to do, as FOTA I will try and have all the teams together. This is very important, particularly in these difficult moments.
Q. There has been discussions and confusion about Michael Schumacher's position in the team. Can you clarify that please?
LdM: To be honest, I am sorry. This was a little bit invented by the press, because Michael's position is very clear since the beginning. When Michael stopped, I told him – do you want to become a manager? Do you want to be for one year on the right arm of Jean Todt and then replace Jean Todt? Yes or No? No!
I am sorry because I think Michael has got a good mentality, but I understand that his life is different. So we said to him, why don't you come sometimes to the races, but his main engagement was to work on the development of road cars – Scuderia California he has done a lot of work, with very good relations and team spirit with our technicians.
He came last year to a few races, and he came at the beginning of the season – and he will come back. But he has no responsible role within the team because he has no time to be present in Maranello.
Having said that, Michael is part of our family. Michael is part of our history. Michael is in very good relations to Domenicali and he will continue to give ideas and suggestions as a consultant – no more and no less.
Q. What were your feelings when watching the Australian Grand Prix and seeing the Brawn cars leading. Were you proud because Ross came from Ferrari, or disappointed with what your team did?
LdM: Well, first of all I like Ross very much because he has been in our family in very important years, giving a very important contribution. Then I have seen a Honda car with the Brawn name, of a car manufacturer Honda that has invested a huge amount of money in two wind-tunnels – deciding at the beginning of the [2008] season to concentrate very early on a completely new car, and then decided at the end of the year to stop. But this is a Honda – with one of the biggest budgets to prepare this car in F1 – with a different name and with a very good car. And, with an interpretation of the rules that is different from other teams.
In my opinion, this was mainly due to this grey area of the rules and the demonstration is that important teams have done a completely different interpretation – so at least the rules have been very badly written. I don't want to make any comments about the result of the appeal because I don't like to make comments – this is a Ferrari attitude since forever, at least in the public.
Q. You were talking about the presumptions at Ferrari. What do you believe was the effect of that?
LdM: Well, there is sometimes when you win too much you think you are the best. I want a different attitude, and some time to have this approach is useful, particularly when you have fantastic people like we have in Ferrari.
Some time we think that maintaining the top is easy. But we have done 10 years, showing that we are able to maintain the top. Except for 2005 where we were not competitive, we won or lost the championship at the last race. This year the main reason was that if we approached the rules in a different way, without KERS, and with a different floor, then today we will talk about a different Ferrari.
Q. Max Mosley has asked for some input from teams about a budget cap. What do you think about that?
LdM: Let me put it in a different way. We are in F1 since 1950 – without stopping or going up and down. We have been there.
We race and we continue to race in F1 for three historic reasons since the beginning. Competition is part of the Ferrari brand. It is part of our plot. We started as a team and then we became a car manufacturer...We have won and raced everywhere in the world in prototypes, except in go karts.
Second, we want advanced research. We want F1 as a technologically competitive series, where there is competition, in which we can develop gearboxes, engines, electronics – why not KERS? And then transfer it in our road cars.
And third, we compete in Formula 1 because F1 is extreme competition. We rather prefer to have even shorter races in which there is really competition between drivers, between technology, between teams, between cars, between technicians. And we want to maintain, for what we can do, F1 at this level. This is why we have been against the standard engine and things like this.
I personally have a lot of passion. Ferrari has a lot of passion, but this is not an endless story. So we will see.
My attitude, and I think this is important. Stability, credibility of governance of F1 – I think we have and we need a strong political authority. I am a legalist – we need a strong political authority.
As a regulator, we need clear rules. We need teams that are very close to each other outside the track, and with competition between them on the track. And we need a modern, efficient company for the commercial [rights] holder.
Having said that, I don't like to do polemics. I don't like to answer – particularly when I disagree. This is my approach with Ferrari – whenever we decide to talk, we will talk once and not many times looking ahead. I don't want to do polemics at all. We don't need it, F1 doesn't need it. F1 is facing difficult moments but the direction of teams to reduce costs has been fantastic.
<HR style="COLOR: #666666; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #666666" SIZE=1><!-- / icon and title --><!-- message -->Q. What is your explanation for the start of the season and the difficult situation Ferrari finds itself in?
Luca di Montezemolo: Listen. First of all it is not so easy. I was thinking this morning in my car coming here from the airport that my first race as Ferrari team manager was at Silverstone in 1973. You were too young!
Jody Scheckter was in the middle of a big crash and Jackie Stewart was in the lead. At that time, at that race, Ferrari started with Jacky Ickx in 16th and Arturo Merzario 18th. So in my life, I've seen a lot of difficult moments. This is part of competition, this is part of sport.
We have won eight world championships in the past 10 years. In the last two years we won three titles out of four, and we lost the other one at the last curve, of the last lap of the last race. So we have to look ahead.
But to answer to your question - I want to understand why we are there. Why we are in the middle of a black tunnel. And the main reasons are three.
Number one, we have seen very bad written rules. They are what I call grey rules, with different interpretations. And if teams that have won the last three world championships, like Renault, McLaren and Ferrari, an important team and car manufacturer like BMW and even Red Bull, have done one interpretation, it means that at least the rules are not clear. So very unclear rules means different interpretations, means different cars in the field.
Second, is KERS. KERS represents a lot of money. It represents something that has been introduced to have a link between Formula 1 and advanced research for road cars in terms of energy, and in terms of green [technology] and in terms of innovation as I like. And we have done immediately the KERS, even if KERS means a lot of money, it means a problem with the safety, it means reliability and it means to project a completely different car – as McLaren has done and as a lot of other teams have done.
But we have been surprised to see KERS was just a suggestion, not a real world. And today we are facing a very strange and in my opinion not positive situation. We have three different F1 on the grid – we have F1 competition cars with KERS, F1 competition between cars with no KERS and a different floor, and third competitors with no KERS and no floor. I think this is bad, and it is one of the reasons why unfortunately we are not competitive and we are forced to invest time, and extra money in such a difficult moment, to do a heavy modification to our car.
The other reason is that we have started to work in a hard way to the new car late. And this was a pity, particularly in a year in which the rules have been completely new. It is not, in other words, an evolution of last year's car, and this is a second reason why we have not been competitive.
And the last reason is that I feel inside the team there has been a little bit too much of a presumptuous approach. Sometimes to put the head down in the ground is useful to looking ahead, but I must say that sometimes having your whole head, feet, everything in the ground, even more underground, is better. So I think these are the main reasons.
We are working hard and I have a big confidence in my team. I am sure that we will go back very soon – not immediately, but very soon.
Q. You are a patient man – but how long can you be patient before something has to change in the team?
LdM: Of course I am totally unhappy, but stability of the team and confidence of the team for me since 1992 was my main goal and I will continue. This team is exactly the same team that was very close, crossed the line not 20 years ago but a few months ago winning the championship, so there is no problem.
When I know the reason I am confident, and when I don't know the reason I am worried. I know the reason, my people know the reason – and they are fully committed, so I am very confident. But then I am very upset for other reasons that are nothing to do with the team.
Q. What has the present situation done for unity within FOTA?
LdM: Well, I think that unity of FOTA is crucial. I think it is very good and we will have a meeting in London on May 6 to discuss. I call your attention to the fact that we are at the end of April and we don't know exactly next year's rules. For me, for us, stability is important to maintain costs down because we have done so many changes in the last year, so we need stability for the future.
Some teams have taken the opportunity of very badly written rules for an interpretation. Somebody asked for a different interpretation, but it doesn't mean that we are all together.
And until I will spend time, not for so long because I have too many things to do, as FOTA I will try and have all the teams together. This is very important, particularly in these difficult moments.
Q. There has been discussions and confusion about Michael Schumacher's position in the team. Can you clarify that please?
LdM: To be honest, I am sorry. This was a little bit invented by the press, because Michael's position is very clear since the beginning. When Michael stopped, I told him – do you want to become a manager? Do you want to be for one year on the right arm of Jean Todt and then replace Jean Todt? Yes or No? No!
I am sorry because I think Michael has got a good mentality, but I understand that his life is different. So we said to him, why don't you come sometimes to the races, but his main engagement was to work on the development of road cars – Scuderia California he has done a lot of work, with very good relations and team spirit with our technicians.
He came last year to a few races, and he came at the beginning of the season – and he will come back. But he has no responsible role within the team because he has no time to be present in Maranello.
Having said that, Michael is part of our family. Michael is part of our history. Michael is in very good relations to Domenicali and he will continue to give ideas and suggestions as a consultant – no more and no less.
Q. What were your feelings when watching the Australian Grand Prix and seeing the Brawn cars leading. Were you proud because Ross came from Ferrari, or disappointed with what your team did?
LdM: Well, first of all I like Ross very much because he has been in our family in very important years, giving a very important contribution. Then I have seen a Honda car with the Brawn name, of a car manufacturer Honda that has invested a huge amount of money in two wind-tunnels – deciding at the beginning of the [2008] season to concentrate very early on a completely new car, and then decided at the end of the year to stop. But this is a Honda – with one of the biggest budgets to prepare this car in F1 – with a different name and with a very good car. And, with an interpretation of the rules that is different from other teams.
In my opinion, this was mainly due to this grey area of the rules and the demonstration is that important teams have done a completely different interpretation – so at least the rules have been very badly written. I don't want to make any comments about the result of the appeal because I don't like to make comments – this is a Ferrari attitude since forever, at least in the public.
Q. You were talking about the presumptions at Ferrari. What do you believe was the effect of that?
LdM: Well, there is sometimes when you win too much you think you are the best. I want a different attitude, and some time to have this approach is useful, particularly when you have fantastic people like we have in Ferrari.
Some time we think that maintaining the top is easy. But we have done 10 years, showing that we are able to maintain the top. Except for 2005 where we were not competitive, we won or lost the championship at the last race. This year the main reason was that if we approached the rules in a different way, without KERS, and with a different floor, then today we will talk about a different Ferrari.
Q. Max Mosley has asked for some input from teams about a budget cap. What do you think about that?
LdM: Let me put it in a different way. We are in F1 since 1950 – without stopping or going up and down. We have been there.
We race and we continue to race in F1 for three historic reasons since the beginning. Competition is part of the Ferrari brand. It is part of our plot. We started as a team and then we became a car manufacturer...We have won and raced everywhere in the world in prototypes, except in go karts.
Second, we want advanced research. We want F1 as a technologically competitive series, where there is competition, in which we can develop gearboxes, engines, electronics – why not KERS? And then transfer it in our road cars.
And third, we compete in Formula 1 because F1 is extreme competition. We rather prefer to have even shorter races in which there is really competition between drivers, between technology, between teams, between cars, between technicians. And we want to maintain, for what we can do, F1 at this level. This is why we have been against the standard engine and things like this.
I personally have a lot of passion. Ferrari has a lot of passion, but this is not an endless story. So we will see.
My attitude, and I think this is important. Stability, credibility of governance of F1 – I think we have and we need a strong political authority. I am a legalist – we need a strong political authority.
As a regulator, we need clear rules. We need teams that are very close to each other outside the track, and with competition between them on the track. And we need a modern, efficient company for the commercial [rights] holder.
Having said that, I don't like to do polemics. I don't like to answer – particularly when I disagree. This is my approach with Ferrari – whenever we decide to talk, we will talk once and not many times looking ahead. I don't want to do polemics at all. We don't need it, F1 doesn't need it. F1 is facing difficult moments but the direction of teams to reduce costs has been fantastic.
From Pistonheads:
MERC TO LEAVE F1 OVER ‘LEWIS-GATE’?
Merc’s boss says big FIA penalty could threaten engine deal
With McLaren under continued pressure from the FIA over its allegedly dishonest response to a stewards' inquiry at the Australian GP last month, Mercedes and other McLaren partners are reportedly considering their positions with the team.
The FIA meets on Wednesday to consider charges that McLaren has brought the sport into disrepute. A range of draconian penalties could follow the proceedings, including possible exclusion from the 2009 championship or race bans.
Mercedes boss Dieter Zetsche is quoted in the German media today, saying the firm could pull out of its engine supply deal with McLaren following the FIA’s decision.
‘If circumstances change, perhaps because of an unreasonable punishment by the FIA, it is possible that we could consider our engagement,’ he told Focus magazine.
Zetsche’s veiled threat could be politicking designed to help mitigate the perceived threat of FIA sanctions, but separate reports suggest McLaren’s other sponsors are viewing the possible outcome of Wednesday’s meeting with trepidation, too.
David Morton
Lifetime Supporter
McLaren got away with the lying. The FIA just showed what toothless wankers they really are because Mercedes threatened to throw their toys out of the pram if
McLaren got a real spanking.
What message does this send out to anyone in motorsport or sport in general?
But we all know F1 is anything but a sport..................
McLaren got a real spanking.
What message does this send out to anyone in motorsport or sport in general?
But we all know F1 is anything but a sport..................
I dont know, Dave, I think its a pretty nasty result for Macs, they will be afraid to sneeze, let alone race, without fear of further reprisals. They will be suffocated for the rest of this year unless they are daft enough to think they are above redress.
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
Hmmm, they got off with a suspended spanking....Same as Max really:stunned:
David Morton
Lifetime Supporter
Oh dear,
Rubens has the hump over team orders.
Rubens has the hump over team orders.
Ummm.... it was a difficult strategy to make work, it really did envolve old Rube giving it everything and more... kind of gave Jensen an easier time too... you have to be some kind of machine to make a 3 stopper work.
Or is this a different order i'm as yet unaware of???
You've got to feel a bit for Rubens he's had a hell of a career, but never really shined... He's always played the sidekick role.
Racing drivers ALWAYS have a reason why it 'aint there fault that a team mate is consistently quicker over a race distance, guess it's part of human nature in a competitive situation. This is often true of the "one lap" qualifying specialists like Fizzy or Trulli.
David, I seem to remember you giving us the heads up on just how good Vettel was some time back. Looking at the in car shots his car control is immense. He seems to be able to drive smooth and quick and then take the the thing up a notch by wringing its neck right on the extreme edge of control. Stunning............Senna like?????.....
John
David, I seem to remember you giving us the heads up on just how good Vettel was some time back. Looking at the in car shots his car control is immense. He seems to be able to drive smooth and quick and then take the the thing up a notch by wringing its neck right on the extreme edge of control. Stunning............Senna like?????.....
John
Well of course, Brawn favouring Button as you would expect deliberately gave Ruby B a bad set of tyres so he had no chance of matching JB's pace...:laugh:
Seems to me he didn't try hard enough and has a very short memory. If it wasn't for the likes of Mr Brawn & co, Mr Barichello would now be doing a spot of gardening instead...
Ross Brawn pulled this stunt several times with Ferrari and got Schumacher up front from an unfavoured position, leaving people bewildered (including Rubens) and saying "HTF did he manage that?"
Man's a genius..
Seems to me he didn't try hard enough and has a very short memory. If it wasn't for the likes of Mr Brawn & co, Mr Barichello would now be doing a spot of gardening instead...
Ross Brawn pulled this stunt several times with Ferrari and got Schumacher up front from an unfavoured position, leaving people bewildered (including Rubens) and saying "HTF did he manage that?"
Man's a genius..
Pat Buckley
GT40s Supporter
During the race Button (while running 2nd to Barichello) was heard telling Barichello that he needed to pick up the pace.
David Morton
Lifetime Supporter
Hi John,
Yes - Vettel will be No 1 in the very near future no matter which way they rig the point scoring system next season. During the last visit for me at Monza (Vettels first Monza in F1) his dad parked his camper adjacent to my rig and I got a small insight of the Vettels.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com<img src=" /><o
></o>
Vettel (the younger) came on a scooter to see them (for dinner I think) and he looked as though he was still in junior school. He was in mufti and no-one recognized him. His dad was adamant he would personally remain anonymous and was actually paying for his own tickets. He did not go near the box (garage, pits). A really pleasant and none precocious family unit and I hope they are still the same. I'm sure with his attitude, he could easily sweep every title in motorsport he chooses to drive in. <o></o>
Dave M<o></o>
Yes - Vettel will be No 1 in the very near future no matter which way they rig the point scoring system next season. During the last visit for me at Monza (Vettels first Monza in F1) his dad parked his camper adjacent to my rig and I got a small insight of the Vettels.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com<img src=" /><o
></o>Vettel (the younger) came on a scooter to see them (for dinner I think) and he looked as though he was still in junior school. He was in mufti and no-one recognized him. His dad was adamant he would personally remain anonymous and was actually paying for his own tickets. He did not go near the box (garage, pits). A really pleasant and none precocious family unit and I hope they are still the same. I'm sure with his attitude, he could easily sweep every title in motorsport he chooses to drive in. <o
></o>Dave M<o
></o>
Similar threads
