I am currently reassessing my online activities. I am not currently updating this blog, but you can still view the archive.

Archive: 2009 March

Car numbers: A message to Räikkönen?

24 March 2009 18:01

Categories: News, Opinion

The FIA published the final entry list for the 2009 season which contained a few changes to the previous versions.

The change that grabbed the headlines (okay, created a tiny ripple) was the fact that Brawn have been assigned car numbers 20 and 21. The FIA have decided that Brawn is technically a new entrant, seemingly because Honda had a commercial agreement that it would participate in F1 as Honda.

Force India moved up the grid as a result and have been assigned numbers 18 and 19. The two Toro Rosso drivers, Sébastien Bourdais and Sébastien Buemi have swapped numbers so that the more experienced of the two has the lower number — an uncontroversial practice.

But I am fascinated that Ferrari have seen fit to swap the car numbers of their two drivers. Team can allocate their numbers in whatever way they see fit (with the exception of number 1). But clearly Ferrari have made a conscious decision to demote Räikkönen.

For his entire Ferrari career, Felipe Massa has been the “second” driver, at least as far as car numbers go. This is also reflected in his pay packet, which is allegedly significantly lower than Kimi Räikkönen’s.

This year it’s different. Räikkönen’s contract may ensure that he still gets paid the megabucks. But this year he will have to race in the number 4 car, while Massa takes number 3.

It might seem like a small thing, and in a way it is. But it’s very interesting that earlier entry lists had the drivers swapped around with Kimi as driver number 3 and Massa as number 4. This means that at some point over the winter, Ferrari have made the decision to officially make Räikkönen the number two driver, at least as far as the FIA entry list goes.

The entry list was published on the same day as Ferrari boss Stefano Domenicali gave an interview to La Gazzetta dello Sport which James Allen analysed:

You don’t need to be a genius at reading between the lines to get what Domenicali is saying here. A repeat of last year’s performance would signal the end of Kimi at Ferrari.

Is the number swap another subtle hint from the Ferrari team that Räikkönen must improve or else?

7 comments

2009 F1 season preview: Part 2

23 March 2009 17:10

Categories: Opinion

Continuing my look at how I think the teams line up going into the new season.

5. McLaren-Mercedes

There has been lots of speculation over McLaren’s position throughout the winter. In the past month or so it has emerged that McLaren appear to have major problems finding grip at the rear. The McLaren has scarcely been able to set a semi-respectable time all winter, and ended up doing loads of straight line testing with yellow paint smeared all over the car in an attempt to understand the airflow.

In the cynical world of F1, many observers pointed out that this could just be the ultimate form of sandbagging. James Allen alerted us to the theory that McLaren are simply approaching testing in a different way as a result of the new testing restrictions. Yet more (such as Mr C on Sidepodcast) suggest that it may be a publicity start.

I don’t buy any of it. Sandbagging is all very well, but they have to turn up the wick at some point to make sure that everything behaves as expected at full speed. And I doubt it’s a publicity stunt, because I can’t imagine that Vodafone are too pleased about having their logo smeared with yellow day-glo goo in quite a high-profile way.

It’s worth remembering that McLaren have produced a dud of a car before in recent years — the MP4-18, which was so bad it never raced, and its offspring the MP4-19. Mind you, these problems were largely down to reliability rather than aerodynamic issues. That year, McLaren still managed to win a race.

My guess is that if McLaren manage to find a fix for their aerodynamic problems, they will turn out to have a decent season. But it will have proved a distraction, having used up resources and time which could have been spent on improving the car rather than fixing it.

4. Brawn-Mercedes

Brawn have been the surprise of the off-season. After a troubled winter which saw the team put up for sale without warning, and a protracted rescue, the team looked set to have a poor season. Yet the Brawn has easily been the most impressive of the cars, setting blistering times during practice.

It could all be an attempt to attract attention and gain sponsors. But the team is still getting a nice amount of funding from Honda. Also, Mercedes said they wouldn’t supply an engine until funding was fully in place, so presumably it is in place. I’m sure Brawn wouldn’t say no to a bit of extra funding though.

In a way, it makes sense that the Brawn is a fast car. Let’s not forget that Honda basically gave up on 2008 in order to focus on 2009. Before the team was put up for sale, I thought Honda were going to be the team to watch in 2009. Expectations only dropped after the tumultuous events of the winter.

Of course, this is irrational because it is still the same car. Only the engine is different. While this would normally lead to reliability problems, the Brawn car has been surprisingly reliable during testing. Whether or not you think Brawn were running light during the test sessions, the reliability of the car cannot be denied. Indeed, it may be the fact that Brawn are actually in a better position. Judging by Jenson Button’s comments, the Mercedes engine has more grunt that Honda’s.

My gut feeling is that Brawn will be in contention to win a few races, particularly at the start of the season. They may not have the resources to develop the car as intensively as other teams throughout the season, so their performance may drop off later on in the season.

3. Toyota

Immediately after Toyota’s launch, I pooh-poohed their chances. But their testing form seems remarkably solid. The TF109 has been among the fastest cars, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see Toyota win a race or two. But there is still something inside me that refuses to see them as genuine championship contenders.

2. BMW

This is an important year for BMW. For many, they unforgivably gave up on the championship battle last season. A certain Polish driver was particularly peeved. If BMW don’t perform really well this season, history will view their 2008 strategy as a mistake.

Fortunately for BMW, their pre-season form seems pretty solid. They have done nothing spectacular, but this is part of the BMW way. Last year they seemed in the doldrums going by their testing form, but they had no problems at all once the actual racing was under way. BMW are not a showy team, and it is their methodical and sober approach that makes them winners.

BMW seem poised to take advantage of the ability to use kers. The team has always seemed the most confident of everyone over their kers system. But could it be a disadvantage to their star driver Robert Kubica? The Pole is tall (and therefore heavy) for an F1 driver, and the added weight of kers is one particular area where BMW appear to have a weakness.

1. Ferrari

Ferrari were the first to launch their car, and at first I felt like Ferrari were going to have a moderate season. For some reason, the early testing form suggested that to me. Of course, the idea behind the early launch was to enable Ferrari to debug and perfect the car. So the car’s more recent performances has been pretty tasty.

If there is one thing that will be a cause for concern to the Scuderia it will be reliability. They seem to have been suffering from a few gremlins over the winter. This will be especially worrying since Ferrari’s reliability left a lot to be desired last year as well.

All-in-all, though, I can’t help feeling that Ferrari are going to be leading the way this season.

0 comments

2009 F1 season preview: Part 1

22 March 2009 18:09

Categories: Opinion

How exciting! In just seven days’ time the F1 season will be under way. It is high time, therefore, that I cast my eye towards it.

Of course, to assess where the teams stand we must look back over winter testing. This year’s winter testing action has been fascinating and deserving of a post in its own right. I can’t remember winter testing being so closely followed by so many people on the internet.

Of course, part of that is just with the nature of internet coverage which is expanding, with more contributors getting involved all of the time. But even taking that into account, there has been a lot to chew over.

For one thing, there are the new regulations. This year sees what is by all accounts the biggest change to the rules in at least 25 years. It has been fascinating to see not just the general shape of the new cars, but the different approaches of the teams.

Almost inevitably, this means that there is a new hierarchy, and it is fascinating to watch it emerge. The Honda saga provided a gripping side-story to the on-track action, and the apparent supremacy of the fledgling Brawn team seems too good to be true. At the same time, one of F1′s biggest teams seems to be in big trouble.

This post will outline how I think the teams will measure up throughout the season. Suffice it to say, though, that it is proving very difficult to truly tell which teams have the advantage. It is worth reading Autosport’s analysis of the winter testing times. With kers in the mix, this year we could see cars suiting certain circuits more than others.

But here is my attempt to work out how each team’s overall performance throughout the season will measure up.

10. Force India-Mercedes

Despite Force India’s new partnership with McLaren and Mercedes, I fear that they do not yet have the resources to make much headway up the grid. Matters cannot have been helped by the late change of engine supplier, and the need to integrate various McLaren parts into the car. The car launched late and has had comparatively little testing.

But on paper Force India should have a handy package. As long as the aerodynamic package isn’t a complete dud, the Mercedes lump should give the car plenty of grunt. Vijay Mallya himself says that the team, which seemed slightly ramshackle last year amid reports of infighting, has been improved by the presence of the man from McLaren, Simon Roberts.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see Force India challenging for points from time to time. But I don’t see them establishing themselves even as regular midfield runners. The driver line-up is easily the least exciting on the grid. Meanwhile, the car has not set the world alight during testing. No doubt Force India will spend another year constantly targeting Q2 and never reaching it.

9. Toro Rosso-Ferrari

Toro Rosso amazed the world last year by winning a race and showing its bigger sibling team how it’s done. Sadly, even the most optimistic observer does not expect Toro Rosso to come close to matching its 2008 form. Toro Rosso’s best asset, its star driver Sebastian Vettel, has now graduated to the main Red Bull team.

Sébastien Bourdais is a competent driver, but this year is make or break for his F1 career. One positive is that he will probably prefer the slick tyres. His team-mate Sébastien Buemi is the season’s only rookie, so will be allowed a bit of breathing space by observers. Buemi seems handy, and showed flashes of talent in GP2 this year. He also seems to have impressed the Red Bull guys as a test driver. How he will measure up as an F1 race driver is obviously yet to be seen.

Toro Rosso may be in a position to challenge for a few points here and there. But with the Renault having been the only one to have been improved over winter, it is unlikely that Toro Rosso will so easily make the Red Bull team look silly. All the while, the team will have to ready itself for the probably outlawing of customer cars which may be a distraction.

8. Williams-Toyota

The Williams has looked quite handy in pre-season testing. Autosport’s analysis shows that it has set the second-fastest time at Barcelona this winter, although its long run pace doesn’t seem quite so hot.

I would also doubt whether Williams will be in a position to develop the car as well as other teams will be able to. Let’s not forget that in 2008 Williams looked like they were going to be the third-best car, and it didn’t turn out that way.

The ace up Williams’s sleeve will be its flywheel kers system, which sounds like quite an impressive system. But with a fair degree of paddock scepticism over the benefits of kers, this could turn out to be a case of something that works better in a brochure than on the racetrack.

7. Red Bull-Renault

I would like to think that Red Bull are in a position to become a front-running team. I do have a soft spot for them, and the car is probably the most beautiful on the grid. Adrian Newey is also usually pretty handy at adapting to new technical regulations.

But their testing form, while not being particularly poor, has not exactly suggested that this is a team on the verge of regularly challenging at the front. The odd win is probably not out of the question though, and in Sebastian Vettel they have one of F1′s hottest properties.

6. Renault

After a troubled start to the testing season, when the car appeared to be beset by aerodynamic problems, Renault appear to have put aside their woes. It seems similar to last year, when Renault started the season with a poor car, but managed to turn it into a double race winner by the end of the season. Except this time Renault have improved the car before the season has begun.

Renault will also have been advantaged by the fact that they have been allowed to improve their engine over winter — the only power-plant to be granted such an upgrade. And you can never underestimate their lead driver Fernando Alonso, whom I consider to be the best driver on the grid.

Part 2 will be published tomorrow

4 comments

Could Melbourne be a dusk race?

19 March 2009 20:37

Categories: Opinion

We have just about become comfortable with the concept of night races, after the success of last year’s Singapore Grand Prix. But in Bernie Ecclestone’s quest to have all races starting at a sociable hour in Europe, could he have inadvertently invented the dusk race?

There were a couple of close calls last season. The season finale at Interlagos last year was strange enough. The fact that the entire circuit was plunged into complete darkness immediately after the chequered flag only added to it. The podium was lit, and the sky behind looked pitch black even with all of the techniques they can use on television to mitigate it.

The sun wasn’t even setting. Sunset was approximately 90 minutes after the end of the race. But heavy clouds ensured that if the race hadn’t finished, they may well have had to bring out the red flag anyway, so dark the place seemed.

It was a similar scenario during Friday Practice for the Italian Grand Prix last year. Even in the late morning, when the sun is high in the sky, a fierce storm gave teams a dry (okay, a very, very wet) run for the dark conditions they were to expect at the following race in Singapore.

In the past two yeras the start time of the Australian Grand Prix has been shifted from 1400 local time to 1530 last year to 1700 this year. The idea behind this is to have the race starting at 0700 British time (0800 CET), which is a smidgen more sociable than 0300.

I don’t know about you, but being a nightowl I much preferred the middle-of-the-night start. It felt like a special occasion, and for me it was all part of the romance and the excitement of the build-up to the start of the season.

Sometimes ITV put on a special night of programming building up to it. No such thing from the BBC this year of course. A “grand prix night” is a bit redundant when the grand prix is on in the morning. This is a missed marketing opportunity, showing once again that Bernie is not quite as smart as he thinks he is.

But does the later start also have implications for safety? The evening start is a messy compromise. Bernie wanted a night race, but the Australian GP organisers refused. So they met in the middle.

That’s all very well in normal circumstances. The race starts at 1700. So the sun will be pretty low, but it will still be daylight.

But what if something unforeseen happens? The start of last year’s Brazilian Grand Prix was delayed by fifteen minutes. If the race has to be stopped, that will add more time as well. On top of all this, the race may be anything up to two hours long (and that excludes any stoppages for red flags).

On 29 March 2009 the sun sets in Melbourne at 1918. Let’s say the formation lap takes three minutes. If the two hour time limit is reached, cars could still conceivably be running at racing speeds at 1905 (for the time it takes for the leader to reach the finish line, then the cars on the lead lap to complete that lap). Then there is the in-lap. If, for some reason, the red flag has to come out, they would only be able to take ten or fifteen minutes maximum to be sure that the race will be completed with the sun still in the sky.

It is an unlikely scenario. The two hour time limit is seldom reached, and a lengthy race stoppage is thankfully also rare. But the possibility exists. I’m surprised not to have seen anyone else mention this. Can the drivers, marshals and spectators be sure that all of the appropriate precautions have been taken?

Could the Australian Grand Prix be the first ever dusk race?

16 comments

The WMSC's decisions

17 March 2009 15:01

Categories: News, Opinion

Today the World Motor Sport Council met to make its decisions and already F1′s bloggers and Twitter users have been voicing their opinions. Here are some of my more in-depth thoughts.

Points

The points system for 2009 has been amended, and the result is a compromise between Bernie Ecclestone’s controversial ‘medals’ proposal and the current points system. Basically, the current 10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1 system will remain in tact, but the Drivers’ Championship will be awarded to the driver with the most wins.

I have long been in favour of a radical change to the points system, and I am quite receptive to a “medals-style” system. But many other fans were not so keen.

This compromise solution isn’t one that I have seen suggested before. But on the face of it, it seems like a fair enough compromise. I would still prefer a more radical change to the points system, rather than having the championship automatically going to the driver who has had the most wins. But this could have been much, much worse.

Testing

From now on, teams will be allowed three young driver training tests between the end of the championship and the end of the year. I believe that such tests were unlimited before (correct me if I’m wrong). This represents yet another barrier to the young drivers that Max Mosley purports to be helping.

Straight-line testing is also facing further restrictions. Between 1 January 2009 and the end of the championship, teams will be allowed only eight days of straight-line or constant-radius testing. As pointed out by @sidepodcast on Twitter, this could leave McLaren in trouble given the amount of straight-line testing they have already done this year.

I’m not opposed to limits on straight-line testing. It seems fair to limit it just as other testing is restricted. However, applying this retrospectively does seem to be rather underhanded, and is especially unfair on those teams that took advantage of straight line testing a lot over the winter. Is it yet another FIA anti-McLaren conspiracy? Don those tin foil hats! Say what you like about Max and Bernie, but they sure know how to stir up a fuss!

Qualifying fuel loads

The weights of all cars after qualifying will now be published. This will give the geeks (like me) a lot of interesting data to analyse on a Saturday evening. But I’m not sure how this will improve the show. Personally, the suspense surrounding a driver’s fuel load is the only good thing about having race fuel loads during qualifying. I quite like not knowing when the leaders are going to take a pitstop.

People talk about F1′s script writers. Well now we will have a “spoiler” long before the race has even begun. This is a shame.

I assume this is a response to those who lament the fact that qualifying no longer shows who the fastest driver is. But the real solution to this would be to get rid of the ridiculous race fuel load idea altogether. It has never worked, and it adds nothing to the show.

Tyres

Just a small one this. Wets are now officially “intermediates” and extreme wets are “wets”. This seems rather uncontroversial to me, because I normally refer to inters and extreme wets. Since inters became such good all-round wet weather tyres, this problem has existed, and it’s good that the FIA has tried to inject a rare bit of clarity into the regulations.

Media

Drivers will now have to make themselves more available to sign autographs. And there will be no running away in a fug of embarrassment after a poor performances. All drivers must make themselves available to the media for interview after the race or after they have retired.

Senior team personnel will also have to make themselves available to TV crews. Fota had proposed a similar idea anyway, and it’s a good idea to ensure that the fans get more out of the sport.

Changes to the 2009 Technical Regulations

You what? Yes, apparently the FIA have changed the 2009 Technical Regulations, details of which will be published later today. Haven’t they left it a bit late?…

The batshit-crazy zone

Mind your step. This is where we enter the realms of nonsense. It wouldn’t be the FIA without a nice dose of nonsense, and they certainly haven’t disappointed this time round.

From 2010 onwards there will be a budget cap of £30 million per season. But it’s a voluntary budget cap. So to give teams an incentive to stick to the magic limit, the FIA will allow these teams to have more technical freedoms. Essentially, there will be not one but two sets of Technical Regulations. Maybe from 2010 onwards the sport will become known as “Formulae Ones”, “Two Formula Ones”, “Formula One.1 and Formula One.2″.

In all seriousness, I think this is a recipe for disaster. For one thing, the FIA reckons it will be able to work out when “the cost-capped cars have neither an advantage nor a disadvantage when compared to cars running to the existing rules.”

Now I don’t know about you, but I quite like the idea that in F1 some cars are better than others. It’s called competition. It’s what sport is made of. And too often motorsports go down the route of trying to equalise performance between the cars by restricting the best cars. Then that series goes down the pan (hello, BTCC). That’s because people watch motorsport for the competition between teams and drivers. The moment you try to neutralise that, you start to alienate the core audience.

Besides, it’s all very well to do what they do in Touring Cars and add extra ballast to race-winning cars. But it’s a different thing altogether to try and work out how to manipulate cars when they are being run to separate sets of regulations. The FIA can’t even create one decent set of unambiguous technical regulations, never mind two of them, and with the aim of having the two types of cars performing equally!

For me, this just stinks. The FIA would be able to penalise cars for very little good reason, other than something vague about equalising performance. Decisions would probably be made in smoke-filled rooms, obscured from the fans’ view.

Believe it or not, F1 just got even more political.

8 comments

« Newer posts

Older posts »