2011 Silly Season

Post by **mario** » 13 Feb 2011, 16:32

Glennerz wrote:Meh, It's their choice. He may have done wrong in the past but purely as a technical consultant Virgin can't go far wrong.

And whilst he may have a black mark on his record with the Singapore race fixing affair, Symonds is still hugely experienced and respected. Cynically, for a team which is so far back, and needs to try everything to make up the deficit, they might as well take the gamble and see if Symonds can help them.

Phoenix · Post by **Phoenix** » 13 Feb 2011, 17:44

I think that for Virgin it's something of a coup to sign the guy, because he can help the team a lot. Let's just now hope he won't make d'Ambrosio crash so Glock can score a point though :lol:

Post by **mario** » 14 Feb 2011, 11:54

Interesting article here in The Guardian - I'm not sure whether this should go on in here, or in a separate thread, but either way it is worth mentioning.

Now, during an interview with The Observer, as picked up on and re-reported by The Guardian, Horner suggested that FOTA may be considering bringing in additional restrictions on spending in other areas - in effect, a budget capping mechanism. Although he did not explicitly say that the additional restrictions, aimed at targeting spending on engine development, marketing and so on, would amount to a budget cap, his comments suggested that the measures would effectively be the same as a budget capping mechanism.

It seems that Red Bull's enthusiasm, publicly at least, for these measures is to increase transparency on the teams finances, and a way of countering accusations by unspecified smaller teams of overspending by bigger teams.
Basically, the way that the current Resource Restriction Agreement works is that any team which overspends is fined on a sliding scale, depending on how much they overspent, with the fines deducted from the current years permissible spending. The money from the fines are then redistributed to the other teams: Horner's accusation is that some smaller teams are deliberately spreading rumours of overspending by Red Bull in the hope that they will be fined, giving the smaller teams additional revenue from those fines.
To quote directly from Horner:

The teams currently self-police that they are working within the spending limitations and Horner said: "The other major problem Red Bull Racing had with the RRA was that [other teams] wanted to introduce a penalty which just encourages infighting. The little teams see an opportunity to make some income and you end up with a situation of whistle-blowing. You can see it at the moment, it is putting the teams against each other which is not what Fota was supposed to do."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/fe ... e-red-bull

I wonder, though, if Red Bull's new enthusiasm for a budget cap is connected to the fact that it would include spending on engines, which is an area where it has accused other teams, especially Ferrari, of heavy spending to gain an advantage?

What would also be interesting is the greater financial transparency. Now, Ferrari is often said to have the biggest budget (the article I've linked to suggests that they had a budget of £248 million last year), but, on the other hand, all of Ferrari's efforts are housed within a single company.
By comparison, most of the teams have subsidiary outfits - for example, Renault had their Renault Sport F1 division, which worked on engine and drivetrain developments (Renault Sport F1 remained with Renault, though, when they sold their stake in the team to Genii Capital), Mercedes has Mercedes HPE (their engine and drivetrain development centre), whilst Force India and Mclaren have a co-owned subsidiary for sharing R&D costs. Red Bull themselves have Red Bull Technology, which houses their design team - an outfit created solely to get around the previous ban on customer cars, before the FIA re-wrote the rules to stop them after repeated complaints from other teams (complaints which had been going on since 2006 - Spyker were particularly vocal, I believe).

Now, the question is how much spending goes on in those subsidiary companies, and how can you separate the spending on Formula 1 related activities with other, non Formula 1 related activities?

Captain Hammer · Post by **Captain Hammer** » 14 Feb 2011, 22:34

mario wrote:It seems that Red Bull's enthusiasm, publicly at least, for these measures is to increase transparency on the teams finances, and a way of countering accusations by unspecified smaller teams of overspending by bigger teams.

I don't think it was the smaller teams accusing Red Bull of that. It felt like Ferrari's doing, because they knew that Red Bull would be able to develop a very good car. But having them suspended from FOTA for breaching the RRA, Red Bull would have no say in the 2012 regulations, which will influence the 2013 regulations when major engine and design changes come into effect. Whoever was trying to get Red Bull suspended from FOTA wasn't trying to punish them for breaking the rules, but was trying to tie their hands and limit their ability to influence the 2013 regulations, thus trying to prevent them from developing a very fast car.

Post by **mario** » 14 Feb 2011, 23:26

Captain Hammer wrote:
mario wrote:It seems that Red Bull's enthusiasm, publicly at least, for these measures is to increase transparency on the teams finances, and a way of countering accusations by unspecified smaller teams of overspending by bigger teams.

I don't think it was the smaller teams accusing Red Bull of that. It felt like Ferrari's doing, because they knew that Red Bull would be able to develop a very good car. But having them suspended from FOTA for breaching the RRA, Red Bull would have no say in the 2012 regulations, which will influence the 2013 regulations when major engine and design changes come into effect. Whoever was trying to get Red Bull suspended from FOTA wasn't trying to punish them for breaking the rules, but was trying to tie their hands and limit their ability to influence the 2013 regulations, thus trying to prevent them from developing a very fast car.

As far as I am aware, though, the Resource Restriction Agreement does not contain a clause allowing FOTA to eject a team out of the body for breaking the RRA; all the reports about the RRA suggest that FOTA can only levy financial penalties against the guilty party. For example, in this BBC article, dated 12th January, they seem to make it quite clear that any breach of the RRA would result in fines (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsp ... 359085.stm):

The RRA is a Fota-specific document, and is not part of the rules laid down by governing body the FIA, so teams cannot be stripped of results in races.
But there is a sliding scale of penalties - any team found guilty of committing excessive resources has their allocation for the following year reduced accordingly, with the reduction increasing in relation to the overspend.

Likewise, Auto Motor Und Sport has suggested in the past that any penalty against Red Bull would be in the form of fines, with the money redistributed to the other FOTA teams, not expulsion from FOTA. I do not totally discount the possibility of expulsion from FOTA for a major breach of the RRA - but I am yet to see an article that suggests that a team which flouted the RRA would be stripped of FOTA membership. And Domenicali has not made any comments suggesting that FOTA should expel Red Bull from FOTA either - all his comments have been pretty neutral, and he has not made any public accusations of overspending.

The other question is why, if the claims of overspending really were a ploy by Ferrari to force Red Bull out of FOTA, why wouldn't Horner say so? Why would he publicly blame the smaller outfits on the grid instead?

[And, on a side note, surely it would be a bit pointless to stop Red Bull influencing the 2012 regulations when those regulations are going to be almost the same as this year, whilst most of the big changes for 2013 - such as the engines, the mechanism for downforce generation and so forth - have already been broadly agreed on?]

DanielPT · Post by **DanielPT** » 15 Feb 2011, 11:57

Is this the begining of 2012 Silly Season?

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/89489

*Why every driver wishes to become a cheater one day is beyond me...

Jeroen Krautmeir · Post by **Jeroen Krautmeir** » 15 Feb 2011, 12:20

MUHAHAHAHAHA!

Post by **mario** » 15 Feb 2011, 13:02

Jeroen Krautmeir wrote:MUHAHAHAHAHA!

It looks like the protests in Bahrain do have the potential to take on a more sinister edge. We've already had two people killed in clashes with the Bahraini security forces, and Giedo van der Garde, who is in Bahrain for the GP2 Asia event, says that there have been violent clashes between protesters and the police. He says that the protests were so widespread that nobody could leave the hotel to travel to the track. http://www.gpupdate.net/en/gp2-news/252 ... isruption/
To be honest, though, it isn't surprising that they would want to protest during the race - considering that there are tens, and probably hundreds, of millions of viewers around the world, a public demonstration in front of such a large audience would create a lot of press for the protesters. It'd also be a major snub by opponents of the government to protest at the same venue that the Bahraini government has repeatedly used for their own publicity...

P_Friesacher · Post by **P_Friesacher** » 15 Feb 2011, 15:43

On the plus side, demonstrations might liven up the race there a little.

JohnMLTX · Post by **JohnMLTX** » 15 Feb 2011, 17:47

Hell, It'd give the commentators something to talk about other than Kobayashi.

jpm · Post by **jpm** » 16 Feb 2011, 17:52

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/89513

Yippeee!!!! Quick Nick it is then!

James1978 · Post by **James1978** » 16 Feb 2011, 19:03

Really pleased for Heidfeld, just shame about the circumstances surrounding it. This could make or break Petrov though. If Nick outperforms Vitaly, or maybe isn't quite as fast over one lap but accumulates a lot more points which I feel could happen, then who will make way for Kubica when he recovers?

Myrvold · Post by **Myrvold** » 16 Feb 2011, 22:26

Heidfeld.

Post by **mario** » 16 Feb 2011, 23:30

James1978 wrote:Really pleased for Heidfeld, just shame about the circumstances surrounding it. This could make or break Petrov though. If Nick outperforms Vitaly, or maybe isn't quite as fast over one lap but accumulates a lot more points which I feel could happen, then who will make way for Kubica when he recovers?

That, however, assumes that Kubica does make a return to the cockpit this year, which is unlikely given the extent of his injuries and the current diagnosis of his doctors. For example, it took Schumacher the best part of 14 weeks in 1999 to recover from his broken leg, and a similar amount of time for Webber's leg to heal before he could resume testing - those sorts of injuries don't heal quickly, and leave their make for some time afterwards.

And there is a big gulf between being fit to test, and being ready to drive an F1 car - Webber was able to recover most of his physical fitness during the off season, but even so, he himself admitted that he wasn't fully fit until a few races into the season. Coulthard indicated that it won't just be strength that is crucial, or being able to make fine adjustments; it's having the necessary stamina to maintain that level of performance over a full race distance (plus testing and qualifying) that will be a challenge.
But, on the other hand, if anybody has the capacity to surprise, Kubica does - we've seen drivers on more than one occasion make earlier than expected returns to the cockpit, and put in fighting performances. So, although I would be surprised (albeit happy) to see him back in the cockpit this year, I guess it is possible.

So, for the sake of speculation, let us turn to a theoretical consideration of how the season might pan out. For the moment, let us assume that the R31 is reasonably competitive - not a world beater, but a regular top six to top eight finisher (i.e. best of the rest behind Red Bull, Ferrari and Mclaren), much as the R30 was a number of times last year. Now, in that scenario, you would expect that a driver like Heidfeld would score regularly - perhaps not podiums like Kubica could, but a Rosberg like performance (a steady stream of respectable points finishes). In that scenario, where Renault are likely to have a fairly secure 4th place in the WCC, you would assume that unless Petrov has performed especially badly that Heidfeld would be moved aside for Kubica to reclaim his seat, leaving Renault with the line up they wanted in the first place.
If, on the other hand, Heidfeld was a regular podium finisher, and scoring quite heavily for the team, that would probably put Heidfeld into potential championship contention, or at least a rather firm team leader role. In that case, Petrov might be vulnerable if he isn't scoring well, especially if there is a tight battle in the WCC between Renault and another team for a top four (or better) finish, where the team need every point they could get. In that case, the team might chance their arm on Kubica being back to his old form and ditch Petrov in the hope that they can outscore their rivals.

Unfortunately, we have to wait until the season is under way before we can have an idea about that - but, it is not unreasonable to suggest that the more Heidfeld scores, the better his chances of keeping the seat all year.

F1000X · Post by **F1000X** » 17 Feb 2011, 01:00

James1978 wrote:Really pleased for Heidfeld, just shame about the circumstances surrounding it. This could make or break Petrov though. If Nick outperforms Vitaly, or maybe isn't quite as fast over one lap but accumulates a lot more points which I feel could happen, then who will make way for Kubica when he recovers?

Heidfeld. Vitaly stays, he's got the sponsorship money, the youth, the promise of improvement. Heidfeld will never get any better. Heidfeld probably has contract that is on race by race basis, so should Robert be able to make the final race or two of the season, they can put Kubica back into the seat without paying side-lined Heidfeld.

Ferrim · Post by **Ferrim** » 17 Feb 2011, 15:35

Just when you thought it couldn't get any weirder...

http://twitter.com/HWNSNBM

FullMetalJack · Post by **FullMetalJack** » 17 Feb 2011, 16:03

Ferrim wrote:Just when you thought it couldn't get any weirder...

http://twitter.com/HWNSNBM

JDD Forum, there's already a topic on it.

Ferrim · Post by **Ferrim** » 17 Feb 2011, 17:34

Yeah, found it after posting that, but I thought it fits here (it's about an announcement tomorrow... I know, it won't be that, but...)

Phoenix · Post by **Phoenix** » 17 Feb 2011, 21:54

Ferrim wrote:[...] I know, it won't be that, but...

Huh? Do you have solid proof that it won't be that?

dr-baker · Post by **dr-baker** » 17 Feb 2011, 22:16

In 1992, Andrea Moda was not allowed to replace Perry McCarthy for another driver because they had already used up their maximum number of permitted driver changes. Does that rule still exist? And I guess Heidfeld's replacement of Kubica won't count because the season hasn't started/force majeur?

DanielPT · Post by **DanielPT** » 17 Feb 2011, 22:20

dr-baker wrote:In 1992, Andrea Moda was not allowed to replace Perry McCarthy for another driver because they had already used up their maximum number of permitted driver changes. Does that rule still exist? And I guess Heidfeld's replacement of Kubica won't count because the season hasn't started/force majeur?

That doesn't seem to be a problem these days. HRT replaced Chadhock for Yamamoto and then for Klien... Renault is doing the first replacement and they are forced to it. I remember that rule. They could do it whenever the current driver couldn't drive due to injuries or something that prevented them of driving.

Captain Hammer · Post by **Captain Hammer** » 17 Feb 2011, 22:26

Ferrim wrote:Just when you thought it couldn't get any weirder...

http://twitter.com/HWNSNBM

I call BS.

DanielPT wrote:Renault is doing the first replacement and they are forced to it. I remember that rule. They could do it whenever the current driver couldn't drive due to injuries or something that prevented them of driving.

If that rule still exists, I think Renault would be exampt from it because a) Kubica is injured and unable to race, and b) the season hasn't started yet.

Klon · Post by **Klon** » 18 Feb 2011, 02:02

The rules state that four drivers may be used during races and score points during one season (Friday drivers do not amount to that number, i.e. after four drivers were used a team has still the option to get someone new for Friday testing). The actual number of changes is not limited i.e. a team could change their drivers at every race. It is possible for exceptions to be made, but I think that would only be accepted on extremely short notice i.e. if one of the drivers injure themselves two or three days before FP1.

Captain Hammer · Post by **Captain Hammer** » 18 Feb 2011, 07:09

Baumgartner has moved to distance himself from rumours of a HRT drive, posting the following in Twitter:

I would like to distance myself from all rumours regarding the vacant HRT seat. Though wait for the big announcement tomorrow at 12.30CET

Apparently Tonio Liuzzi will test for Hispania at the Barcelona test this weekend, and a few journalists are tipping him for the drive.

Post by **mario** » 18 Feb 2011, 10:08

Captain Hammer wrote:Baumgartner has moved to distance himself from rumours of a HRT drive, posting the following in Twitter:

I would like to distance myself from all rumours regarding the vacant HRT seat. Though wait for the big announcement tomorrow at 12.30CET

Apparently Tonio Liuzzi will test for Hispania at the Barcelona test this weekend, and a few journalists are tipping him for the drive.

Interestingly, Baumgartner's Twitter page seems to have vanished - when I clicked on the link Ferrim provided, it came up with an error page saying "This user does not exist". I wonder if that account really was Baumgartner's, or whether it was somebody playing a practical joke by making up claims of "a big announcement" - time will tell.

As for Liuzzi going to HRT, well, Autosport have just put out an article suggesting that he is due to test for HRT on Saturday. http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/89535
I guess that it is logical that they might be interested in him, but the fact that he is only due for Saturday suggests that Myrvold's post in the HRT thread (suggesting that Pantano and Klien are also in the frame) might have some substance to them.

Meanwhile, on the pit wall, there are additional developments - Mercedes have announced that Bob Bell, formerly of Renault, will be joining their team in April as their new Technical Director. http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/89533

DanielPT · Post by **DanielPT** » 18 Feb 2011, 10:49

mario wrote:Meanwhile, on the pit wall, there are additional developments - Mercedes have announced that Bob Bell, formerly of Renault, will be joining their team in April as their new Technical Director. http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/89533

It is an excellent addition to Mercedes personnel in my opinion. For me it is clear that the Mercedes staff structure can improve. And signing Bob Bell, who I think he did a great job taking Renault out of the crashgate mud. Focusing people and improve the team resources allocation and efficiency is what I think Mercedes needs right now.

CarlosFerreira · Post by **CarlosFerreira** » 18 Feb 2011, 16:12

Captain Hammer wrote:Baumgartner has moved to distance himself from rumours of a HRT drive, posting the following in Twitter:

I would like to distance myself from all rumours regarding the vacant HRT seat. Though wait for the big announcement tomorrow at 12.30CET

Admittedly, he can easily distance himself from the HRT car simply by taking an energetic stroll.

Post by **mario** » 27 Feb 2011, 21:43

Slightly amusing development here - Red Bull Racing have managed to wrangle a free engine supply for 2011 by agreeing to change the name on the cover plate.

As some of you might know, Renault currently holds a large stake in Nissan (about 44%), with Nissan owning about 15% of Renault, and the two motor corporations are sharing engines and R&D costs on new drivetrain developments. Now, Nissan has a sub division known as Infiniti, which was set up so Nissan could have a series of more luxurious cars which would otherwise not sit with the brand image of Nissan's main division.

Nissan, as you can imagine, are keen to increase the profile of this division; therefore, they decided to use their links with Renault to rename a customer Renault engine as a branding exercise. Red Bull have accepted this, so Red Bull's engines will now be known as Infiniti's engines, even though all that has changed is the name on the engine block.

With prices at about €8 million a year for an engine supply contract, it means they are saving about 4-5% of their budget by accepting this deal - not an inconsiderable benefit. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsp ... 409120.stm

Cynon · Post by **Cynon** » 28 Feb 2011, 01:37

Those bastards are clearly going after the iconic memories of the Red Bull Cheever team which had Infiniti engines in the IRL and which were at the time legitimately competitive. Therefore I suggest we call Red Bull by the name of Red Bull Cheever an demand they place #51 and #51 on their cars for the 2011 Formula 1 season. :mrgreen:

Eddie Cheever's IRL team was the Infiniti works team as well.

Alternatively, what does this suggest about the other manufacturers in the sport? Will we see some of the Ferrari engines rebadged as other Fiat brands? Will this bring the Dodge name into Formula 1 with Sauber or Toro Rosso? Because I would love to see the Fiat-Chrysler connection bring the Dodge name into F1, and who better than with Sauber?! With the U.S. GP coming in 2012, that would give Dodge an extra marketing platform as well since their NASCAR presence is almost nonexistent.

Shizuka · Post by **Shizuka** » 28 Feb 2011, 07:42

So, Team Lotus will also run Infinitis? Lotus-Infiniti and Lotus-Renault is at least different...

Captain Hammer · Post by **Captain Hammer** » 28 Feb 2011, 09:24

No, it's just Red Bull.

madmark1974 · Post by **madmark1974** » 28 Feb 2011, 11:03

Cynon wrote: Alternatively, what does this suggest about the other manufacturers in the sport? Will we see some of the Ferrari engines rebadged as other Fiat brands? Will this bring the Dodge name into Formula 1 with Sauber or Toro Rosso? Because I would love to see the Fiat-Chrysler connection bring the Dodge name into F1, and who better than with Sauber?! With the U.S. GP coming in 2012, that would give Dodge an extra marketing platform as well since their NASCAR presence is almost nonexistent.

Dodge Sauber sounds like something Kobayashi shouts when he tries to overtake someone!

DanielPT · Post by **DanielPT** » 28 Feb 2011, 11:30

Changing Team Lotus-Renault to Team Lotus-Nissan isn't that bad either. And, given time and success (perhaps) that would be sticking a knife in the other Japanese brands F1 deep wounds (especially you Toyota :twisted:

)...

I like the sound of Red Bull-Infiniti. It really sounds like an Indycar team!

cretoxyrhina · Post by **cretoxyrhina** » 28 Feb 2011, 13:09

In the other side, deep in my heart I wished that Red Bull would make another drink named 'Lotus' and renamed the team. Lotus-Renault vs Lotus-Renault vs Lotus-Renault sounds totally rejectful :mrgreen:

dinizintheoven · Post by **dinizintheoven** » 28 Feb 2011, 13:16

...made with essences of lotus flowers to make the name legitimate, then with added taurine and glucoronolactone to give it that nasty underlying Red Bull taste that permeates all energy drinks.

I'll pass...

Phoenix · Post by **Phoenix** » 28 Feb 2011, 13:42

I am disappointed. They could have branded the engines as Nismo

watka · Post by **watka** » 28 Feb 2011, 13:52

Phoenix wrote:I am disappointed. They could have branded the engines as Nismo

Or Gordini. Or Alpine.

Phoenix · Post by **Phoenix** » 28 Feb 2011, 14:04

watka wrote:
Phoenix wrote:I am disappointed. They could have branded the engines as Nismo

Or Gordini. Or Alpine.

Nismo sounds more bad-ass.

DanielPT · Post by **DanielPT** » 28 Feb 2011, 15:34

Phoenix wrote:
watka wrote:
Phoenix wrote:I am disappointed. They could have branded the engines as Nismo

Or Gordini. Or Alpine.

Nismo sounds more bad-ass.

I agree. When saying it (Red Bull-Nismo), one gets the idea that they are planning to drift their way through victory, which would be massively cool.

CarlosFerreira · Post by **CarlosFerreira** » 28 Feb 2011, 16:08

Phoenix wrote:I am disappointed. They could have branded the engines as Nismo

Or they could have simply dropped the engines altogether and make the spoiled brat pedal. Now there's an idea.