I wonder where Ralf got the idea from? Rumours that the idea came from letters delivered to his home address are thought to be wide of the mark, as is the idea that said letters were advertising the soon to be vacant position of ‘friend of petrolheadblog.com’.
In order to keep this little article halfway sensible in length and appearance, you’re about to be linked to within an inch of your lives. Be ready. The links are for comparative purposes, so if all you’re interested in is pictures of new cars, you’re quite safe to ignore them all. Speaking of pictures, a little reminder that wherever you see a picture on this site, you’ll find some more words if you hover your cursor over the image.
The F1 launch season began in earnest earlier this week with the unveiling of the new Ferrari F10, the car scheduled to carry Felipe Massa and Fernando Alonso through the coming year. Hopes have been high for the F10 since the Maranello team’s designers, led by Aldo Costa and Nikolas Tombazis, abandoned work on last year’s F60 in order to concentrate their efforts on the 2010 machine.
The designers might have been hard at work, but one wonders whether the Original Thought department have been on an extended break. It’s difficult to look at the F10 and escape the conclusion that Ferrari’s efforts were concentrated on borrowing design concepts from everyone else. The most obvious visual differences from last year’s F60 are a new nose design heavily influenced by the Red Bull RB5, and sculpted sidepods oddly reminiscent of those seen on the BMW F1.09, a car which did nothing to mark itself out as ripe for plagiarising.
Also noticeable is the increased length of the car and resultant longer wheelbase, brought about by the need to accommodate a larger fuel tank than the one carried in 2009.
Rumours from Italy, reported in Britain by The Times but so far unsubstantiated, have it that there is some concern about the F10’s projected performance figures, and that a B-spec car is being hurriedly designed and put together to improve matters. Any alarm would be caused by wind tunnel performance and simulation data, since the car has yet to run for the first time – cold, icy conditions at their Fiorano test base have prevented the team from giving the car a shakedown.
How much of a worry that is for fans of the Italian team isn’t clear; every single team will start the Bahrain Grand Prix with a car substantially modified from the one appearing at their launch. Cars evolve, whatever their purpose, and a racing car evolving before the start of a season isn’t a story. A fundamental redesign, though, would be an altogether different thing. One to watch, perhaps.
Meanwhile, in Newbury, a place that rivals northern Italy for cold, ice and absolutely nothing else, Jenson Button and Lewis Hamilton unveiled the new McLaren MP4-25 earlier today. Compared to last year’s MP4-24, a beautiful machine that was also desperately slow for much of its life, the most obvious visual differences from the front are a Red Bulling of the front end, albeit a much more conservative effort than Ferrari’s design, and a reshaping of the sidepod air intakes.
Compare the 2009 car with the new model side-on, however, and things are markedly different.
For a side-by-side comparison of MP4-24 and MP4-25 that doesn’t require you to flick between two links, direct your browser here.
The fin on the engine cover, the only blemish on an otherwise very attractive face, is designed to improve airflow to the rear wing and also accommodates a cooling duct made necessary by a repackaging of the car’s internal cooling systems. The chassis and bodywork have been lowered, and the rear of the car has been modified to make better use of the double diffuser (banned for 2011, but very much a part of the 2010 regulations) that had to be hurriedly shoehorned into the back of most of last year’s grid. As Nigel Mansell once famously said, “If it goes as fast as it looks, everyone else had better watch out.”
With the knowledge gained during 2009’s rapid recovery fresh in their minds, it’s easy to assume that the MP4-25 will be as fast on the timesheets as it looks on camera. Next week, we’ll take the first steps towards finding out how safe that assumption is.
There are reasons why nothing has been posted for a little while, all of them rather too mundane to detain you with here. Time that might otherwise have been spent doing this had to be spent doing something else instead. There is, of course, a quick and easy fix: match my current salary.
Remember that Mercedes concept livery? Here’s the real deal, or as real as a deal can be when it’s painted on last year’s Brawn:
Elegant, classy, understated and yet still distinctive and recognisable. You may feel differently, of course, and while that’s fine, you may wish to consider this: what if you’re completely wrong?
USF1 have announced their first driver for 2010. You may recall that the stated aim was to promote US talent in all areas of the sport, including driving, and if so you won’t be at all surprised to learn the name of the good ol’ boy they’ve signed.
Jose Maria Lopez.
Lopez comes from Argentina, which as far as my atlas can tell is somewhere in the extreme south of the USA. His record in the junior classes is alright but not exceptional (winner of the now-defunct Formula Renault V6 Eurocup in 2003, solid in F3000 and GP2 thereafter but only a single race win to his credit), and while he’s gone on to great things in the competitive touring car series held in his home country, he ended up there because Renault didn’t see enough in him to employ him further after his stint on their Young Driver Programme. With no recent single-seater running and a start-up team supporting him, Lopez could find himself settling in for a rather long 2010.
Staying with USF1, they’re about to demonstrate that they’ve really been building a racing car all this time. Their first F1 machine, Type 1, is scheduled to turn a wheel in anger for the first time at Barber Motorsports Park at some point in February, before joining in the final European tests prior to the season opener in Bahrain on March 14th. The car is yet to break cover and the team have kept something of a low profile, leading to increasing doubts over their participation, but at least they have some kind of plan in place.
The same cannot be said for another of this season’s new teams, Campos Meta, who have been very clear in saying that their car isn’t finished yet and might not run at all prior to Bahrain. Their being in Bahrain is apparently certain, but the heat of a desert nation is not the ideal place to give a car its first shakedown. In fact, the first race isn’t the ideal place to do it regardless of location. Bruno Senna remains contracted and ready to drive, his teammate may not be known until the eve of the first race, and the team continue to actively seek investors.
Lotus will have their car ready for launch on February 12th and running at Jerez 5 days later, while Virgin aim to give their machine a shakedown in the first week of February prior to joining the established teams at Jerez on February 10th
Red Bull and Force India have taken the decision to skip the first test of the winter in Valencia next week, citing a desire to spend more time working on the design of their cars. Dark mutterings have inevitably followed, but it should be remembered that Red Bull did exactly the same thing in 2009.
With refuelling banned for 2010, the Sporting Working Group have voted to introduce a rule stating that the top 10 qualifiers must start the race using the same set of tyres they qualified on. This has yet to be ratified by the F1 Commission or World Motor Sport Council but looks certain to be added to the 2010 rulebook.
The objective is to maintain some kind of strategic element, giving teams the choice between qualifying well on a soft tyre that might not be ideal for the start of the race or sacrificing grid position for a good race tyre. Whether the idea has any bearing on the tyre choices made by the teams will depend largely upon the compounds that Bridgestone provide. If there’s little appreciable difference between the softer and harder options, there won’t be a decision to take.
Also awaiting ratification is an amendment to the existing points system. The SWG meeting resulted in a proposed scoring system of 25-18-15-12-10-8-6-4-2-1, with points being issued down to 10th place. The aim here is to encourage drivers to push for victory by increasing the points weighting for the winner, while also ensuring that drivers and teams finishing lower down the order still have something to race for by extending the points-scoring threshold down to 10th place.
There was a time, not at all long ago, when points were awarded to the top 6 drivers, 10-6-4-3-2-1. When that points system was introduced in 1991 there were 31 cars entered each weekend. Only 26 could start the race, 20 of those would end up with nothing to show for their efforts, and as a result a point was a precious and valuable thing. That system was weighted more heavily towards the winner than the proposed 2010 system too – assuming the same drivers finish 1-2, it’ll take 4 races this year for the leader to build up an advantage greater than the points available for a race win, a race more than under the 1991-2002 system.
There’s not necessarily anything wrong with the new system. It’s just that the old one was better. Am I wrong? Let me know.
Friend of petrolheadblog.com Nelson Piquet Jr is making his oval racing debut on an incredibly fast superspeedway near you this coming February 6th. I’d duck if I were you.
If it seems like only yesterday that Giancarlo Fisichella was being reported as favourite for the vacant Sauber drive, that’s because it really, genuinely was.
Sometimes these things make too much sense. Fisi spent much of 2009 showing well for Force India, before forging late-season links with Ferrari that saw him given a testing and development role with the Scuderia. He still has a desire to race, Sauber have Ferrari engines for 2010, Giancarlo used to drive for Sauber…the pieces came together like a pre-school jigsaw.
Somewhere between yesterday’s news reports and this morning’s driver announcement, Peter Sauber’s dog must have opened the box and ate the piece with Giancarlo’s face on it, for I’m sure that the Roman’s name isn’t spelt ‘Pedro de la Rosa’. The Swiss team have opted to sign the 38-year-old from Barcelona, whose last full season of Formula One came with Jaguar in 2002.
Pedro’s appointment might seem a strange one on the face of it. 8 seasons on from his last full-time drive, de la Rosa has been a fixture at McLaren since being cast aside by Jaguar. Contracted as test driver throughout, the Spaniard nevertheless had a couple of opportunities to race for the Woking outfit. His cameo in Bahrain 5 years ago, after Juan Pablo Montoya hurt himself falling off a tennis racket, was brilliantly entertaining and ended with Pedro claiming fastest lap. His half-season in 2006 when the Colombian quit for NASCAR in mid-season was less startling, Hungarian podium finish notwithstanding. His reputation is that of a solid, reliable pair of hands, lacking in ultimate pace but a very capable development driver. That, of course – well, that and a few Euros in sponsorship money – is why Sauber have signed him.
A month or so ago, Sauber confirmed Kamui Kobayashi as the first of their 2010 race drivers. Kobayashi’s pair of races for Toyota suggest that the Japanese driver has plenty of raw pace but the kind of rough edges that would occupy a sandpaper factory for a week. His racecraft is questionable, his defensive driving on the dangerous side of robust, and he has very little prior experience of setting up a Grand Prix car, though he can hardly be blamed for that. He will show well given a decent car, but can’t be relied on to bring the car home every time, or to lead a development programme through the course of a season.
For that, the team need an experienced old hand, and they don’t come much more experienced than de la Rosa. His technical knowledge, allied to his knowledge of McLaren’s successful working practices (in-depth knowledge, as you’d expect from a trusted member of the team – until today, PdlR was scheduled to give McLaren’s 2010 car its first run next month), will be invaluable. His temperament inside the car tends to be even, as does his performance, an excellent baseline for judging the performance of new parts. A well-respected and approachable man, Pedro is also the ideal mentor for a young, wild hotshoe like his 2010 teammate.
With the right tutelage, Kamui Kobayashi will be the long-term solution, the man charged with making Sauber’s future bright. Surprise choice or not, Pedro de la Rosa is the right man to provide it.
The filling of Sauber’s vacant seat must have brought great joy to the folks at Renault. Nick Heidfeld is out of a drive. Christian Klien wants one. So does Anthony Davidson, along with his F3 and Super Aguri sparring partner Takuma Sato. If an up-and-coming driver is what they want, and last year’s experience of Romain Grosjean ought be enough to show that it isn’t, Ho-Pin Tung and the delightfully-named Bertrand Baguette are available. If an old hand desperate for one last go fits the Renault profile, Jacques Villeneuve is their man.
The seats at Campos and USF1 will go to drivers bringing sponsorship, and it’s difficult to imagine any of the above-named fancying a drive with either team anyway. With every other competitive seat filled, Renault is their last sensible choice, and that’s a cracking bargaining position for the French squad.
Remember that fabulous Mercedes concept we saw a few posts ago? Sleek, clean, aggressive lines used to create a machine that looks rapid even in stills.
It probably doesn’t need saying that not every racing car comes out looking that way. Some of them, such as this fine example, have features that appear to have fallen from the ugly tree atop Minger’s Hill, smacking every branch on the way down, before rolling slowly down into the nearby settlement of Uglytown where the residents beat them vigourously with aesthetically displeasing sticks. In spite of that, those cars are often moderately successful – the linked example, Williams FW26, would win a race at the end of 2004, though by then shorn of that remarkable front end.
This occasional feature isn’t that interested in cars that succeed in spite of their looks. Design 101 seeks to celebrate cars that could surely never work, cars that even the untrained eye immediately comes to view as patently ridiculous. Sometimes the design quirks are relatively subtle. At other times, they’re what-the-hell-is-that obvious. The first entry, a break from Formula One coverage to honour the car that inspired the whole idea, falls very firmly into the latter category.
The 1981 Indianapolis 500 was one of the most controversial races ever seen at the Speedway. On May 24th, Bobby Unser took the chequered flag ahead of Mario Andretti, the only other man to complete the full 500 miles. On May 25th, the official results had Andretti the winner, Unser having been penalised for overtaking under yellow flags when rejoining after a pit stop. Unser’s Penske Racing team filed a protest, the issue eventually being resolved in Unser’s favour on October 9th.
Watching from the sidelines, having failed to qualify an aging Vollstedt car for the race, was Idaho short-track racer Ken Hamilton. At Indy, just as anywhere else, you can’t do a thing if you don’t have a good car around you, and Hamilton didn’t. What he had, thanks to an approach from a multi-millionaire Idaho native, was the promise of a well-funded ride for 1982. Ken’s benefactor wanted to build an Indycar, and had his designer ready to start work. All he needed was a driver.
The designer was another Idaho native, Dean Wilson. In the late 1970s Wilson had founded the Eagle Aircraft Company, specialising in the design and manufacture of agricultural aircraft. Whether knowledge of crop dusters could be applied to single-seater racing cars was something that had yet to be tested, and one wonders whether it might have been smarter of Hamilton to suggest that the car might be better suited to someone else. Come the month of May, though, a ride is a ride, and Ken had one.
Wilson was a believer in function over form. If his creations did the job they were designed for, they were automatically beautiful. His first and so far only foray into car design certainly followed that philosophy, and the results were spectacular, though not necessarily for the right reasons.
To give you a feel for the cars of the era, here’s a picture of the Wildcat that carried Gordon Johncock to a hair’s-breadth victory over Rick Mears in 1982:
You might imagine that the skills needed to design a plane would transfer easily to the design of a racing car. After all, a fundamental understanding of lift and downforce is essential. The influence of the air around affects the performance of each method of transport. You might begin to imagine something different once you compare and contrast that Wildcat with this shot of Hamilton and the Eagle Aircraft Flyer:
Even now, with the benefit of some 28 years distance, it’s difficult to know exactly what to say about the Flyer. At first glance, it appears to have been designed by two different men, one at each end of the car, working in offices several thousand miles apart. The cab-forward seating position is extreme even by the standards of the time, and the enormous amount of car behind the driver hasn’t been designed with ease of use through traffic in mind. It looks heavy and ponderous. The airbox, feeding a Chevy engine at a time when a Cosworth DFX was the engine to have, is in prime position to foul the airflow to the rear wing, while at the same time getting little air itself thanks to the headrest-cum-rollbar directly ahead.
In fact, every surface, from the bulky nose section to the curious wheel shrouds front and rear, gives the impression of having been designed with the express intention of ruining the airflow to the piece behind it. Function over form is fair enough, but the Eagle Aircraft Flyer looks like a car that has neither, unless the function is to appear a discordant mess.
None of that would matter if the Flyer had turned lap records straight out of the box. Had it done so, of course, you wouldn’t be reading this now. Hamilton would later say, “The thing was out to lunch aerodynamically,” a statement which somehow fails to surprise.
The car was Wilson’s baby, its creator maintaining to this day that all it needed was some more time and some more money. Hamilton, better placed than anyone to know what it really needed, felt that letting someone else give their attention to the car would be more beneficial, particularly if that someone had any prior involvement in motorsport. When his efforts to get the Flyer up to speed saw him indulge in a couple of spins, Ken weighed up his chances of qualifying (”At best, we were 12 or 14 mph off making the cut,” and more often substantially further away even than that) against the dangers of an accident in a car with nothing much between his feet and fresh air, parked it and walked away.
Hamilton was inducted into the Western Idaho Racing Association Hall Of Fame in 1987 and continued to race well into the 21st century. Dean Wilson continued to design and sell planes, with varying degrees of success, into the late 90s, when his focus switched to modifying and maintaining his own Piper PA-16 Clipper. The Flyer was passed to Ken’s son Davey in 1991 to be used as part-payment in a deal taking Davey into Indycars with Hemelgarn Racing. It helped to launch Davey’s top line single-seater career, a decade after destroying his father’s.
Though not the sort of question you’ll have to think too hard about, unless you’re one of the utter, utter cretins this is being written to address. I’m going to nudge you ever so gently in the direction of the right answer, because I’m a sport like that. Look at this picture:
Done? Take your time, these words will still be here when you’re ready. What is this picture? Is it:
a) Michael Schumacher testing a GP2 car, in a test which has been sanctioned by the FIA, the F1 testing committee and GP2, which allows GP2 to gain feedback on their new car and a big old dollop of publicity while also giving Michael’s troublesome neck a workout?
b) That cheating German git getting in some practice before the F1 testing ban ends on February 1st?
Still not sure? It’s a). Now leave.
The limits placed on off-season testing in F1 were designed as a money saving measure. They don’t exist to keep drivers out of racing cars, though that inevitably happens. If a driver wishes to do something else over the winter to keep his hand in, and the necessary permissions are given, he can do so.
In this case, Michael Schumacher is doing it because it’s in everyone’s interests to have a race-fit Schumi in Bahrain on March 14th, because there are few better ways of drawing attention to your new car than getting the most successful F1 driver in history to break it in, and because it’s the kind of thing you do when the only thing you know is how to win.
Nelsinho’s move to NASCAR is not unexpected. He tested a Camping World Truck Series machine in late summer, and hadn’t a hope of returning to Formula One after that business with the deliberate crashing. Unless, that is, you’re the kind of person who merrily goes along with this kind of triple-A grade revision of history:
“I have spent the last few months carefully evaluating my options for this year. I had to choose a path and it was a difficult decision to make. Being successful in Formula 1 was always my goal but I have learnt that happiness is just as important as ambition and after my first 18 months in F1 did not go as planned I have decided to focus on something different and have chosen to take a route in America.”
You must understand, folks, that the route in America he chose to take wasn’t in any way forced upon him. His lack of work ethic, tendency towards meek surrender, hugely questionable ethics and attitude problem had no bearing on his ability to find continued employment in Formula One. It’s vitally important that you remember that.
What we could do tonight is talk a bit more about that court ruling. About how the FIA’s guilty verdict still stands, how Flavio Briatore still isn’t permitted to manage racing drivers and how that might give Mark Webber, the only F1 driver yet to jump ship, a bit of trouble come SuperLicence time. We could talk about Max Mosley, who appears to have temporarily forgotten that he isn’t actively involved in these things anymore and has, somewhat predictably, come out swinging against Briatore.
What we’re going to do instead is look at a picture of a car:
You’re looking at a concept livery for the 2010 Mercedes Grand Prix entry. Nothing is finalised – the car is a 2009 Brawn, for a start, though you’d imagine the design philosophy will be the same – but what’s there looks great. The livery itself is a lesson in how to incorporate sponsorship without ruining a classic theme, with the turquoise Petronas colours represented by that thin swoosh along the side of the car. The basic lines are clean but still aggressive, mercifully free of the chimneys, aerodynamic flip-ups and side wings that blighted the cars through the bulk of the last decade. It looks like a racing car should. It looks purposeful. It looks fast.
What I’ll be doing shortly, in a little off-season feature, is asking you to bear that last paragraph in mind.
They weren’t, as it turns out. A French court ruled yesterday that the FIA have no power at all to ban Briatore and Symonds for their roles in the Crashgate scandal. There’s no provision for it in the FIA statutes, and equally no provision for the FIA to prevent their licence holders (which don’t include Flavio and Pat, since neither of their roles require a licence. That’ll probably change soon enough…) from working with them. It was also suggested, and this I know you’ll struggle to believe, that the banning of Briatore might have been in some way influenced by then-president Max Mosley’s ongoing personal battle with the Italian.
None of that means that the two men aren’t as guilty as all Hell. It does, though, make the sport look awfully silly. Again.