Thursday, February 24, 2011
Michael explains Williams? gearbox, KERS and more | 2011 F1 season
F1 teams battle over cost-cutting
The first race of the 2011 season is still two months away, but the fight for a competitive advantage in Formula 1 is still raging away behind the scenes.
As their engineers put the finishing touches to their new cars in time for the start of pre-season testing next month, team bosses are trying to thrash out a new cost-saving agreement. And it's getting a bit nasty.
Rivals - almost without exception, I'm told - believe Red Bull exceeded en route to winning the world title last year the limitations laid out in the document that defines how teams commit their budgets. They also claim that Red Bull are blocking a new version of the so-called Resource Restriction Agreement to take the sport through to 2017, where the current one runs only to 2012.
One insider at a rival team said Red Bull had been "flouting" the RRA. This is quite a serious accusation, as it effectively claims Red Bull either spent longer developing the aerodynamics of their car, employed more staff, or spent more money - or all three - than they were allowed to. In other words, they had an unfair advantage.
Red Bull deny outright that they overspent in 2010, and insist they are objecting to the revised agreement only because it is flawed in its current form and they want to ensure it is "fair and equitable". More of which in a moment.
"We've worked in accordance with the RRA limits since they were introduced," Red Bull team principal Christian Horner told BBC Sport. "With tremendous hard work and internal efficiencies, we believe we've absolutely adhered to it.
"Red Bull has committed its budgets wisely and it's obviously surprising that people will feel that way, but it's inevitable, I guess, when you're at the front and winning races."
No one will go on the record to confirm their suspicions about Red Bull, but Virgin Racing chief executive officer Graeme Lowdon, while making it clear he does not know about Red Bull's budget, says: "On something as fundamental as this, on something that's there to make the whole business you're in sustainable, if someone was to even breach the spirit of that, then that's extremely disappointing.
"I cannot see how anyone can level a criticism at an RRA. If it made a worse show, or watered it down, then there would be a case to answer. But it doesn't so it's very disappointing if teams ignore something as fundamental as this."
In many ways, this financial dispute echoes the technical rows that enveloped Red Bull in 2010.
Unable to explain or understand how the RB6 car was so fast, rivals first accused Red Bull of having an illegal ride-height control system, and then of an overly flexible front wing. Red Bull insisted the car was completely legal, and the FIA, F1's governing body, never found otherwise.
Horner finds Red Bull in the middle of another controversy about 2010. Photo: Getty
"We expect other teams to potentially challenge [whether we have over-spent]," Horner says, "as they have done on front wings and ride heights and everything else in the course of last year. But we don't have any issue.
"Red Bull probably has the third or fourth biggest budget in F1. We spent prudently and have achieved great efficiency within the factory, and we have to top that in 2011."
This row has come up in the context of negotiations over revising ways of controlling F1's costs. Keeping a lid on budgets is, along with ensuring the racing remains as good as possible, one of the central themes for F1 stake-holders at the moment, as the sport's bosses seek to ensure it remains both compelling for its audience and affordable for its competitors in a difficult economic climate.
The RRA is the document the teams drew up in 2009 to control costs in F1. It defines a series of limitations on resources, getting stricter through 2010, 2011 and 2012, and the penalties for exceeding them. But it was always meant as a stepping-stone to a longer agreement.
In the current agreement, there is a sliding scale of penalties covering the following main areas of resource commitment:
- Aerodynamic development, measured in wind-tunnel hours or computational fluid dynamics data, with the more you do of one, up to a given limit, meaning the less you can do of the other;
- Total staff numbers, from 350 in 2010 down to 280 in 2011, and total external spend, from 40m Euros in 2010, down to 20m Euros in 2011, with the more you commit to one, the less you can spend on the other.
The penalties were based on a sliding scale. For example, a breach of up to 5% is punished by having that same amount taken off your resource allocation for the next year; a breach of 5-10% means having 1.1 times that amount taken off; and so on.
The new document - the fundamentals of which were largely agreed at a meeting at the Singapore Grand Prix last September - changes that.
One team principal, who did not wish to be identified, said that the new RRA relaxes the restrictions on resources - teams can spend a bit more money and employ a few more staff - and in return the policing is stricter, both in terms of how teams' spending is analysed and the penalties for exceeding the limits.
But the detail is proving problematic, with Red Bull in particular unhappy about the new document as it stands.
Horner says his objections are rooted in ensuring the new RRA, which would run until 2017, does what it is intended to do.
"The RRA is a positive thing for F1," he says. "I think a solution can be found for the outstanding issues, it just needs some sensible discussion between the teams, because the thought of an unrestricted spend in F1 is unpalatable for all the teams.
"So it is a matter of achieving transparency and a fair and equitable system between all independent and manufacturer-owned teams so that no party is at an advantage or disadvantage."
"The resource restriction needs to be sorted quite quickly because at the moment it is unclear what rules we are working to in 2011 in many respects, so it's important a solution is found and I think one will be found."
Mysterious Skoda concept announced for Geneva debut
Skoda has announced plans to introduce a mysterious new concept at the Geneva Motor Show. It will preview their new styling direction.
Nino Farina Walt Faulkner William Ferguson Maria Teresa de Filippis
Ferrari Launch Their 2011 Car The F150
Jose Froilán González Oscar González Aldo Gordini Horace Gould
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
F1: Kubica begins rehabilitation process
Kubica begins rehabilitation process By Pablo Elizalde Tuesday, February 22nd 2011, 15:05 GMT Robert Kubica has begun his rehabilitation and is in "pretty good" condition mentally following his accident, one of the the doctors treating him said on Tuesday. Kubica underwent his final surgery last week and was moved out of the intensive care unit a few days ago. Related posts:- F1: Kubica requires one more operation Kubica requires one more operation By Michele Lostia and Matt...
- F1: Kubica to undergo surgery this week Kubica to undergo surgery this week By Pablo Elizalde and...
- F1: Kubica set to stay in Italy for rehab Kubica set to stay in Italy for rehab By Michele...
Melbourne faces fresh calls to drop its Grand Prix | F1 Fanatic round-up
Real horsepower in Austin
Michael Schumacher has no regrets
Michael Schumacher has admitted he "feels good" about his decision to race in Formula One again.
The German driver, who won the world Drivers' Championship seven times, has had a disappointing 2010 season. He had been expected to challenge for the title but ended the season ninth in the standings with 72 points.
He couldn't even beat his team-mate Patrick Depailler Pedro Diniz Duke Dinsmore Frank Dochnal
Nissan tries to poach Porsche owners in Germany for GT-R [video]
New street campaign by Nissan in Germany targets Porsche drivers and asks them to test drive the GT-R. 
Tony Bettenhausen Mike Beuttler Birabongse Bhanubandh Lucien Bianchi
Red Bull under the spotlight
 Mark Webber and Sebastian Vettel celebrate with Red Bull boss Christian Horner on the podium |
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Team order rule needs a re-think
 Jean Todt arives for Wednesday's hearing |
?Whether you are for or against team orders, if the FIA could not back up its own rules and nail a competitor in a blatant case such as this the rule really does need reviewing. Perhaps Ferrari?s thinly-veiled threat to take the matter to the civil courts if they were punished too harshly scared the governing body, who as much as admitted the flimsiness of its rule."Paul Weaver, reporting for the Guardian in Monza, was in favour of the ruling which keeps alive Ferrari?s slim chances in an enthralling championship.
?The World Motor Sport Council was right not to ruin a compelling Formula One season by taking away the 25 points Alonso collected in Germany. That would have put him out of the five-man title race. But the council was widely expected to increase the fine and possibly deduct points from the team, as opposed to the individual. In the end, it could be argued that common sense prevailed. But the decision will dismay those who were upset by the way Ferrari handled the situation as much as anything else.?The Daily Mail's Jonathan McEvoy expressed outrage at the FIA tearing up its own rule book by allowing Ferrari to escape unpunished.
"Although the race stewards fined them �65,000 for giving team orders in July, the FIA World Motor Sport Council, to whom the matter was referred, decided not to impose any further punishment. It leaves the sport's rulers open to derision. It was, after all, their rule they undermined. In a statement, the WMSC said the regulation banning team orders 'should be reviewed'."