Bleacher Report - Articles by Milos Pintrava

Charlie Whiting Clarifies 2009 Engine and Safety Car Regulations

Milos Pintrava — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 03:57:29 -0500

The latest version of 2009 Formula One regulations included some changes that were not exactly advertised in advance. I was not alone not sure about what the eight engine per season rule exactly means. The other innovation were the safety car rules.

Timmie pointed out yesterday the interview with FIA race director Charlie Whiting that also clarifies some of the new things in the 2009 F1 regulations:

Eight engines per season rule

“It’s eight engines for the whole year. A driver will only incur a penalty if he uses a ninth engine. So the teams can use the engines as they like. There’s no three consecutive race rule because there doesn’t seem to be a need for it any longer. The engines will not have to do three complete events now.

In the past, as you know, the two-race engine was used only on Saturdays and Sundays. Now, for 17 races, the eight engines will have to do the three days of each Grand Prix. What the teams will do is to have a Friday engine that’ll probably do the first four races or something of that nature.

They’ll then take the engine out and use another one for Saturday and Sunday. All we’ve got to do, - it’ll be extra work - is to make sure that these engines remain sealed and are untouched.”

Fine, now we know, that teams can play with the engines around and do not have to use the same at any number of consecutive races. We also know that unlike in 2008 the engines used on Fridays also count.

What I still do not understand is how will the penalties work. If a driver has to use ninth engine in for example 15th race, will he be penalized in that one race only or also in each consecutive race?

Safety car

“The rule introduced in 2007 was a bad one, and we’ve gone back to the 2006 regulations. The only difference is we intend to implement a minimum time back to the pits. When we deploy the safety car, the message will go to all the cars, which will then have a “safety car” mode on their ECUs. As soon as that message gets to the car, it’ll know where it is on the circuit, and it’ll calculate a minimum time for the driver to get back to the pits. The driver will have to respect this and the information will be displayed on his dashboard.

If you remember, the reason we closed the pit entry was to remove the incentive for the driver to come back to his pit quickly. That’s gone now, as you won’t be able to reach the pits any quicker than your dashboard display allows you to.”

Well, the previous rule was not perfect to say it mildly. It affected results of several races, for example Singapore...But I am not sure how FIA expects this new complicated rule to work...Can’t someone come up with something a bit less complicated ?

The complete text of technical briefing with Charlie Whiting is available on FIA Web site (click here).

Charlie Whiting clarifies 2009 engine and safety car regulations

So, F1 almost lost Williams team …

Milos Pintrava — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 01:24:29 -0500

The glory days—Williams dominated F1 in 1996

Only two days ago I posted the article “What current F1 teams I would and what teams I would not miss ?” I listed three current teams that I believe F1 can’t afford to loose. Yesterday the news broke out that one of those three—Williams, was close to giving up.

Not that long ago (2002-2003) Williams were still one of the top teams fighting for race wins and top championship places. But following the split with their engine partner BMW during 2005 season there were not too many reasons to celebrate for the Grove based team. Williams moved from the top 3 towards midfield (and lower midfield) with regular points and an odd podium here and there being the most they could hope for.

Where did all the 2008 sponsors go ?

It did look rather well for them ahead of 2008 season though. The car seemed to be quite competitive during winter season, the space on the car was decently filled up with sponsor logos. Unfortunatelly some of them left (Lenovo, Petrobras), others got caught up in collapse of Iceland’s economy (Baugur group - All Saints, Mydiamonds, Hamleys…) and we all could read about the troubles of RBS. Add to this mix the fact that the team has been loosing money for at least 3 years in the row (details further below) and the recipe for disaster is almost complete. Adam Parr, the team’s CEO, to FT.com:

“I think it would be fair to say we have reached a point where further borrowing is not acceptable to the board of this company.”

Following the deaprture from F1 of Honda many predicted that Williams (without manufacturer or a billionaire backing) is the team in the biggest danger. Reading all that came out yesterday only confirms those predictions. But as it worked out, the demise of Honda and the cost cutting action that followed proved to be blessings for Williams, at least for now. Sir Frank Williams:

“[Given] the financial pressure we are under, the consequent changes to the rules to reduce the cost of racing are a major benefit.”

It also emerged that Bernie Ecclestone advanced payment of £14.5 million to Williams - the money the team would eventually receive after signing the new Concorde Agreement.

“It’s a prepayment. They are entitled to some back-payments only due for payment when they sign the Concorde. We said to them we will pay you now.”

Hearing about Ecclestone forking out millions in advance and ahead of contracts being signed suggests that the situation at Williams was serious. It looks like Ecclestone really meant it when he said this few days ago:

“It’s bad for me to say this, but the only team we would really say we would miss is Ferrari. I wouldn’t want to lose McLaren for sure. I wouldn’t want to lose Williams.”

It is funny to think that while Williams races with Toyota engines it may be thanks to Honda (end their exit) that the team is still around …

According to Financial Times Williams team cost about £100m last season, three times as much as 10 years ago, made a £21.4m loss in 2007, on top of a £27.7m loss the previous year, and its net debt for 2007 tripled to £24.7m. Sir Frank Williams:

“We need to make a profit. To be successful and to be certain of staying in business, we need to be successful financially too. So, we need to make a profit every year. We’ve lost in the last two years, or three, I think, but we have the reserves and resource to manage that.”

At the moment according to Adam Parr, more than 60% of Williams’ sponsorship target was committed for 2009 and RBS (for what it is worth) was tied to two more years of a three-year sponsorship deal. They clearly still have some job to do …

Photos: Williams/LAT

So, F1 almost lost Williams team …

KERS: Where Do The F1 Teams Stand—Summary

Milos Pintrava — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 09:18:22 -0500

KERS—the green source of headache for many!

The introduction of KERS (Kinetic Energy Recovery Systems) into Formula 1 has turned into rather controversial issue. One hand this brainchild of Max Mosley is here to show to the outside world how green and road relevant F1 can be. On the other hand this for F1 new technology has been a massive drain on financial resources of the teams at the time when FIA , FOTA and even Bernie Ecclestone talk about need to drastically reduce the cost of Formula One.

The decision to bring KERS into the F1 picture however came at the free spending times, before the current crisis hit. The teams have already spent millions on development and because of that, as Mario Theissen says, dumping KERS now perhaps would not be too wise:

"We agreed that the cost of KERS was quite significant, but the real thing is that when we discussed it a month ago the money had been spent already on development, so it would be the worst thing to spend money on something you don’t use."

There are calls to delay the introduction of KERS to 2010. Different people have different arguments. Some argue with the cost, some with safety concerns. I however think that the main reason for those who now oppose the 2009 introuction of KERS is much more simple—difficulties and set backs with the KERS development. I do not think that Luca di Montezemolo or Flavio Briatore would be now so vocal opponents of KERS should they have a perfect working KERS fitted in their brand new cars. So let’s look where all the teams currently stand and what are their KERS plans for 2009:

McLaren

McLaren are believed to be advancing well with their KERS development and are even expected to supply KERS to Force India as a part of their technical partnership deal. However, according to McLaren test driver Gary Paffet (to Forumula1.net at the Autosport International Show), the team hasn’t decided yet whether they will run with or without KERS this year:

“Yes, the rumours are that Ferrari are struggling with their KERS device, but there is no guarantee that everyone will be running the system anyway. Our system is coming on relatively well and we are happy with the development, but I can’t say that we will definitely run it. It all depends on the trade off between the weight and how much time it is going to give you. There is only a limited amount of lap time it can give you with the available power.”

Ferrari

Ferrari are one of the most vocal opponents of KERS. They abandoned their original project with Magneti-Marelli and rumours are they are still struggling with the development. Several prominent Ferrari figures slammed KERS as expensive and irrelevant to road cars. Kimi Raikkonen however had something positive to say after running the new F60 with KERS in Mugello this week:

“Both days the use of KERS had positive results. The system works well like every other new component. You have more power but for such a short time that I think it won’t change things much. Maybe it’s an interesting invention, but I don’t think it’s decisive.”

There are no words from the team yet whether they plan to run KERS from the beginning of the season or not.

BMW Sauber

BMW Sauber have been the biggest supporters of KERS. BMW also opposed the proposals of the other teams to postpone KERS introduction to 2010. But being supporter of KERS does not mean being ready—Mario Theissen:

“KERS is still the most challenging and exciting part of the new package to me. Looking back to when we started more than a year ago on KERS, that time was pure research. Then we went through a stage I would call pre-development. Now we are in the development stage. We are still not ready to race, but if I look at what progress we have made in last 12 months, it’s amazing. We have learned so much. We are still pushing hard. We are not ready yet. I am sure we will be ready at some point, I don’t know whether we will be ready for Melbourne. That is the character of innovation, you take risks and you don’t know when they will pay off. I’m pretty sure it will pay off at some point in the season and that it might become the crucial factor.”

Renault

Renault bosses are one of the fiercest critics of the dangers and cost of KERS. Flavio Briatore even calls introduction of KERS in F1 “a terrible mistake”. Renault’s technical director Bob Bell voiced the safety concerns:

“It’s unknown territory for us. We are not used to seeing cars with high voltage stickers. I think there will be some accidents this year. It’s inevitable. And you’ll probably see some mechanics get nasty shocks. Let’s hope it’s no more than that. The same could be said of marshals. The sport has done a very good job of trying to minimise the risk, to mechanics, technicians and trackside people, but there is still a risk. It’s several hundred volts and the potential to be tens of amps, so it’s pretty lethal. And it’s DC (direct current), so if you hold it you cannot let go.”

Flavio Briatore slammed the cost of KERS:

“I think it is a terrible mistake. In the end Renault, Mercedes-Benz and Ferrari supply engines to other teams, and we are not making any money - it is costing us but we are doing it for the good of F1. We have the big reduction in the costs of engines, but in another way we have opened the door on something else. We don’t know how much it is going to cost us in the end with development, and we don’t know if it is dangerous or not - it looks like it is not 100 percent in control. And does it bring any good to us? What it brings to us is only cost, that is sure.”

According to Bob Bell the teams is not yet sure if they will run with KERS in Australia.

Toyota

According to Toyota’s senior general manager of chassis Pascal Vasselon their “KERS system is running on the test bench, and it is working reasonably well”. Toyota has however decided not to run KERS from the beginning of 2009 season as they are not convinced KERS would be an advantage. Pascal Vasselon to Autosport:

“We took this decision being convinced that it would be an advantage. It’s not because we are late with the programme that we are not going to run it at the beginning of the season. We took into account the performance of the whole package. When you have KERS on the car you have almost no freedom left in terms of centre of gravity. It’s not only the boost you get for a couple of seconds, you have to take into account the effect on the whole car. That’s why we felt we needed some additional time to know whether there will be a net benefit.”

Williams

Williams are the only team developing a flywheel based KERS. The team believes KERS may bring them some benefits later on in the season. They may however opt not to use KERS from the beginning of the season and focus on the new 2009 aero package instead. Williams technical director Sam Michael:

“It’s very difficult to sign off KERS in time for Melbourne with all the other things we are trying to do. We are trying to make sure that the cooling and gearbox and everything else on the car is working first, and we are also concentrating on making sure our mechanical and aerodynamic package is optimised before we try and get KERS on the car. Because if you get something wrong on the aerodynamics or you get something wrong mechanical, you can lose seconds. Whereas KERS, even when you have everything 100% reliable is worth two and a half or three tenths. It’s important and that two and a half or three tenths will be important during the season, but to start with it will be swamped by the aero and getting the setup of the car right around the slicks and making sure all the mechanicals don’t break.”

Force India, Toro Rosso and Red Bull are not developing their own KERS and will rely on progress of their engine partners Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault. The same would probably apply to the team formerly known as Honda, should they find a buyer.

At the moment it does not look like there will be too many cars fitted with KERS on the grid in Melbourne …

Will Toyota Still Be on the F1 Grid in 2010?

Milos Pintrava — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 00:31:28 -0500

Toyota TF-109 testing in Portimao

In the immediate aftermath of Honda’s F1 withdrawal announcement all the remaining car manufacturers including Toyota confirmed their commitment to Formula One. The December statement from Toyota however had word “currently” placed right next to word “committed”:

“Toyota is currently committed to succeeding in Formula One and to reducing our costs. We are contributing to the FOTA activities which will achieve significant cost reductions whilst maintaining the spirit of the sport. We hope FOTA’s proposals and activities will be given the widespread support they deserve as they provide the sound, stable base Formula One requires at this time.”

That already that time sounded like very carefully crafted statement stating the intent to continue in F1 but at the same time leaving the door open for possible exit. All the talk about other teams disappearing ended (temporarily) following the cost cutting measures agreed on by FIA and FOTA.

Most of the attention has turned to Honda search for new owner of their Formula One team. But then came the launch of Toyota’s 2009 challenger (TF-109) and all the funny talk surrounding it.

John Howett, Jarno Trulli, and Tadashi Yamashina

First Jarno Trulli suggested that a race win in 2009 is necessary for Toyota’s continuing presence in F1:

“Toyota’s message has been very clear: we carry on with F1, however we all have a great responsibility to try to bring home the maiden victory, which could be decisive for the future. We need to do that in order to justify the reason to stay in F1. I won’t say it is vital, but it is very, very important nowadays.”

I admit I expected someone from Toyota to come out and dismiss any doubts about their commitment these words from Jarno Trulli might have created. But instead the team’s president John Howett said pretty much the same:

“We need a strong season. If we have a weak season we have no future. Whether we really have to win to stay is difficult to stay, but we feel we have to win. It is our desire and our passion shared by our people in Cologne. We feel we must win, and then we can cement and secure a very bright future in F1.”

The icing on the cake for me however were the words of Toyota’s team principal Tadashi Yamashina:

“Honestly speaking, we are also struggling to stay in F1. We discussed lots with the Japanese management, but fortunately Mr. (Katsuaki) Watanabe, our CEO, convinced the bosses to stay in F1. As John mentioned, Toyota are doing some cost reduction to get some better performance, but we are still alive and, from that sense, this season is very important. Even if the headquarters had some operational loss, we spend their money to fight to win a race, so it is very, very important for us to win this year.”

Not only did he confirm the importance of race win for Toyota’s survival in Formula One. He also made it clear that there were discussions in Toyota about possible pull out from F1.

Toyota guys have very little to show for the billions they probably spent on their Formula One adventure. Between 2002 and 2008 Toyota took part in 122 races, scored only one fastest lap, two pole positions, six front row starts, and eight podium finishes. The best results so far are Trulli’s second places in Malaysia and Bahrain back in 2005 and Glock’s 2nd place in Hungary last year.

It does sound like combination of the current economic slump and another underachieving season may be deadly for Toyota F1 team. They better ask their buddies in Honda for name cards of the unsuccessful takeover candidates, just in case…

Photos: Toyota Motor Corporation

Will Toyota still be on the F1 grid in 2010 ?

2009 F1 Drivers' Helmets

Milos Pintrava — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 10:30:57 -0500

With the teams revealing their 2009 Formula One cars we also have chance to see some of the 2009 F1 drivers helmets. Here they come. I will be adding more (or better) pictures as they become available.

Hamilton, Kovalainen, Glock, Trulli, and Piquet keep their helmets more less same as in 2008. Alonso added some red colour to his lid (to match the new colours of the Renault car probably).

Robert Kubica keeps his 2008 colours while Nick Heidfeld has changed his dominant helmet colour from 2008 blue to 2009 green after getting inspired by similar snowboard helmet.

2009 F1 Drivers Helmets