[Henldyhl]

I think Maclaren in the long term are doomed whitout Adrian Newey.

The MP 22 & 23 was an evolution of his design. The MP 24 & 25 are dogs moore or less. No new WCC whitout Adrian I fear, when was the last time, -98?

For now Adrian works for that awful drinks company, and their cars are beating the **** out off the MacLaren team. Even if they have the new Senna in the team nothing seems to help.

Ron should call Adrian right now, perhaps he then can save the team.

[HotDolly]

I think Maclaren in the long term are doomed whitout Adrian Newey.

The MP 22 & 23 was an evolution of his design. The MP 24 & 25 are dogs moore or less. No new WCC whitout Adrian I fear, when was the last time, -98?

For now Adrian works for that awful drinks company, and their cars are beating the **** out off the MacLaren team. Even if they have the new Senna in the team nothing seems to help.

Ron should call Adrian right now, perhaps he then can save the team.

Yes he was a big loss to them when he defected to Red Bull in 2006 but you cannot just blame that for the problems that have occured since, after all, in 2008 they proved that they can build and develop a decent championship winning car without him.

Plus its too early in my view to dismiss this year's McLaren as a "dog", its won 2 races so far this season out of 6 and took a dominant 1-2 finish in China to boot.

[Nmoitmzr]

Mclaren have challenged for more Championships and won more in the last 4 years than Newey has achieved with Red Bull so far. The last car he worked on for Mclaren was the MP4-21 and it was far from a championship winning car. The MP4-22 was an evolution of a Newey chassis but seemed to be developed into a winning car once he'd left. Newey is a fantastic Designer and has a great record, but he's not the only designer in F1 capable of designing a winning car.

A strange thread indeed....

[WaicurtaitfuT]

The Red Bull is still streets ahead of any thing else,and the renault is a surprize too.So Mac need to up their game,because if they dont the Red Bull will be over a second a lap quicker,rather the 6 hundreths quicker,that it is now!

[Pszinygv]

Maybe they'll allow Merc to upgrade their engine like the FIA allowed with Renault...funny how Renault powered cars seem to be doing so well now...

[reervieltnope]

The Red Bull is still streets ahead of any thing else,and the renault is a surprize too.So Mac need to up their game,because if they dont the Red Bull will be over a second a lap quicker,rather the 6 hundreths quicker,that it is now!

All in good time. The Red Bull is an evolution of the 2009 car which, even without the DDD and a weezing motor was pretty nippy.

All change next year, no more evolution, no more DDD, possibly the return of KERS.

Red Bull never incorporated KERS into their cars, and I would guess that Newey will have a headache or two packaging that and keeping it cool......

Lets just see who develops the quickest this year.....

[hujdrftgkas]

I haven't noticed the Woking mechanics running around shouting Albatross just yet!

[reervieltnope]

I haven't noticed the Woking mechanics running around shouting Albatross just yet!

They might do that on a weekend, but wait until you are not looking....

[hujdrftgkas]

They might do that on a weekend, but wait until you are not looking....

Damn, never thought of THAT - I overlooked that Ron's organization is so organized!!!

On the other hand - Lewis seems to forget that in the heat of the racing moment over the RADIO.

[PristisoliTer]

It seems very strange that an aerodynamicist can have so much influence on whether a car is a winning car or not. I mean, when you think about it, the problems in F1 regarding overtaking are because of aerodynamics (the following car in the dirty air and all that) are well accepted, and yet we have a situation where there is an engine development freeze and a single tyre supplier (= very little tyre development).

So if, for example, Ferrari want to catch up with Red Bull, they can't do it by strapping on a new engine with more power or improving their tyres. They have to improve their aerdynamics. Would not make more sense to have an aero freeze? Or better yet, let the teams decide which element they will freeze at the start of the year...

[hujdrftgkas]

It seems very strange that an aerodynamicist can have so much influence on whether a car is a winning car or not. I mean, when you think about it, the problems in F1 regarding overtaking are because of aerodynamics (the following car in the dirty air and all that) are well accepted, and yet we have a situation where there is an engine development freeze and a single tyre supplier (= very little tyre development).

So if, for example, Ferrari want to catch up with Red Bull, they can't do it by strapping on a new engine with more power or improving their tyres. They have to improve their aerdynamics. Would not make more sense to have an aero freeze? Or better yet, let the teams decide which element they will freeze at the start of the year...

The whole argument involves aerodynamics - problem is unless there is an outright banning of aero, which would destabilize the cars and make them extremely risky to drive, the only way is to do it in current fashion.

"Problem" is that there are such brilliant people working in f1 that they will innovate.

And if reducing aero is achieved, how is it policed? There are people that have put forward what appears to be sound hypotheses, however it is in the theory and finally application that the true result will be known.

By then its too late because the cars are built and it is set at least for an entire season. I dont see a way out of this. Formula One is the way it is.

Let the teams decide?! I think we went through that argument in 2009

[reervieltnope]

The whole argument involves aerodynamics - problem is unless there is an outright banning of aero, which would destabilize the cars and make them extremely risky to drive

I don't agree with this viewpoint - not if you specifically design a car without wings, diffuser etc.

Obviously, if you take a current car and just lop off the wings it will be rather slow on the corners, but wicked quick on the straights!!!

[russianstallian]

There is nothing about aero that makes it a requirement for safety. If anything it increases cornering speeds which actually makes the cars less safe!

If you were to reduce downforce to zero, obviously the cars would have to go around the corners much more slowly, so the speed involved if you have an accident is thus much reduced.

[loginptsa]

I think Maclaren in the long term are doomed whitout Adrian Newey.

The MP 22 & 23 was an evolution of his design. The MP 24 & 25 are dogs moore or less. No new WCC whitout Adrian I fear, when was the last time, -98?

For now Adrian works for that awful drinks company, and their cars are beating the **** out off the MacLaren team. Even if they have the new Senna in the team nothing seems to help.

Ron should call Adrian right now, perhaps he then can save the team.

McLaren have been excellent. Even when they were behind the 8-ball at the start of last year they improved quite rapidly. Have no doubt - they are a top team, and performing just fine without Newey.

[exchpaypalgold]

It seems very strange that an aerodynamicist can have so much influence on whether a car is a winning car or not. I mean, when you think about it, the problems in F1 regarding overtaking are because of aerodynamics (the following car in the dirty air and all that) are well accepted, and yet we have a situation where there is an engine development freeze and a single tyre supplier (= very little tyre development).

So if, for example, Ferrari want to catch up with Red Bull, they can't do it by strapping on a new engine with more power or improving their tyres. They have to improve their aerdynamics. Would not make more sense to have an aero freeze? Or better yet, let the teams decide which element they will freeze at the start of the year...

Or even better, freeze nothing at all!

I agree with the bulk of what you're saying though, F1 has boxed itself into this aero-is-all corner with the engine and tyre regs, and the rulemakers have nobody to blame but themselves. They try and blame the economy but that was in fairly rude health when the engines and tyres were neutered in the 2006/07 off-season.

[Henldyhl]

McLaren have been excellent. Even when they were behind the 8-ball at the start of last year they improved quite rapidly. Have no doubt - they are a top team, and performing just fine without Newey.

Agreed on , they are a top team.

Now when the engines no longer go booooom, the only thing they need is Adrian and Kimi.

[PristisoliTer]

The whole argument involves aerodynamics - problem is unless there is an outright banning of aero, which would destabilize the cars and make them extremely risky to drive, the only way is to do it in current fashion.

"Problem" is that there are such brilliant people working in f1 that they will innovate.......................................... .....

Let the teams decide?! I think we went through that argument in 2009

It's not the only way to do it. It's possible to limit the aero influence while at the same time using the talent of the "brilliant people" to re-inforce the situation.

The concept is very simple:

Downforce can be measured. The loss of downforce that happens to a car in "dirty" air can also be measured. So, let the "brilliant people" design whatever way they want, but with a limit to how much they disturb the air for other cars. The limit is clear, without the necessity for being cleverer than the designers.

As for the development freeze, what I was saying was that perhaps they should make teams choose between freezing their aero development, their engine or their tyres. It would make for more variation in the designs, leading to more passing, different cars being stronger on different circuits. Remember the early 80s? Sometimes the turbos were quicker, sometimes the cosworths. The idea is just speculation....

[exchpaypalgold]

As for the development freeze, what I was saying was that perhaps they should make teams choose between freezing their aero development, their engine or their tyres. It would make for more variation in the designs, leading to more passing, different cars being stronger on different circuits. Remember the early 80s? Sometimes the turbos were quicker, sometimes the cosworths. The idea is just speculation....

Yep more design variety, or rather different teams having different strengths in different areas, is always a good thing. As recently as 1994, Benetton had the best driver (after Imola), Williams the best car, and Ferrari the best engine, which meant for instance at Hockenheim the form book got ripped up and Ferrari dominated in the middle of a season where they were generally a distant third in the pecking order. And this was when everyone was on the same tyres (although not by regulation).

When you add tyres into the mix then there's countless examples of un-artificially shaking up the order when there's been a tyre war, Mexico 1986, Phoenix 1990, Barcelona and possibly Hungaroring 1997, the entire 2003 and 2005 seasons (including Indy - hey at least we got an unusual top 6 in that one), and so on.

Yes, if there is to be a freeze then your idea would be infinitely better than what we have now, I just don't like the idea of freezing full-stop, in what is supposed to be a technical competition.

[SantaClaus]

Downforce can be measured. The loss of downforce that happens to a car in "dirty" air can also be measured. So, let the "brilliant people" design whatever way they want, but with a limit to how much they disturb the air for other cars. The limit is clear, without the necessity for being cleverer than the designers.

It's an interesting concept, but one issue I see is that when the rules are framed based on a particular method of measurement, the "brilliant people" will just find ways to make something that passes the test conditions, but behaves differently in the "real world". Think of the Ferrari sprung floor for example.
I can imagine teams spending piles of cash coming up with designs that pass the FIA wind tunnel test, but generate much more turbulence for the following car when the driver is sitting in it, or when the engine's running, or at different speeds to what the FIA test at.
Which is one reason why they invariably fall back on the blunt instrument of legislating on the causes (sizes of wings and diffusers etc.) rather than measuring effects.

[PristisoliTer]

It's an interesting concept, but one issue I see is that when the rules are framed based on a particular method of measurement, the "brilliant people" will just find ways to make something that passes the test conditions, but behaves differently in the "real world". Think of the Ferrari sprung floor for example.
I can imagine teams spending piles of cash coming up with designs that pass the FIA wind tunnel test, but generate much more turbulence for the following car when the driver is sitting in it, or when the engine's running, or at different speeds to what the FIA test at.
Which is one reason why they invariably fall back on the blunt instrument of legislating on the causes (sizes of wings and diffusers etc.) rather than measuring effects.

Yes, but that would be further down the road. There's always a simple way round these things, that's why, for example, they introduced the wooden plank on the bottom of the car.