Bob Barnard Track Engineering

They say money makes the world go round, and it certainly makes the F1 world go round. In fact it has enough money to go around, it just isn't being split up correctly at present. The Resource Restriction Agreement, RRA, was raised again by Horner, and Whitmarsh continued in the  "we must be more relevant and not be seen as gas guzzlers" vein. F1 engines are I believe the most efficient engines around when you consider the power they produce from each gallon, and not just look at the miles per gallon. And there is that old "relevant" again. I guess the World Cup is relevant because most of us have kicked a ball around at some time in our life, but there again most of us have driven a car.

Bernie in responding to the Mayor of Melbourne about the value of an F1 GP compared it to the Olympics and the World Cup, and as far as the Olympics goes he is dead right. I was in Barcelona in 1992 and watched the Sydney Games lead up, and what a con job that is. Go and spend $6 bn  on facilities you did not need and will not use again for two weeks of exposure that no one cares about afterwards. At least you get an F1 race each year. The World Cup  has been different as the stadiums are used afterwards, although we now have South Africa looking for someone to run them and Qatar building stadiums in the desert.

Mark Hughes writing in Autosport the other week said "The sport can't afford to allow money to haemorrhage out." His article concentrated on the cost to promoters of staging a GP and where that money is going. The basic problem is it is not going back into the sport, it is going to a bunch of investors who have done no more than buy the rights. No one begrudged Bernie making a lot of money, he built this sport over many years and with his own abilities, and made others rich along the way, but the current situation with CVC is unsustainable. Hughes questions how many new countries there can be that will keep paying for GP's, and when the existing ones will get tired of it, like Malaysia and Bahrain. Now I met both those track chiefs in Cologne last year and they are already asking those questions. In Bahrain the Parliament is asking what they get for their money, and the circuit chief has a good answer. "What would it cost us to send everyone who watches the race a postcard?" It is a good argument, and has worked till now, but for how much longer? Malaysia says it has achieved it's objective of putting the country on the world stage, now they need the track to make money.

Joe Saward asks the question what these latest popular uprisings mean for F1? It is OK to go to all these exotic places with loads of money, but how safe and stable are they? Apparently there are stirrings in Bahrain today, and the F1 circus is headed there shortly. Would a new popular government be so keen to spend millions on a rich man's toy?

In a somewhat related article Sebastian Vettel is asking if the wheel has turned too far towards making F1 a "show" rather than a sport? Movable wings, KERS buttons, all to make the show better, but not for the driver. Alonso does not think it will be any easier to pass a car that is similar in speed, only those pesky back markers, and as I said a week or so ago, timing when to turn the wing back at the start of the braking zone is going to be a tricky problem, with some drivers missing it in early testing. So, we are spending loads of money on "widgets" that we are not sure even work. OK, KERS or some form of energy recovery system is going to be part of future automotive design, but that is being developed in spite of F1, not because of it. Porsche and Williams kept on developing their system when F1 had given it up.

So we have a situation where there is an incredible imbalance between the three parties to the deal. The promoters are not making money, the teams are getting some of the money coming into the sport, and a third party who are a silent partner effectively is creaming most of it off. Is this sustainable? Add to that the alienation of the traditional supporters of the sport by removing the opportunity to see it live and pandering to an elite who will lose interest and move on to the next big thing. Ask NASCAR how that is working for them. And while we are at it let's think about the "Car of Tomorrow" where the rules are so tightly proscribed it is almost spec racing. The teams spend enormous amounts on the smallest, silliest parts just to gain a thousand of a second, and as soon as they find it the part is banned. Does any of this sound "relevant" or "sustainable?" Oh yes, and now we are to have tires that wear out faster to make the "show" more fun, is that being efficient or relevant, or even safe? Interesting how the word "green" has disappeared from most of the motorsport vocabulary, apart from good old ALMS.

I commented the other day that if Boullier wanted Grosjean in F1 then he should give him a seat at his team, so what does he do? He hires Fauzy, a 28 year old Malaysian who has shown nothing in his previous trip to F1. Must be the long arm of Proton the Malaysian car maker backing Lotus cars, and they need some backing. Joe Saward in his blog today presented their latest earnings (losses) figures and the need for $64 in finance with a $700m loan being sought. These are the guys who intend taking over the world?  The naming court case is due to start Monday, so they had better get talking if they want to settle this as Bahar says.

While the Canadians are expressing concern over the Lotus fag packet livery Marlboro confirms it will continue to sponsor Ferrari and Ducati. How does that work? Are the Canadians color blind. Do they not sell Marlboro in Canada so it's OK? More power to Marlboro, if it is legal to sell them then it should be legal to advertise, or is the tax too convenient? I am no fan of smoking, in fact if cigarettes were banned it would suit me just fine, but I have been on the receiving end of this hypocrisy.

Qatar seems to be quietly taking over motorsport, along with some of its Gulf friends. Qatar Holdings LLC. is buying more of Porsche, and strengthening links with Williams. Joe again believes that this is a move to bring in VW-Porsche to F1, but that was countered by Porsche saying today that Le Mans is more interesting, affordable and a lower risk of failure than F1. I am old enough to remember the last time Porsche ran in F1, and it was not pretty.

The Mayor of Rome now says he wants the Olympics in 2020 rather than the F1 race, so I guess that is over. Can my Italian friends keep an eye on Flammini's land deal?

A1GP is to be resurrected it seems as A10 World Series, whatever that is. Never quite understood what A1GP was about except losing bucket loads of money. This has to rely on a big series sponsor and the promoters paying lots of money to have a race, without any "name" drivers, at least none that the general punter would know, and in spec cars. "The ethos is completely different in terms of the business model." a spokesman for A10GP said. It had better be. The series will run in the off season in non-European countries, so perhaps these racing starved people will not care who is driving? Now I know there are a bunch of Englishmen who just love "Our Jens," but I have never bought in to the jingoistic "our nation is better than yours" concept in motor racing. I, and I would believe most fans, like drivers and cars from wherever. Drivers I admire because of their ability and character, not nationality, and cars for their engineering and style. I can admire both the Peugeot and Audi equally at a Le Mans race without being French or German, and in the case of A1(0)GP we do not even have the difference in nationality of the cars, other than the color, and who really cares about that? We already have the Superleague based on soccer teams, which probably has more chance of motivating followers, although despite the success of my soccer team's car, Tottenham, I personally am unlikely to walk across the street to watch it. Good luck.

I loved yesterday"s quote from Lotus Renault designer James Allison who said the design of this year's car "would be on the brave end of brave." That's what we want to see, and Chapman would be proud. Or was it Lotus drivers who were the brave ones?

It's OK expanding racing to the far east, so long as they can build the tracks properly. We have had the earlier saga of Korea not building a track and paying Bernie a chunk of change not to run a GP, and now we are presumably still paving a track to race on in two weeks time. A couple of years back we had a Shanghai street race where the hairpin was so tight the cars had to do a three point turn, and no I am not joking, and then the manhole covers were not secured and the race was stopped to weld them down. Now we have the second practice for Superleague cancelled at a new Beijing street race because the curbs are coming up. It is actually worse than this as it is being run as non-championship race to a Chinese National Sanction as the track was not approved safe for an FIA Grade 2 status. So, the drivers are not going to race as hard if it is a non-championship race? It is OK to have a serious accident so long as the Chinese are approving it? What piece of unsafe are we missing here? As I said yesterday some people get a pass because they do not know better. Who built this anyway?

Suzuka already looks to be a Red Bull benefit. I know it is only Friday, but the signs are ominous. Ferrari nearly a second off the pace, Button struggling with the car, and Lewis dumping it into the wall almost from the get-go and doing very few laps in the second practice. Let's hope the new rear wing arrives in time for him. I guess they only had two of the new wings, and unlike Red Bull, did not want to take the one off of Button's car for him. It must be hot off the press or you would think they would have brought more than the two with them. The Degner curves are catching people out just as they did last year, despite the curbs being altered, but obviously not improved. Barrichello in particular commented that they love Suzuka as drivers, but it does have some safety issues and they have to drive accordingly. Not easy to make changes to Suzuka, being tightly wrapped in the valley as it is. Let us hope the rest of the teams can get it sorted and we can see another good race, and one not spoiled by the weather.

Trulli says he is looking forward to next year with Lotus and applauds their improvement this year. Looking at the practice times they are the class of the new teams, but are still over 4 seconds adrift of the quick guys. HRT are some 6 seconds back, so it seems not surprisingly the new teams have not made much progress this year. They are going to have to make a very significant redesign of their cars in the off season if they are to survive, which so far only Lotus seem to have put in place.

In other F1 news it seems the engine builders are agreeing with me, rule changes cost money, so they are trying to change Jean Todt's mind about the four cylinder turbo for 2013. Cosworth is saying it will cost Euro 20m to design a new engine, and who is paying, HRT,Virgin? The other guys are saying this is a Euro 100m deal, so where's the cost saving in F1 now? They sensibly suggest they can do a lot with the existing 8 cylinder if Jean wants "green," otherwise it is going cost lot of green stuff. Resource Reduction Agreement anybody?

Over in Malaysia Rossi seems to be riding around his shoulder problem, or maybe it is the chip on it that is helping? I'm sure after the comments of Yamaha management he is out to prove something. He is now saying he will go to Australia, which I am sure the Phillip Island Promoter is very relieved to hear, and make a decision after that. Stoner will be looking for a good result to take to the Island, while Lorenzo I'm sure will be looking for a nice quiet race to the World Championship.

Bathurst is on and practice times are as competitive as you would expect from this series, with 1.5 seconds separating the top twenty cars. I'm really sad we do not get the race here, although after ten hours last weekend of Petit I need to get some things done. I think we have had a highlight show on occasions. If any of my US friends know please tell me. David Brabham looks like it could be a long race as his car is well down in practice, but as they say in the classics, and F1 driver's interviews, it is a long race.

Murphy The Bear has a new post today, it is the usual mixture of rumor,opinion, and truth, but as always funny and worth logging in to.

Will the real Lotus please stand up? This situation over the use of "Lotus" would be silly if it were not for the history behind that name. This is a fight between two Malaysian groups that both use the Lotus name. One is Proton, the Malaysian car maker, owned by the Government I think, that owns the rights to make Lotus road cars, and has obviously decided to go racing in a big way. They sponsor a car in IRL for Kato to drive, and have just extended that deal, and have just announced an LMP2 Prototype for 2012. In between they have announced they are sponsoring the ART GP2 team next year. So, despite licensing Tony Fernandes, another Malaysian, to use the Lotus name this year in F1, I guess they have woken up that this is a great name to have if you are going racing and have decided not to renew the agreement, or rescind it, depending on what you read.

The plot thickens, as "Team Lotus," the original F1 Team, was presumably run as a separate entity to the Lotus road cars, and that name is apparently owned by David Hunt, relation of James Hunt F1 Champion. Tony Fernandes says he has acquired the rights from David to use the Team Lotus name next year. It is all headed to the courts to resolve this mess. As nice as it is to see Lotus racing again, some of us would probably have been just as happy to remember them as they were and save us all this. How about "Force Malaysia" Tony?

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, or paddock. It seems FOTA met at Singapore and agreed a "Resource Restriction Agreement" RRA, to run through 2017. Reading between the lines it sounds as if they have just extended the time for the existing "Resource Restriction" out to 2017. Quoting Renault Team Principle, Eric Boullier, "The decision taken last year [with the original RRA] was maybe in a special context with manufacturers threatening to break away for another championship. The RRA in its old version could even have damaged the sport by being too radical and I was keen to change the slope and extending it – and why not? We know we have to enter into a transition period. Everyone has done a reasonable job and I am happy we have signed this agreement."

So, it is business as usual, find as much money as you can and find a way to spend it. Martin Whitmarsh said that a number of loopholes have been closed and the RRA should be harder to fudge in future. Let us remember that this is basically a "Gentlemen's Agreement" between the teams, and there are few gentlemen in that paddock. You just have to look at the ludicrous amounts of money spent on the "motorhomes," McLaren being the biggest offender, to see where it goes. How is that making the racing better? Yes the drivers and engineers need somewhere to work and debrief, but that is a mobile Taj Mahal used for only half the races anyway. Never mind a test team, how big a team and how many trucks does that take to cart around and assemble, let alone run. Can you imagine the kitchen?

Just look at the musical drivers going on. A contract is not worth much apparently. Heidfeld did bring a sponsor to HRT as I suggested, but his drive to the end of the season seems to have lasted one race. Let's see who gets in that hot seat for Japan. Ask Petrov how his contract is going, with Boullier now saying he wants to meet Kimi face-to-face to see how serious he is about returning? Luizzi is confident his contract and good relations with the team will save his seat for next year. Let us know how that works out for you Tonio.