Hey. Get a grip on who's saying what in this thread. 'He' is in favour of the team in Charlotte. Doesn't mean I want to swallow the obvious BS coming out of there - July video presented as activity in December for example.

Its almost embarrassing watching a bunch of what id like to presume are grown men arguing like school yard girls.

Do it with respect, logic, common sense and with something remotely close to what we call a brain or dont do it at all.

If you watch the Red Bull factory tour video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6RZKqzAaHY and listen to what he says at around 1:25 onwards ("You'd be surprised at how much of a racing car is actually glued together").

I guess that's the standard production procedure with carbon fibre.

Completely off topic but; Did you know that BMW and other car manufacturers actually glue together parts of their chassis on production cars?

Rather than over-analysing the situation, it simply looks to me that USF1 are short of MONEY, TIME and PROGRESS. I'm sorry for them, but there seems little point pretending otherwise.

For me the idea was a flawed from the start, A US based team working to an outsourcing model with no wind tunnel and a US driver policy, lacking a major sponsor or much F1 experience.

Frankly the selection of their entry by Mosley is a metaphor of his entire reign. A politically motivated selection, based on false technical pretence. Its all very well lowering the budget to £40m, but utterly irrelevant when the team in question cannot even raise £20m. And as for Bernie, I seriously beg to differ that this is the way to engage the US audience. As if a country not exactly addicted to F1 is going to follow the crap team at the back of the grid because its got a few stars and stripes on it!

Its a crazy idea, and however romantic the notion that F1 could be 'done differently'.... er, no, in a word. It can't. At least not this differently. Any team entering F1 stating that their driver policy is to sign drivers from a country where there are no outsanding F1 candidates available, is doomed to failure. Its to difficult a sport to start placing artificial handicaps on yourself.

And where's your EVIDENCE, EVIDENCE and EVIDENCE?

One should always be cautious with using words like truth, as its not easy to define what is the truth.

I can argue for instance that USF1 have shown more evidence that they are progressing than what the other new teams have done (or Sauber and others for that matter but let's keep them out of it as they are established teams and have proven previously that they can deliver).

-They have shown pictures and videos of their factory
-They have shown photos of their European base being built
-They have shown photos and video of their tub
-They have said that they have passed crash tests
-They have said that they have the first chassis ready and are starting assembly of it

As far as I know, and I might be wrong, the other new teams have so far only provided the last two points of the above five I have listed.

So I disagree with your statement that USF1 "have done almost nothing to prove they're going to make it for this season", they have done quite a bit to show that they are working towards their goal. The team might still fail and not make it, but that's not my argument, its just that there are evidence of progress at the team.

Why can't an outsourcing model work?
They have access to one of the worlds best windtunnels in the Windshear facility (which was one of the reason they chose Charlotte as their base).
Virgin is not going to use a windtunnel and, like USF1, have done their design using CFD (which may still prove to be not as good as using a windtunnel)
Sauber does not have a major sponsor either at the moment (and how do you know that USF1 doesn't have a major sponsor?
Neither Campos, Virgin or Lotus, as teams, have much F1 experience either (that's kinda why they are new teams), it's more to do with the people you employ.

Why can't F1 be done differently? What is it about F1 that requires things to be done in one specific way? Hasn't F1 history shown that new groundbreaking ideas have changed the sport (ground effects, engine as a integral part of the chassis, turbocharging, carbonfibre tub, DD diffuser).

What if USF1 makes it to the start in Bahrain, races through the season etc?

The problem is everything is from scratch. They are making slow progress, but I would feel much better if they had a bit more done, basically they have 3 pieces of CF to show for at the moment. These are the most basic parts of the car. They have the front and rear suspensions, electronics and ECU, steering and throttle/brake controls, brakes, throttle, cooling, engine, fuel system, hydraulics, gearbox, drivelines, hubs, driver cell, underbody, diffuser, sidepods, front + rear wings, air + oil systems, front, rear and side crash structures/tests, and probably a few I'm missing.

All of these individual systems need weeks of fabrication and testing by themselves. Then they need to function in harmony before the car can even hit the track.

Thay have what 30 days until testing, and 70 until Bahrain? 20 and 55 odd working days. Lets just hope their work rate is accelerating because Windsor gabbing about some hubs and bearings on their way is not exactly lifting my concerns.

From the new teams, only USF1 and Lotus grab my interest. If they can pull this off, I will be following them closely.

What exactly has Virgin, Lotus or Campos shown so far?

I think too many people here are drawing conclusions based on what facts? Where are pictures or videos of Virgins, Lotus or Manors 2010 tubs? How about their factories or workers for next season?

How do you compare this new built from scratch team with Virgin, Lotus or Manor, when you have nothing to measure them to?

Once you start showing some side by side comparisons with the other brand new teams, then you can draw some real conclusions.

You want me to provide evidence that something hasn't happened? In what format?!

How about if testing starts on 1st Feb and USF1 don't have a car or drivers at the first test - will you agree that is evidence they are 'behind schedule'?
And if they are the last team to have not tested, will this provide more evidence?
It will for me.

Things can be done differently, but not so drastically without enough money, time or expertise. I just find the whole thing a bit to wacky, like a Saudi Arabian Ski team preparing for the winter olympics from their own indoor slope in their country, which isn't ready yet.

For me this is a thread about USF1. I'm not comparing them to other teams. I'm deducing that a half built factory the other side of the world is not ideal on top of a questionable business plan that is quite different to any other team. I don't think that is debatable at this stage. The questions about their business model to enter F1 will fairly evaporate if they make it to Bahrain, but until they do the 'is this really going to work' question is entirely fair - since nobody has done it like this before. My feeling is that they are making a particularly big deal of showing the world what they have acheived so far... and there are conclusions to be drawn from that in itself.

Well I would like your evidence in plain English...

The only evidence you can come up with seems to be based on events that have not taken place yet... You were debating the teams progress based on the assumption they will not be ready for the first race or test? You honestly don't have anything apart from that to base your statements about their finance, progress etc on?

If the team does not show up at the tests that's not a good thing, but some of the other new teams have also said that they will not be ready for the first tests. I would like to see the team at the tests but will wait until the first race weekend or if the team informs us that they are pulling out instead of making predictions based on negative hypothetical assumptions on the teams future actions.

Let me ask you again. Why cannot things be done so "drastically" different (as you put it)? And since you argue that they can't I would also like some more substantial facts to base that opinion on (not just because you think it can't). Do you have inside knowledge of the team or how to manage a F1 team and how to go about manufacturing a F1 car?

Until proven otherwise I don't think there's a "law of nature" that regulates ONE way of running a F1 operation. Yes, USF1's operation is set up slightly different than the others (not based in Europe, outsourcing manufacturing to some extent, using CFD etc.) and the team might not make it to the grid. But with my limited knowledge I can't see that you have provided any factual reasons why it will not work (like: outsourcing manufacturing won't work because of factor X and Y which makes result Z impossible/hard to achieve).

And, how do you know they don't have the money, expertise or time?

Maybe you are just stating your personal thoughts as facts? If you said "I don't believe that it will work out doing it differently" that is different from saying "It will not work doing it so drastically different". The latter is stated as a fact, the former as your personal opinion (which your statements seem to be).

why are you avoiding the question?

where are sauber/campos/lotus sponsors??..
renault does not even have an updated website. It only says coming soon.

this comparison is kind of stupid because we all know there is nothing that resembles snow or skiing in saudi arabia whereas north carolina is the heart of automobile racing in the US.

Things can be done as differently as you want to and they can succeed however to be the first to do them that way does make it far more of a learning process, than doing it the way everyone else dose things.
Add to that the lack of F1 experience and it gets even harder.
Thats not to say they cant do it but would it have been wiser to first learn to walk before they tired to run?

I'm not avoiding a question, I asked one - does USF1 have a sponsor? The answer to that is not 'does Campos have one?'.

I'm not glad about the lack of a sponsor, at all. But there it is, so IMO there's no point listening to Windsor's vague verbiage until he announces one.

Thanx on reply.


I saw that Video then My question was why the H do they not split the car in right- and Left? The guys can make more asymmetric cars depending on where to race.


And No I expect only human, buildings, bridges and toys are glued but not the road going cars. Welded may be... what glue do they use on what? Hi-monocule glue?

so why you ask a question that you already know the answer to? A more logical argument is to compare usf1 situation with other teams . If as of today lack of sponsorship announcement determines if a team will be in bahrein or not then usf1 may not be the only one missing from the grid.

Is not Chad Hurley immensely rich (15 billion or so)? Isn't him an investor in the team? Would he put his image of great entrepeneur in danger by supporting a dubious project? Or, would he be part of a dubious, future-limited project?

he has the money to bail them out and fund 100 percent of the team without the need of a sponsor if push comes to shove. Brawn ran most of the year without sponsorship.

I said "all I ask is a sponsor", trying to point out the core of the issue. I got into this initially because some people were saying the website showed USF1 are on track, when it's obviously an empty vessel showing exactly the opposite.

Yes some other teams might not make it. The ones with not enough sponsorship. The ones with sponsors are giving them publicity, as per the whole idea...

According to reports today:

http://paddocktalk.com/news/html/modules.p...c=1&catid=1 and http://www.motorsport-magazin.com/formel1/...ormelwagen.html



and:



This is NOT statements from USF1 and should be taken for what they are, but it seems that the plan is to do a presentation of the team on the 25th and participate in the official tests.

100m from Honda helped

honda's support ended in 2009. Brawn was on his own las year and had button doing his own laundry and paying for his travel

Strange thing is that rich people normally want to stay that way and are very careful with their money. Witness Larry Page and Sergey Brin (co-founders of Google) who invested heavily in Tesla Motors but were unprepared to make a further investment when it got into trouble saying enough was enough. Fortunately Tesla found other investors. Chad Hurley will have a bottom line as well and in fact he may well have been brought onboard at a discount to encourage other investors.

Now that's some irony for you. The all-American team promotes Argentina.

Within that waffle you seem to be saying that the only evidence that you would find as satisfactory proof that USF1 will not race in Bahrain.... is if they don't race in Bahrain.

He had Virgin almost from the start. Besides, the operating costs of the team are probably peanuts compared to what was spent on developing that car. Using Honda money...

Oh please check your facts before posting. Honda did support the team in 2009 and a lot of that will have gone in redundancy payments to the staff that had to be let go. Button made a gesture of solidarity with those that were left by accepting a pay cut and paying his own travel etc. I could go on but it'll probabally be too many words for you

Yes they are personel opinions. I specifically didn't want to get into a long explanation of the analysis I have drawn it from because I don't have the time this week, which is why, to repeat, my post started 'rather than analyse the situation'.

I think the over-riding impression coming from the team is that they are behind schedule and lacking funds. We both know what sources of information I am drawing those conclusions from. You have drawn the opposite conclusion. That's fine by me, but you haven't proved it either - and I'm not asking you to.

Oh for gods sake, it it geek week? Its not meant to be a perfect metaphor, I thought of it in about 2 seconds.

I see USF1 claim the factory shut down will hurt them badly.

and it takes two seconds to know that is a bad analogy.

^ you mean claim the factory shutdown will hurt them badly.

how much is spend in developing the car?

So that is your reply on my request for the facts you offered to provide

If you had cared to read my post you would have understood that what I said was that until the team itself declares otherwise or they don't show up in Bahrain I will not assume that they are not going to make it based on pure speculation.

Can you please supply some evidence to support your claims instead of attacking people requesting facts to back up your statements?

On what basis are you concluding that I have drawn the opposite conclusion? I have not said that they WILL make it or that doing it differently WILL work. I am merely questioning your statements that it WONT work. That is completely different to drawing a different conclusion.

I have access to the same sources as most people on here and I find it hard to arrive at a impression that they either are lacking funds or are flooding with money (when I see how much money they have used on their factory etc. it's nearer to get the impression that they do have money and also considering having Hurley on board). That you draw a conclusion that they are lacking funds must be based on other sources than I have access to (unless you just believe they are lacking). For me it's actually hard to draw any major conclusions on their funding at the moment (Lopez is a pay driver and brings money which indicates the need for money, but other drivers have been approached that wanted a salary to drive for the team so at the moment it's not black and white in this respect).

Yes, it seems that they are behind on some parts of their own previously stated schedule. (although Anderson have recently said that they are on schedule for the race season in 2010). So far there is not anything that I know of that suggests Anderson's latest statements about them being on schedule is wrong.

And how convenient for you that you do not have time this week to back up your claims...

I didn't offer to provide you with facts, I didn't attack you and I'm not even questioning your opinion. Your position is entirely sound, that you will believe USF1 will make it to Bahrain until they don't or say they don't. I'm just saying I'm a lot less certain than you from what I've heard. It doesn't look at though I'm alone in this thinking, Bernie Ecclestone is of a similar opinion.

You sound like someone trying very hard to have an arguement. I'll pop back to this thread during the Bahrain GP weekend.

and your arguments sound very weak..

see you in 60 days..

Here come the first signs of "I'm sorry but we won't be on the grid because we've been let down by those lazy Europeans"

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/80730

"We're all complaining a little about everything closing down for the New Year but - believe me – America is currently much more industrious than the UK," Windsor wrote on the US F1 website's blog.

"Here, at our home base, we were quiet on Christmas Day (naturally) and then again today. The UK – and most of Europe – basically shut down on December 18 and will not stagger back to life until January 4. That's 16 valuable days lost in the too-short life of the F1 European winter.

"And that's not all: remember the August F1 shutdown that was introduced for the first time in 2009? Well, it's happening again in 2010. Understand that most of Europe closes for August and you kind of understand the decision. Unless you're American, that is."

Also

"As in Australia, August for Americans is just another working month in which some people maybe take a week or two away. There's no nationwide shutdown, as such"

Just like everywhere apart from maybe France and Italy

So, one has to wonder, what is the purpose of Windsors statements? Being aware of the rumors surrounding the team, what good does it do to make statements which best are interpreted as general whining with no connection to the plight of the team, at worst that will only strengthen the rumours about USF1 having problems. If so, Windsor continues to surprise me with his lack of communications skills. Otherwise, the only reasonable explanations for the latest stream of messages from Windsor is that he is trying to come up with a scenario that will lay the blame elsewhere if the teams doesn't get to the start line.

I see nothing wrong with his statements, they are facts. We do not shut down for a month here - not that I know about. New Years, Independence Day, Christmas Day, and maybe a couple others depending on your company. Typically here you get 1 week vacation after 1 yr employment, 2 after 2, and the better companies will go up to 4 weeks. I've not seen many people take 4 straight weeks off though. Around here they'd forget you even worked there.

From ByronF1 on Twitter. He's the UK Daily Mirror's F1 correspondent...

Peter Windsor of USF1 says: "Our goal was never to take F1 to the United States but to take the United States to F1".

Re: Peter Windsor's words

Er, what is he on about? I've worked for both UK-based and NA companies; one UK employer gave an extra week of vacation time (beginning at 3 weeks as opposed to 2 for full-time employees) spread out over the year. That's it, there was no nearly month-long holiday shutdown over Christmas or in August, not for me, nor for my co-workers and fellow contractees in any country. In fact, I had to clock in a further half hour per day (due to different mandatory break regulations) with my European jobs, so the extra week of vacation would have evened out. Multi-week shutdowns? Clearly, I was working in the wrong industry to take advantage of this perk!


Windsor's comments read, to me, like excuses or a bit of America versus Euros rivalry baiting. I've said it already but I'll say it again – Peter Windsor needs to work on his pr skills...or, maybe, this is the fan gathering tactic he's decided to run with. Just browsing this thread shows how setting a team up as a 'national team' (even if all that's nationalistic about it is a name) gets accusations flying about hidden agendas, biases and patriotism.

I'm really, really, really not liking 2010's emerging, even if not always by design, national teams trend.

if that is the case then how come I do not see many complaint about ForceIndia or the new 1MalaysiaF1team.. I also hear that the folks in Malaysia are planning to built their car there..

Guys, this topic has gone from 'Will USF1 make it to the 2010 grid' to discussions about nationalisms too many times.

I don't think Peter Windsor's comments are that different to what he's said before. There's always been an unpleasant undercurrent of showing the effete Europeans how things really should be done.

Of course (as is often pointed out in these interminable arguments) the effete Europeans may already know how things should be done.