Facebook [Peter-"You could say it's an opportunity to give two young guys with a lot of talent a chance to come on board with fresh, clean minds, grow with the team and operate within the system the team is going to work within."]

I'd rather have Pantano and Klien.

According to this blog: http://blog.al.com/blogoftomorrow/2010/01/...erican_tea.html the tests will not be open for the public.

And the deal is not done yet, the team have made queries for possible dates over the last day.

Shame if it is private. USF1's car livery has the potential to be good, so it would be nice to see it.

If they have 10 to choose from, then that means most of their options are as mediocre as each other. A choice of 10 is hardly narrowing the field is it?

The quote is from the Formula1.com interview linked to previously (and should probably not be taken too much out of context, even though there are hints about going with two new drivers):

http://www.formula1.com/news/interviews/2010/1/10320.html

What logic did you use to get to that conclusion? Would it be different if they had 6 or 15 to choose from? Do you know who those 10 people are?

We have at least the following 10 ex F1 drivers looking for a drive:

Ralf Schumacher
Jacques Villeneuve
Nick Heidfeld
Pedro deLaRosa
Nelson Piquet
Giancarlo Fisichella
Nakajima
Romain Grosjean
Christian Klien
Anthony Davidson

The quality of the above 10 ranges from World Champ to also ran. And I haven't even listed any of the up and coming GP2 drivers etc, so how you can conclude that a list of 10 people has to be mediocre is beyond me...

There isn't a name on that list I'd take Jaime Alguesari over.

Even if they are just pay drivers, currently without superlicenses, I have enough respect for the team to believe that they wouldn't be looking at anyone if that driver was unlikely to be allowed to start in Bahrain.

Just wait for the conspiracy theorists who will say that the team, on purpose, will choose drivers that are not fulfilling the superlicence requirements. Obviously because USF1 (according to the conspiracy people) is just a PR excercise with no intention of competing in F1. And with no drivers having a superlicense, the team could blame the FIA for their failure to be able to compete... (since it now seems more and more likely that the team will actually have a car to compete with come March, and the team then cannot blame the lack of a car as their reason to not compete). Very shrewd reasoning from the conspirators...

The conspirary people haven't, mind you, come up with a explanation as to why anyone would pour money into setting up a factory in the US, signing a lease with their Spanish base, signing long term supply agreements and employing 80 people (plus race team), building a car and then call the whole thing off just before the season starts... Obviously if they run into financial problems etc. that could still happen, but if they did it just as a PR excercise why bother with all the financial expenditure?

As I have said before I have been a cautious optimist with regards to the USF1 team. Some posters on here have been so certain about the impending failure of the USF1 team that they have written comments that I'm sure they would not like to be reminded about should the team make it to the grid... (that's why when we are making comments about issues we don't really know everything about we should always be a bit cautious. Or you could take a chance and make bold statements and risk being wrong and have egg on your face or be right and claim to be a oracle...).

Jack + Rossi(US) should be fun.

You forgot Sato

Well obviously this latest story is just another wily PR play from Windsor. They are probably going to put a shell around a golf cart and run it around Barber MP and take pictures.

out of this list I would take Klien and Davidson as my 2 drivers. but I wouldn't mind having Sato back in the mix either

Windsor is really not helping that much with the latest interview:



Aka. All experienced drivers are currently contracted (except Heidfeld of course who has categorically denied any interest in the team) and we missed the boat.



He knows exactly what a pay driver is, and instead of biting the bullet and confirming it's an option, he waffles on about Alonso and Santander.



WTF??

He's just waffling on without answering any questions.

Windsor thinks you're an idiot.. I mean, of course that goes as well for all of us.

This is the guy who acts surprised, for no reason whatsoever, when the interviewer opens the door and enters his office, even though clearly the cameraman was standing there next to him already..

This is 'Peter very very busy', for the masses, or something.. haha

So you're saying that all of this is still just part of a "PR Excercise"?

And you are using Windsors acting skills, or lack of, to rate the team by? BTW, have you ever seen any of the many other "documentaries" etc, that also has the participants "acting", even though they obviously know that the cameraman is there before they enter the room? It's a very commonly used way of creating "natural real life situations" on TV. It's a way of trying to create a natural situation, but TV has the problem that they have to have the camera in situ before it happens, so obviously it's not a surprise to the person, but to try to make that impression they have to "act". They could have done it another way, but you can hardly blame Windsor for doing what ESPN wanted to do, or...????

Some of us are more concerned with the team, the car and ho the team progresses etc. Others are obviously more into commenting personal traits in the persons involved, like F1 was a Big Brother show

Barber is a great place for a test. Let's see a show of hands on this thread for all that have lapped there. Mine's up....

The circuit is good and if they had a bit more infrastructure, stands, F1 garages and weren't in the middle of nowhere, it would be a great venue for a US Grand Prix.

Rod Nelson, who has beeing working for Williams as Chief Operations Engineer for the past three years, switched to USF1.

Obviously just another publicity stunt.

Is it me or is Peter Windsor not liked?

No, and no.

I can't rate the team yet, but I can dislike the teamboss and his phoniness, and also be uninspired with what they've done with the driver(s)..




I don't like him for one... but at least he seems to be brilliant at setting self-evaluation parameters!

Windsor: "I would like to see a bet placed about which of the new teams, who make their car completely in house and is doing so outside Europe, will be the best. What I’m saying is that every team has its own characteristics so it’s difficult to set parameters to measure which is the best.

Tends not to help when you insult your home country.
But i would not say too many people have insulted PW just pointed out he has put his foot in his mouth many times over the last 9 months.
Be it promised timescales that never happened or silly and clearly wrong comments about such things as how the Europeans work.

Hopefully he'll bring some uniforms. Interesting, to me anyway the variety of people involved from the F1 and stock car hires to the contractors. Definitely not a traditional F1 operation. With the resource restrictions coming into play I think at least at the middle and back of the grid it will make things interesting.

Like him or not, I think Peter Windsor is doing a great thing for F1 in the USA.

I wish Ken Anderson and Peter Windsor the greatest success.

isn't he from Australia.. When did he do that?

Nope, I thought so too. I was corrected as well that he was born in Surrey England and raised in Australia. Is that considered an insult to your country?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Windsor

I hope the team is a success as well, even if I'm not a fan and that one day Star Spangled Banner plays on the podium, just as I hope the other five new teams acheive success. I however believe that you've got to treat the public with respect. For instance I lost respect for Hamilton, not because he crashed into the back of Raikkonen, but because of his interviews afterwards where he insulted my intelligene by claiming roughly something along the lines "I wouldn't call it a mistake as such"

People won't lose respect etc. if USF1 turns up with two drivers who acheived a respectable level of success, but are paying for the seats. We'll understand bills need to be paid and anyway, those drivers have shown something that they might be able to cope in F1, but if you then begin to insult our intelligence by claiming that x and y are pay drivers or that the Euro's are doing it wrong when 11 and a half teams are European and a lot of them are going to be eventually be better than you in 2010, then I will soon begin to get pissed off.

I agree that Windsor didn't make new European friends with his observations about the European work hours (which was not clearly wrong as you say, but quite recognisable even though many of us Europeans hate to admit it). But maybe Windsor isn't too concerned about winning new European friends but rather to win new American friends.

Nose crash test video

And a dog!

I love this team!

Hey peoples opinion of Windsor will only get better - he is wearing a suit/tie

No, he screwed that up as well as they are hardly making their car completely in house! What an utter cock.

Presentation has always been a factor! As looked at 49) years ago. Hope you don't mind a humorous look at the subject. B²

What the video doesn't tell you is that both the nose and side impact panel tests both failed their dummy tests.

The reason the parts aren't fitted to a test structure or tub is...it hasn't been completed yet.

Sorry, but someone please explain how are they going to test at Barber in 4 weeks when they haven't passed any of the required tests?

Maybe Ken has more up his sleeve than his highly embellished resume.

Don't believe that? Look up the Indy winner records and see if you can find him mentioned anywhere as Chief Engineer for a one, let alone 5 wins. Nigel Bennet and alan jenkins are listed in everything I can find

http://www.teamdan.com/people/j.html

Anybody ever wonder how he could design shocks for Penske Shock and WilliamsF1 team and be Chief Engineer for Mears at the same time?

Better yet, find somewhere where he's named as the Chief Designer of the '97 G-Force--you can find many names associated with it....but not his.

He was involved..but he wasn't Chief or lead designer on any component save a shock or bit of suspension. Ask Penske or Arie. Arie's '97 engineer was Tim Wardrop

http://www.nofenders.net/2007/10/doctor-doctor.html

http://insideracingtechnology.com/indyganasi.htm

http://oilpressure.wordpress.com/2009/11/1...gotten-chassis/

The Falcon...ask people involved what the problem was a Falcon...Anderson's disappearing act

Search Ken Anderson and G Force...hmmm. the only thing you come up with is his self-proclaimed genius---does anyone remember that car...most people would run from a car so horribly turned out. I guess some writer should do some due dilience and ask Chip Ganassi who owned G Force in '97 before he sold it to Panoz in 1998

How did he go from shock/designer engineer a year ago to Cheif Engineer? Any one notice how Ken's resume grew from this original story to today's website...we've all read about people's resumes being embellished once they get away with it once...http://www.autopuzzles.com/forum/index.php?topic=7080.msg49722

Doesn't anyone do their homework anymore?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXf2jx-fHZ0
Where's the tub here?

*hint* - It's just the nose cone that is being tested, not the entire car.

Ken, could you give us a source for the claim that both parts failed their tests?

So you have something against Ken Anderson?

The tests were done at Cranfield in the UK. And didn't you see the test rig? It clearly says that it's the nose cone that's being crash tested, not the entire car. Are you familiar with the crash test procedures since you have so strong views on it?

Can you tell us what's the difference between the Lotus nose cone crash test: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRYFs24t9fQ and the USF1 (apart from the test rig which clearly looks more state of the art in the USF1 video).

Have YOU done your homework?

Slightly OT, but those nosecones totally atomise on contact with the wall!

I thought the FIA usually crash tested parts to destruction?

Why was there a guy in the video shaking his head while watching the crash test??

Big Problems for USF1, i think, because there was a guy in the video shaking his head

Nose looks very basic, not much work done, Probably completed at the last minute from a very basic design.

USF1 is looking shaky

This post My inferences whle watching the Youtube video Peter Windsors suit

Oh yeah, I'm not disagreeing!

Looks totally amazing.

The USF1 seemed to splinter while the Lotus turned to dust.

Is there a major difference that anyone else notices?

The lotus test was done two months ago on the 5th of November.

Damn, no uniform again?!

In all honesty, it did look wrinkled. That proves it, Windsor does NOT read these forums and the team is destined to fail with clothing like that. They need a tailor and a make-over. Maybe that's where Oprah is going....Oprah USF1

How many crash tests does and F1 car have?

Isn't it the nose, the side and the roll hoop?

USF1 have asked the FIA if they can start the season in Spain according to Gazzetta. Sounds like they're in trouble time wise.

According italiaracing.net Team USF1 will not participate in the first four F1 Grands Prix, and only make two pre-season tests...........

Oh dear, more food for the naysayers.


But it does seem like they have to show everything off in order to prove that progress is being made.

Still, the FIA permission to start in Spain is just wrong.