Simply put, all the teams should be allowed to test their cars wherever is convenient at a FIA approved venue. IF the FIA really want the teams to be able to save money that is.

Why should Ferrari stare at Fiorano and truck all the crap & personel to Spain/France/or wherever? it makes no financial sense for some of their tests.

Same w/USF1. Why should they be forced to transport all their equipment/personel to timbucktoo for a shakedown. Finally the FIA have come to a common sense decision. Good job FIA

The salient point is that they've waived the rules for one team without having a compelling reason to do so.

[The original article stated that the waiver had been due to USA F1's base outside Europe]

I didn’t say that. I said that all of the technology needed to build an f1 car can be found in the US..


don't have a link now but what I read was that the Norfolk facility is a temporary location until they complete their state of the art HQ at the Sepang Circuit..

But who are "they"? The teams are the ones that are mentioned as allowing USF1 to do the test days.

So you are now angry with the other teams for allowing USF1 to do the two extra test days????

The official rules state 6 days, it's just the teams (FOTA) that has agreed to reduce that further to 4 days. But that has not made it's way to the regulations yet. So if you ask the FIA how many test days the teams have they would say 6 days, if you ask FOTA they would say that they have agreed to reduce that further to 4 days but have allowed USF1 the original 6 days.

Are you saying that there is no straight piece of tarmac within easy reach of the USF1 base?

I cannot see a single reason why any team should be granted extra testing due to thier location.

Maybe USF1 had already those days booked as windtunnel time...

Thinking about the name of the team, it doesn't scan well when you are referring to the actual cars themselves.

At least it doesn't to me. All the others scan better.

Maybe, but it's being reported as extra testing and defended by some here, as required due to their location. I think thats BS.

Agreed, the location thing sounds like BS..

Why railroad a proper debate by only seeing the negative, even in postive news?

Location seems unlikely given that the 6 days are to be used over the whole season, and they should have the Aragon facility up and running soon.
However I would like to know why FOTA/FIA granted USF1 an exemption?

because they're cool like that..
maybe if another teams asks for this, the same deviation will be granted..

Like I said maybe USF1 were already planning to use those test days as windtunnel time.. maybe there's a penalty for them canceling something that was already arranged..

I'm going to cut USF1 some slack on this one... I'm tired of the poorly thought-out rule changes. If they want to change some regulations they should be looking at 2011 at this point and accept the 2010 ones for what they are..

FOTA are so not "Cool like that"

I'm just intrigued as to what happened in the comittee room that made the teams restrict themselves, but not USF1.

Why? The mechanics and other team members aren't the designers. The significant portion of rules compliance is in the design. Are you suggesting that wrenches turn differently for an F1 car? What sets F1 apart, or did until the last few years are the materials, designs and ability push the envelope in terms or race car design. They all bolt together the same way, it's just different parts and materials. If a guy can change a shock on a DP1 he'll have no problem changing a shock in a formula car.

I think some people here are confusing two completely separate stories/issues:
1. The FIA said USF1 can do the Feb tests in Alabama instead of Spain.
2. The teams agreed to exempt USF1 from their recent agreement to reduce straight-line testing from six to four days.
Please be clear about which one you're talking about.

Please be clear about who you think are confused.

as for point 2, I also wonder how that came to be... did that go through a 70% FOTA vote? to then be accepted and submitted to the FIA as an unanimously approved (with the exception of USF1) regulation change (because that's how the regulations are changed)?

did they change the regulations when Massa tested last year?.. I doubt they did.. They probably just called each other and asked are you guys ok..? and that was the end of that..

I purposely avoided doing that in order to comply with the recent request from a moderator to discuss the issues and not other posters.

Yeah, but article suggests this latest arrangement will be put into the regulations (and if the current Concorde works as it used to, it takes unanimous support of all the teams)... I'm talking about the switch from 6 days to 4.. not the USF1 exemption.

In general, I was wondering what was the point of cutting back on the straight-line testing days as it is obvious to me this isn't helping the new teams at all... more specifically, I wonder if that indicates that the established teams are trying to screw the new ones, at the FOTA level of things..

You are overcomplicating the issue here.

The teams have agreed to let USF1 have six days of testing in 2010 (for whatever reason USF1 have stated as the cause of their request). The teams have agreed to reduce it to four days but have decided to give USF1 the extra two in 2010.

Noone has said anything about USF1 voting against the reduction or it being a 70% vote. As long as the FIA regs say 6 days, the reduction to four is nothing more than a "gentlemans agreement" between the teams until the FIA changes the regs. So, for the time being, it's up to the teams to say that team X may be exempt from the agreement. When the FIA adopts the 4 day rule, obviously it will be up to the FIA to decide on these matters.

The teams are all just laughing. "Yeah, let them have 6 days testing a non existent car. Hell, give them 600"

Says who?

Maybe the autosport article and yourself are oversimplifying it.

Personally, I think the USF1 exemption is the 'gentleman's agreement', and the switch from 6 days of straight-line tests to 4 follows a genuine regulation change procedure. If you try to see it that way, it does lead to some intriguing questions..

You obviously missed this part of the thread:

USF1 has got there 3 tests in Alabama instead of Jerez or Catalunya, and then 6 Straight-Line tests. They are also taking advantage of wind tunnel time, so they want their car to be as good as it can be. For all we know they could have a car, we just might have not seen it yet. How many teams have shown the actual car itself? 0. So then why is USF1 a 'failure' for not showing their car? No reason. USF1 has shown their CFD mockups of the car, which is more than most teams have shown.

In response to the Best Buy sponsorship, they are moving into Europe according to a story I read 3 months ago. (Haven't the slightest idea where to find it).

About Renault in the US, no there is no Renault in the US, BUT they own most of Nissan, and some of Renault's cars are basically re-branded as Nissan's. I own and drive a 2008 Nissan Versa, (which is the equivalent to a Renault Clio).

Well, I said it

I take my info from the Autosport article:



So why try to see it any other way than what the Autosport article says? Is it just because that it somehow can set the USF1 team in a bad light if it was the FIA who had given the team a preferential treatment? As far as the article says it is actually the teams that agreed on this, which makes the USF1 seem more like a genuine team. If the team was nowhere close to having a car or being believeable, would the FOTA have even bothered granting them these tests? And why apply for an extra two days if you don't have a car?

The 2010 sporting regulations was quoted in an earlier post and says 6 days as Autosport's article also says. So those where the regulations that FIA had announced for 2010.

I did not know that about Renault owning Nissan. Thank you for clearing this up!

I'm not trying to make a mountain out of a molehill, I'm just curious about the rationale behind this change and how it came to be accepted..

- I bet the logic behind this is to reduce costs, so why is one of the poorest team seeking an exemption?

- "... a further restriction in straight-line testing that was recently agreed by team principals." Clearly, in real-world terms, at least one team principal was against it... but for the agreement to make it into the FIA regs, it supposedly has to be backed by all the teams.

- Has the FOTA structure played a role in the end-result? Apparently FOTA operates with a 70% majority of the votes between themselves to go ahead with stuff (say, USF1 would have said "Nay" to cutting back on test days..), is it what happened here? ..because even though 70% approval is enough within FOTA, unanimity is required to actually go ahead and change the FIA regulations.

Now afterall I may well be over-complicating the issue a little bit ( ), but IMO the thing does raise some questions, mainly because I believe this measure is silly, especially at this point.. with a bunch of new teams entering, 2010 being underway, and what not..



...




In a completely unrelated fashion, I wonder if Williams is feeling alright? He didn't say no to this? WTF is going on?!

Yes, I also believe the rationale is to reduce costs. And FOTA needs to come up with cost saving measures after the FIA/FOTA war last summer. And do we KNOW that USF1 is one of the poorest teams? That they want to have two extra days of testing shows that they have money to test, doesn't it?

USF1 are probably seeking excemption so that they are more prepared for the 2010 season opener in Bahrain and the pre season track tests. I don't see too many other probabe reasons.

And how do we know that one team principal was against it? Everyone might have voted for it, but USF1 have wanted to use the opportunity in 2010 to get the excemption as a one off. For 2011 and beyond, USF1 is probably also backing the 4 day rule.

(Possible scenario: All teams voted for the 4 day test proposal (to save money in the long term and because the FIA needs unanimity to get a new reg thru), one team (USF1) have so far asked the other teams to keep the 6 test days for 2010 (so they can be better prepared as 2010 is their first season)).

So what I see is a win win situation: The teams all agree to save costs by reducing straight line testing to 4 days, but are in the situation to help out the new teams in 2010 by giving them excemptions, since FIA has not adopted the new regs yet (only USF1 have applied so far - that the team wants to maximize their test allotment really should be taken as a positive sign about the seriousness and intent of the team).

Silly or not, you have to take the rationale behind it up with the FOTA... (apart from the obvious cost saving measures).

Is USF1 going to be ready for the first group tests? I've skimmed the last few days worth of posts in this thread, and seen everything from the car is almost ready to go to rumours that they won't make the beginning races of the season. If they anticipate missing some allocated track time, that might prompt them to ask for more straight line test days. Any word on other teams – new or old – having asked for additional time? I assume now that USF1 has gotten the go ahead, some others might also be interested.

how about setting up a website and file a petition to the FIA to prevent the USf1 team from having these 2 extra days of testing since apparently the rest of the teams don't have an issue with this..

while you at it how about asking them to force the team to introduce uniforms asap..

Have you checked www.autosport.com

This article explains the test programme for USF1 (will be allowed to do three tests on an American race track in Alabama, USA before joining the rest in Spain)

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/80776

Well, maybe I just failed to express myself correctly, or my sarcasm detector is broken, but whatever.. if I was to setup an useless petition, it would be about keeping the 6 days of straight-line testing in 2010.

...aka stop messing with the farking regulations so relatively late in the game... they should use the little brainpower they've got to work on making solid 2011 regs instead...

This article have just appeared on the USF1 teams new opening page (even though it's dated Jan 3rd it showed up today):

http://www.usgpe.com/news/young-americans-...t-in-jerez.html



Is this just filed under "interesting news about US race drivers" or is it filed under "a hint of possible drivers for the team"?

You are still referring to the teams, right? As it was the TEAMS that has proposed the limitation to 4 days of testing...

correct.

The FIA simply signs at the bottom of the page in such a situation.. their own daftness doesn't enter the equation.

Further expansion of new offices at the factory:



http://www.facebook.com/OfficialUSF1Team#/...85&comments

@DFV

I know what they're saying, but are they really certain they'll make it? The recent financial worries with Campos highlight just how challenging it is for these new teams to be ready in time. USF1 have made noises that seem to indicate that they're finding the time schedule tighter than they'd like. IMO, they might well be better off to skip Valencia and test at home at a later date, but then I suppose that wouldn't give the best impression to certain audiences. Or...

The article actually makes it sound as if they were granted an exemption because they wanted to debut at home. Are they really planning extensive test time in America or doing more of a car debut, running laps to show that they exist and are ready? (And before anyone gets the wrong idea, that's not meant as an insult; I see no difference in them running at Barber and Ferrari at their home track).

If they are certain, you will have to ask the team.

They say they are certain to be in Bahrain, have applied for extra 2 days of straight line testing (why do that without a car?) and say they will debut the car in early february at the Barber track in Alabama. Do we have any other info to suggest otherwise? (I'm not saying that we should take their statements as guarantees that everything is fine, but what else do we have to go by at the moment?)

What noises are you referring to regarding the time schedule? I can't remember any statements from the team to that effect?

The first three test sessions in the US make a lot of sense when your factory is in the states. If they need new parts or change stuff that only shows up when running the car at a track, the factory is a bit closer and makes the logistics easier for their first test (which is a lot about sorting out all the little or large issues with the car). I would rather have the first tests in the states and rather test in Europe when the team have more experience with the car.

They have major announcements coming in "days and weeks", so they have things to announce but they don't know when they are going to do it.

That is a really daft comment about what the team said. Do you expect every statement from the team to have exact dates and times? Like, we have major announcements on thursday 14th, tuesday 19th, and thursday 21st??? How many businesses make statements like that when they have several different announcements coming up? What if some of the announcements are depending on some signatures that require people to fly in? What if something happens that pushes the date back a day? You end up looking stupid just because you had said that the announcement would take place on the 21st. That's why you play it safe and use more vague terms.

All the other teams that made major announcements in the recent past (Renault, Toyota, BMW, McLaren etc) also said that they would announce something "before new year", "before Christmas" or "in the coming days/weeks". Very common PR strategy so that you keep your options open and don't have to do a lot of PR work when the announced date falls through.

You are probably not working with PR I would guess...

Quite right, because USF1 have been defined over the last year by their carefully thought out and delivered promises.

Web cams in the factory? all American drivers? Rolling chassis when?

Perhaps they have been listening to your infinite wisdom DFV.

Yes, let's take Speed TV's Bob Varsha at his word. Clearly, being the voice of the American F1 coverage, he has absolutely no vested interest in USF1.

The track that USF1 is testing at instead of the Spain tests is Barber Motorsports Park in Birmingham, Alabama. It's only a few minutes away from Talladega Superspeedway for the people who know where it is. I think it's a excellent selection for them because it is much like a modern f1 circuit with it's own little mini version of Eau Rouge.


and an rFactor virtual on board lap here (track is laser-scanned):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gXrpFW34mc

Yes, we should all know that Varsha is lying and there is no car, in fact, there is no team. He said that just because he wants people to think there is a car and a team. That way, when the season comes and there is no USF1, he will be proven a lying moron. I completely agree with JarnoA. Most public personalities relish the opportunity to be publicly humiliated. It's so obvious.

On the other hand, he could be "puffing". Which is a sales technique used in all advertising where you say "our widgets are the best in the world," even thought they probably aren't. But that's too simple isn't it?

BTW, do any of the USF1isBS crowd have source material yet for the claim that the nose cone and side panel crash tests failed? I keep asking, and none of you can back it up. That would go along way towards the rumor mill credibility in my book.

Again, I look forward to any new facts.

I don't think the rFactor version is laser-scanned, but it is fun! Nice circuit they have got there.

Some much clearer iRacing vid on youtube, this one is laser-scanned.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRMMUmu75F4

I think they've finally learned to stop making promises and providing dates they might/can not hit, I think it's good they aren't giving us more specific dates for more news yet.

Well, yes, I suppose there is a bit of that.

They don't really need to build up to announcements like the big teams do, but hopefully we will see some drivers soon.

According to the article below Best Buy bought into a European electronics retailer in 2008 but are only opening their first Best Buy branded stores this year. It also states BB is in the US, Canada, Mexico, Europe and China. Seems to me a BB sponsorship could be true considering all the locations they have stores in now. I also think a black on yellow paint scheme would look pretty damn good.

http://www.bestbuyinc.com/news_center/07-2...-wheway-new-ceo