I think the big problem is Windsor has always had someone to fall back on. Before Frank/Patrick kept him in line. Most recently he had SpeedTV production. If you watch the video of Hurley when his involvment was verrified I believe he made it quite clear. His role in all this was startup cash and the videos and behind the scenes insight. PW and KA never being in control of the platinum cc went nuts. We can have a huge shop, no how about two!!! I always wanted THAT at Williams........ They blew through the cash and now are digging through the cusions for spare change. I don't think Hurley is or has fronted any change since the very beginning. I also think Windsor thought his contact status would help out and now he is finding out maybe he's not so cool afterall. Like the extra insight to the prerace coverage on Speed but I fall with most in thinking he's a pompass arrogant prick.

My post was in direct reply to one poster claiming USF1 was both fake and a scam. I'm aware that most people don't argue it is either of those.

Speed Article with Pechito's Manager


He says the only thing that can delay USF1 making Bahrain is failing the final crash test "Sometime next week". (Consistent with rumors)

He also implies that they are in negotiations with Dallara in the event of a worst case scenario. Of course, this would mean Campos really is finished.

So that the current situation at USF1 (maybe )

At least they are thinking of contingency. Good.

Isn't it weird the article says they began talking to Dallara at Chad Hurley's request?

Not really, If USF1 fails, he stands to lose A LOT of money. At least if USF1 enter with the Dallara, he still has a chance of recouping some of his losses (eventually).

Which means that while CompositeKen's story is likely false, there is a small amount of truth to the story. Unsurprisingly, Hurley isn't pleased with how the team is progressing.

Closer, I think.




If Windsor and pals have actually blown 20+ million without anything worthwhile to show for it, you might call it incompetence. (I find the 'platinum credit card' comment all too plausible.)

However, if any of the cash had come from your pocket, and IF the team management had not exactly lost any of their own money, and they had farmed out jobs to family and old friends as well, then, just possibly you might think of it slightly differently.

But I seriously doubt that anyone here has put money into USF1.
And its a moot point as to whether any posters have taken any money out!




Isn't the important point to emerge overnight from South America that Windsor has promised his backers there that they will be testing in mid-Feb?
I wonder if Reutemann did his due dilligance and visited Charlotte?

If that tweet about starting work on the tooling for the undertray was genuine, then I, for one, don't see testing happening that soon.


The business about CRASH testing is somewhat irrelevant I think.
They don't need to pass that before doing on-track testing. (Didn't Renault supposedly have a problem last year with their nose?)
The car you test doesn't have to be to spec (McLaren wing last year, Ferrari's pylon, use a 2008 Toro Rosso), or even exactly safe (today's mk 2 'birdcage').
You can go testing with a car that is not to raceworthy standard. And, hey, add a bit more carbon as required, so you pass the crash test before the first race.
But you do need four wheels attached, an engine and a gearbox, amongst other things.
I just wonder if someone is preparing the ground for a statement that "we couldn't run the car because we couldn't get through the crash tests, and so we are going to do more refinement, and aim for racing in China ..." which is totally bogus, but looks to me where we are heading.




Thanks to whoever it was that posted the plan of their factory.
I reckon the (one and only) car assembly bay currently seeing any action is the one right next to the offices. Which might explain (but not excuse) why the spare computer kit has been left lying around there for a month or more - right at the centre of the "action".

You mean that I am wrong according to Wikipedia whereas I am not wrong according to Branson himself (as reported by that source which is known for always making mistakes - not - the BBC):

Branson told BBC Sport that Virgin had signed a three-year title sponsorship deal that did not involve any equity in the team. He added that Virgin had "lent the team some money".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport...one/8412892.stm

That clears that one up.

Guys, do u contemplate the idea that Dallara is not working exclusively for and with Campos?

Whatever USF1 is negotiating with Dallara doesn´t have to mean anything at all with Campos, they just can´t sell the chassis to somebody else.

USF1 might be asking for a similar kind of deal, but not for the Campos material.

Adrian Campos confirmed that, and yesterday the actual president of Campos confirmed the problems with Dallara were solved.

I meant when you defense is the only thing that can go wrong is if we fail the crash test ... How is Hurley demanding they have contingencies in place? I mean ... he's not an engineer, he's far more likely to look for contingency plans if he thinks they won't be able to build the car rather than do so in case the car they build somehow fails the crash test. It's just sounds ... you know ... weird .. They 've had this tub for months, did It suddenly dawn on them Oh shit .. this might fail the crashtest, let's tell Hurley see what he thinks

And that Lotus are struggling "similarly".

Let's see, out of a population of 305,000,000 that would be about 50 million: 2 million native americans and 48 million of Hispanic descent (the majority from Mexico and Central America).

How are we going to know when he starts showing signs of senility? Maybe when he starts promoting a Vatican street race?

http://fia.com/en-GB/mediacentre/pressrele...ticipation.aspx

So the "you can miss three races" clause was bull as suspected

Why are many of these theories assuming that passing the crash test will be such a big deal? Has there been any new data to suggest that they won't pass? It looks like the rumors are starting to be taken as fact, then used as the basis for speculation. The last thing I remember that had some credibility was USF1 saying that they were planning on having extra carbon to pass the test even if it meant that they would be "a few ounces" over weight.

I am not addressing the teams progress, just the crash test pass/fail rumors as a basis for speculation.

I will say that even at this point, I see only two alternatives.

Either they are working their butts off (meaning that they have money, but not time) and are behind schedule but think they can make Bahrain;

or they are out of money, know they won't make Bahrain, and are hoping against hope to get money and make a later race.

I don't see Dallara as a legit option, just because it would cost to much to build half a car, then buy Dallara's, then scrap their car. Or if they did finish their car this season, they would effectively be paying for two cars in one season.

From http://formula-one.speedtv.com/article/f1-...ut-three-races/ yesterday:

"FIA president Jean Todt has confirmed reports that F1 teams may sit out three Grands Prix in 2010 without penalty."

""In the last World Council the opportunity for a team to not participate in three rounds of the championship, also not consecutively, was granted," Todt is quoted as saying by Italy's La Gazzetta dello Sport."

Did something get all twisted going from French to Italian to English, or WTF is going on? I mean, Todt, head of the FIA, supposedly says one thing one day, and the next day the FIA contradicts him. ??? Todt, the press, the FIA--maybe USF1 doesn't have a lock on incompetence.

More popcorn needed!

Rightly so, IMO.

LOTS more popcorn!

I'm going to say it now, USF1 won't make it. Even though I hope they will, at this point I just can't see it happening.

This is Todt's actual quote so ...

No misinterpretation here: "In the last draft of the Concorde agreement it’s written that a team can skip three races." As I mentioned in the other thread, the teams could use Todt's own quotes in court to explain why they interpreted the clause to mean that they could miss three races without punishment.

Check Brad Spurgeons blog in the NY Times (he was one of the journalists present at that meeting)

So he actually said "that it was possible for the teams to skip up to three races and not be penalized."

Now why wouldn't it be possible to infringe the CA and FIA regulations but not be penalized?

I'm going to say it now, USF1 WILL make it. But they will be very slow!!!

Seemingly the Modt said "I think its this way, but I'll check and get back to you later ...

Thats the New York Times version http://formulaone.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/0...-participation/
Thanks to (JPW on) the Stefan thread for finding it ...

and reposting here (and curses to my intermittent connection!)

After all the -gates maybe someone in charge could at least print some competent rules. Why must all things FIA turn so complicated? Next week we find out refueling is still ok. No wonder it takes PW and KA to try this out. Always hoped Penske would make another go of it. Penske and Ganassi teaming up COULD make a legit run. Wonder if PW even approached them. Bet he was laughed down the hallway!

I think the confusion over the three-race deal is this: if you miss one race, the FIA has the right to sanction a team however they see fit, which may be nothing, or they may take your license; but if you miss four, then you automatically forfeit your license.

The NYT version does not contain the blunt quotes from Todt yesterday - I wonder why! Now the FIA is finding out why it is useful to have a lawyer in charge - I can't remember Max bluntly contradicting himself within 24 hours.

I think Roger is happy with what he is already doing, although he was interested in buying Saturn for the dealer network among other things. F1 would be an additional stress that would surely see his other racing outfits suffer, so I just do not see Penske doing it. If he was going to, he would have already done so (in modern times that is). Ganassi would be interesting, get him to team up with Swift engineering - plus they can use Wind Shear for the wind tunnel. Swift has a smaller scale tunnel if I remember right, I have always liked them.

Andretti would be interesting as well for a jump to F1 honestly. Plus he has that test track around his house (ok it is kart track, but I still want it).

I guess the latest news once you translate it all seems to suggest that Lopez will be back on or around the 15th, the engines will be there on our around the 15th (some say 17th), and they will fire-up the engine (on a test stand?), and proceed to test. So that is a few more days away, the floors to the car would surely have been long done, it takes what two-three days to bake and bond it all? Someone call Crawford Composites and make sure they are not baking IndyCar parts ahead of the F1 kit.. lol Next week should be telling for sure.

Sorry for all the edits, but this is interesting: http://www.maxicode.com/racing/team_car/te...warren_bio.html

Michael Schmidt's credibility has taken a massive upward swing thanks to this stuff

Schmidt was the first one that was raising doubts and saying there is troubles when everyone thought things were going great and now it turns out Schmidt was right all along and USF1 are up shit creek

Speed with a new article, not much new really however: http://formula-one.speedtv.com/article/f1-...-bahrain-debut/



On a side note, and I really hate to point to the videos, but is it possible at this point that the team is shifting parts to spain? In one video they are boxing a wiring loom, was this for storage, shipping to the crash test, or shipping to Motorland? Complete speculation on my point, if I was running the team and we were late, I would be building the cars in Spain. I would have Cosworth ship the race engines there, and really even the test engines if they are not in the US yet. The cars have to go to Europe in a few weeks anyway, might as well make it now.

That's how it probably is. Like in school basically, you miss three hours, you miss the 4th you're expelled.

But what if you show up and you just forget your textbooks? (Cars in this case, or you forget your engines?)

Or show up with a couple of Honda Civics, not pass scrutineering, and just say, "Well, we tried."

Best thing Hurley could do at this point is to sell the gridslots to those Serbs or whatever they are, forget about ever meeting that aussie with mouth-diarrohea.

A) Thanks, Brad Spurgeon, for explaining clearly the situation. "Yesterday I reported what Jean Todt and his spokesman had said during a meeting with the media in Paris concerning the right of Formula One teams to skip races. The two men had qualified what they said by saying that it was their understanding, but that they were not sure, that it was possible for the teams to skip up to three races and not be penalized. They said they would verify this and inform the media later. Somehow, some reports from that meeting came out saying this was in fact a fait accompli, that teams could skip up to three races. In fact, [...NO...]"

B) In light of their expressed uncertainty, no team "could use Todt's own quotes in court to explain why they interpreted the clause to mean that they could miss three races without punishment.", as mattorgen speculated.

C) The FIA press release said nothing about what the consequences of "an infringement both of the Concorde Agreement and the FIA Regulations" would be. Fines? Elimination from the championship? If the latter, then my 80% feeling that USF1's goose is cooked will go to at least 95%

Ummm, actually, yesterday's piece - linked from today's article - does say 'the blunt stuff' --- BUT it also reported the qualification that Todt wasn't certain.
Excellent, accurate reporting of what was said!

Absolutely they could. The very fact that the two men who run the sport have stated teams can miss races is evidence enough to build a case on. There is no question about that. Whether that case would be successful or not is what is open to question.

Wait I have seen a Falcon Indycar lying around here somewhere!

The NYT article says that Todt said he was not certain yesterday
The Times article does not mention Todt saying he was not certain.

What proof do you have that the former is more accurate than the latter?

Its just a proper English version of what appeared on this thread last night as a Google translation.

I fear that Mr Windsor has been promising his Argentine backers that the car is all ready, just needing its crash test certificates.
Of course, it needs a gearbox for the rear-impact testing. Which might (or might not) be a problem.

I have pointed out previously that passing crash tests is not a requirement for track testing, But engines, gearbox, wheels and stuff ARE needed for track testing.

When were they going to be at Barber?

Well, YESTERDAY they {EDIT the NYT} reported that the Modt had had said that he wasn't certain.
Click the link in the first article - please!

No, the two men who run the sport DID NOT say "teams can miss races". They said they didn't know for sure and would check. Which is what any team would have to do. And presumably, in doing the proper checking, they would arrive at the same conclusion as Todt et al. A team would get nowhere going to court and trying to base its case on what Todt said off the top of his head rather than the actual controlling documents, especially after the FIA clarified the situtation within 24 hours or so.

The last rumors I saw from the Barber officials were that they were clueless to it all still.

Nice post! I agree 100%. I have met Chad Hurley and he seemed very keen to see his team do well, but not at any expense. I think his initial investment is lost and he knows it. The Peter and Ken show have blown through the funds, Bernie has not given them the $40M as yet, and they need those funds as well as driver investment to even continue. That is why Bernie has withheld the $40M hoping that USF1 simply drops out and Stefan GP takes their spot. Windsor should have called Toyota and said we will take your cars for a discount sans motors, and used modified versions of them for 2010 until they had their own "super innovative" car ready to roll. I feel bad for Hurley who has lost millions of dollars because of two incompetent boobs like PW and KA. From the very first akward video showing PW with Varsha at his headquarters, something looked off and phony about this outfit. Perhaps they never had any realistic chance of making the grid this year and simply scammed Hurley and others out of money? Let's hope that is not the case and it is just a matter of horrible management that has sunk this "US" ship. Peter Windsor is a Lewis Hamilton knob gurgling douche bag, and if he is sacked then I will pull for this team. Just please don't let him back at Speed!!

So what proof do you have that the NYT yesterday is more accurate than the Times yesterday?

One said Todt wasn't certain and the other didn't state this at all.

Can we please keep this thread on topic - USF1. There is a thread dedicated to the "no show" issue.

Thanks

Yes, there does seem to be a disconnect between Mr Windsor's statements and the general perception of reality.

I suspect that the difference between crash testing and track testing may have become blurred with multiple translations between Spanish and English.

Personally, I doubt that they will achieve either this month.
Clearly, others have had more faith in Mr Windsor's statements.

I well I would expect JML's manager to be talking to more than just Peter Hamilton (opps Windsor, sorry I watch SpeedTV). So at this point dare I say I trust the comments coming from JML's manager over Windsor. Hopefully, he was talking with Warren and others. I have faith in Dr. Warren to be honest, so hopefully we hear more from him.