Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Sauber money saving idea thwarted by Red Bull


  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

#1 Tonka

Tonka
  • Member

  • 834 posts
  • Joined: November 11

Posted 19 September 2013 - 07:05

http://www.grandprix...ns/ns26317.html

 

Have Red Bull got the Ferrari veto ?

 

 

Red Bull has rejected a proposal that might have levelled the playing field for F1's struggling teams.

Next year, in-season testing will once again be allowed, but midfield teams Sauber and Force India admitted during a recent team managers' meeting that they probably cannot afford to attend every test day.

According to Germany's Auto Motor und Sport, Sauber proposed that, instead, they be allowed to substitute a test day for a day of wind tunnel testing with the actual race car.

 

(Read the article for the rest)

 

Looks to me like Red Bull have put the boot into the struggling little teams.  I'm surprised Sauber have a full-size wind tunnel and Red Bull don't.

 

 



Advertisement

#2 Cyanide

Cyanide
  • Member

  • 2,624 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 19 September 2013 - 07:11

Red Bull were the ones pushing for these new tyres as well, and they got what they wanted. So apparently, yes, they do. 



#3 Gilles4Ever

Gilles4Ever
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 20,067 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 19 September 2013 - 07:25

Any team could have torpedoed the changes, it's a rule change and agreement must be unanimous. (unless it's done under the guise of safety)



#4 JohnCooperF1

JohnCooperF1
  • Member

  • 69 posts
  • Joined: September 13

Posted 19 September 2013 - 07:32

I guess Sauber would have 'inherited' the wind tunnel from BMW when the team was sold back to Peter Sauber.



#5 JohnCooperF1

JohnCooperF1
  • Member

  • 69 posts
  • Joined: September 13

Posted 19 September 2013 - 07:36

As Gilles has pointed out it is not a RB veto against rule changes... I cannot see Ferrari or McLaren handing rival teams any concession either.



#6 Chubby_Deuce

Chubby_Deuce
  • Member

  • 5,917 posts
  • Joined: July 04

Posted 19 September 2013 - 07:42

 I'm surprised Sauber have a full-size wind tunnel and Red Bull don't.

 

Seriously? This was big news when it was built, along with the (at the time) largest computing power in F1.

 

Red Bull still use the tunnel that was built by Jag back in 2002, I believe using 60% scale models.



#7 Der Pate

Der Pate
  • Member

  • 624 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 19 September 2013 - 07:47

As Gilles has pointed out it is not a RB veto against rule changes... I cannot see Ferrari or McLaren handing rival teams any concession either.

 

Thank you very much! The RB-bashing here sometimes is too much!

 

It is clearly written in this article, that other teams as well are against cost-cuttings. And if you look it the Red-Bull-way it is more expensive for them to build a model for the windtunnel, than testing for one day...



#8 Tonka

Tonka
  • Member

  • 834 posts
  • Joined: November 11

Posted 19 September 2013 - 07:51

Any team could have torpedoed the changes, it's a rule change and agreement must be unanimous. (unless it's done under the guise of safety)

 

Any team could have vetoed the idea, but only one team did.  Apparently none of the other 3 "rich" teams did.  With over half of the F1 teams struggling to survive, Red Bull are starting to push their weight around and people wonder why they and Vettel are not popular.



#9 Tonka

Tonka
  • Member

  • 834 posts
  • Joined: November 11

Posted 19 September 2013 - 07:53

Seriously? This was big news when it was built, along with the (at the time) largest computing power in F1.

 

 

 

Amazingly, there are more things I don't know about, than I do know about.



#10 Der Pate

Der Pate
  • Member

  • 624 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 19 September 2013 - 07:56

Any team could have vetoed the idea, but only one team did.  Apparently none of the other 3 "rich" teams did.  With over half of the F1 teams struggling to survive, Red Bull are starting to push their weight around and people wonder why they and Vettel are not popular.

 

There were times, when (popular) teams like McLaren or Williams act the same way...

 

And I remember many cost-cutting-ideas, which were vetoed especially by Ferrari, because they were the rich... For me it seems that Ferrari still don´t want cost-cutting, but they keep quite and let red Bull do the unpopular things...



#11 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 19 September 2013 - 08:03

This is a bit odd then:

 

"Much of the momentum for the new agreement has come from the smaller teams, who will be able to use the tests to raise revenue by charging young drivers for time in the car."

 

BBC

 

And after all the tests follow on from race weekends, so there's no extra travelling or test teams.  

 

Though I thought the ban on in-season testing has had an excellent effect on the sport.  I suppose it'll help new drivers, if race drivers are banned, but they could have achieved the same thing with Anthony Hamilton's plan.



#12 Reinmuster

Reinmuster
  • Member

  • 653 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 19 September 2013 - 08:43

I guess Sauber would have 'inherited' the wind tunnel from BMW when the team was sold back to Peter Sauber.

 

on contrary, it was Sauber's state-of-art wind tunnel that attracts BMW, among others.



#13 dau

dau
  • Member

  • 4,569 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 19 September 2013 - 11:16

Any team could have torpedoed the changes, it's a rule change and agreement must be unanimous. (unless it's done under the guise of safety)

As far as i remember it, a 70% majority was required in the Technical/Sporting Working Groups, which was reduced to a simple majority in the new Strategy Working Group, though i'm not sure whether this has been implemented yet. The Strategy Working Group is made up of six seats for FOM, six for FIA and another six for Ferrari, McLaren, Mercedes, Red Bull, Williams plus the highest placed team in previous year's championship, which would be Lotus at the moment. FOM can force decisions on the basis of them being safety related, but otherwise, no team can veto a majority decision. Not even Ferrari, though they have been given the casting vote instead. I'm not sure about how the F1 Commission works and whether it is possible to veto decisions there, but usually, they were only rubberstamping whatever the Working Groups decided on.

 

So either there was no majority for that idea anyway and it's not only RBR who opposed it, or it hasn't even been introduced in the SWG yet and was only discussed outside the usual rulemaking process. 



#14 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 2,438 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 19 September 2013 - 11:40

As far as i remember it, a 70% majority was required in the Technical/Sporting Working Groups, which was reduced to a simple majority in the new Strategy Working Group, though i'm not sure whether this has been implemented yet. The Strategy Working Group is made up of six seats for FOM, six for FIA and another six for Ferrari, McLaren, Mercedes, Red Bull, Williams plus the highest placed team in previous year's championship, which would be Lotus at the moment. FOM can force decisions on the basis of them being safety related, but otherwise, no team can veto a majority decision. Not even Ferrari, though they have been given the casting vote instead. I'm not sure about how the F1 Commission works and whether it is possible to veto decisions there, but usually, they were only rubberstamping whatever the Working Groups decided on.

 

So either there was no majority for that idea anyway and it's not only RBR who opposed it, or it hasn't even been introduced in the SWG yet and was only discussed outside the usual rulemaking process. 

 

 

Seems overly complicated. How about a simple majority rules, but you can only vote if you've been there every year since F1 began?



#15 dau

dau
  • Member

  • 4,569 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 19 September 2013 - 11:44

Seems overly complicated. How about a simple majority rules, but you can only vote if you've been there every year since F1 began?

AKA "let FIArrari decide"?



#16 wj_gibson

wj_gibson
  • Member

  • 2,126 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 19 September 2013 - 11:50

I guess Sauber would have 'inherited' the wind tunnel from BMW when the team was sold back to Peter Sauber.

 

I'm pretty sure they already had what was regrded as the best wind tunnel in F1 well before BMW came along.



#17 JHSingo

JHSingo
  • Member

  • 1,095 posts
  • Joined: June 13

Posted 19 September 2013 - 12:10

Idiotic move. It is this short-sightedness that is slowly killing Formula One.

 

Maybe when the grid decreases to a point where we're struggling to get a ten car grid, they'll suddenly be in favour of cost cutting and claim they were the ones championing the idea all along.



#18 dau

dau
  • Member

  • 4,569 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 19 September 2013 - 12:17

Idiotic move. It is this short-sightedness that is slowly killing Formula One.

 

Maybe when the grid decreases to a point where we're struggling to get a ten car grid, they'll suddenly be in favour of cost cutting and claim they were the ones championing the idea all along.

Nope, then we'd just get three-car teams.



#19 JHSingo

JHSingo
  • Member

  • 1,095 posts
  • Joined: June 13

Posted 19 September 2013 - 12:32

Nope, then we'd just get three-car teams.

 

Really? That's just an non-viable short term fix.

 

Look what happened in MotoGP. Costs got out of control for too long, nobody did anything, grids soon declined and they were forced to bring in the "CRT" class because of the lack of manufacturers. Now there is only really Honda and Yamaha competing for wins.

 

Say no more.



Advertisement

#20 ThomFi

ThomFi
  • Member

  • 629 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 19 September 2013 - 12:41

An (older) interview with Peter Sauber from 2011.

 

http://www.motorspor...groesse-an.html

 

According to him, only the Toyota wind tunnel is on their level.



#21 dau

dau
  • Member

  • 4,569 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 19 September 2013 - 12:47

Really? That's just an non-viable short term fix.

 

Look what happened in MotoGP. Costs got out of control for too long, nobody did anything, grids soon declined and they were forced to bring in the "CRT" class because of the lack of manufacturers. Now there is only really Honda and Yamaha competing for wins.

 

Say no more.

Hey, don't tell me. Ferrari's been lobbying for three-car-teams for about a decade or so, Red Bull and McLaren wanted customer teams a while ago and i'm pretty sure Merc would be fine with that as well. At least Bernie seemed to be opposed to that idea from the start, so i doubt it's a real threat as long as he's in charge of FOM.



#22 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 3,224 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 19 September 2013 - 13:08

earlier this month ... this was published

 

FIA ready to get tough on cost cuts

 

the zist of it is this,

 

- so far the FIA hasn't been confrontational against the teams resisting the RRA. It also doesn't want to implement anything that isn't unanimously agreed upon by all teams.

 

- but the FIA and particularly Jean Todt is thinking about going confrontational to push forward the RRA once the Concorde agreement is signed.

 

- There will be a ''Strategy Group think tank'' consisting of 18 members (6+6+6) that'll do the voting and all teams doesn't necessarily have to agree on it. 

 

- FIA will use it's block votes (6) for RRA along with Bernie and smaller teams to counter against the likes of RBR and Ferrari.

 

"I have been reading a lot of things about cost-cutting and it is something that you cannot address with the teams," explained Todt.

"At the end of the day we met in Maranello with a few teams, and a consensus was against this [RRA] proposal of cost cutting.

"So where are we now? We have been implementing, when the Concorde is settled, a new governance, where there will be a strategy group.

"It will be on the agenda, at the first meeting when we are involved, to bring in cost cutting.

"The FIA has six votes, the CRH (commercial rights holders) has six votes, and six teams have one vote each.

"I can guarantee you the FIA will vote in favour of cost cutting. Then we will see."

 

 

expect fireworks  :smoking:



#23 fabr68

fabr68
  • Member

  • 3,963 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 19 September 2013 - 13:44

I dont underatand why in a sport so called "pinnacle" of motorsports you are not allowed to use anything and everything available technology wise to develop a car. This goes totally against how the real world and automotive technoligy operates.

If you want to use wind tunnels, fine. If you want to test, fine. Give it a go with everything you got is handiccapped with using whatever monopoly teams are the strongest at.

#24 V3TT3L

V3TT3L
  • Member

  • 1,681 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 19 September 2013 - 17:26

Maybe RB made the veto bcs Sauber was acting like a proxy to another Big Red team that has aerodynamic problems   ;)

 

Has the Big Red team made the request directly, the chances would be slimmer as all other top teams would deny it. :cool:



#25 SonJR

SonJR
  • Member

  • 139 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 19 September 2013 - 17:26

I'm pretty sure they already had what was regrded as the best wind tunnel in F1 well before BMW came along.

Yeah, IIRC, Peter had it build with the money he got from selling Kimi to McLaren. (That and a couple of Mercedes trucks).



#26 KingTiger

KingTiger
  • Member

  • 483 posts
  • Joined: September 13

Posted 19 September 2013 - 17:54

Typical Red Bull. I can't wait for the day Mateschitz loses interest in F1. 



#27 JohnCooperF1

JohnCooperF1
  • Member

  • 69 posts
  • Joined: September 13

Posted 19 September 2013 - 18:36

Typical Red Bull. I can't wait for the day Mateschitz loses interest in F1. 

 

I think you mean Typical F1.... RBR are no different to others before them. :|



#28 Der Pate

Der Pate
  • Member

  • 624 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 19 September 2013 - 18:37

People only read, what they want to read...

#29 JohnCooperF1

JohnCooperF1
  • Member

  • 69 posts
  • Joined: September 13

Posted 19 September 2013 - 18:50

True... I am as guilty as any.



#30 BRG

BRG
  • Member

  • 11,513 posts
  • Joined: September 99

Posted 19 September 2013 - 18:59

I don't understand why in a sport so called "pinnacle" of motorsports you are not allowed to use anything and everything available technology wise to develop a car. 

 

Then try a little harder.  If all but a couple of teams get priced out of F1, which is what would happen if unlimited resources are used, you will have something that makes the US GP 2005 at Indy look like a close fought contest.  Two teams, maybe six cars in all, of which four will not be allowed to win by team orders. The fans will love it - or rather, the fans will leave it, in droves.

 

Soon the pinnacle of the sport will have no-one on it at all.  Is that what you really want?  To kill off the sport?



#31 Lucass

Lucass
  • Member

  • 121 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 19 September 2013 - 19:51

Yeah, IIRC, Peter had it build with the money he got from selling Kimi to McLaren. (That and a couple of Mercedes trucks).

I believe that's a bit of a forum myth as a proper full scale windtunnel would cost upwards from $30 million and I'm pretty sure McLaren paid nowhere near that amount for Kimi to Sauber.

 

I can very well see why Red Bull was against this proposal, testing would give all the teams the same opportunity at the track if it rains everybody is hampered, if there's a red flag everybody stops testing.

Also the teams with a better windtunnel such as Sauber would be at an advantage.

 

Finally windtunnel hours don't come cheap either, so I doubt the can't afford reason is the only reason for this proposal



#32 Andrew Hope

Andrew Hope
  • Writer of 2013's Best Opening Post

  • 7,015 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 19 September 2013 - 19:56

You want to save costs? Get rid of all the drivers for the first race of the year and make the grid girls race instead. Whoever finishes last has to be Flavio's girlfriend for the rest of the season. You're going to see some awfully fierce battles into turn 1 at the start of the season.



#33 ryan86

ryan86
  • Member

  • 1,100 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 19 September 2013 - 20:39

I believe that's a bit of a forum myth as a proper full scale windtunnel would cost upwards from $30 million and I'm pretty sure McLaren paid nowhere near that amount for Kimi to Sauber.

 

I can very well see why Red Bull was against this proposal, testing would give all the teams the same opportunity at the track if it rains everybody is hampered, if there's a red flag everybody stops testing.

Also the teams with a better windtunnel such as Sauber would be at an advantage.

 

Finally windtunnel hours don't come cheap either, so I doubt the can't afford reason is the only reason for this proposal

 

But unless the fan detatches and scythes through the car, you're unlikely to be left with any repair work.



#34 Shambolic

Shambolic
  • Member

  • 568 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 19 September 2013 - 21:01


I can very well see why Red Bull was against this proposal, testing would give all the teams the same opportunity at the track if it rains everybody is hampered, if there's a red flag everybody stops testing.

 

 

 

 

Yep, it's because of the weather.

 

And not at all yet another case of a top team using its weight to protect its advantage, to the detriment of the sport.

 

It's not a Red Bull thing, it's an F1 teams are so damned insular they really cannot grasp there's a bigger picture that goes beyond their own self interests.



#35 Lucass

Lucass
  • Member

  • 121 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 19 September 2013 - 22:04

But unless the fan detatches and scythes through the car, you're unlikely to be left with any repair work.

Exactly and that's why the teams that do go testing probably aren't so keen on others using the windtunnel instead.

 

Yep, it's because of the weather.

 

And not at all yet another case of a top team using its weight to protect its advantage, to the detriment of the sport.

 

It's not a Red Bull thing, it's an F1 teams are so damned insular they really cannot grasp there's a bigger picture that goes beyond their own self interests.

The proposal by Sauber and Force India is fuelled by self-interest too.

The teams can't even agree on what day it is and it has always been like that.

 

Teams should look after themselves that's what they do best.

Others such as FIA and the commercial rights holder should worry and take care of the health of the sport.


 



#36 pingu666

pingu666
  • Member

  • 8,720 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 19 September 2013 - 23:44

they dont want different answers to the same question, sadly.



#37 Tron

Tron
  • Member

  • 614 posts
  • Joined: September 13

Posted 19 September 2013 - 23:58

When did wind tunnel testing get regarded as track testing?

 

Is wind tunnel testing also restricted?



#38 pingu666

pingu666
  • Member

  • 8,720 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 20 September 2013 - 03:53

normal scale modeling is, and cfd is too (but u can mix n match)

 

full size aero windtunnel work is rare in f1, but normal in nascar i think.



#39 Winter98

Winter98
  • Member

  • 638 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 20 September 2013 - 04:03

You want to save costs? Get rid of all the drivers for the first race of the year and make the grid girls race instead. Whoever finishes last has to be Flavio's girlfriend for the rest of the season. You're going to see some awfully fierce battles into turn 1 at the start of the season.

Hmmm.

 

Your idea certainly has potential. :)



Advertisement

#40 Kelateboy

Kelateboy
  • Member

  • 5,792 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 20 September 2013 - 04:05

When did wind tunnel testing get regarded as track testing?

 

Is wind tunnel testing also restricted?

 

Full-scale wind tunnel testing is regarded as track testing. You can substitute a one day aerodynamic test carried out on FIA approved straight line or constant radius sites with four hours of wind-on full scale wind tunnel testing to be carried out in a single twenty four hour period.

 

I don't believe there is any limit on the 60% scale wind tunnel testing.



#41 Shambolic

Shambolic
  • Member

  • 568 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 20 September 2013 - 04:06

Exactly and that's why the teams that do go testing probably aren't so keen on others using the windtunnel instead.

 

The proposal by Sauber and Force India is fuelled by self-interest too.

The teams can't even agree on what day it is and it has always been like that.

 

Teams should look after themselves that's what they do best.

Others such as FIA and the commercial rights holder should worry and take care of the health of the sport.

 

 

Oh, Sauber will be wanting an option that suits Sauber. But there's a difference, to me, between wanting another solution, and demanding just one, as long as it suits. Which isn't to say either team is acting selflessly, because none of them seem to care about anyone other than themselves.

 

A certain sexual kinkster tried to argue the teams need to be told, not asked, what to do, and look what happened to him. Which is why we have this continuation of the teams all falling over themselves to protect their advantages, undermine those of others, and mostly maintain the status quo even though it's given us near spec cars, stagnating oily bits, and gimmick laden crap that even Nascar would probably find artificial.

 

We really do need someone to step in and say "You can have much more technical and sporting regs freedom, but you can only spend x a year, so shut up with the "Woe is us, it'll cost too much" and get on with it". Red Bull can Newey their backsides off, Ferrari can have twenty drivers hammering around their private track, and Sauber can wind tunnel morning noon and night, as long as none of them go over budget. Different answers to the same problem, so the brains flex more than the questionably legal wings.

 

/rant



#42 Kingshark

Kingshark
  • Member

  • 2,944 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 20 September 2013 - 06:54

Red Bull make it just too easy to dislike them... passionately.



#43 Shambolic

Shambolic
  • Member

  • 568 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 20 September 2013 - 07:32

Red Bull make it just too easy to dislike them... passionately.

 

That I can't argue with.



#44 HP

HP
  • Member

  • 14,228 posts
  • Joined: October 99

Posted 20 September 2013 - 07:45

earlier this month ... this was published

 

FIA ready to get tough on cost cuts

 

the zist of it is this,

 

- so far the FIA hasn't been confrontational against the teams resisting the RRA. It also doesn't want to implement anything that isn't unanimously agreed upon by all teams.

 

- but the FIA and particularly Jean Todt is thinking about going confrontational to push forward the RRA once the Concorde agreement is signed.

 

- There will be a ''Strategy Group think tank'' consisting of 18 members (6+6+6) that'll do the voting and all teams doesn't necessarily have to agree on it. 

 

- FIA will use it's block votes (6) for RRA along with Bernie and smaller teams to counter against the likes of RBR and Ferrari.

 

 

expect fireworks  :smoking:

How will any team want to agree to sign the Concorde, if after signing it, you get a kick into the pants? Especially if FIA announces it in advance.

 

And if the Concorde isn't signed, then who is getting the most out of the current situation? AFAIK it's FOM.. And who get's the most if these measures are going into effect. Again AFAIK FOM. Say no more.

 

The block votes and Bernie IMO is a huge give away..



#45 Boxerevo

Boxerevo
  • Member

  • 1,934 posts
  • Joined: December 10

Posted 20 September 2013 - 07:47

There were times, when (popular) teams like McLaren or Williams act the same way...

 

And I remember many cost-cutting-ideas, which were vetoed especially by Ferrari, because they were the rich... For me it seems that Ferrari still don´t want cost-cutting, but they keep quite and let red Bull do the unpopular things...

Truth.



#46 Sin

Sin
  • Member

  • 1,949 posts
  • Joined: December 12

Posted 20 September 2013 - 09:14

mh I'm usually the biggest Red Bull fan as you know... but if this really happened I strongly disagree with RB on this thing... the tyres were a completely different subject... but I think here RB is just being unfair to less rich teams...

 

I'm still an RB fan tho.... since I know as it is a competition, all the teams are asses at some point....

 

but really RB overthink that!

 

adding to that I'm a fan of both Sauber & Force India as well....


Edited by Sin, 20 September 2013 - 09:18.