Jump to content


Photo

Taking part in Formula 1


  • Please log in to reply
97 replies to this topic

#51 uechtel

uechtel
  • Member

  • 1,960 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 19 August 2003 - 10:42

Originally posted by Racer.Demon
Mind you, this practice of turning a blind eye to the rules for the local hero's sake happened well into the 80s - so even in Concorde days.

Anyone remember Huub Rothengatter's orange Spirit allowed to start from 27th at the 1984 Dutch GP?


Sorry, I don´t agree here. AFAIK the 27 car grid in 1984 was due to the fact, that Tyrrell, in spite of having been already excluded from the races, had achieved a "Einstweilige Verfügung" (sorry, don´t know the English expression for that!) to be allowed to carry on until the verdict in the final court hearing. So at the time of the Dutch GP it was not finally clear whether Tyrrell were racing "legally" or not and hence whether they could "take away" anybody else´s position on the grid. To avoid the dilemma of either prohibiting Tyrrell from "legal" partcipation (if they would have won their cause afterwards) or on the other hand getting into danger of excluding somebody, who had been outqualified by a car, that was on the grid illegally (if Tyrrell lost at court), the solution was to have an additional starter when one of the Tyrrell drivers had qualified.

Complicated, isn´t it?

Advertisement

#52 uechtel

uechtel
  • Member

  • 1,960 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 19 August 2003 - 10:43

Originally posted by Racer.Demon
BTW, in some way it reminds me of the "force majeure" practice used in the 107% days of allowing people to start without having set a time below 107%. That thing of "Well, we've proved in other sessions that we were able to" was always a bit of, well, old school!

These days, of course, with the small entry number and one-shot qualifying, you can make the grid with "no time"... If you look at it from a different angle, F1 has become "inclusive" again! DNQs are simply impossible now.


Yeah, the first step back to the fifties! :clap:

#53 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 79,955 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 19 August 2003 - 11:35

Originally posted by uechtel
.....a "Einstweilige Verfügung" (sorry, don´t know the English expression for that!) to be allowed to carry on until the verdict in the final court hearing.....


Compete under protest?

#54 Racer.Demon

Racer.Demon
  • Member

  • 1,722 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 19 August 2003 - 12:14

Literally, "temporary bylaw". I like Ray's version better...

#55 Racer.Demon

Racer.Demon
  • Member

  • 1,722 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 19 August 2003 - 12:29

Originally posted by uechtel

Sorry, I don´t agree here. AFAIK the 27 car grid in 1984 was due to the fact, that Tyrrell, in spite of having been already excluded from the races, had achieved a "Einstweilige Verfügung" (sorry, don´t know the English expression for that!) to be allowed to carry on until the verdict in the final court hearing. So at the time of the Dutch GP it was not finally clear whether Tyrrell were racing "legally" or not and hence whether they could "take away" anybody else´s position on the grid. To avoid the dilemma of either prohibiting Tyrrell from "legal" partcipation (if they would have won their cause afterwards) or on the other hand getting into danger of excluding somebody, who had been outqualified by a car, that was on the grid illegally (if Tyrrell lost at court), the solution was to have an additional starter when one of the Tyrrell drivers had qualified.

Complicated, isn´t it?


It all comes flooding back to me now - it also explains the 27-car British GP grid. The 26-car grid at the Detroit GP (on June 24) with Huub not qualifying was indeed before the FIA ruling (which IIRC took place between the Dallas and British GPs) after which the Tyrrells ran under appeal (that's the term you were looking for!).

Still, I vividly remember the Dutch disappointment over Huub failing to qualify and the "dispensation" given to him by the FIA "on special request" on either Saturday evening or Sunday morning, because of the importance of having a local hero start the race. So what was all the fuss about? With 27 entries, of which two were competing under appeal, he was bound to start anyway.

#56 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 61,701 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 19 August 2003 - 13:00

Originally posted by Racer.Demon
Literally, "temporary bylaw". I like Ray's version better...

Possibly, in English legal jargon, an interim injunction. IIRC Tyrrell sought redress from an English court (seem to remember some chap from Systime Computers talking about it on Breakfast TV), so it is possible that FISA was forced by a Court order to let Tyrrell take part.

#57 petefenelon

petefenelon
  • Member

  • 4,815 posts
  • Joined: August 02

Posted 19 August 2003 - 13:51

Originally posted by ensign14
Possibly, in English legal jargon, an interim injunction. IIRC Tyrrell sought redress from an English court (seem to remember some chap from Systime Computers talking about it on Breakfast TV), so it is possible that FISA was forced by a Court order to let Tyrrell take part.


OT (and probably of interest more to Northern hackers of a certain age!), but Systime were a seriously dodgy outfit!

In t'owd days (as like!) they used to build interesting Intel-based systems of their own, but for the most part they sold 'turnkey' versions of DEC VAX and PDP-11 computers, largely into the UK defence industry, and didn't bother paying DEC for the copies of the operating system they shipped - and of also 'cloned' DEC boards without troubling DEC with royalties on the designs, IIRC. Oh, and they sold a few VAXes behind the Iron Curtain back when you couldn't export 'powerful' computers behind the Iron Curtain.

Lawsuits from DEC and action from the UK DTI ensued. Much hilarity etc., company collapsed.

At one point it looked like they'd actually have one of the first powerful single-user workstations on the market - faster and cheaper than the Vaxstation, certainly...

They had a big glass-and-chrome headquarters in Leeds, and a bigger lawsuit from DEC... (Part of the UK TV series 'Edge of Darkness' was filmed there!) There is a story that the helipad (!) they had was there because the MD lost his driving licence for drunk driving - so decided to come to work by helicopter!

I think a lot of the Systime software people became Visionware which became... which became...

#58 uechtel

uechtel
  • Member

  • 1,960 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 19 August 2003 - 13:57

Originally posted by ensign14
Possibly, in English legal jargon, an interim injunction.


Thank you for the brief English lesson!

And I found another one: Alex Caffi qualifying 27th and allowed to start in 1987. Guess where!

But I think I have in mind, that in his case the other teams were asked whether they had a problem allowing Caffi in.

#59 conjohn

conjohn
  • Member

  • 487 posts
  • Joined: July 03

Posted 19 August 2003 - 15:04

Originally posted by uechtel
So perhaps I can calm you down again a little bit :wave: ...


No need, uechtel. I overreacted, plain and simple :blush: :blush: . My only possible excuse is that I had just come back from Washington DC on an overnight flight, I can't sleep on planes, and I was trying to stay awake to chock to body into European time again :drunk: So I plead jet lag.

I also tried to stay awake so that I could follow the NASCAR race at Michigan on PitCommand. I lost in that too, as I missed the last hour, but I saw in the results yesterday the no 99 made it into 11th place.

Advertisement

#60 uechtel

uechtel
  • Member

  • 1,960 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 19 August 2003 - 20:34

No need to apologize. After all, my understanding of this place is that it is meant to have these discussions here...

#61 ghinzani

ghinzani
  • Member

  • 2,027 posts
  • Joined: October 01

Posted 19 August 2003 - 20:36

Originally posted by petefenelon
>
(I'm (slowly) working on an 8w article about designs that turned up under other names - got kind of tangled up in the Ralt RT2/Lola T850/Toleman/Docking-Spitzley/SPA/Roman/assorted Can-Am cars saga and sidetracked from F1....)


I like the sound of that!!

#62 Nikos Spagnol

Nikos Spagnol
  • Member

  • 1,408 posts
  • Joined: April 02

Posted 19 August 2003 - 22:24

BTW, regarding DNQ been allowed to race, all of you forgot to mention another important rule modification: the standartization of starters per race. In the past, it seems, it was up to the race organization to set up the number of starters (they usually allowed less drivers to race in Monaco than in other venues).

It was during the eighties that it was fixed for all races: initially, 24, but 20 (?) in Monaco, then, 26 for every venue. Nowadays, Concorde Agreement limited the number of teams to 12, thus 24 cars.

Does anybody remember the exact dates and numbers?

#63 Don Capps

Don Capps
  • Member

  • 5,933 posts
  • Joined: May 99

Posted 20 August 2003 - 02:03

Originally posted by conjohn
OT: Don, maybe we saw each other on the streets of DC last week, as I was there for a conference.


Heavens! Please let me know in advance the next time you'll be in the area! The same goes for the rest of you as well.

#64 fines

fines
  • Member

  • 9,647 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 20 August 2003 - 15:10

Originally posted by Nikos Spagnol
BTW, regarding DNQ been allowed to race, all of you forgot to mention another important rule modification: the standartization of starters per race. In the past, it seems, it was up to the race organization to set up the number of starters (they usually allowed less drivers to race in Monaco than in other venues).

It was during the eighties that it was fixed for all races: initially, 24, but 20 (?) in Monaco, then, 26 for every venue. Nowadays, Concorde Agreement limited the number of teams to 12, thus 24 cars.

Does anybody remember the exact dates and numbers?

Uhh... from memory, 24 cars in 1979 and 26 in 1982. Monte Carlo with 20 starters up to 1986, inclusive.

#65 conjohn

conjohn
  • Member

  • 487 posts
  • Joined: July 03

Posted 20 August 2003 - 18:10

Not only the number of cars on the grid were standardized, but also the format. I think it was in 1980 that the staggered two lines was mandated. So no more 4 or 5 cars abreast.

And still they can't get through the first corner....... :

#66 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 61,701 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 23 August 2003 - 13:59

Where Nostalgia Meets Readers' Comments: Zsolt Baumgartner this weekend is taking part in both the F3000 and F1 events at the Hungaboring...

#67 conjohn

conjohn
  • Member

  • 487 posts
  • Joined: July 03

Posted 24 August 2003 - 07:26

Originally posted by ensign14
Where Nostalgia Meets Readers' Comments: Zsolt Baumgartner this weekend is taking part in both the F3000 and F1 events at the Hungaboring...


...but will only race in F1. 24 hour rule?

#68 Geza Sury

Geza Sury
  • Member

  • 942 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 25 August 2003 - 14:00

Originally posted by ensign14
Where Nostalgia Meets Readers' Comments: Zsolt Baumgartner this weekend is taking part in both the F3000 and F1 events at the Hungaboring...

Coloni withdrew his entry from the F3000 race. BTW, is 24 hour role in force now?

The Hungaroring produced very entertaining F3000 and F1 races, so I guess it's not appropriate to call it "Hungaboring" anymore :cool: The changes to the circuit layout made overtaking a real possibility :up:

#69 conjohn

conjohn
  • Member

  • 487 posts
  • Joined: July 03

Posted 25 August 2003 - 14:20

Originally posted by Geza Sury

BTW, is 24 hour role in force now?


I can't find any reference to it in the Formula 1 Sporting Regulations on FIA's website, so it seems to be obsolete now.

#70 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 61,701 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 25 August 2003 - 19:47

Originally posted by Geza Sury
The Hungaroring produced very entertaining F3000 and F1 races, so I guess it's not appropriate to call it "Hungaboring" anymore :cool: The changes to the circuit layout made overtaking a real possibility :up:

Yes, I was amazed and very pleasantly surprised.

#71 petefenelon

petefenelon
  • Member

  • 4,815 posts
  • Joined: August 02

Posted 26 August 2003 - 09:34

Originally posted by Geza Sury

Coloni withdrew his entry from the F3000 race. BTW, is 24 hour role in force now?

The Hungaroring produced very entertaining F3000 and F1 races, so I guess it's not appropriate to call it "Hungaboring" anymore :cool: The changes to the circuit layout made overtaking a real possibility :up:


So that put the F3000 grid down to what? 14 cars? :(

pete

#72 Racer.Demon

Racer.Demon
  • Member

  • 1,722 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 26 August 2003 - 09:39

13 cars. Keohane was a non-starter too. :

#73 uechtel

uechtel
  • Member

  • 1,960 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 26 August 2003 - 10:09

So perhaps the solution would be the reintroduction of another tradition, a combined race for Formula 1 and Formula 3000? :lol:

In the late fifties and during the sixties there used to be even combined grids and as late as 1988 Alex Caffi took his place in practise for the Brazilian GP with the Dallara F 3000 as the Formula 1 car was not yet ready.

Which brings up another "rule question":

Is it still allowed to take part in Formula 1 with a Formula 3000 car?

#74 Racer.Demon

Racer.Demon
  • Member

  • 1,722 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 26 August 2003 - 11:14

I don't think so. To begin with, you'd fall foul of these two rules:

Originally posted by uechtel
Production cars prohibited: Somewhere around the mid-eighties a team was required to bring a car OF ITS OWN DESIGN (think of the dispute about the Benetton-copy Ligier). In the seventies it had been possible to buy an ex factory McLaren M23, Lotus 78 or a production March and do the step into Formula 1.

Formula 1 franchise: Near the end of the nineties the Formula 1 field was restricted to explicitely named teams. A place was held free for Honda and Toyota and BAR had to buy out the Tyrrell team to get into the business.


So unless Lola is allowed in as the 11th F1 team...

And I expect the B2/50 to fail scrutineering because of dimensions, weight, lack of refuelling possibility, and what have you.

However, Minardi did test on F3000 Avon tyres in 2003 pre-season testing!

#75 Geza Sury

Geza Sury
  • Member

  • 942 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 26 August 2003 - 12:08

The combined field of F1 and F3000 consists of only 33 cars... That's a joke :

#76 uechtel

uechtel
  • Member

  • 1,960 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 26 August 2003 - 13:01

At the German GP in 1953 there had been 34 starters. But of course that had been Formula 2 then...

#77 Rob29

Rob29
  • Member

  • 3,582 posts
  • Joined: January 01

Posted 26 August 2003 - 13:23

Originally posted by uechtel


Formula 1 franchise: Near the end of the nineties the Formula 1 field was restricted to explicitely named teams. A place was held free for Honda and Toyota and BAR had to buy out the Tyrrell team to get into the business.

I don't think this is strictly correct. As I understand it the current rules allow for a maximum of 12 2car teams.The problem is the entry fee of $30M! BAR found it cheaper to buy Tyrell and sell its assets,rather than pay that.Toyota seems to be the only team that has ever paid the current fee. So there is room for 2 more teams,but in practice any new big time players would most likely buy Minardi or Jordan.

#78 petefenelon

petefenelon
  • Member

  • 4,815 posts
  • Joined: August 02

Posted 26 August 2003 - 14:26

Originally posted by Racer.Demon
I don't think so. To begin with, you'd fall foul of these two rules:



So unless Lola is allowed in as the 11th F1 team...

And I expect the B2/50 to fail scrutineering because of dimensions, weight, lack of refuelling possibility, and what have you.

However, Minardi did test on F3000 Avon tyres in 2003 pre-season testing!


The Lola is built to F1 dimensional and safety regs, at least.

Minardi tested on Avon slicks 'cos they had no other rubber - their car looked great to me!

#79 petefenelon

petefenelon
  • Member

  • 4,815 posts
  • Joined: August 02

Posted 06 October 2003 - 16:36

Originally posted by Racer.Demon
I think it was run by David Brown, and he went on to do something else. Isn't he in IRL at the moment?


David Brown's just turned up in ChampCar, at American Spirit Team Johannson as a race engineer.

Advertisement

#80 uechtel

uechtel
  • Member

  • 1,960 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 04 November 2003 - 21:02

Originally posted by uechtel

before 1997:
Colour scheme freeze: A team is not allowed to run two differently-sponsored cars neither to do major changes towards the colour scheme of their cars during the season. First victim: BAR 1997 (also an extremely stupid rule and I always wonder who could have any advantage of this?)


got it!

In the current edition of "motorsport aktuell" it is stated, that the rule was introduced to prevent happenings like at Japan in 1993 when Ligier did the outrageous thing and had artisan painter Hugo Pratt change the design of Brundle´s car in some really excitingly looking "zebra" outfit compared to the rather boring standard colour scheme of Blundell´s car.

According to "msa" the FIA decided to have only identical looking cars at the beginning of 1994 because "they wanted to be regarded more porfessional" :confused:

around 1988 / 1989:
Money deposit: Every team wanting to take part in the championship has to make a money deposit at the start of the season in order to appear at every race. Exceptions due to "force majeur" possible?


Didn´t the Kauhsen team (being no FOCA-member) have to make a 30.000 $ deposit at the beginning of 1979, that was lost when the did not appear in Argentina?

So a "split" rule, introduced for non-FOCA-teams already in 1979 and then also for the FOCA-members at the end of the eighties?

#81 uechtel

uechtel
  • Member

  • 1,960 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 20 November 2014 - 23:15

Some keywords in the Kinnunen topic made me searching for this old thread. As I announced there I take another look into the narratives of Mike Lang´s "Grand Prix!" to recapitulate his description of the beginning struggle for the right of participation between the FISA/FOCA-teams and the "independents" in 1974. But before that, I think I found a late answer to a quite old question:

 

Mind you, this practice of turning a blind eye to the rules for the local hero's sake happened well into the 80s - so even in Concorde days.

Anyone remember Huub Rothengatter's orange Spirit allowed to start from 27th at the 1984 Dutch GP?

 

Well, the Dutch GP was quite late in the season and took place after the Tyrrell scandal at Detroit. As far as I remember the story was, that a couple of weeks after this event Tyrrell were not only disqualified but should be excluded from the season (I really do not want to debate at this place any more whether that was rightful or not, as there are enough other exhaustive discussions about that in other threads already). As one can imagine Tyrrell did not simply accept this and started legal action at a civil court, which spoke a "provisional verdict" (Einstweilige Verfügung in German, I don´t know the exact English phrase), that Tyrrell´s cars were to be allowed to start in the consecutive races until a final verdict would be spoken. This lead to the conflict, that if Tyrrell cars outqualified some of the opponents and then would be retroactively excluded, then those opponents would have reasons for protest, that their own exclusion was also illegal. To avoid this it was decided, that the Tyrrells "did not count" towards the field size, means, if one of them qualified the allowed number of starters was extended to 27 (or 28 if both of them succeeded into the starting field). This happened the first time at the British GP where Gartner in the Osella was allowed to start from 27th position, and for sure that was no case of "preference" for a local...

 

Edit: Sorry, I did not see we discussed this already on the second page of this thread... :blush:
 


Edited by uechtel, 20 November 2014 - 23:27.


#82 uechtel

uechtel
  • Member

  • 1,960 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 20 November 2014 - 23:23

So now to Mike Lang´s report of the happenings in 1974. Here is what he wrote in his season summary:

"...the other main problem which actually developed early in the season was the increasing number of newcomers to Grand Prix racing causing overcrowding. This eventually came to a head at the time of the French Grand Prix but a meeting between the Formula 1 (Constructors) Association and CSI representatives resolved the situation by both sides agreeing that while anyone could take part in practise only the fastest of a pre-determined number according to the length of the circuit would be allowed to take part in each race, although grids were generally limited to 25 cars."

 

So this would have been the first time in the history of the World Championship Grands Prix that the numbers of starters was fixed by a general rule (and not individually limited by the individual organizers of the events).



#83 uechtel

uechtel
  • Member

  • 1,960 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 20 November 2014 - 23:51

At the Belgian GP things were obviously still very much in order:

"...where a very large entry of no less than 32 drivers was accepted, the only qualifying requirement being a practise time of not slower than 110% of the average of the three fastest times."

The only victim to that rule was Kinnunen, while Larrousse made best use of this generous chance to get his one and only Grand Prix start.

 

Monaco:

"The huge entry seeen in Belgium had caused considerable overcrowding not only in terms of space in the paddock and pits but also out on the track during practise. This had come about because of the sudden upsurge in the numbers of newcomers to the sport and because of the Formula 1 (Constructors) Association felt that their members were being unnecessarily handicapped. As a result consulations took place with the organisers of the Monaco Grand Prix who were subsequently persuaded to restrict the number of entrants among non-members with the newest to arrive on the scene being the first to be refused permission to participate. On this occasion it led to the non-appearance of the Finotto and Token teamsalthough Tom Pryce later let the organisers know how he felt about being left out in the best possible way by driving to a resounding victory in the supporting Formula 3 event. Even with these two absentees and Williams having just one entry for Merzario there were still 28 drivers on the entry list fighting for the 25 available starting places..."

Comparing with the entry list from Belgium it appears that also the non-entries of Nicholson and Kinnunen might have something to do with such kind of "pre-selection". Maybe they had been already so pessimistic that the did not even dare to appeal for an entry? And what is the reason why Williams did enter only one car?

 

Sweden:

"This year the entry was even bigger and to avoid overcrowding was restricted to 27 with some of the newer teams being refused permission to participate as at Monte Carlo".

Again a comparison of the entry lists with the events immediately before and after reveals the possible candidates: Amon, Trojan (Schenken), Finotto (Larrousse), Nicholson, Token (Pryce), maybe even also Migault who was normally a third BRM entry? On the other hand it is quite understndably why Kinnunen was accepted at this place...


Edited by uechtel, 20 November 2014 - 23:52.


#84 uechtel

uechtel
  • Member

  • 1,960 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 21 November 2014 - 00:02

For the Dutch GP now events started to get in motion:

"For the third successive race the size of the grid was being retricted to 25 and, like the organisers of the Monaco and Swedish Grands Prix, the Dutch were intending to refuse certain entries. However, on learning that their entry was being refused for the second time in a fortnight [so confirmation that they were one of the affected at Sweden] the Trojan team complained to the RAC who, in turn, took the matter to the CSI. This ultimately led to an official statement being made to the effect that the future World Championship status would be withdrawn from an organiser not alloowing anyone the right to practise for a Grand Prix even if it was necessary to restrict the numbers of starters in the actual race. Naturally enough the Dutch immediately rescinded and the Trojan team were made to feel every bit as welcome as the other 27 entries that materialised."

Nevertheless there was no sign of the Amon, Finotto, Nicholson, Token and Kinnunen. Maybe because it was too late for them after only Trojan had made actions against the exclusion?



#85 uechtel

uechtel
  • Member

  • 1,960 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 21 November 2014 - 06:50

French GP:

"Because of [the circuit] being only 3.289 km in length the size of the grid was being restricted to 22 but with 30 entries arriving the Formula 1 Association (led by Bernie Ecclestone of Brabham and Max Mosley of March) was complaining of over-crowding again in spite of the CSI´s statement made prior to the Dutch Grand Prix. [...]

Two drivers were not even able to practise in the afternoon [of Friday practise] as Formula 1 Association representatives had approached the organisers about the number of cars out on the track in the morning and persuaded them (at the threat of withdrawing all their members) to stop Schuppan [Ensign] and Kinnunen from continuing their practise. [...]

Understandably there was considerable resentment in the Ensign camp over the decision to stop Schuppan practising and Mo Nunn wasted little time in making his feelings known on the matter. In fact, it developed into a slanging match that led to a meeting between Formula 1 Association and CSI representatives that same evening when the whole matter of qualifying for Grands Prix was thrashed out once and for all. Both sides eventually agreed that whilst anyone could take part in practise only the fastest of a pre-determined number according to the length of the circuit would be allowed to take part in each race. With this settled Schuppan and Kinnunen were welcomed back when practise resumed on Saturday morning[...]"

Sounds to me like a defeat of FOCA, as the numbers for practise were not restricted, which to my understanding had been their main goal. But obviously the solution worked for a while for there is no mention of any such conflicts for the rest of the season in spite of for example the British GP fielding no less than 34 competitors.


Edited by uechtel, 21 November 2014 - 06:55.


#86 Charlieman

Charlieman
  • Member

  • 2,538 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 23 November 2014 - 18:21

Monaco:

"The huge entry seeen in Belgium had caused considerable overcrowding not only in terms of space in the paddock and pits but also out on the track during practise... ...Even with these two absentees and Williams having just one entry for Merzario there were still 28 drivers on the entry list fighting for the 25 available starting places..."

18 cars started the Monaco GP in 1971, 25 cars in 1972. That's a significant change, probably a Bernie consequence.

 

On the general topic of F1CA (as it was named at the time), membership qualifications and politics denied BRP admission because they "used too many bought-in components". F1CA membership delivered privileges in the 1960s for a guaranteed start place and money.



#87 kayemod

kayemod
  • Member

  • 9,571 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 23 November 2014 - 18:54

18 cars started the Monaco GP in 1971, 25 cars in 1972. That's a significant change, probably a Bernie consequence.

 

On the general topic of F1CA (as it was named at the time), membership qualifications and politics denied BRP admission because they "used too many bought-in components". F1CA membership delivered privileges in the 1960s for a guaranteed start place and money.

 

BRP's exclusion from F1CA was surely largely political, which is possibly what you're alluding to. The other British constructors effectively formed a cartel and decided that the starting & prize money pot should only be shared by them. BRP claimed to only use only a similar proportion of bought-in parts as the others, and rather less than some. They were refused an inspection or negotiations, and were effectively blackballed by Lotus, Cooper, BRM & Brabham. Although it's true that BRP never achieved much in the way of results, their potential seemed to worry the other teams.



#88 Vitesse2

Vitesse2
  • Administrator

  • 41,742 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 23 November 2014 - 19:52

18 cars started the Monaco GP in 1971, 25 cars in 1972. That's a significant change, probably a Bernie consequence.

More a consequence of the first alterations to the track, I think you'll find. Although this was a year before it was lengthened, part of the reason for the previous limitations on the size of the field was the lack of pit space. New FIA regs required them to be protected by Armco barriers, so they were moved (for this year only) from the narrow Boulevard Albert I to the Quai des États-Unis - the pits returned to their approximate previous site in 1973, once the Piscine section had been added and a permanent pit lane established.



#89 BRG

BRG
  • Member

  • 25,883 posts
  • Joined: September 99

Posted 23 November 2014 - 20:01

BRP's exclusion from F1CA was surely largely political, which is possibly what you're alluding to. The other British constructors effectively formed a cartel and decided that the starting & prize money pot should only be shared by them. 

 

Scandalous!  Such a thing would never happen today.   :cool:



#90 Nemo1965

Nemo1965
  • Member

  • 7,836 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 24 November 2014 - 11:16

Thank you Uechtel, for reviving this thread. The mess with the smaller teams stirred several memories in my head, and a vague impression that somehow, since the 80's and 90's, F1 has become more and more a monopoly, and we are now bearing the fruits (ha!) of this.

 

It is very interesting to read such excellent posts of more than ten years ago. It puts a lot of the stuff with the super GP2 plans and so forth in perspective.



#91 uechtel

uechtel
  • Member

  • 1,960 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 24 November 2014 - 12:47

18 cars started the Monaco GP in 1971, 25 cars in 1972. That's a significant change, probably a Bernie consequence.

 

On the general topic of F1CA (as it was named at the time), membership qualifications and politics denied BRP admission because they "used too many bought-in components". F1CA membership delivered privileges in the 1960s for a guaranteed start place and money.

 

That´s interesting. Did the F1CA already have such "special agreements" in regard to starting money for their mambers well back in the sixties? Was it kind of a general agreement or were they negotiated with each race organisator individually?

 

And when was BRP excluded?



#92 kayemod

kayemod
  • Member

  • 9,571 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 24 November 2014 - 13:03

That´s interesting. Did the F1CA already have such "special agreements" in regard to starting money for their mambers well back in the sixties? Was it kind of a general agreement or were they negotiated with each race organisator individually?

 

And when was BRP excluded?

 

Hard to give an actual date, but the process came to a head some time in mid 1964.



#93 Charlieman

Charlieman
  • Member

  • 2,538 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 24 November 2014 - 16:28

More a consequence of the first alterations to the track, I think you'll find. Although this was a year before it was lengthened, part of the reason for the previous limitations on the size of the field was the lack of pit space. New FIA regs required them to be protected by Armco barriers, so they were moved (for this year only) from the narrow Boulevard Albert I to the Quai des États-Unis - the pits returned to their approximate previous site in 1973, once the Piscine section had been added and a permanent pit lane established.

I researched the topic a little before I wrote my words. I couldn't find a date or change log for circuit modifications, so thanks for those details. However there was a push for standardisation at the time by entrants and sponsors, which seems to have been formalised in 1974 with the 26 car grid. Organisers at longer, simpler circuits had adopted the "standard" before 1974.

 

1972 would have been too early for Bernie to influence the Monaco organisers (so I eat my previous words) but it was the year when BRM tried to enter five cars at every race. The increase in grid size at Monaco is more likely a combination of sponsor/entrant pressure and circuit change. Regulations for organisers, part of uechtel's query, appear to emerge later. Yellow Book rules, anyone?



#94 Charlieman

Charlieman
  • Member

  • 2,538 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 24 November 2014 - 17:31

BRP's exclusion from F1CA was surely largely political, which is possibly what you're alluding to. The other British constructors effectively formed a cartel and decided that the starting & prize money pot should only be shared by them. BRP claimed to only use only a similar proportion of bought-in parts as the others, and rather less than some. They were refused an inspection or negotiations, and were effectively blackballed by Lotus, Cooper, BRM & Brabham. Although it's true that BRP never achieved much in the way of results, their potential seemed to worry the other teams.

Ta, Rob. I was cautious about the political angle because I couldn't recall a source. I think Innes Ireland wrote a few words about BRP's isolation. BRP became a constructor in 1963 and closed shop the next year, so we can identify a period when F1CA was active.

 

The history of F1CA and FOCA is a bit of a mystery. Hence this discussion thread, I suppose. To establish an association, you need at least three members (Lotus, Cooper, BRM, another?) but Ferrari wouldn't have any time for garage car builders. Presumably Ferrari negotiated their own entry terms and F1CA worked for their members. When did Ferrari join F1CA?



#95 Vitesse2

Vitesse2
  • Administrator

  • 41,742 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 24 November 2014 - 17:39

I got the exact details from Guido di Carli's site - which also has maps of the various rejected proposals:

 

http://www.gdecarli....p?var1=1&var2=2

 

However, it seems we're both partly right!

 

 

Bras de fer entre les constructeurs et l'A.C.M.

Cette course est le théâtre d'un sérieux affrontement entre les constructeurs et le pouvoir sportif. Sous l'égide de Bernie Ecclestone, la F1CA a en effet signé avec les organisateurs de courses des contrats prévoyant des grilles de départ de 25 voitures, afin de ne pas léser les petites équipes. Or le jeune nouveau président de l'Automobile Club de Monaco Michel Boeri refuse d'autoriser plus de vingt voitures à prendre le départ dans les rues de la Principauté, pour des raisons de sécurité. Les Monégasques estiment déjà avoir fait suffisamment de concessions: entre 1970 et 1972 le nombre de partants à Monaco est passé de seize à vingt. Boeri s'appuie sur les prescriptions de la CSI pour s'opposer aux constructeurs. Hélas pour lui, sa position ne tient pas car la CSI et l'ACM avaient quelques semaines auparavant télégraphié à la F1CA qu'ils consentaient à augmenter le nombre de concurrents admis au départ. En fait le prince de Metternich, président de la CSI, se sert de Boeri pour briser les prétentions des constructeurs.

 

Finalement Metternich charge Jacques Blanchet, le président de la FFSA, de mener des négociations entre l'ACM et la F1CA à l'occasion du Grand Prix d'Espagne. Parfaitement francophone, l'avocat et patron de March Max Mosley mène au nom de ses collègues les pourparlers avec Boeri et Blanchet. Aucune décision concrète ne sort de cette entrevue.

 

Lorsque les équipes arrivent à Monte-Carlo Bernie Ecclestone sonne l'hallali: si l'ACM ne cède pas, le Grand Prix n'aura pas lui. A Paris, le président Metternich tempête contre les chefs d'écuries qui selon lui n'ont aucun droit de regard sur le règlement des Grands Prix. Mais son influence est nulle. A Monte-Carlo, Michel Boeri tente de gagner du temps et demande aux équipes de commencer les essais tandis qu'il promet d'autoriser vingt-deux voitures à prendre le départ. Mosley et Ecclestone refusent: s'ils n'obtiennent pas satisfaction, les constructeurs quittent la Principauté. L'ACM tente de leur forcer la main en faisant cadenasser les portes des garages ! Mais les équipes ne tardent pas à briser les chaînes... Michel Boeri ne peut que capituler: il y aura bien vingt-cinq voitures admises au départ de la course.

 

C'est un terrible échec pour le pouvoir sportif qui a dû céder aux injonctions des constructeurs. Conscients qu'ils sont les acteurs principaux de ce sport, et désormais conduits par l'homme d'affaires hors pair qu'est Bernie Ecclestone, ceux-ci n'entendent pas seulement parler d'égaux à égal avec le pouvoir sportif, mais bien lui imposer leurs volontés.

http://www.statsf1.c...972/monaco.aspx

 

But of course - generally - all that anyone remembers about Monaco 1972 is that it p***ed down with rain and Beltoise won!



#96 uechtel

uechtel
  • Member

  • 1,960 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 25 November 2014 - 07:59

The limitations of participants at Monaco varied a lot. As I understand it was FOCA´s policiy to shrink the grid size in 1974, not to increase it.

 

1970: 16 cars

1971: 18 cars

1972: 25 cars (no qualifying)

1973: 25 cars (no qualifying)

1974: 25 cars

1975: 18 cars

1976: 20 cars

1977: 20 cars

...

1986: 20 cas

1987: 24 cars (no qualification)

1988: 26 cars

 

Also in Lang´s text there is always mention, that the different circuits had individually "licensed" number of starters, depending mainly on the length of the track. Initially this was only for the actual race but later obviously also a limitation for practise had been introduced (probably after the introduction of prequalifying in 1977)

 



Ta, Rob. I was cautious about the political angle because I couldn't recall a source. I think Innes Ireland wrote a few words about BRP's isolation. BRP became a constructor in 1963 and closed shop the next year, so we can identify a period when F1CA was active.

 

The history of F1CA and FOCA is a bit of a mystery. Hence this discussion thread, I suppose. To establish an association, you need at least three members (Lotus, Cooper, BRM, another?) but Ferrari wouldn't have any time for garage car builders. Presumably Ferrari negotiated their own entry terms and F1CA worked for their members. When did Ferrari join F1CA?

 

Probably a while after 1982 I think...



#97 uechtel

uechtel
  • Member

  • 1,960 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 25 November 2014 - 20:58

Hard to give an actual date, but the process came to a head some time in mid 1964.

I took a second look inside Mike Lang´s book for this, but did not find explicit mention. Unfortunately his narratives covering the fifties and sixties are much less comprehensive (and probably also more reluctant to name names) than for the eighties. So the only passages I found by reading between the lines are the follwoing occasions:

 

Dutch GP 1964 (the organizers were always notorious for being quite selective in their selection of entrants):

"BRP were absent because of an acute shortage of cars, but apart from them all the other leading teams were present and supported by the more regular private entrants who had been invited to make up a field of eighteen." Ok, the BRP cars had damage at Monaco, but a fourtnight should be enough for example to fix a leaking tank on Taylor´s car for example. So did they really have a shortage of cars? Sheldon says, it was decision by the organisers not to invite BRP, which would have been also very strange regarding the presence of Anderson and Siffert with their private Brabhams.

 

The BRP were missing also at the German GP, but without explicit mention by Lang. But Sheldon writes "The British Racing Partnership were unable to come to terms with the organisers about their worth so forfeited their entry." Seems there could have been quite fundamental differences between the AvD and Ken Gregory, as for 1962 I have found almost similar words in Sheldon´s text: "Only the British Racing Partnership were absent, the team had a difference of opinion with the organisers as to the amount fo starting money they were worth"

 

Other mentions of starting money / number issues during the early sixties:

1960 Monaco GP

Lang: "Although 24 entries had been accepted the number of starters was being limited to 16 again."

 

1960 Dutch GP

Lang: "...but in the background the entrans were arguing with the officials over the qualifying conditions. Eventually it was agreed that the original number of starters permitted be increased from fifteen to twenty but no starting money would be paid to the extra five. With this settled the air became a bit clearer though there was still some discontent amongst the teams who were unlikely to be in the money."

Sheldon: "The organisers of the Dutch GP did their best to cause disharmony among the ranks by inviting 21 cars but saying that, although everyone could start, only the best 15 in practise would be paid starting money. The upshot was that, although Chuck Daigh qualified, Reventlow withdrew both cars, Salvadori´s Aston Martin was withdrawn, Gregory withdrew but Trintignant came to a special deal with the organisers. Godin de Beaufort, being Dutch was going to start any way. [...] The start was rather funny because Trintignant´s deal involved his getting into the first ten places in the early stages of the race. Only then would he qualify for starting money."

 

1960 Portuguese Grand Prix

Sheldon: "The organisers only invited the cream of the Grand Prix world but gained a drive for their man, Cabral, in the Centro Sud Cooper."

 

1961 Monaco GP:

Lang: "As usual though the number of permitted starters was being restricted but this year each of the five 'works' teams were guaranteed a place on the grid for theior two leading drivers as were Moss and Trintignant for being past winners. This left only four places for the remaining nine drivers present to fight over."

Sheldon: "The organisers only accepted a certain number of potential qualifiers which meant that, for instance, the second Reg Parnell Racing entry was disappointed."

 

1961 Dutch GP:

Lang: "This year the entry list was made up of two cars from each of the 'works' teams except Ferrari who had three, one car from Rob Walker and Yeoman Credit, two Porsches entered by the Durtchman de Beaufort and finally a Lotus and Cooper from Camoradi International, the last two cars being accepted as reserves, which, in the event, became non-starters."

Sheldon: "The organisers invited exactly who they pleased. All the factories were allowed two entries. Ferrari were allowed an extra one to balance the British teams while Porsche managed four by virtue of the local driver borrowing two cars from the works and loaning one of them to Herrmann. Gregory and Burgess were invited as reserves but with no hope of a start unless one of the main invites failed to make the grade."

 

1961 Belgian GP:

Lang: "Although the organisers had invited twenty-five entries, only a pre-selected sixteen plus the fastest three out of the other nine were to receive starting money. It was then a matter of personal choice for the six unlucky ones to decide whether or not to start in the race. Included in the nine who had to qualify was the UDT-Laystall team [BRP!] with their Lotus and, having two drivers present, they decided to let Allison and Taylor both practise, the faster earning the right to drive in the race."

 

1961 French GP

Lang: "With the organisers making no restrictions about who could start and who couldn´t the large field of 26 cars lined up on the grid..."

 

German GP

Sheldon: "...BRP giving the race a miss because of a commitment to an American race."

 

1961 Italian GP:

Lang: "A huge entry of 37 had been accepted and no restriction was being made to the number of starters providing each individual driver recorded a time no more than 15% slower than the second fastest practise time."

 

1962 Dutch GP

Lang: "..although the entry was restricted to twenty, all the leading teams were present."

Sheldon: "...the Dutch organisers, as was their wont, selcting the field by personal whim rather than by logic. This meant that such worthies as Lewis and Marsh were ignored while Ben Pon and the sluggish Seidel both got drives. In the end Lewis was invited because no car was available for Trintignant..."

 

1962 Monaco GP

Lang: "Like the previous year, the organisers invited two entries from each of the five 'works' teams leaving six places available for the remaining eleven entries present to fight over. These included Brabham and Trintignant, no concession being made to past winners this year."

Sheldon: "if the metho of invitation that the organisers of the Dutch GP adopted was silly then that of the Monaco organisers was equally dotty. With only 16 starters allowed, two entries from each of the five manufacturers were given a firm start while everyone else had to qualify for the six remaining places."

 

1962 British GP

Sheldon: "#52 Jo Siffert dna, not enough starting money offered."

 

1962 Italian GP

Lang: "... the organisers had decided, however, to allow only 22 cars to start in the race subject to the proviso that each individual driver recorded a time within 10% of the second fastest practise time."

Sheldon: "The only absentee from the entry list was Brabham who could not come to terms with the organisers in respect of starting money."

 

1962 South African GP

Sheldon: "The entry was similar to the two previous races with the more uncompetitive locals not being accepted."

 

1963 Monaco GP

Lang: "Altogether twenty-four entries were invited to practise for this, the first Championship event of 1963, even though only sixteen cars would be allowed to start in the race as had become usual. Perchance, though, only sixteen of the entries materialised so the decision by the organisers to guarantee starting places only to past winners or to the current and former World Champions proved incidental."

 

1963 French GP

Sheldon: "Arundell was prevented from starting for he was racing in the Formula Junior race and it was now not permitted to drive in another race within 24 hours of competing in a Grand Prix"

 

1963 German GP:

Lang: "When practise times were sorted out the organisers decided that Pilette, Raby, Parnell and Kuhnke had been too slow and restricted the number of starters to twenty-two."

Sheldon: "The organisers of the German Grand Prix, like those of the British race invited everyone who wanted to come but stipulated that only a certain number of the also-rans would get a start thereby eliminating some of the really slow drivers like Kuhnke and Parnell."

 

1963 Italian GP

Lang: "Throughout the afternoon most of the others were having to work hard in order to try to qualify for the organisers were accepting no-one who failed to achieve a time less than 10% slower than the second fastest practise time. Even then only 20 starters were being allowed to start in the race which meant that eight of thos epresent would be unlucky."

 

1963 South African GP

Sheldon: "The organisers invited all teh European factory teams plus one private entry. As well as this dear Godin de Beaufort turned up in the hope of a drive. Luckily for him Mike Hailwood did not arrive so he was given a drive prviding he lapped in 1:37,9 - over two seconds better than he managed last year."

 

1964 Monaco GP

Lang: "When all times had been collated Amon, Revson and Collomb were the unlucky ones to be excluded from the race, only the fastest 16 being accepted."

 

1964 Dutch GP

Sheldon: "As usual, the organisers of teh Dutch Grand Prix invited just whom they chose, to drive in their race. In essence this was the usuals plus de Beaufort and minus the British Racing Partnership."

 

1964 French GP

Lang: "Apart from Scuderia Centro-Sud and Rob Walker the organisers attracted all the regular entrants..."

Sheldon: "Considering that there was no particular restrictions put on entries there was the smallest turnout of cars for some time."

 

1964 German GP

Sheldon: "#24 and #25 BRP entries: dna, disagreement with organisers."

 

1964 Italian GP:

Lang: "Once again however the total number of starters was being restricted to twenty so with twenty-five entries materialising everyone was anxious to make an early start when the firts practise session opened..."

 

1965 South African GP

Lang: "This did nothing to prevent a large entry from materialisng, however, but after allowing for guaranteed places on the grid for drivers of the regular teams, one for Frank Gardner in the John Willment team and another for South African champion John Love, only four places were left for the other drivers present. To sort things out a bit a special pre-practise eliminiation session was held. Out of the twelve though, only three failed to lap under the prescribed time of 1 min 37.0 sec..."

Sheldon: "The local drivers had a special pre-qualifying session. They had to lap in under 1:37 in order to qualify for practise and three drivers failed to do this. Once these drivers had pre-qualified they had another hurdle to mount for only 20 cars would be allowed in the race."

 

1965 Monaco GP

Lang: "To support Spence at Monaco, Team Lotus had entered Rodriguez but after a wrangle with the organisers over starting money both entries were withdrawn"

Sheldon: "The organisers, when they heard of Clark´s absence, only guaranteed Lotus one starter so they withdrew their entries. There were therefore 17 drivers competing for the 16 starting positions..."

 

1965 Belgian GP

Lang: "Proceedings got off to a bad start for this year´s European Grand Prix due to wrangles over starting moeny. The crux of the matter was that this was being paid only to sixteen starters. Of course two drivers from each of the 'works' teams were guaranteed places on the grid and consequently starting money leaving just four places for ten privateers who had been invited. Fortunately this resolved itself by the organisers agreeing to pay starting moeny to a further two cars and as the entries of Hawkins and Mairesse failed to materialise only the two slowest would be unlucky. Nevertheless agreement was not reached until after the first practise session so only the twelve 'works' drivers took advantage of the 2 hours provided on Friday evening."

Sheldon: "There was almost a strike before the Belgian GP. The aggrieved people were the private entrants. The organisers invited ten drivers but when they arrived, they found that only four would be paid starting money. They therefore abstained from the first session. The organisers relented and, out of the eight who arrived, six would be paid with thze other two being allowed to start but not be paid. In the end only Anderson was left out, having problems he could not fix in order to set a good time. Gregory opted to start without starting money."

 

1965 French GP

Sheldon: "The organisers tried to persuade the Willment team to provide a car for Jo Schlesser. When all that was produced was a Formula 2 Brabham, they cancelled not only that entry but Gardner´s as well. Anderson was cabled and rushed down to take part."

 

1965 British GP

Lang: "Ith the organisers calling for a lap within 5 seconds of third fastest time in order to qualify there was no lack of interest among the slower drivers."

Sheldon: "In addition to the usual runners there were a few who were not normally seen at Grand sPrix. They knew that the organisers were prepared to accept anyone provided they could lap a time not greater than 110% of the pole-sitter."

 

1965 Dutch GP

Sheldon: "The organising club had no truck with qualifying and only invited 16 cars to take part. Honda withdrew an entry and the club increased the field to 17 by extending invitations to a second Parnell car and Bob Anderson."

 

1965 German GP

Sheldon: "The long length of the Nürburgring put no constraints on the number of starters in the German GP providing that drivers could lap within 110% of the pole position time - a new requirement for Grands Prix."



#98 uechtel

uechtel
  • Member

  • 1,960 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 26 November 2014 - 23:20

A lot more to find in Lang´s book. In the inttroduction for the 1982 season he writes

"Meanwhile other non-technical changes were also announced at the same time. These included limiting teams to only one change of a car/driver combination during the season (except in a case of force majeure) once they had mounted their drivers for a season, raising the maximum number of entries acceptable for a Grand Prix from thirty to thirty-four and the number of starters from twenty-four to twenty-six, the one exception being Monaco. However, if more than thirty entries materialized at a Grand Prix, it was stipulated that pre-qualifying should take place and concurrently with the first official practise session rather than holding special pre-qualifying sessions as in the past, to reduce the number of cars taking part in the remaining practise sessions to thirty. Those obliged to take part would be selected from teams who had failed to score any Championship points in 1981 and involved, initially, Warwick and Fabi (Toleman), Jarier and Paletti (Osella) and Boesel (March)."