Wolff calls for changes to tyre pressure protocol

63 comments on “Wolff calls for changes to tyre pressure protocol”

1. 

   Sean (@spaceman1861)
   7th September 2015, 0:10

   Not gonna lie I watched that whole michelin video.. no regrets id watch it again.
   1. 

      Max Jacobson (@vettel1)
      7th September 2015, 1:08

      I suspect they no longer see themselves as in contention for the tyre supply contract ;)
2. 

   Anon
   7th September 2015, 0:16

   I guess it’s a bit off topic for the round up, but I’m a bit surprised at no one raising an issue with the way the fans acted as Rosberg retired, when the fans at Silverstone were blasted for doing the same thing a couple of years ago as Vettel retired.
   1. 

      Mark Thomson (@melthom)
      7th September 2015, 20:31

      I had the same thought. Unworthy.
3. 

   JohnnyRye
   7th September 2015, 0:39

   I don’t really blame LH for the hat, F1 has messed up moments of silence in the past in much the same way, I think it was in Japan after the tsunami where half the drivers were still talking to each other.

   F1 needs to make every moment of silence as genuine as JB’s or else don’t bother trying.
   1. 

      Mach1 (@mach1)
      7th September 2015, 1:10

      ??????
      Did I miss somthing?
      1. 

         BasCB (@bascb)
         7th September 2015, 6:03

         Lewis first sent a tweet apologizing for not having taken off his cap saying something like “I was listening to music and though we were just getting a picture taken, didn’t know that was supposed to be the tribute” @mach1

         Then he sent a second tweet apologising again.
         1. 

            ColdFly F1 (@)
            7th September 2015, 8:15

            I think Hamilton made amends for wearing the cap by sending the tweet in the round-up at 1:23PM yesterday – probably when leading the race on the rettifilo straight! @bascb
            1. 

               BasCB (@bascb)
               7th September 2015, 8:18

               yeah, he did mention the last race weekend that he has a friend doing his twitter/instagram stuff during race weekends @coldfly (after having the gun-range shot up on instagram at about the same moment of that shooting in the Amsterdam-Paris train on friday of the Spa weekend)
            2. 

               Bob Steele (@bobwhosaysni)
               7th September 2015, 8:51

               The race started at 2:00 in Italy, so he could have sent it himself.
            3. 

               ColdFly F1 (@)
               7th September 2015, 11:05

               @bobwhosaysni – I assumed that the tweet screen shot came from Keith’s account (thus BST).
               But it seems from the time-stamp if you go to the tweet that it was actually CEST.
   2. 

      Iestyn Davies (@fastiesty)
      7th September 2015, 1:49

      I can imagine, he grew up karting with Davidson, Wheldon and Wilson, strange that only two of them are now left.

      FOM’s message was a bit odd as well.
      1. 

         Joe (@joew)
         7th September 2015, 9:17

         FOM’s message was just awkward. Is it Bernie himself with the Magical Track-Writing Machine? Someone ought to put a hammer through it.
4. 

   Mach1 (@mach1)
   7th September 2015, 1:10

   Haha is that photo from before or after the race as it looks as if Toto is about to punch Hembery.
   1. 

      McF1 (@mccosmic)
      7th September 2015, 4:59

      @mach1 It’s a cracking photo. Next caption competition @keithcollantine? Hembery (who so reminds my of David Brent really looks as if he’s getting his nuts squeesed by Toto.
      1. 

         ColdFly F1 (@)
         7th September 2015, 8:18

         It says Spa-Francorchamps. But we know there were other reasons for Mercedes to be cross with Pirelli then! @mach1, @mccosmic
5. 

   RogerA
   7th September 2015, 1:12

   This whole tyre pressure nonsense shows how ridiculous F1 has become with its over-regulation & bubblegum tyres.

   Never before in f1’s history has tyre pressure, camber, temperatures or any of that stuff ever been regulated & there were no problems related to any of this on any other tyre supplier’s tyres.

   if these pirelli’s tyres need outside regulation then there clearly not good enough, they shoudl be able to handle all of the pressures & strains of f1 without regulation just as all past tyres did. if they are unable to improve the tyres to move away from this absurd over regulation & nonsense like what we saw this weekend with mercedes then its time for them to step aside.

   yes i know there making bubblegum tyres because they were asked to, but if they cannot make decent tyres that fit that mandate then maybe they should refuse to tyres this way & insist there be allowed to make some proper performance tyres as michelin & other potential tyre suppliers back in 2010 did.

   its frankly utterly absurd that what is supposed to be the pinnacle of the sport with the fastest, highest performance cars are been forced to race on the crappiest tyres in motorsport that are miles off providing any sort of real performance.
   1. 

      @HoHum (@hohum)
      7th September 2015, 3:56

      You wont be surprised to hear that I absolutely and entirely (no pun) agree with you, thanks for carrying on the good fight, I’m losing interest.
   2. 

      tromoly (@tromoly)
      7th September 2015, 7:20

      What regulation restricts camber angles? Haven’t seen that one, only recommendations from Pirelli that teams can ignore if they choose (Red Bull in 2011).

      There’s a regulation on maximum tire temperature? That’d be kind of hard to enforce, I imagine again that Pirelli has a recommendation on optimal tire temperature based on tire data, though that point I imagine all teams are trying to stay around for optimal performance.

      Tire pressure regulations aren’t a big deal, the NHRA has had a 7psi minimum for about 11 years now with the pressure checked right before the engines fire up for a run, their system of measurement works out just fine.
      1. 

         Max Jacobson (@vettel1)
         7th September 2015, 9:49

         Blanket temperature, yes, but obviously not when on track.
      2. 

         BasCB (@bascb)
         7th September 2015, 9:57

         After 2011 and especially the Silverstone 2013 incidents the FIA actually DID make it mandatory to follow the camber and pressure limits given by Pirelli @tromoly.
   3. 

      Selbbin (@selbbin)
      7th September 2015, 7:33

      yeah, other tyre suppliers never ever had any issues with handling the strain and there were never any failures…. except for those pesky Michelin tyres in 2005…
   4. 

      Stephen Crowsen (@drycrust)
      7th September 2015, 7:38

      My belief is Pirelli (or whoever the tyre supplier is) should state their recommendations for the race, and then leave it up to the teams to decide whether or not they want to follow those recommendations. The teams are professional people and they should know exactly what pressures, cambers, number of laps, etc work for their car and what don’t.
      I guess part of the problem with that approach is when there is a tyre failure and Pirelli are considered to be the cause of the failure, then it makes Pirelli want to have more say in how the teams manage their tyres. So now we have Pirelli dictating what the tyre pressures are, what the cambers are, etc.
   5. 

      Apex Assassin
      8th September 2015, 16:38

      AGREE 100%!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
6. 

   Iestyn Davies (@fastiesty)
   7th September 2015, 1:54

   FIA reveals more of its incompetence.. On the grid walk Brundle interviewed Todt, and of course he could only say he has no influence on Bernie’s decisions. But this tyre measurement (or lack of) farce is truly next level!
7. 

   Iestyn Davies (@fastiesty)
   7th September 2015, 1:58

   If Renault will do a works only outfit or bust, leaving is definitely an option if there’s no sweetener from Bernie.

   That would leave Merc and Ferrari with 4 teams each and Honda with 2 (Manor B-team?)!
8. 

   OOliver
   7th September 2015, 2:33

   Bernie doesn’t make money from ticket sales so he doesn’t care. He doesn’t care if a circuit can sustain the fees paid.
   1. 

      Dom (@3dom)
      7th September 2015, 21:46

      I’m really concerned @ooliver

      With regard to the threat to Monza not being on the calendar in future, it may just be Ecclestone’s haggling strategy again but it’s enough to get even the drivers worried so you’d think it’s serious.

      I’m glad that the drivers are speaking their minds on the matter. I’m glad for their contribution, as sometimes as a fan, it’s easy to feel that our voices and those of the media are just being ignored and have limited influence. I don’t know if the driver’s voices will truly help, but any help is appreciated.

      For me, as far as Monza is concerned, there is the fact that it forms a unique extreme. It’s like the opposite of Monaco (cars needing absolute maximum downforce, skimming barriers around a tight, twisty track), with Monza cars need the skinniest wings, minimum downforce and drag, top speeds make the difference there. From one end of the spectrum to the other. That variety in the F1 circuit is just as important, and on top of that Monza has the heritage and the character and the atmosphere to boot. It really should not be lost, surely for Ecclestone some common sense should prevail in these negotiations , otherwise I despair at what the calendar will be like in 10 years time.
9. 

   Stig Semper Fi (@stigsemperfi)
   7th September 2015, 3:50

   So Red Bull will have to settle on Ferrari on Mercedes power for next year? What a shame, I bet they’re guttered…
   1. 

      BasCB (@bascb)
      7th September 2015, 5:57

      Lets see how this all pans out @stigsemperfi. We have seen that same Autosport piping to someones tune in “confirming” that Lotus had been swayed by Renault to sell, when the offer was still to be made last week and a few other things like that. Now this “speculation has it” as a headline …

      Until Renault and Red Bull agree on how much the bulls are going to pay up for ending their supply a year short there won’t be a deal.
      There is clearly some PR pressure going on (on the Genii guys to sell for a low price, on Renault to really come in and on Mercedes to supply their engines to Red Bull, on the Lotus creditors to keep faith) probably coming from the RBR camp (who want those better engines) and BE (who wants to see RBR with better engines so that they stay and would like Renault coming in full Manufacturer)

      Yes, its likely that things will happen, but “speculation” has been rife about ample things in the paddock for ages, and not all of that is rife for a serious article suggesting we have a done deal here.
      1. 

         MazdaChris (@mazdachris)
         7th September 2015, 11:35

         @bascb from what I understand, RBR wouldn’t need to pay Renault anything, as their current contract is one which ensures them ‘works team’ status. With Renault saying that they won’t supply customer teams, and having the intention of buying their own works team, that would seem to invalidate that contract. Before you even brought in potential performance/reliability clauses which must surely have been broken by Renault by now.

         I agree that there’s a lot of speculation but it seems to me that Autosport has been one of the few sites to carefully distinguish an article about rumours and speculation from those which are based on clear insider information.
         1. 

            BasCB (@bascb)
            7th September 2015, 12:06

            that is wrong @mazdachris. If Red Bull terminates now, before Renault even is sure to get their own team and clearly before they can prove Renault not having the intention to heed their current contract (Renault have repeatedly stated that they count on the current contract for 2016 running its course), the only way to do so is by paying off the contract.

            I have even seen rumours that RBR paying off Renault might be key to the manufacturer buying Lotus (using the RBR money to satisfy outstanding money to debtors).
            I would not want to judge how good the sources of Autosport are, but in this affair they have already been used to put out rumours to push negotiations along, so its quite possible this is also part of that.
            1. 

               MazdaChris (@mazdachris)
               7th September 2015, 12:13

               @bascb Contract negotiations don’t need to be public to be well known. Renault’s intention to buy up a works team IS something they have stated publically, and regardless their position will also be a factor in any current negotiations. You can’t imagine that Renault and RBR aren’t talking to each other and that RBR have just sent notice to Renault solely off the back of some articles in the media. RBR will have been involved in those discussions and will be aware of the current situation, which is what will have driven this. Whether it has been made public or not is irrelevant. While Renault are in negotiations which would put them in potential breach of contract, then RBR are well within their rights to terminate the contract solely on those grounds. If nothing else, it would imply that Renault aren’t acting in good faith and have an intention to breach their contract. Given the time-sensitive nature of developing an F1 car, RBR need to nail down their supplier right now, as waiting it out would ultimately be harmful to their business.
            2. 

               BasCB (@bascb)
               7th September 2015, 12:54

               Well but so far its an intention. That is a very good reason to negotiate (which I think all these public “leaks” “speculations” etc. are signs of – hard boiled negotiations and parties trying to push parties into actions etc) @mazdachris.

               As you say, contract negotiations do not have to be public to be well known. Rather the real negotiations normally take place without the media present, and any messages put out during the process serve the purpose of one of the parties.

               You keep saying that Renault just by negotiating with teams about buying them would put them in “potential breach of contract”. But first of all we do not know that (i doubt Renault would do that, as it gives RBR a trump card and surely Renault have ample contract lawyers) unless we know the exact wording in the contract, and second “potential breach of contract” is a reason for signalling a partner that they are risking a lot, not a reason to terminate a contract up front.

               Renault could very well keep Red Bull as their “works team equivalent” for next year, or at least prepare to do so (knowing that Red Bull wants out of the contract anyway ASAP) until the end of the contract after season 2016.

               As for Red Bull – they have the confirmation from their current partner that Renault does count on their contract. Yes, they WANT out early. And yes, it makes sense for the team to push for a new engine ASAP.

               Putting out a rumour that they have terminated with Renault might just be part of trying to push Mercedes in giving in (Mercedes clearly stated that they wouldn’t even officially talk about a deal until RBR and Renault agreed on terminating their contract) and supplying those engines.

               So let me say it again. No, Renault being interested in changing things is almost certainly NOT a breach of contract, and YES negotiations are going on in the background and everyone clearly wants things settled soon. But its not done yet, otherwise why would people wait to announce that? Unless Singapore finance plays a role off course
            3. 

               MazdaChris (@mazdachris)
               7th September 2015, 13:51

               @bascb I think it’s important to notice what that article is NOT saying, as much as what it is. The only line which gives a definitive positive statement is this one:

               It is understood Red Bull has issued a document requesting a termination of the partnership that will be accepted by Renault.

               Everything else in the article is just generalised information outlining the broader circumstances, but nothing directly relating to this apparent document which has been passed to Renault. We don’t know what the content is at all. In fact, it’s interesting to me that it doesn’t say that they have informed Renault that they are terminating the contract. It actually says that they have requested a termination, which implies that this is something that Renault could reject if they felt so inclined. But I think we can also pretty safely assume that this hasn’t come out of the blue; Renault will have known this was coming as Renault and Red Bull will have been in discussions about this for a while now. Both want to end their relationship it seems – Renault either want to buy a manufacturer, or walk away completely. Neither of these goals is compatible with a continued supply of PUs to Red Bull. Likewise, Red Bull want to seek an alternative supplier – the need to do this is very pressing if they hope to accomplish this in time for 2016.

               So my reading of this is that Renault and Red Bull have already agreed to part company and that the issuing of this request is simply the final, official step of that process. Given that it would be mutually beneficial to tie things up as quickly as possible, I would have thought that this would be an agreement by mutual consent to free both parties from their contractual obligations, and that there wouldn’t be any penalties applied from either party regarding the termination. Obviously there will, alongside that, be an agreement which outlines how the two companies will continue to operate (fees and OLAs) for the remainder of 2015, but I think that will be the end of the road at that point.

               The point I’m getting at is that this is an agreement by mutual consent rather than one party deciding to terminate while the other is willing to honour the current contract. These things will have been comprehensively thrashed out between all parties behind closed doors and to me this seem to indicate that the process is now complete and they’re just sorting out the final legal bits before any public confirmation. I’m not going to say that it’s likely to be an amicable split, but I think both parties will be going away satisfied with how they’ve left it.
            4. 

               BasCB (@bascb)
               7th September 2015, 13:59

               yes, well Mutual consent however can (and quite often does) mean a sum of money was involved @mazdachris. And it clearly shows that it was Red bull who wanted to terminate, not Renault being in breach too.

               But yes, that is the one part that seems clear, that Red Bull has asked for and is counting on Renault to accept (or possibly already received that), a termination of the contract.
   2. 

      JCost (@jcost)
      7th September 2015, 8:39

      I think theywant the Mercedes one but they would be happy to get a Ferrari one. On the other hand, Renault is keen to prove Red Bull they still got it so I’m expecting a good engine from Renault next year…
10. 

    Jay Menon (@jaymenon10)
    7th September 2015, 5:53

    So this means that Renault are buying Lotus and Red Bull are getting their supply of Merc engines, which probably be rebadged as Aston Martin. Red Bull-Aston Martin…got a nice ring to it.

    I wonder what will happen to Torro Rosso? Will Renault still supply customer engines if they buy Lotus?

    I think Honda might have a new customer…by lack of choice!
    1. 

       BasCB (@bascb)
       7th September 2015, 5:58

       Not quite @jaymenon10. For now it just means that someone is “speculating” about that (Bernie and the RBR camp) and putting out messages to achieve their goal in “friendly” and not too scrupulous press (as its really only speculation and not everyone wants to report that as “news”).
    2. 

       BasCB (@bascb)
       7th September 2015, 7:00

       German Tabloid Bild reports that Mercedes has now “confirmed it will not supply Red Bull” and that the team is negotiating with Ferrari currently (it also “confirms” the speculation that they quit with Renault) to get engines for next year …

       Forcing the issue it seems?
       1. 

          Selbbin (@selbbin)
          7th September 2015, 7:10

          Looks like Ferrari can name it’s price.
    3. 

       BasCB (@bascb)
       7th September 2015, 13:05

       And according to German AmuS (wo seem to have some good sources in the paddock, although in the past more at the likes of Mercedes and Red Bull then at Renault), its not even clear quite yet that Renault will actually enter as Goshn (Renault boss) wants a written guarantee from Bernie that his promise for their team to become a privileged team stands before deciding on entering and buying Lotus.
11. 

    pSynrg (@psynrg)
    7th September 2015, 7:51

    It would be rather amusing to see the Renault engine come on song in 2016…
    1. 

       Todfod (@todfod)
       11th September 2015, 8:37

       I really hope that happens. Renault solve all their issues out, just like Ferrari did, and BOOM… they start 2016 with an engine that can compete with at least the likes of Ferrari.

       What would be even better is if Mclaren switch to Renault power for next year. That team is getting nowhere with Honda as an engine partner
12. 

    Guy (@)
    7th September 2015, 8:21

    If they were smart, Red Bull and Ferrari would join forces to reign in Mercedes. Whats that saying…”the enemy of my enemy is my friend.”

    I can’t see Mercedes supplying Red Bull. Ferrari on the other hand can since they have nothing to lose. That is they are willing to put their ego aside.
    1. 

       Woody (@woodyd91)
       7th September 2015, 10:15

       Ferrari on the other hand can since they have nothing to lose. That is they are willing to put their ego aside.

       Nope I don’t think they have anything to lose because of the nature of how the supply their customer teams, unlike Mercedes it’s widely understood that Ferrari customer teams get, well lets call them “B-Spec PU’s” compared to the A spec that the works team gets. Mercedes on the other hand give all their customer teams exactly the same engine as they have. The only time they haven’t is last weekend in Monza where according to rumours the new spec engines were so new they only had 2 built & that because it was experimental it wouldn’t give its customer teams it. Which is understandable, I mean if you’re Williams, Force India or Lotus you want to bag as many points as possible not risk your car blowing up because of an experimental engine, Ferrari tend to do the reverse and get it’s customer teams to test various PU parts for them..

       I really can’t see Mercedes supplying RB with engines, however as i said before if Red Bull can put a Ferrari engine in the back, which is much closer to Mercedes engine than the Renault in terms of performance then we can see if the RB is really the best chassis on the track just lacking power or whether just simply have the best PU & chassis combination.
       1. 

          Asanator (@asanator)
          7th September 2015, 11:44

          The issue this year is Sauber being able to pay for the current engines (or any engines) which is why they had the unit behind the works team. As far as next year goes, with the engines locked at the start of the season, I would expect Rebull to get the same engine as the works Ferrari as dictated by the rules.
          1. 

             Dom (@3dom)
             7th September 2015, 21:55

             @asanator I thought there was a possibility that the same “token based” situation could occur next year to try help other engine manufacturers catch up
             1. 

                Asanator (@asanator)
                8th September 2015, 14:49

                @3dom yes there will still be the token system although all of the available tokens will have to be spent before the season starts so there can be no mid-season upgrades unlike this year. The same spec PU will have to be supplied to all teams running that manufacturers engine for the entire season. I doubt Manor will get a reprieve as they have done this year to run the 2014 engine although if it all shakes out as the rumours suggest they will be running Merc engines next year anyway.
    2. 

       ColdFly F1 (@)
       7th September 2015, 11:12

       @sudd

       I can’t see Mercedes supplying Red Bull. Ferrari on the other …

       I think it’s the opposite. It would hurt Ferrari if somebody else than the main team wins the championship with their engine.
       On the other hand Mercedes (corporate – not the team) just wants its name out there winning races. And marketing to a younger public (RBR fans) is quite appealing.
13. 

    chris (@)
    7th September 2015, 8:23

    Before Honda came back, F1 engine supply was all marketing smoke and mirrors.
    Whilst the engines are clearly different, Mercedes & Renault have had an engine alliance for a decade or more & Mercedes was a business partner of Chrysler (50/50) who in turn had strong commercial links with Fiat who own Ferrari. Renault and Nissan (who own the infinity brand) also own each other. Behind the scenes it’s not far fetched for Renault to broker deals with Mercedes or Ferrari on Red Bull / Torro Rossi’s behalf, leveraging their business relations to get deals done.
    It’s a shame Seb isn’t back in RB as When Redbull get that Merc engine, we could have seen an almighty battle, I hope DR is up to the task.
14. 

    MazdaChris (@mazdachris)
    7th September 2015, 11:29

    If I were in Red Bull senior management’s position, I would be looking to split the difference and have RBR supplied by Mercedes and Torro Rosso supplied by Ferrari. Potentially wouldn’t be the most palatable of deals for the suppliers, but it would mean that one RB brand or other would always be in a position to reap the benefits of any performance fluctuations between the two.

    I’m really hoping that Mercedes see the appeal in beating RBR on a level playing field. It would be the best possible endorsement of their programme if they can genuinely point out that they have built the best car/PU package, and end any speculation that a team supplied with an inferior PU are only losing because they’re being hobbled.

    To be the best, you have to beat the best at their best.
    1. 

       BasCB (@bascb)
       7th September 2015, 13:07

       yeah, i think its not too unlikely to see Red Bull do that.
       1. 

          MazdaChris (@mazdachris)
          7th September 2015, 14:05

          @bascb Obviously the difficulty for Red Bull is that, with no supplier for next year and seemingly no option to continue with Renault, they are at the mercy of Ferrari and Mercedes when it comes to making an agreement.

          Firstly, Mercedes are currently supplying their quota of teams. If (when?) Renault buys out Lotus, we can assume that frees up Mercedes to supple one team, but that still leaves them needing to find a second supplier for one of their two teams. Red Bull ned to be thinking strategically here so it’s not going to be a case of RBR and TR going separately and trying to secure their own supply; it’ll be senior people at Red Bull thrashing out deals for both teams collectively.

          If they manage to secure a Mercedes PU for one team, it seems likely that the other would need to go with Ferrari regardless, unless FOM/FIA are prepared to allow (and Mercedes/Ferrari are prepared to consent) Mercedes to supply an increased quota. I can’t personally see Ferrari being happy about that.

          So in the end it may actually be Ferrari who hold the key rather than Mercedes. Mercedes simply need to decide whether or not they want to supply one Red Bull team (presumably RBR) in the event of Renault buying out Lotus and using their own PU. Ferrari on the other hand may want to insist on supplying both Red Bull teams or neither at all. After all, if RBR are going to potentially win races, better for Ferrari for them to do it with a Ferrari PU in the back rather than a Mercedes one.
       2. 

          BasCB (@bascb)
          7th September 2015, 14:13

          I have seen some reports that actually STR still count on their contract for 2016 with Renault @mazdachris, so it might be that RBR terminated only for their more important team.
          That probably makes sense, as spending resources and money to get out at Renault and get a new engine at the fly for the top team might be worth it, but for STR too, maybe not. It would probably still mean STR changing after the current contract runs out though. They would still get the leverage of promising STR change over too (or splitting it between several suppliers as deemed best way to go as you mention), but spare them the cost involved in a quick change now.

          Now the question is whether Bernie can help RBR convince Mercedes to give them the better engine, or will they have to rely on Ferrari (see Ferrari stating that they are fine with supplying RBR in the press today), unless they would give Honda a thought off course (LOL).
          1. 

             MazdaChris (@mazdachris)
             7th September 2015, 14:38

             @bascb Oh I’m sure they gave Honda a thought, but I doubt that thought was one that Arai-san would enjoy hearing..

             One thing I do find slightly interesting is that we’re lead to understand that Renault have said that they aren’t interested in supplying customer teams, which would seem to imply that they wouldn’t be supplying TR either. Why I think this is interesting is that (and I appreciate that I may be reading too much into this) this may not just be sour grapes from Renault, it may actually be a part of their plan. The rules are written in such a way regarding PU development that each manufacturer homologates an initial design and then is allowed to develop that design incrementally using a number of development tokens each year. A new manufacturer coming to F1 designs their PU on a blank sheet of paper with no development restrictions. With this in mind, I wonder whether part of the idea behind buying a whole team is that the PU operation is then done as an in-house operation of the F1 team and not done by RenaultSport F1 in Viry-Chatillon. This could potentially mean that this would be a wholly new entry, power unit included, meaning that Renault could also create a completely new power unit which isn’t an evolution of the old one. This would mean effectively winding up RenaultSport F1 which currently makes the PUs and transferring ownership of the facility and staff directly to the F1 team itself, which would explain their inability to continue supplying PUs to customers. There doesn’t seem to be any restriction within the rules which would prevent them from being able to do this, and it seems the sort of concession FOM would be like to make if it meant the return of a full manufacturer team.

             Like I say, perhaps reading too much into it, but it’s food for thought anyway.
             1. 

                BasCB (@bascb)
                7th September 2015, 17:09

                Interesting idea there about Renault and possibly them playing with the thought of going clean sheet @mazdachris.

                For now, I think they would not go that route, because of the importance of getting money for being a “historical” manufacturer from FOM/Bernie which makes their continued presence important. But then again, Bernie might be fine with Renault potentially taking a jump in performance as that would make them more likely to stay for a while.
             2. 

                MazdaChris (@mazdachris)
                7th September 2015, 18:51

                @bascb Well I think it’s only natural they’d be looking at every possible angle to give themselves the best possible leg up with their manufacturer team. I’d have thought that the historical bonus would be related to the manufacturer entry so the PU supply would be something separate from that. Obviously this is all speculation, but I think if I were in Renault’s shoes I’d be looking for any chance I had to throw their current PU design in the bin and start again.

                In other news, apparently Mercedes have now definitively ruled out supplying Red Bull so it looks like Ferrari is their only option. Let’s hope they haven’t backed themselves into a corner and find themselves without a PU for next year. Surely that couldn’t be allowed to happen..?
             3. 

                BasCB (@bascb)
                7th September 2015, 22:45

                the thing seems to be that there is no actual rule about what would make one count towards the priviledge, its up to what you get out of Bernie @mazdachris. So CVC will be trying to hold on to as much money as they can, with Bernie being their frontman, and Goshn will be holding out for as much as he feels he should be worth (about what Merc got before their 2014 championship?).
                If they do not agree, its also possible that Goshn really pulls the plug (although that would also means all F1 engine development R&D goes down the drain). Mercedes not supplying Red Bull seemingly certain (or at least until someone can sway a very good argument, I guess), looks like BE will now be up to managing how to get RBR and Ferrari to agree because Didi will be playing the “or I could pull the plug” card on him I guess.
                All in all, a lot of dealing going on there between the teams involved, their top brass and Bernie. And then we have Lotus and its owners who somehow need to urgently get some money to survive long enough to actually get someone to buy them too. A lot to to for BE then.
15. 

    GeeMac (@geemac)
    7th September 2015, 13:23

    Wolff is 100% right, this rule needs to be clarified and it needs to be clarified asap. For far too long the FIA’s technical regulations and technical directives have been incredibly poorly drafted. It seems to me (and I am giving a lot of professional courtesy to the FIA lawyers here) that they always draft FIA documents in such a way as to leave them open to murky interpretations rather than setting out the rules in clear terms.

    After the race I, like many, thought it would be a slam dunk DSQ. But then I started to think the way I do in my day job as a lawyer. When I draft agreements (banking and finance documents, not that any of you care I am sure!) I was always taught to use the 5 Cluedo (Who? What? Where? When? Why?) questions to ensure that my drafting was accurate and I still do to this day. If you apply that test to the tyre pressure issue you can see why the stewards had no choice but to let Hamilton’s win stand:

    Who had to perform the check: Pirelli. And it seems they did. No problem.
    What did they have to check: That the tyre pressures were higher than 19.5 PSI. And apparently they were when the measurement was taken. Still no problem.
    Why carry out the check? To make sure they tyres are inflated above a pressure which the tyre supplier says is safe. Still no problem.
    When do you have to carry out this check? Oh dear, seems like they forgot to clarify that.
    How do you have to carry out this check? Oh dear, they sort of forgot about that too.

    It isn’t often that lawyers getting involved makes things better, but all it would take is for a reasonably skilled lawyer to spend half hour at a keyboard to sort that rule out.
    1. 

       BasCB (@bascb)
       7th September 2015, 14:15

       I think there is a lot of garbage lawyers advising the FIA currently, or maybe at least someone proofreading.
       Just look at their attacks on Gary Hartstein for his comments over Schumacher and Bianchi on his blog etc, not to mention the omission of that engine homologation date in the engine regulations @geemac, its quite the mess at the FIA.
       1. 

          Iestyn Davies (@fastiesty)
          7th September 2015, 14:58

          The FIA couldn’t organise a motor race at a race track! @bascb
16. 

    Billys (@bilarxos)
    7th September 2015, 20:29

    Nice fight Daniel-Jenson!

Comments are closed.