Vowles officially takes over as Williams team principal days before season starts

RaceFans Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: New Williams team principal James Vowles has officially started his role at the team’s Grove factory

In brief

Vowles officially takes over as Williams team principal

New Williams team principal James Vowles has officially started his role at the team’s Grove factory after serving his notice period with Mercedes.

Vowles, former chief strategist at Mercedes, had originally been announced as the team’s new team principal in January, replacing Jost Capito, but could not join Wiliams officially until yesterday due to contractual factors with departing Mercedes.

“I really struggle to put into words just how much it means to me, how excited I am, and all the emotions that are bubbling inside me at the moment,” Vowles said in a video posted on social media. “I had the pleasure of meeting already a huge number within this organisation. I frankly can’t wait to meet the remainder over the next few days.

“In just a few days, we’ll be testing in Bahrain in earnest. It’s, for us, an opportunity to really understand where the car is and what we need to do from that baseline to move forwards.”

FIA holds race director, steward training programme with Wittich

The FIA has completed a three-day training programme created by its president, Mohammed Ben Sulayem, for selected individuals to educate them in the disciplines of stewarding and race direction.

A group of 24 trainees from around the world attended a three-day High Performance Programme in Geneva, Switzerland. Formula 1 race director Niels Wittich was one of the mentors involved in the training.

“My leadership team inherited a number of challenges when we took office at the end of 2021,” said Ben Sulayem. “It has been well documented that one of those was Race Control management. We have made changes to the Race Control operation and we have devised the High Performance Programme to ensure that we have a pathway of talent coming through for the years ahead.”

Saudi Arabia wants “champion” driver

The chairman of the Saudi Automobile & Motorcycle Federation, Prince Khalid bin Sultan Al-Abdullah Al-Faisal, says Saudi Arabia want to see a home grown driver competing for major international motorsport championships in the coming decades.

Saudi Arabia is increasing its investment in motorsport, including Formula 1, with the Saudi Arabian Grand Prix set to be held for the third time in just under a month. Prince Khalid Al-Faisal says the kingdom hopes to grow as a force in international motorsport.

“We would like a Saudi champion – a driver who is capable of winning an international racing competition,” he said.

“We are really enthusiastic about motorsport and have big plans and we want to contribute by having a big role in the future of the sport. Hopefully in 10 to 20 years from now you will see Saudi Arabia and Saudi companies and more people engaged globally with Formula 1.”

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Social media

Notable posts from Twitter, Instagram and more:

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Comment of the day

With Alexander Albon hailing the arrival of Williams’ new team principal James Vowles, @asanator is struck by a scarcely believable stat…

It’s crazy to think that Williams last constructors title was 26 years ago (1997). Even crazier to think that it was just the year before McLarens last constructors title (1998).
Asanator

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Lou, Nirupam, Phiwe, Saiesh, Keamo and Phiwe Maserumule!

On this day in motorsport

  • On this day in 1983 Toleman revealed their new livery for the upcoming season and announced the signing of Bruno Giacomelli

Author information

Will Wood
Will has been a RaceFans contributor since 2012 during which time he has covered F1 test sessions, launch events and interviewed drivers. He mainly...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

28 comments on “Vowles officially takes over as Williams team principal days before season starts”

  1. some racing fan
    21st February 2023, 0:36

    Patrick Head and his management of the engineering side of the Williams teams was the main reason why Williams was so successful. Sure, Frank Williams was a really good businessman but when Head was demoted at the end of 2004, Williams was never as competitive ever again. Head had a really advanced engineering degree- probably at the level of aerospace which in the late 70s no engineer in F1 probably had.

    Nowadays Head probably wouldn’t want to work in F1 again because he’s too old. But he will go down as one of the greatest engineers F1 has ever seen.

    1. some racing fan
      21st February 2023, 0:37

      *team

    2. If Patrick Head was so good, why didn’t Williams do anything of note after Adrian Newey left?

      1. According to Newey himself, Head and Williams had a specific way of doing things, which worked great for them in the 80s, but they were too set in their ways and so couldn’t adjust to F1 from the mid-90s onwards.

      2. Because they did good before Newey.

      3. some racing fan
        21st February 2023, 7:52

        They won 4 constructors championships before Newey got there (1980, 1981, 1986, 1987) and 3 driver’s titles (1980, 1982, 1987) and were consistently among the most competitive teams in the 80s. After 1997, Williams didn’t have a competitive season until 2001, because they had to stick with stagnant Renault V10 engines that were rebadged- and when they got together with BMW they were competitive again in 2001 and 2004, and nearly won the CC in 2003.

        1. some racing fan, with regards to your earlier comments about Patrick Head’s qualification – he had a degree in mechanical engineering, not aeronautical engineering.

          In terms of academic qualifications, Patrick Head wasn’t that special for that period – there were several other designers with comparable qualifications – Forghieri, to pick just one – and there were some, like Harvey Postlethwaite, who arguably had superior academic qualifications (Postlethwaite completed a PhD in mechanical engineering, whereas Head only studied to undergraduate level).

          To some extent, although Williams did have reasonable success in the early to mid 2000s, there were some suggesting at the time that the power of BMW’s engines at the time was somewhat compensating for some of the defects in their chassis. In terms of design trends during that era, Williams weren’t really seen as being at the forefront of aerodynamic or chassis development either.

          1. some racing fan
            21st February 2023, 10:40

            They probably weren’t on the forefront of aero or chassis development either (that was probably McLaren at the time, even though Ferrari were more competitive, especially in 2002 and 2004, where they destroyed everyone) but the point I’m trying to make that they were competitive from 2001-2004- and at least a hell of a lot more competitive then as they sadly are now, and in that short period they reached their peak in 2003- and we all know how that went.

            I think Head was probably more special than you give him credit for- he certainly had more education and a more advanced degree in mechanical engineering than, say John Barnard or Gordon Murray had, but not as much as Dr. Harvey Postlethwaite, who as you say actually had a PhD in mechanical engineering.

            Forghieri was one of the few F1 engineers who could design an car’s entire mechanical structure on his own- he was especially good at designing engines and transmissions. But when it came to aero he needed assistance, which even though he and his team were somehow able to make the ’79 Ferrari competitive particularly at the beginning of the season even against the Ligier cars, but at the British GP when Williams corrected some aerodynamic issues on the FW07 then that car became almost unbeatable for the rest of that season. So of course the nearly downforce-less ’81 Ferrari had to evolve, they got Postlethwaite to design the chassis for the ’82 car, which was better but still a bit on the heavy side.

    3. Head was never demoted by Williams, you can’t demote a co-owner. He stood back (a) as part of the wider succession plan in the team and (b) because he wanted to slow down after decades in the sport.

      1. some racing fan
        21st February 2023, 7:45

        Head was made Engineering Director from Technical Director- the top engineering spot on the team, which went to Sam Michael. Although not official, this was widely seen as demotion.

        1. Those who see this so widely need to narrow in and look at the facts, it was not a demotion. They believed Michael was the future, so they put him in the top role with Head assisting in the wings while he got up to speed. That’s succession planning 101.

          1. some racing fan
            21st February 2023, 10:41

            Oh man, how did that end up…

          2. I agree, but that isn’t really the point. Head still wasn’t demoted even if Michael wasn’t ultimately the right person for the job.

  2. Really, Head was “demoted”? Didn’t know and that’s a bit shocking. Didn’t he have part ownership?
    Then, Frank was never full of feeling, dumping Mansell and Hill after their championship years.

    1. At least as far as dumping Hill goes, that was a joint decision between Frank and Head (and they made pretty much all decisions together). And it was already partially made in 1995 when they decided to hire Villeneuve (and let’s be honest, 1995 was kind of an embarrassment for Hill). And it was made official in 1996 well before Hill won the championship. Williams and Head felt they needed a German driver because they thought they needed to take advantage of the Schumacher-mania, so they hired Frentzen and then eventually Ralf, who they thought would guarantee the future of the team (we know how that went).

      1. Williams and Head felt they needed a German driver because they thought they needed to take advantage of the Schumacher-mania, so they hired Frentzen and then eventually Ralf, who they thought would guarantee the future of the team (we know how that went).

        The real reason is that Frank Williams had a bee in his bonnet for many years that Frentzen was quicker than Schumacher because of their respective reputations while in the Mercedes Sports Car team. Frentzen was viewed by many as the quicker of the two, add to that his performances with Sauber in 1994 and 1995 (which were impressive) they thought they had the right man to take the fight to Michael. It turned out not to be true of course.

        Frank’s son Jonathan spoke about this at length in a recent episode of the “Bring Back V10’s podcast” where they discussed the circumstances around Williams dropping Damon Hill.

      2. @aesto @geemac There were a lot of people in F1 at the time who saw Frentzen as a potential world champion, Some were of the view that he was quicker than Schumacher while others (And i’d say probably most) felt he had the potential to be as quick as Michael but that Michael was ultimately faster & a more complete overall package.

        What Williams & Jordan later found is that when Heinz was happy in his environment & confident in the car he could be super quick but that if anything threw him off a bit then he struggled. And when Jacques Villeneuve pretty comprehensively outpaced him straight off the bat Heinz struggled under the pressure of having to try & up his game so much, Lost some confidence & struggled to get it back.

        There was also the feeling that the car suited Jacques driving style more & that having lost Newey very early in it’s development cycle that the team were struggling to maintain it’s development (Which is what helped Ferrari & Mclaren overtake them in terms of ultimate performance by mid season) & therefore didn’t put as much into trying to get it feeling better for Heinz as they could have done.

      3. It’s worth also pointing out that Head said on F1 podcast that they were really happy with Hill on 96, and that they were initially willing him to stay at Williams. But according to Head, Hill had a new manager to negotiate his contract, and this new manager asked for an enormous amount of money (like Schumacher level), which Head and Frank thought was really unrealistic. Since according to him Hill’s manager was not flexible to reduce the amount, he said it was really a no go to have Hill on the team, which he felt would be much easier should Hill negotiated directly with them. It was not to be and this was the first of the bad decisions that ruined Hill’s career, the second being not choosing to drive for McLaren afterwards.

    2. @kcrossle Head was never demoted by Williams, you can’t demote a co-owner. He stood back (a) as part of the wider succession plan in the team and (b) because he wanted to slow down after decades in the sport.

  3. “We would like a Saudi champion – a driver who is capable of winning an international racing competition,” he said.

    I wonder if they will start their search with 100% of the potential talent pool.

    1. There’s got to be a joke in here somewhere about chopping foreign journalists into small pieces.

  4. Disappointing that already talk is of having FOUR (yep four) DRS zones in Melbourne. I get so much more enjoyment out of laps that don’t have DRS where drivers have to actually execute a pass rather than press a button.

    1. The fourth zone got removed for a reason, so I doubt it’d contradictively get reinstated.
      @dbradock

    2. laps that don’t have DRS where drivers have to actually execute a pass rather than press a button.

      That’s not how Melbourne works. You’d be waiting ad inifitum.

  5. The fourth activation zone (removed for a reason) isn’t confirmed.
    However, if that got reinstated despite the general safety issue with approaching high-speed corners, this wouldn’t necessarily mean faster, as drag levels & gearings also impact straight-line speed, while other things additionally affect overall lap time & race winner’s time, including the floor edge change that might minimize the evolution impact early into the season.
    The last AusGP had two SC & one VSC phases, so the upcoming season’s race would most likely be faster if entirely neutralization-free, but another matter otherwise.

    I’ve never heard about Red McCombs, but R.I.P.

    COTD somewhat speaks volumes about how much things have changed in F1.

  6. If the Saudis want a champion, they’d be better off funding grassroots motorsport, rather than a Grand Prix.

    1. petebaldwin (@)
      21st February 2023, 13:01

      People at the top don’t understand that concept. It’s the same as this push to have women driving in F1 which great as it is, is extremely unlikely to happen as long 99% of people at your local kart club are men. I don’t know what the karting community in Saudi Arabia is like but I would hazard a guess that it’s incredibly tiny compared to the countries you generally see F1 drivers coming from.

      They could get a Saudi driver into F1 providing they’re willing to fund one through the formulas but unless you’ve got a solid grassroots motorsports community, how do you know who to pick? There will almost certainly be someone as naturally talented as Hamilton and Verstappen living in Saudi Arabia but the chances of that person ever sitting in a kart are pretty much non-existent. They’ll pick a son of someone high up in the country and will go the pay driver route which will completely fail to achieve what they want it to.

  7. Saudi Arabia wants “champion” driver

    That’s nice. How do they expect to have homegrown athletic talent if they have no grassroots national culture? Their approach to a lack of talent for their national football league is to hire talent from mostly Europe and Latin America. They don’t invest in their own people and culture because they can just buy talent. It’s not about pride or nationalism, just greed.

Comments are closed.