Day 2 - Yet More Photos
I haven’t left for the 3rd day of testing yet, as yesterday knocked us both for six. We’re out of practice and not match fit. I’m planning on heading off shortly, and generally getting in the way as all the motorhomes are dismantled. In the meantime here are a few shots from Wednesday’s testing.
Nelson Piquet
Piquet was on duty for day two of testing, and for the second time his running was curtailed due to car failure (probably engine related).
The man took an unusual line into the pits in this shot, drawing alongside much earlier than usual. As he blasted by he showered us in what might have been carbon brake dust.
Jarno Trulli
Toyota managed to finish 2nd in the running on day two and it was Trulli who put them up there.
The fences around Silverstone are, like most tracks, a pain for photographers. This shot was taken high up on the main grandstand as Jarno was about to start another lap.
Felipe Massa
Ferrari had a quiet Wednesday at Silverstone, they finished the day 7th having spent a lot of time on longer fuels runs.
I always like a driver with his visor open, but I swear the man’s asleep at the wheel here. Rumour has it that Tuesday afternoon’s testing was delayed after Massa overslept - I guess this track bores him.
Nico Rosberg
The Williams’ pitwall always seemed to be busy during the three day test. They had more personnel up there than any other team and frequently the drivers jumped up for a chat too.
Looking at this shot, you do have to wonder if the higher cockpit sides really make much difference to drivers safety this year. Although not the tallest driver on the grid, Nico’s head still clears the protection by some margin.
June 26th, 2008 at 12:21 pmScott Woodwiss said:
they’re great images. nice work!
June 26th, 2008 at 11:03 pmme said:
cheers scott. haven’t had time to look through today’s yet, but thought you might be interested in this one:
http://www.drop.io/sidepodcast/asset/lewis-sidepod
any idea what the attachment on the lower-left sidepod is for? doesn’t appear to be on the right side:
http://www.drop.io/sidepodcast/asset/lewis-sidepod-right
June 26th, 2008 at 11:05 pmmy FA fantasy said:
Hey guys, got any Force India pics with new engine cover? I think it’s the coolest on the grid now, I’m serious, it’s not a joke. I want to touch this engine cover! I want to worship it, it’s so arty, Gascoyne is the greatest artist in F1 these days.
I wonder what happened to Kimster’s exhaust pipe in France after the race? Have they found it, some lucky punter found what he’s been looking for, unlike Bono.
God, Force India is my favourite team now, I’ll just scream that into the night for the neighbours to hear.
June 26th, 2008 at 11:15 pmScott Woodwiss said:
hmm, that’s a good one….
it looks like it’s restricting air flow into the sidepod. unless it’s some kind of cooling device? either way, that one has me stumped
June 26th, 2008 at 11:33 pmme said:
have put two in drop.io, but they’re not great shots.
what am i missing then? on track the car looks like a mclaren rip-off, and up close the gold’s simply too gold.
don’t get me wrong, love the team n’all, but “arty”?
June 26th, 2008 at 11:35 pmme said:
and why only on the one side?
June 26th, 2008 at 11:59 pmlou said:
Love the photos!
Will you put some on flickr over the weekend/next week? Did you have a good time?
Just in case anyone is in the area, Brands Hatch is hosting the FIA Historic Formula One Championship this weekend at the Autoglym HSCC Historic Festival. I live about 40 mins away but unfortunatly I can’t go as I have german guests staying with me
More details about the weekend can be found here if anyone is interested.
June 27th, 2008 at 12:09 amme said:
sure thing, and facebook probably.
today i had to hide out of the way of the sun. and kimi / lewis / alonso brought out heaps more paparazzi, so taking pics was tougher, but yeah lots of fun.
June 27th, 2008 at 12:15 amlou said:
I look forward to it
Glad to hear it. Can’t wait for the coverage of it on the podcast
bet your tired though. Hats off to Christine for still doing f1minute, I think I would have wanted to just go to sleep.
June 27th, 2008 at 12:24 amme said:
yeah, i don’t remember the last time i woke up to find it darker than when i’d gone to sleep.
June 27th, 2008 at 12:29 amlou said:
That is dedication!
June 27th, 2008 at 12:36 amScott Woodwiss said:
http://gallery.autosport.com/picture.php/dir/2008juntest1/image/XPB_0JQTUDC0NRIRGG0JHZJEO-3
i’m sorry, but what the hell is up with those cockpit sides?!
June 27th, 2008 at 12:40 amme said:
i didn’t see those in action sorry!
all i can say is, erm… wow at least they’re being innovative.
or maybe DC decided the current iterations aren’t
restrictivesafe enough?June 27th, 2008 at 12:41 amScott Woodwiss said:
actually, after looking at some other pics of the FI, i’m not sure that’s a new part. I think on that occasion, someone didn’t put in that removable cockpit piece in properly.
Unless that really is a new part, in which case…..just WOW.
June 27th, 2008 at 12:42 amme said:
ahh, okay. that’s a bit of a rookie error on their part.
June 27th, 2008 at 12:44 amlou said:
can you post the pic into drop.io? I don’t have a subscription to autosport.com so i can’t see the photo
June 27th, 2008 at 12:48 amScott Woodwiss said:
done
June 27th, 2008 at 12:52 amlou said:
Thanks Scott
Was feeling a bit left out not knowing what you were talking about…
They are seriously high cockpit sides… do you think it came loose during the lap… surely they would not let the car leave the pitlane like that…they must have noticed…
June 27th, 2008 at 12:57 amlou said:
Can anyone explain to me what this would do?
June 27th, 2008 at 10:15 amStuart Codling said:
I’ll have to pretend I’m not reading this…
June 27th, 2008 at 10:32 amme said:
haha, umm yeah we shouldn’t encourage that.
lou, here’s the original in the context of the autosport site:
http://www.autosport.com/gallery/photo.php/id/105717
sadly it’s far too small to make out what scott was talking about, so here’s the link to autosport subscriptions:
https://secure.autosport.com/subs/
June 27th, 2008 at 10:45 ammy FA fantasy aka BOL said:
The colour scheme may not be perfect but the car itself as a sculpture is simply perfect. A true monster. VJ is really keen to make some progress, EADS sponsorship and all…
June 27th, 2008 at 11:44 amStuart Codling said:
Very kind of you. No need to cancel my order for the Sunseeker just yet!
June 27th, 2008 at 11:51 amSteven Roy said:
It looks like something to block airflow. It’s worth remembering that although on the surface cars look symmetrical under the skin it is a different story so it is possible that they have a water rad in one sidepod that needs a lot of cooling and maybe a small oil cooler in the other that requires very little air. It has been known for teams to run cars at places like Silverstone in an unbalanced set up as the vast majority or corners are in one direction. Before they started messing about with the track layout some teams even tried staggered tyres like they use on ovals.
The FIF1 cockpit sides look like they are meant to be that high. With Gascoyne designing it is probably for aero dynamic reasons. As a guess it helps smooth the flow over the top surface of the car or even creates ram effect for the airbox.
June 27th, 2008 at 11:55 amlou said:
thanks ‘me’ erm yeah I really should get one of those… but considering I’m trying to persuade my dad to buy me a nice lens for my camera today…. and I have already got him to pay goodwood… perhaps I should wait a bit before asking for a subscription. I’m gonna have to get myself a job. Fingers crossed I get the job I applied for yesterday… maybe then I will be able to afford such luxuries
June 27th, 2008 at 12:16 pmSteven Roy said:
I think you should get in touch with Darren Heath and offer to be his assistant for the summer. If nothing else he needs someone to organise his tabards.
June 27th, 2008 at 12:27 pmme said:
gotta be said, they have a damn easy life, don’t they?
i know the equipment is expensive and a little awkward. and a lot of what they do involves a degree of being in the right place at the right time. but not one of them broke a sweat the whole of this week. and when you have the correct tabbard and the correct lens, life is pretty simple so far as i can see.
i’d love to know how come they aren’t all deaf though? didn’t see a single earplug in use by any of them.
June 27th, 2008 at 12:33 pmfraggle said:
Its far from simple though. I got an insight in to the life of a motorsport photographer last summer. Having been out with media passes on the circuit, its a whole different ball game to that when you’re a spectator.
What bugs me though, is with F1 testing, they dish out media passes - seemingly at the drop of hat. I clocked one guy with a compact!!!! Not even an SLR on him. Most others had 2!
June 27th, 2008 at 12:40 pmlou said:
lol that is a good idea… That would be brilliant… the best summer… but i can’t see him wanting to be bothered by a 16 year old all summer.
Hopefully Jessops will hire me 
I noticed on Darren Heath’s website that he has an exhibition on but it’s just too far away to even think about going, which is a shame. 
It can be a bit of a tough market though… i can see what you mean… It’s still one of my dream jobs though
June 27th, 2008 at 12:42 pmSteven Roy said:
I suppose 16 is a bit young to deal with all those F1 press pack boozy evenings.
June 27th, 2008 at 2:18 pmme said:
different, agreed. but it still doesn’t strike me as the worst job in the world. you get the best seats in the house for starters
i’m not surprised. if i was your age i’d wanna be one too!
June 27th, 2008 at 2:34 pmme said:
talking of which, did lewis get his yet? i was half expecting to see it in monaco.
June 27th, 2008 at 2:34 pmlou said:
Of course I have not taken any photos of f1 cars moving yet….. my view may change after I have had a go
June 27th, 2008 at 2:43 pmme said:
a lot of that is down to have fast your equipment is, or how good you are with a manual focus. not that i really have a clue what i’m talking about of course.
the big problem i think you’ll come across, in the longer term at least, is there isn’t enough f1 action throughout the year to really keep your eye in.
there was an 11 month gap between the last time we shot an f1 car in anger and the shots we took this week. you just have to learn everything all over again
June 27th, 2008 at 2:43 pmStuart Codling said:
Hmmm… Well, to be fair, you probably don’t get the premier league at a test because the demand for pictures isn’t that great – a little news stuff, perhaps, but mainly it’ll be just contract work for teams. Very often the big agencies will send juniors to tests to gain experience. I’m very surprised you didn’t see anyone wearing earplugs.
Also, the big agencies drive down the rate card so a lot of photographers end up working for peanuts. I don’t imagine this motivates them.
But, yes, it’s very easy to settle into a routine of going to the same old corners and taking the same old pictures. Darren made a very good point when we were going through some of the pictures I took at Magny-Cours: “Anyone can do that with the right lens.”
This is the sort of picture he meant:-
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sc_pix/2595615190/
The fact that I took it illustrates his point perfectly!
Some snappers put more effort into their art than others. Those of you who get Darren’s blog by email will have seen a shot from M-C that no one has done before, and which took a lot of forethought on Darren’s part. I bet lots of people are standing in that place next year.
In US sportscars there used to be a veritable conga line of snappers in Regis Lefebure’s wake – all standing a corner or two down from where he was, all clocking what lens he was using and where he was pointing it, and all champing at the bit to get down there when he moved on.
Quite. The criteria for a permanent pass are quite stringent and determined by the FIA - minimum of 240 pictures published a year. One-off accreditation for testing is granted by the individual circuits and not all of them are very exacting.
I suppose you’ve got to learn somewhere, but you aren’t going to learn much with a compact – in which case, you’re probably standing in someone’s way.
June 27th, 2008 at 2:51 pmme said:
that would make sense.
there seemed to be a lot of good banter between those attending, so i’d guess some have been doing it a while. i’ll have to look through all of our shots to see how many had plugs in or not, will have a count up and get back on that.
if i were him, i’d be shooting a lot of cloud formations
June 27th, 2008 at 3:54 pmSteven Roy said:
Franck has been given a proper job. Details @ http://iheartfranck.com/
Christine will be pleased. I must dig out the ALMS calendar for live commenting.
June 27th, 2008 at 4:01 pmSteven Roy said:
I just had another look at the FIF1 with the unfeasibly high cockpit sides. I thought that maybe they were designed to feed air on to the fin but when I blew the picture up it now seems clear that this is the standard cockpit protection that has come loose. The head restraint seems to be blocking the air box and no-one would design it to do that.
June 27th, 2008 at 4:09 pmme said:
franck for irl then?
June 27th, 2008 at 5:11 pmRich said:
Surely you could keep your eye in by going to local races with say Formula Ford competing and taking photos of them. Sure the F1 cars go a bit faster.
Your photos look fine to me, wish I was there!
June 27th, 2008 at 5:23 pmme said:
surely we don’t have time for that
i take your point though. if we were serious about it, then yeah, we could spend the best part of the year figuring out all the best spots around silverstone.
June 27th, 2008 at 7:05 pmDan Brunell said:
Interesting news from BMW…
LINK: http://www.autosport.com/news/grapevine.php/id/68625
I am not reading too much into this. Yet some might think this as a warning shot towards Heidfeld.
June 27th, 2008 at 7:15 pmme said:
hmm, we saw him drive a bmw at goodwood and he didn’t go on to replace anyone then.
i guess the timing’s questionable though.
is nick’s problem not car related, shouldn’t it be up to the team to fix the tyre issues? i know when bridgestone brought a control tyre some people had to adapt their style, but when the buggy was fine last year and not this season, why is he the one who has to change?
June 27th, 2008 at 7:25 pmSteven Roy said:
http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns20514.html
I think the Senna to BMW story is a far bigger threat to Heidfeld. Priaulx was never going to be a GP driver and there is no way he could do it now.
I saw the Senna story on crash.net this morning but I can’t get that site to load now. It reported that Gerhard Berger had a long discussion with Mario Theissen about Bruno Senna last weekend. Berger has adopted Bruno’s career almost as a favour to his former team mate Ayrton Senna.
June 27th, 2008 at 7:32 pmme said:
that’s very sweet, but is he any good? i don’t pretend to know much about gp2, but everytime i watch he’s retiring after some accident or other.
June 27th, 2008 at 7:38 pmSteven Roy said:
He was leading the championship until his car broke down in the last race. The interesting thing about Bruno is that Ayrton once said to Jo Ramirez the McLaren team manager ‘if you think I am quick wait until you see my nephew’.
Following Ayrton’s death the family pressurised Bruno into giving up and he did not race anything for ten years. Regardless what he achieves we will always be asking what if Ayrton had survived to guide him and he hadn’t lost ten years experience.
June 27th, 2008 at 7:45 pmScott Woodwiss said:
If that would have happened, maybe Bruno’s skills would have been so great he would have surpassed even his uncle in terms of greatness. But alas, we’ll never know….
June 27th, 2008 at 9:04 pmRich said:
In all of the BMW Sauber rumours the one thing that is forgotten is that Robert is free to leave the team at the end of the year. BMW Sauber may not retain his services or be prepared to meet his terms (read salary demands). Mario is on record as saying they would rather have young drivers and bring them up to championship level (read we not prepared to pay for an Alonso-like salary). McLaren must be interested in Robert for next year!
June 27th, 2008 at 9:56 pmDan Brunell said:
I think Hamilton would veto that.
June 27th, 2008 at 10:00 pmScott Woodwiss said:
off-topic, i’m doing some live commentary on skype for the Real Life BATRacer’s “Real Life Racing” opening round on Live For Speed.
June 27th, 2008 at 10:28 pmme said:
really. do you think he has that power at the moment? we’re into schumi territory there aren’t we?
June 27th, 2008 at 10:32 pmlou said:
erm… I have no idea about how quick either are… not having ever been in that situation…
It does not show. Your photos are great! and you have had some good practise for the gp too
June 27th, 2008 at 10:36 pmlou said:
If I end up going to the WTCC at Brands then I will take some pics of his run
June 27th, 2008 at 10:44 pmDan Brunell said:
I thinks so. Even with McLaren traditional “two-equal drivers” policy. After last year, I think any driver would be weary to take the “#2″ at McLaren knowing that Ron Dennis will aways take Hamilton’ side on things. I believe that is why Rosberg didn’t want the seat this winter. That why I don’t think Kubica would want that seat if it was offered this winter. They saw the Alonso divorce right up close and personal in the paddock. Who would want to get in the middle of that?
For bad or good… Hamilton and Dennis have showed themselves locked at the hips and McLaren fortunes will rise or fall on those two in the near future. If you want to win a championship, why bother when the team is already stacked against you?
June 27th, 2008 at 11:11 pmme said:
ahh, you’ll find out soon enough then. am sure it’ll be fine.
good point. what happens when dennis steps down though?
June 27th, 2008 at 11:18 pmlou said:
June 28th, 2008 at 12:00 amDan Brunell said:
That is literally THE 100 million dollar question. How close is Lewis to Martin Whitmarsh? More importantly, what will Mercedes do when Dennis leaves. Will they make a run to buy the rest of the team?
June 28th, 2008 at 12:11 amme said:
i get the impression ron is like a real life magny cours. each year we’re told it’s his last, but as a new year rolls around he’s still there.
maybe, he’ll do the same as flav and leave when the number 1 driver does?
June 28th, 2008 at 8:04 amMattw said:
I’m not sure McLaren would give him the choice.
Publically, they look close enouph. Martin is smart enouph to keep the private stuff behind closed doors, but I would be surprised if there was a problem there.
That I can see happening - if Dennis decides to sell his shares. It depends if Ron will want to stay in the shadows (like Schumi at ferrari), or go for a clean break. With Ron, you never know
June 28th, 2008 at 10:57 amme said:
had a quick scan through the photos, but most of the snappers had their backs turned when i took them. i did find this one though:
http://www.drop.io/sidepodcast/asset/no-ear-defenders
he may not represent the majority mind you. will have to pay more attention at the GP.
June 28th, 2008 at 11:47 amRich said:
I have said before McLaren is a media machine - Hamilton will not have any chance to veto the second driver, with the possible exception of Alonso if he wish his seat back. In general Kovi has not scored points and I have not seen him as involved with the whole promotion. He is a stand-in driver until they can get a better driver. For the rest of the season I expect BMW Sauber to drop off while they develop the 2009 car. In their business plan they have met targets. Whether Robert remains with the team is based on his own choices and whether BMW Sauber will meets his salary demands. The car is fundamentally more important that the driver e.g. if Button where at McLaren I would expect he would be enjoying the same sort of success as Lewis does presently. Robert being the first Polish F1 driver of significance there is huge sponsorships to be had, it is an emerging market of opportunity for McLaren team. Would Robert drive for Mclaren were he offered the drive? Firstly they would be prepared to pay more, and on the balance of recent history it is a faster car at more tracks. Lewis as a team mate would not worry Robert. The only concern would be the potential for unequal treatment at the motivation level. My guess would be that McLaren have learnt that lesson and be fairer - also I think some of the “Lewis Honeymoon” may be wearing a bit thin - his petulance with the press would not have gone unnoticed. Frankly his Dad is also little asset to the team. Were I Robert and McLaren offered me the package I expected I would drive for them - it represents a better opportunity than at BMW Sauber. With respect to Nico - he was probably advised by his old man to stay at Williams at least for 2008. I am sure he [Nico] and BMW Sauber would have had some discussions - he is an obviously replacement for Robert leaving or Nick continuing to under-perform with present car. Although I agree with ME - it is also part of the role of team to produce a car suitable for the driver - the quickest route to the most number of points will take precedence over virtually everything else. It is a cut throat business and all the team principles will be butchers in some way or other. One advantage Nick has to keep a seat in F1 is that in the past he has been good at technical feedback with developing the car (similar situation with DC at Red Bull).
June 28th, 2008 at 11:55 amRich said:
Martin will have made sure there are no issues with Lewis - if there are it could upset his career plans and ambitions. I have no idea how much he respects Lewis, but he will see Lewis as a useful commodity. Lewis has not done badly this year - two wins.
June 28th, 2008 at 2:35 pmSteven Roy said:
My view of McLaren is entirely different. Ron is an old fashioned racer at heart and racing is top priority. The difference between him and other team prinicipals is that he realises that the ‘business’ of F1 is not racing but selling sponsorship. Actual racing generates a fraction of the income of an F1 team. That comes from sponsorship and generating sponsorship is something Ron has been great at since he first set up Rondel. However Ron’s primary interest is winning and the only motivation for all the sponsorship stuff is to allow him to win races and championships. It is important not to mix up the cause and effect.
I think Heikki will prove to be a threat to Lewis over the next few years and I don’t see any reason for McLaren to change. Like Lewis I have been watching Heikki’s progress for the last 6 or 7 years and he has always looked like a driver who coud make it. Four or five years ago I was asked by a friend to recommend two drivers who were not in F1 but I thought would be successful in F1 in the future and I sadi Lewis and Heikki so I am sticking with them.
I don’t see Kubica leaving BMW. He is comfortable with the team and the car suits him. Assuming they can keep progressing it would make sense for him to stay there. Recent history tells us that successful drivers are those who join a team when it is not at its best and stay with it. Schumacher at Benetton and Ferrari, Alonso at Renault and even Hakkinen at McLaren. Robert may just be the next in that line.
Keke Rosberg was all over the media saying that Nico should stay away from McLaren. Lewis and Nico were team mates in karting in a team owned by Keke and Lewis beat Nico a lot more than Nico beat Lewis. IfNico couldn’t beat him in a team owned by his father it is unlikely he could go to McLaren and beat Lewis.
The idea that somehow McLaren ar not going to be just as pro-Lewis as they ever were is something I can’t see the basis for. McLaren have always given drivers equal equipment although Ron always seems to be closer to one than the other but the deciding factor with the exception of Hakkin has always been the speed of the driver. McLaren was Team Prost and the media all said Senna was mad to go there because Ron and Alain were becoming like Chapman and Clark. Senna went there and it became Team Senna. So long as Lewis is the best driver available to him Ron will always favour Lewis but the idea that anything has changed based on Lewis’s recent behaviour is baseless.
As to Martin Whitmarsh’s relationship with Lewis. I think that is irrelevant as I don’t see Ron going anywhere. He hired Whitmarsh a decade ago as his successor but I think there is as much chance of Ron stepping down in the near future as there is of Max going voluntarily.
June 28th, 2008 at 2:39 pmme said:
ummm, we just noticed. franck’s first drive for the alms series is the same weekend as goodwood fos… doh!
June 28th, 2008 at 3:17 pmRich said:
Once you might have been right, but today they, Macca, are always seeking the headlines, e.g. the latest conspiracy theory that FIA is against McLaren it was orchestrated by Macca PR. I respect Kovi for coming out and saying they {the drivers} made mistakes and got the penalties as a result. I would like to see Kovi stay at Macca and beat Lewis as I would like to see a triumph of sportsmanship over gamesmanship. Why did Ron attack Le Mans, similarly why did Ron tell everyone that when Kovi came from Renault F1 he was a broken man? These are crafted statements to gain headlines and seek psychological advantage over the competition. Not even Ferrari stoop as low as Macca does these days in the PR wars.
I do not see Sir Frank engaging in these sort of comments, these days he is THE RACER at heart.
June 28th, 2008 at 3:34 pmmy FA fantasy aka BOL said:
I work for peanuts as well and I’m not taking pics of F1 cars and drivers - I just deal with screaming kids so I wouldn’t mind trading my current job for another job, although “peanuts” in the UK and Portugal are two different things, your peanuts are really attractive to us.
On the subject of Lewis - Sky news reported that he got himself involved in a yachting incident, he was taking part in some sort of PR event (yacht race?) and another crew smashed into the “vessel” where a terrified Lewis (wearing a “cool” hat à la Alonso) was placed while the cameras were constantly filming him. Another McLaren PR thing?
June 28th, 2008 at 3:51 pmAlianora La Canta said:
I can’t see Heikki moving anywhere (he’s not doing spectacularly, but he is doing pretty well, a lot of the deficit to Lewis is not Heikki’s fault and McLaren have a track record of keeping a stable points-clocker alongside a less-predictable but potentially faster driver), so there is unlikely to be anywhere better for Robert to go even if he does decide he wants a change of air. Though he doesn’t strike me as the money-chasing sort anyway and BMW are improving, so it could be a close fight between McLaren and BMW if I’m wrong about that.
If McLaren were serious about being PR first and foremost, there is no way they’d have allowed the stunt prior to Turkey involving Lewis and a trapeze. That was one of their sponsor’s ideas. McLaren considers image to be important, but they have never recruited someone on the basis of corporate image, marketing or sponsors and it would take a major change in philosophy to start now.
Ron Dennis dismissed Le Mans because it’s not his style of racing (and having sent a team over there in the mid-1990s, he knows what he’s talking about). Most people prefer some series over others, and if he happens to prefer intermediate-length races to marathons, then that’s his business. The Heikki thing was an act of misinterpretation. The statement was carefully crafted because that’s how Ron normally speaks - the error was because he’d assessed the situation incorrectly, not because he sought to garner headlines for it. McLaren may attract more headlines than most, but they are also faster than most and more distinctive than most (Ferrari are currently the ones attracting the most headlines, the fastest and the most distinctive of all).
Frank Williams can be controversial when he likes; it’s simply that he gets quoted less often.
June 28th, 2008 at 3:52 pmme said:
yeah, coulthard’s taken part in the same thing for mclaren in the past. it’s a hugo boss thing i think?
June 28th, 2008 at 3:53 pmAlianora La Canta said:
Sky news reported that he got himself involved in a yachting incident… …Another McLaren PR thing? {my FA Fantasy - 2 comments ago}
I suspect so. They used to do some pretty varied stuff for PR when Kimi Raikkonen was there. Trust Lewis to be more incident-prone during his stuff, though…
June 28th, 2008 at 3:53 pmRich said:
This time we cannot blame young Lewis for the shunt.
Who runs Macca PR? I think he might be looking for a new job rather soon.
June 28th, 2008 at 4:07 pmRich said:
Not based on what I see of the Internet - in fact Ferrari seem rather quiet.
How can you say Heikki is doing a reasonable job? He is only two points clear of the Trulli [Train] Toyota and Mark Webber in a Red Bull!
June 28th, 2008 at 4:11 pmSteven Roy said:
Rich,
Are you seriously saying that McLaren and for that matter anyine else who isn’t Ferrari get equal treatment from the FIA? McLaren generally keep quiet about most of the stuff that goes against them despite all the hysteria on the net that suggests the opposite. There are five cases of teams being in or reported as being in possesion of another team’s data recently. Only one has been punished. McLaren did not orchestrate the punishment to create conflict. Look at some of the ridiculous penalties handed out recently. Webber said that he was not aware of being blocked but Kovalainen got a penalty. McLaren did not do that the FIA did. Raikkonen was driving around with a lump of metal flailing around but but was not punished. McLaren have a case for victimisation by the FIA as Renault had when the mass damper was banned as Williams had when their CVT transmission was banned. Both these teams invested a vast amount of time and money in these systems and the FIA was aware of them from day one but did not ban them until they looked like winning in the Williams case or were beating Ferrari in the Renault case. Of course it could be argued that McLaren have the best case for having a grievance in this area. Five years ago they invested heavily in a piece of technology that like Williams CVT was banned just before they raced it. It was banned as Max didn’t think such technology should be in F1. That technology is now known as KERS. When McLaren thought of it and had a lead it was banned. Now that there version is too old to be of use the goal posts have moved.
Go read what Ron said about Le Mans. It was not an attack it was simply Ron stating a preference for the sprint type races of F1 than the marathon nature of Le Mans. The guy has a right to say what he likes since he has won both.
All GP teams are media machines that is how they make there money. I like Williams as much as McLaren. Since Lotus left I have not had a favourite team but these are the two teams that I like the ethos of and I don’t think they are that far apart. The one difference is that Ron has been better at raising sponsorship and dealing with engine suppliers. So you cannot claim that Frank is the real racer because he is in the media less because he raises less sponsorship. If he raised more money his drivers would be in the media more.
June 28th, 2008 at 4:15 pmme said:
you can add honda’s fuel tank to that list too.
June 28th, 2008 at 5:34 pmme said:
just to weigh in against anyone claiming that tha fia are biased against mclaren. here’s a screen grab of their homepage:
http://www.drop.io/sidepodcast/asset/if-the-fia…team-on-the-homepage
if you can spot any other f1 team represented on there, just holla.
June 28th, 2008 at 5:50 pmAlianora La Canta said:
1) It’s centred more on Lewis Hamilton, which makes sense as the media think he’s the next Schumacher (well, I suppose he is for sales, given what Stuart’s been telling us…)
2) When the F1-uninitiated think of the FIA, then the first thing they think after the Mosley scandal-related stuff is McLaren. Though one would have thought they’d have checked whether people were happy about the nature of that association first…
Incidentally, I tried looking for non-English versions of the FIA’s site (to check if, for instance, the Italian version features loads of Ferraris). I got back “Bad Request” (in English).
June 28th, 2008 at 5:59 pmAlianora La Canta said:
Who runs Macca PR? I think he might be looking for a new job rather soon. {Rich - 6 comments ago}
Rich, that would be Matt Bishop, who took over the role at the end of last year. Somehow, I thought he’d do better than this…
Not based on what I see of the Internet {Rich - 5 comments ago}
We must be using different parts of the internet during our non-Sidepodcast surfing, then.
How can you say Heikki is doing a reasonable job? {Rich - 5 comments ago}
Because he’s had most of his races ruined by technical failures, and has bettered Lewis on one of the three occasions where they’ve both finished. Plus he’s less likely to make silly mistakes like Lewis has for the last two races. Put together, Heikki’s performance has been doing a very reasonable job.
June 28th, 2008 at 7:09 pmRich said:
I cannot take you seriously on the victimisation McLaren are being treated equally with the other teams. You raised the spy issue McLaren initially were not given any punishment at the first hearing, they did not come clean with information and they got fined at the second hearing. Renault came clean with information immediately and the case was dealt with in the same way it was with McLaren.
Kovi has stated the following…
I don’t think it’s too many penalties,”
“We get a penalty whenever we do something wrong.”
“And I don’t think we should read into it too much. We need to make sure we don’t make mistakes and then we won’t receive any penalties. I don’t think there are more penalties for McLaren than for others.”
“I think we have made some mistakes, I have made some mistakes and we need to make sure we won’t do them again, and then it will be fine.”
Another problem I had is Ron and McLaren immediately questioning Hamilton’s drive through at France using the press. I used to compete in Aprilia Cup 250cc motorcycle racing - rules of racing state that if you make an overtaking manoeuvre but have to leave the track to complete it you need to give back the position. Lewis ignored this in France and FIA gave him the most lenient penalty they could. Hardly victimisation.
Another case Hamilton and ten place penalty at Canada being unfair as McLaren claim - when Vettel went into the back of Webber as Webber tried to avoid Hamilton during the treacherous conditions of the Japanese GP he was given a ten place grid penalty for China. When Vettel completed the Spanish GP he got a five place grid penalty at Monaco because they were going to run the new SRT car which had to have a new gearbox and effectively broke the new four-race gearbox rules - harsh but it is the rules. Macca and Hamilton were lucky to have escaped any penalty while behind the safety car in Japan (he clearly got too close to the safety car and majority of F1 drivers were unhappy that he did not get punished).
It is easy to go into a contest of fairness e.g. there was a problem with Kimi’s tyre(s) at Monaco this year and they were changed after the three minute to start and he got a drive through penalty. Whereas in Brazil Lewis on the Friday practice used more sets of tyres that he should and got only a £10,400 fine and no other penalty! This showed Ferrari were dealt more heavily than McLaren. If Lewis drives into the back of Alonso the press immediately blames Alonso for the incident (Bahrain this year) so Renault had to release their telemetry to clear Alonso’s from any blame. This is hardly fair but the media was clearly being orchestrated by McLaren.
McLaren are using the media to get the public judgement to rule against FIA* - hence I state they are media machine. Last year both BMW Sauber and Williams were under investigation for having too cool fuel at Brazil, both teams kept out of the press on this until there was judgement. Frank and Mario did not use the press to get judgements ruled in their favour - they want to win on the race track. McLaren want to win no matter what it takes from espionage to using the press. It is called Motorsport or Autosport - the emphasis is on the word sport - McLaren have lost sight of this and to them “the end justifies the means”.
*Personally I think Macca are bringing the sport into disrepute and am surprised that the FIA have not not cautioned them over their recent and very public questioning of FIA rulings. But I am impressed that on two occasions in as many months that Kovi has issued statements that contradict his own team. This restores some elements of integrity to the Woking concern. While Kovi is not having the best results I really hope his fortunes change and his driving talent shines through.
June 28th, 2008 at 7:53 pmRich said:
I agree I thought he would have done a better job. If I was head of PR I would immediate overhaul the distinctly amateurish web site they (Macca) have. But the I would probably change it to something like the Red Bulletin.
June 28th, 2008 at 8:13 pmme said:
i think he did that. it used to be black and now it’s light grey. not a significant improvement, i’ll grant you.
June 28th, 2008 at 8:17 pmRich said:
It remains uninspiring - actually the more I look at Red Bull’s site the more I like it. Its refreshing with a great sense of humour.
June 28th, 2008 at 9:12 pmSteven Roy said:
I love the idea that McLaren were fined $100 million because they didn’t come clean. That is rubbish. Read the transcripts. Max said Ron lied but couldn’t produce a single piece of evidence that anything from the 760 page dossier or any other Ferrari data made its way into McLaren’s factory. Despite sending a team of people in for weeks they did not find a file or a piece of paper from Ferrari. When they investigated Renault Charlie Whiting went in on his own for two days and found McLaren files on the Renault computer system and 28 back up copies. Some of the files had thousands of hits against them.
There is not a shred of evidence anywhere that Ron Dennis knew of any Ferrari data before Alonso told him. The only thing the FIA found were a few items which the FIA decided were influnced by Ferrari including the mysterious gas.
Renault did not come clean. That is another Max lie. A Renault engineer left Renault and moved to McLaren. On arrival he told them about the McLaren data which was circulating at Renault. Ron registered a complaint against Renault. Renault put out press releases saying they co-operated from day one but they had been using the data for 14 months. Several seior Renault people were proven to have known about or had seen the data. It is all in the FIA transcripts.
The other thing in the transcripts that I found amazing was that Max constantly stopped McLaren’s QC from asking questions that could have proven that Renault deliberately sought the most valuable info they could get from McLaren. Anyone reading the transcripts who did not know te people involved could easily have mistaken Max as a member of Renault’s legal team.
The other question you have to ask is if Ron knew all along why did he immediately phone Max after his conversation with Alonso. If he had been in on it he would have known that there was no evidence to be found in the factory. THe ‘evidence’ produced by Alonso and de la Rosa was minimal at best and practically incidental.
I am glad you brought up the fuel temperature thing. You mention that Frank and Mario did not use the press. Did Ron use the press? He stood to gain a world championship but did not use the press. The whole cool fuel thing shows the pro-Ferrari bias in the clearest possible light. Never in the history of F1 has the FIA given anyone else measurement of anything equal weight to its own. It has always said that it is the only judge of fact. Yet after the end of the 2007 season it did the opposite. Had it stuck to its normal position it would have declared Lewis Hamilton champion and disqualified the drivers who used illegally cold fuel. Instead it turned its entire history on its head and decided that Meteo France’s measurement of ambient temperature had equal weight to its own and gave the driver’s championship to Ferrari.
Of course it has a habit of taking a stance until it doesn’t suit Ferrari. Never in the history of the sport has a driver been penalised for aerodynamically blocking another until it was decided that Alonso blocked Massa despite being 100 yards up the road.
Never has a piece of a car been declared illegal by the stewards of a meeting while it is fitted to the car but a few days later been re-measured a few thousand miles a way while separated from the car by several hundred miles but it happened in the famous barge board case. The barge board was measured and found to be illegal at the track(Malaysia). Ferrari didn’t like the ruling so turned up in Paris later that week with the barge board mounted on a jig where it was re-measured and found to be legal. There was no possible way for anyone to prove it was the same barge board but it was decided it was legal.
There are many other examples of rules being invebted for Ferrari or decades of history being turned on its head. It’s not a new thing. When one of Colin Chapman’s revolutionary designs was banned despite being perfectly legal he was asked if he could modify to make it legal. ‘Yes’ he replied ‘I could paint it red’.
Of course Heikki didn’t complain. He would have been hammered if he had. That is why McLaren didn’t appeal against the fine. They knew Max would simply make things worse for them. Mark Webber on being told that Heikki had been penalised for blocking him said that no-one had blocked him. If he had no objection and didn’t think he was impeded you have to ask why the FIA felt the need to dish out a penalty.
June 28th, 2008 at 9:29 pmme said:
on this subject apparently lewis’ team won the race but then got disqualified hours later.
christine has the story on f1 minute here:
http://www.f1minute.com/2008/06/28/28-jun-08-hamilt…-in-crash/
if anyone tries to claim it was all the fia’s doing and that max has it in for the guy, i will scream!
June 28th, 2008 at 9:41 pmme said:
he did though didn’t he?
ron instructed his press guy to send out a highly inaccurate briefing relating to the information renault supposedly had of mclarens.
the team had to later issue a complete retraction, if i recall.
i take your points on board steven, but mclaren aren’t whiter-than-white by any stretch of the imagination. they had my support throughout the ferrari investigation, and you can read all our thoughts archived on this very site, but they lost any sympathy i may have had with them once the renault case came around.
June 28th, 2008 at 10:17 pmmy FA fantasy aka BOL said:
Sign of things to come at Silverstone? Bad omen? Oh, man!
Nice research, I was too lazy to find out the truth, got excited after crazy 250CC race and the first/last lap of motoGP race in Holland; feel sorry for Hayden but at the same time glad Edwards.
June 29th, 2008 at 12:57 amMattw said:
That’s a hell of a first day isn’t it! After what happened during the Mclaren spy scandal.
As far as i can see the only persion doing anything wrong during the spying scandle was the Ferrari employee who was handing out the information.
From what I read at the time, I understood that Ferrari re-measured the barge board back at their factory, and the FIA accepted their measurements over the FIA offical at the race.
What I don’t get about the Ron thing is why some people get fixated about trying to call Ron a lier and a cheet, while others in defending him make him out to be a saint.
Clearly the truth is somewhere inbeteen. F1 is a cut throat business. Ron plays the game just as hard/fairly as most of the other bosses.
The FIA set a very bad precident with the McLaren case. We have got to expect this to come up from time to time, as teams try to gain advantage from new precident.
Sometimes you have to wonder what sort of dirt the FIA has on these teams to keep them in line. Especially after the Michelin front tyre fiasco of 2003
June 29th, 2008 at 7:51 amme said:
that’s not quite what i meant though. mclaren handled themselves well during the first spy case, while ferrari fed the media a bunch of half truths.
when the renault case came around, ron decided to take the ferrari approach and started “manipulating” the press. you could argue that it worked for the red team so maybe mclaren figured that was the way to go, but in the end it came around and bit them in the backside.
June 29th, 2008 at 9:24 amMattw said:
Ron did handle the Renault case badly, but that dose not automatically he as a ‘bad’ person. He may have followed the ‘Ferrari approch’ (which was effectively condoned by the FIA) - but he did not push things anywhere near as far as the red team.
June 29th, 2008 at 2:18 pmAlianora La Canta said:
Warning! Long comment alert!
You raised the spy issue McLaren initially were not given any punishment at the first hearing, they did not come clean with information and they got fined at the second hearing {Rich - 11 comments ago}
Rich, McLaren came a lot cleaner in the run-up to the first hearing than Renault did at any point in the run-up to theirs. The “evidence” used by Max to claim McLaren hadn’t come clean was not suitable for purpose, for it did not prove that the team had cheated, only that there were four rogues instead of two (noting that the other two had been granted amnesty by the FIA, so logically no further punishment should have ensued).
In addition, Renault didn’t own up to anything until a McLaren employee alerted the FIA to the problem. McLaren, on the other hand, started the ball rolling by protesting the Ferrari information on the grounds of intelligence. Spyker protested Toro Rosso at the same race on the same grounds and weren’t charged. As an absolute minimum, the FIA are guilty of inconsistency.
Another problem I had is Ron and McLaren immediately questioning Hamilton’s drive through at France using the press {Rich - 11 comments ago}
McLaren moaning about penalties or threatened penalties may not be desirable, but Ferrari do the same when they get a penalty they don’t agree with (it’s just rarer that they disagree with penalties in the first place because previous leader Todt and Mosley had very similar opinions about interpreting F1). BMW do it under those circumstances. Force India do it. Even Toro Rosso do it. You’re complaining about standard team behaviour. It’s not desirable, but it’s a long way from being a McLaren monopoly either.
Whether Hamilton deserved that penalty is another matter (I think he did, so you’re not on your own). However, McLaren can only act what it thinks is the case, just as the rest of us can only act what we think is the case.
Macca and Hamilton were lucky to have escaped any penalty while behind the safety car in Japan {Rich - 11 comments ago}
The reason the penalty for Vettel was waived in the first place was that the visibility was so bad. Well, if the visibility was so bad that breaking the rules is excusable, the race should have been stopped completely (not just stuck behind a Safety Car). The non-issuing of penalties was simply the FIA trying to get itself out of a situation it should never have allowed to happen without blaming itself. To have penalised Hamilton for his bad driving (and yes it was bad) would have counteracted their intention in cancelling Vettel’s punishment in the first place.
Also, it would have been condoning illegal use of copyrighted information, which would have got the FIA into legal trouble with the FOM. While recording races at the circuit is legal, only people with a licence and who have paid the FOM for use of the footage may show it to other people. The individual filming the Hamilton/Vettel/Webber incident illegally put it on YouTube, and that’s how the FIA discovered it was there. The FIA could not have afforded the bill for that, even with the $100m windfall it knew was coming, so it legally had no choice but to back down.
Whereas in Brazil Lewis on the Friday practice used more sets of tyres that he should and got only a £10,400 fine and no other penalty! {Rich - 11 comments ago}
That’s the heaviest penalty that’s ever been issued for that. Jordan used two sets too many tyres for a practise session back in Europe 2005, and were merely punished by not being allowed to use their third driver in the next Friday session. No fine. There were no third drivers in 2007 and they hadn’t made their mind up about the 2008 format, so the fine was all they could do without creating a completely unfair precedent. This is what happens when the FIA doesn’t think about how it’s going to penalise some breaches of the rules beforehand and therefore ends up making up penalties on the spot.
Raikkonen, on the other hand, received the most lenient penalty possible for what he did - it fell into the same penalty category as Lewis’ chicane-skipping exercise. So that was fair (it wasn’t his fault and his mechanics weren’t changing tyres that late deliberately, but he had nonetheless broken a rule with a specific option list of punishments).
Last year both BMW Sauber and Williams were under investigation for having too cool fuel at Brazil, both teams kept out of the press on this until there was judgement {Rich - 11 comments ago}
Simple reason for that - the FIA was absolutely intent to disregard what its own technical delegate had to say on the matter because its weather provider didn’t give it a reliable ambient temperature. If you know the judge is absolutely determined to be on your side regardless of the facts, then you don’t do anything to sway the judge whether you would had the judges disagreed with you or not.
Besides, McLaren wouldn’t have been doing it for Hamilton’s advantage as such because precedent is that drivers with irregular fuel samples keep their position and points (therefore not helping Hamilton one iota) but only lose their constructor’s points (which would have been three points into the ether as far as McLaren was concerned). The only two motives possible were therefore a vendetta against the FIA or an insistence that rules were applied consistently. The former is ruled out by McLaren not using an appeal they were fully entitled to use for the McLaren/Ferrari mess and also not legally contesting the “inspection” in December (which I suspect was possible, since the FIA was not a legal enforcement body). So the only remaining motive is that McLaren were acting to encourage the correct enforcement of the rules.
Personally I think Macca are bringing the sport into disrepute {Rich - 11 comments ago}
The FIA have done far more to put the sport into disrepute than any team - in fact I suspect they’ve done more to put it into disrepute than all the teams put together. Their rubbish handling of the various crises of the past few years combined with rulesets that are written and applied badly have caused more people to stop watching F1 than anything any team has done since the team orders issue of Austria 2002 (and given that we’re comparing a drip-drip-drip effect from one act of outrage, maybe more than that event too). The FIA deserve to be questioned over many of their judgements - simply because some of the judgements McLaren have argued about were in fact fair does not make the other erroneous decisions they’ve made correct. Put simply, most of the ire Rich has against McLaren would be more accurately aimed at the FIA’s ineptitude.
If I was head of PR I would immediate overhaul the distinctly amateurish web site they (Macca) have. {Rich - 10 comments ago}
I completely agree with you - a site that works on everyone’s computers would be a good start (Red Bull’s doesn’t work on mine, but they do have a lot more features…)
if anyone tries to claim it was all the fia’s doing and that max has it in for the guy, i will scream! {me - 6 comments ago}
As this is a sailing matter, I will defer to my dad’s opinion (who unlike me has sailed before). He said “Oh, that makes me feel better. It’s not just blokes in the middle of Learn To Sail courses who do that*…
ron instructed his press guy to send out a highly inaccurate briefing relating to the information renault supposedly had of mclarens. {Rich - 5 comments ago}
Not necessarily. The issuing of a press release does not necessarily tell you whether the release was instructed or not. It was a stupid release, but sometimes staff members make errors without consulting with others. I have heard that the McLaren release about their information on Renault was such an example, but it was Tom Rubython saying it so I don’t know whether to believe it or not…
* - Dad’s boat was struck by a novice on a “Learn to Sail” course at the start of a minor club race yesterday, resulting in him being towed over the line and losing 20 seconds of time. The rookie got no penalty due to his newness, but apparently owes Dad a beer…
June 29th, 2008 at 3:02 pmRich said:
ME said that - I simply repeated it. Other teams don’t use the press the same way McLaren is doing and Ferrari have done in the past and I do not believe they are victimized this year* that was my point and the majority of other teams would agree - listen to Renault F1 podcast.
In only a few months only one team has had to publish apologies and corrections on two occasions. Only one team has had one of its drivers contradict its owm media communication on two occasions. Only one team tells everyone of his integrity using this word specifically.
I cannot take the issue that Renault’s case was more serious than that of Maccas, that is simply A Momentary Lapse of Reason. For Renault it was one incident in the case of Macca it was an information stream over part of a season and that information found itself into the design of its 2008 cars.
Liuzzi was still penalised for overtaking Adrian Sutil under waved yellow flags. Actualy I do agree it should have been stopped.
*Macca’s fine was severe, I would not argue against you on this and too lose all their constructor points last year - I think that was unfair. I would also concede to have lost all their points at Hungary was also too severe. It was the team to beat last year and certainly FIA made an example of them. This year the situation is rather different.
June 29th, 2008 at 3:41 pmAlianora La Canta said:
Sorry, Rich. I didn’t mean to mis-attribute the quote.
I can’t listen to the Renault F1 podcast because they don’t seem to have figured out a way to get certain parts of the site to work on my computer yet…
Only one team has been obliged to put an “apology” (and if you read it closely, McLaren didn’t admit to anything except impressions of wrongdoing, which given the FIA’s behaviour, were bound to exist) out after being subjected to a legally-questionable investigation which uncovered nothing. And don’t start me on the “ideas” - the nature of ideas is such that all the teams would naturally have very similar ideas to one another. So in theory every team should have been ordered to apologise, but only one of them was.
If you cannot accept that having 28 often-accessed copies of information viewed by at least 9 people amounting to 762 pages and 18 diagrams (which were either considerably larger than standard sizes or some information in the pages remains unaccounted for) for over a year is worse than a slightly-larger book of information of which little was proven to be used (and then only by three people - the fourth rogue being the individual in Ferrari who sent the information) and which never (as far as McLaren were aware or the FIA was able to prove) appeared in the McLaren factory or any McLaren server, then it is no surprise you’ve come to such an odd opinion of the overall situation.
In any case, the information did not find its way onto the 2008 McLarens, unless you are suggesting that not only the evidence of the transcripts is wrong but that the FIA’s sanctions on McLaren’s 2008 development were ineffective.
June 29th, 2008 at 4:45 pmRich said:
@Alianora
Just read the PDF I have put up on the drop.io - McLaren have admitted more guilt that you claim in that letter - Why was “Mr Integrity” signature not at the bottom of the letter?
June 29th, 2008 at 4:49 pmRich said:
I googled “Renault F1 podcasts” and got the following link of downloads
http://www.ing-renaultf1.com/en/Ipod.php