Bob Barnard Track Engineering

Hopefully Robert is continuing his recovery. Interesting he is apparently expressing his preference for Luizzi to take over his seat. Number one, why should he have a vote, and number two, why Luizzi? Just a good mate, or is it he thinks he might have trouble getting Nick Heidfeld out of his seat again? Loyalty is great, but if Nick is anywhere near the top of the charts at the end of the year who is going to fire him?

CVC have started their own investigation into who paid who for what in their share purchase. About time they got interested, as I have been saying, if the deal was crooked then would it stick? There must be some lawyers out there who can answer that. Who do they tell if they find anything?

The Bahrain GP Organizers are between a rock and a hard place, with Bernie and the FIA coming out expressing concerns about the safety of staging the GP. The FIA spokesman must win an award for the stupidest comment this year. "There are realities on the ground that we need to accept, but the FIA is fully confident, with the Bahrain Motor Federation, that the situation will be resolved amicably." Really? Since when did the FIA become the US State Department? Ask Mubarak how it worked out for him. You have to feel sorry for the organizers who work all year for this only to have a situation totally outside their control dictate things. I know how that feels, and usually it is the weather, but it has been politics too. This weekends GP2 Asia race will be a good indicator of events. So far so good apparently.

Talking of politics, Silvio Berlusconi is in a bundle of trouble in Italy, and I'm not just talking about Tottenham beating AC Milan. Had to rub that in. Do we really think Montezemolo will leave Ferrari to run the country?

Shanghai has re-upped for another seven years, but the Mayor of Shanghai must have been talking to his mate in Melbourne as he says he paid less for the rights this time around. Are we seeing the beginning of some common sense returning? Nah, can't happen can it?

There are stories today that suggest the McLaren is "too radical," too many things to sort out to get it to perform. Reminds me that sometimes the best cars are the simplest, like the FW07. Easy to set up, and fix. You can out- complicate yourself. Now, it is way too early to come to that conclusion, but smarter people than me who were at Jerez are suggesting  that it did not look good in the McLaren pit. People were always looking for the trick to the RB6, and perhaps that was its' strength, there wasn't one. It was just fast.

Vettel certainly does not like things to be too complicated and has reiterated that overtaking in F1 should not be too easy, and that there are too many buttons, drivers should concentrate on driving the car. Mind you, he does not mind complicating his relations with the team by again stating he would like to drive for Ferrari. Even if he does, why keep saying it? What is he trying to do, or is he just naive? Or too straightforward for most folk to believe? Interesting that Horner has come out and said Webber can stay beyond his one year contract, more mind games? Why bring that up now?

They say money makes the world go round, and it certainly makes the F1 world go round. In fact it has enough money to go around, it just isn't being split up correctly at present. The Resource Restriction Agreement, RRA, was raised again by Horner, and Whitmarsh continued in the  "we must be more relevant and not be seen as gas guzzlers" vein. F1 engines are I believe the most efficient engines around when you consider the power they produce from each gallon, and not just look at the miles per gallon. And there is that old "relevant" again. I guess the World Cup is relevant because most of us have kicked a ball around at some time in our life, but there again most of us have driven a car.

Bernie in responding to the Mayor of Melbourne about the value of an F1 GP compared it to the Olympics and the World Cup, and as far as the Olympics goes he is dead right. I was in Barcelona in 1992 and watched the Sydney Games lead up, and what a con job that is. Go and spend $6 bn  on facilities you did not need and will not use again for two weeks of exposure that no one cares about afterwards. At least you get an F1 race each year. The World Cup  has been different as the stadiums are used afterwards, although we now have South Africa looking for someone to run them and Qatar building stadiums in the desert.

Mark Hughes writing in Autosport the other week said "The sport can't afford to allow money to haemorrhage out." His article concentrated on the cost to promoters of staging a GP and where that money is going. The basic problem is it is not going back into the sport, it is going to a bunch of investors who have done no more than buy the rights. No one begrudged Bernie making a lot of money, he built this sport over many years and with his own abilities, and made others rich along the way, but the current situation with CVC is unsustainable. Hughes questions how many new countries there can be that will keep paying for GP's, and when the existing ones will get tired of it, like Malaysia and Bahrain. Now I met both those track chiefs in Cologne last year and they are already asking those questions. In Bahrain the Parliament is asking what they get for their money, and the circuit chief has a good answer. "What would it cost us to send everyone who watches the race a postcard?" It is a good argument, and has worked till now, but for how much longer? Malaysia says it has achieved it's objective of putting the country on the world stage, now they need the track to make money.

Joe Saward asks the question what these latest popular uprisings mean for F1? It is OK to go to all these exotic places with loads of money, but how safe and stable are they? Apparently there are stirrings in Bahrain today, and the F1 circus is headed there shortly. Would a new popular government be so keen to spend millions on a rich man's toy?

In a somewhat related article Sebastian Vettel is asking if the wheel has turned too far towards making F1 a "show" rather than a sport? Movable wings, KERS buttons, all to make the show better, but not for the driver. Alonso does not think it will be any easier to pass a car that is similar in speed, only those pesky back markers, and as I said a week or so ago, timing when to turn the wing back at the start of the braking zone is going to be a tricky problem, with some drivers missing it in early testing. So, we are spending loads of money on "widgets" that we are not sure even work. OK, KERS or some form of energy recovery system is going to be part of future automotive design, but that is being developed in spite of F1, not because of it. Porsche and Williams kept on developing their system when F1 had given it up.

So we have a situation where there is an incredible imbalance between the three parties to the deal. The promoters are not making money, the teams are getting some of the money coming into the sport, and a third party who are a silent partner effectively is creaming most of it off. Is this sustainable? Add to that the alienation of the traditional supporters of the sport by removing the opportunity to see it live and pandering to an elite who will lose interest and move on to the next big thing. Ask NASCAR how that is working for them. And while we are at it let's think about the "Car of Tomorrow" where the rules are so tightly proscribed it is almost spec racing. The teams spend enormous amounts on the smallest, silliest parts just to gain a thousand of a second, and as soon as they find it the part is banned. Does any of this sound "relevant" or "sustainable?" Oh yes, and now we are to have tires that wear out faster to make the "show" more fun, is that being efficient or relevant, or even safe? Interesting how the word "green" has disappeared from most of the motorsport vocabulary, apart from good old ALMS.

I talked before about headline writers and today there is a classic. Not sure if it is meant to be funny but judge for yourself. "Mosley refuses to be beaten over quirk." What's funny about that you say? His "quirk" is he likes to be beaten! It reminds me of an old and bad joke. Masochist: "Beat me, beat me!" Sadist: "NO." The article is about Mosley's push to have private lives made sacred from media exposure following his little episode with a few young ladies in a cellar.

You can't keep Briatore down can you, now he is a medical expert. "Briatore visits Kubica, predicts recovery." Well I'm sure we all feel better for that Flavio. It is safer to ask who has not been mentioned as a replacement for Robert, I even saw a comment that Mark Webber could consider taking the seat. Now that is an idea even my fertile brain had not considered.

Of course the whole "he should not be doing this" saga rolls on. Kimi has wrecked his car in just about every rally since he left F1 and still gets away with it. Mark Webber goes mountain bike riding and breaks his leg etc, so leave it out.

The other big news is that HRT unveiled an graphic image of the new car. Not the new car you note, just the great new graphics by the Hollywood designer. And yes it looks nice, but does it exist and will it be any better? We have 32 days now to the first race and two test sessions left, one of which starts this week, and they still have only one driver. In a further statement HRT has decided to skip the Jerez test and "support Pirelli" at a filming session in Monza. With the new graphics? What are these people thinking?

In other news, the German weekly, Der Spiegel, has picked up where Stern left off with a story about how much CVC paid for the F1 rights and how much the bank received, which apparently were not the same. Guess where they say the rest went? I have to ask, is this uncovering of information the result of ongoing research, or do they know the whole story and they are teasing it out like a serial to get us to buy the paper?

So the Mayor of Melbourne thinks the "Times Up" for the F1GP and said "I know of no city that has voluntarily walked away from a grand prix, but could Melbourne be the first?" Well I guess there has to be a first. I'm sure quite a few GP promoters now feel that they have given Bernie and CVC enough. Look at Turkey, Spa, France has actually given up, and at the recent Forum in Cologne the Malaysians said they had achieved what they set out to do, now they need to make some money. We had the recent reports on Valencia perhaps not wanting to go on, and Hockenheim has stopped, so perhaps Melbourne is not the first? Even Singapore, Bernie's jewel, is saying they are going to examine the benefits closely before renewing. Are we going to see some common sense appear? I doubt it, there are always more suckers lining up to donate to the CVC fund.

Melbourne provides an interesting insight into how the costs have escalated. When they started in 1996 the race was underwritten to the tune of $1.7m, and last year cost $50m, with a forecast of $70m in years to come. This cannot all be due to sponsorship dropping. There is a pattern here, Adelaide lost the race to Melbourne when the people and politicians tired of the cost and inconvenience.

Here in the US Monday Night Football was a huge success and has since been followed by Sunday and Thursday night games. Someone worked out that people are at home in prime time, and there is not much else to watch in "prime time." Now Luca di Montezemolo is at it again stirring things up, don't you just love him, by suggesting that 2 pm starts should be moved to 5 pm as "most people are on the beach." In a European summer that would work, and if not there are always lights. Not sure what that does for the Asian races though. Luca probably does not realize that people like myself record the races anyway so we can watch them when it suits us and we can skip through the ads.

Talking of moving times of races, I commented a couple of months ago that the Phillip Island MotoGP was always intended to be run in March/April, it was only the fight over tobacco that moved the race location and date. But of course now the F1 GP has moved from Adelaide to Melbourne, and November to April, so the GP Board, who promotes both races, have a problem. It seems Dorna, after twenty years, have decided the MotoGP needs to be in that time slot, and have threatened that the FIM will not license the track if it is not moved. Don't really see what the date has to do with a track license. I have heard of licensing a track for different levels of competition, never for different times of the year?  As I said before, move the F1 race to November and run it with the Melbourne Cup, what a week for partying!

I don't know if any of you have thought through the ramifications of the arrest of Gribkowsky, the banker who managed the sale of the shares to CVC, but if it is true he took a bribe then the person who paid it would also be in trouble presumably, and perhaps the whole deal could be in jeopardy? The bank that sold the shares is State owned and has lost a bundle in the last few years, so I am sure the State would like to get some of that back.  I am no lawyer, but this could get really messy, or just maybe it will get the sport out of the hands of people who care nothing for the sport and only its earning potential.

Senor Carabante of HRT has been ordered to pay an ex-partner an amount of 47 m Euros, that's a lot of dollars! With HRT already strapped for cash it will be interesting to see what this does. Still, they have money in from Tata for Karthikeyan's ride and another seat to sell, and there is always a new investor coming with these guys.

Practice for this year's Rolex started today with the two Ganassi cars at the top of the time sheet, no surprise there. Watch for the Aten entered Ferrari 430 run by my buddy Tony Dowe. This is the first outing for this car, but Tony has a good driver line up and is no slouch in long distance racing.