Bob Barnard Track Engineering

Tony Fernandes is learning what most of us around racing already know, changes to rules cost money. They cost the car builder and the track owner money, everyone except those making the rules. I noticed this when running motorcycle GP's. I would go to meetings of the Road Racing Commission of the FIM, along with sponsors, teams and manufacturers and other track owners, and be forced to listen in silence while 16 men with not a dime invested between them discuss changes to rules. I well remember one poor soul from Yugoslavia, as it was then, who had made all the upgrades to his track as requested, and then was not given a race! He just about cut his wrists on the conference table.

The FIA and FIM keep going on about cutting costs, and then proceed to make the teams redesign the cars or motorcycles each year. And not just a little. We go from movable front wings to movable back wings next year, or has that been dropped? It is hard to keep up, let alone try and design a car for next year. The 125cc class disappears, so what happens to all those machines? Are they now so much junk?

Korea is a running sore now for Bernie, and it seems our friend Mr. Tilke is getting some flak about the lateness in completion. To put the record straight I met Peter Wahl, Managing Director for Tilke, at the Forum in New York back in April, and he said then that the Koreans only wanted them to design the track, the Koreans would build it themselves. Now it seems the Koreans are pleading that they had not built an F1 track before so should be excused for being late! I presume they knew before they started that they had not done this before. When I did Adelaide I had not done it before either, but we still got it done. I know what they mean though, it is more complicated now, but there are also people available now that know how to do it, so there is no excuse if you choose to ignore them. As I try and tell potential clients, it costs just as much to build it wrong as build it correctly, the only difference is the fee for someone like me, and that is peanuts in the scheme of things. The cost of rebuilding it, or not completing it is enormous, as the Koreans are about to find out.

If you want to see the next disaster go on the ESPNF1 web site and look at the photos of the Indian track for next years GP. They are already complaining that the weather is delaying them. When I built Eastern Creek there was a famous photo of the Minister for Sport and I under an umbrella standing in a lake it was raining so much. That was January, and we ran the first race in July. It was not pretty, but by September we ran a test for GP teams following the Oz GP at the Island. You can either get it done or you can't.

There are a couple of interesting pieces on tracks this morning. I commented the other day under "Monza" about the situation at Donnington Park and Adroit. I said at the time it would be good to understand what went on, and fortunately David Broome of Adroit commented on that blog and set the record straight. Not quite what the media was presenting, so thank you David for reading and commenting. Please check out David's comment for the true story. Hopefully this is a happy end to a sad saga, and Donnington can continue as one of England's best circuits for many years to come.

That may not be the case for the new Korean track, where the inspection date has been put back another week, "due to local holidays." Weren't they on the calendar when they booked the 21st? ESPN F1 has a very insightful piece on what happens when it is built, and how likely is it to be financially successful.  Martin Williamson, managing editor of digital media ESPN EMEA, comments on today's web page, "Although it continues to take F1 to new locations, the FIA's determination to base its decisions on cash almost regardless of other factors - especially the local interest in the sport and the location of the circuits - have left the Formula One roadshow going to some places where grands prix take place against a backdrop of indifference. It's all very well to argue it is taking the sport into to new markets, but shouldn't consolidating the existing ones be equally important?"

"Assuming the organisers have a workable circuit by the time the FIA inspect later this month, the Korean Grand Prix will go ahead and contractually will remain on the schedule for the next seven years regardless. But you can't but help get the feeling that the hard work will really start when the builders leave."

Very well said Martin. Check out the full story at http://en.espnf1.com/f1/motorsport/story/28461.html.

I'm not against F1 going to new places, Adelaide would never have happened if it did not seek new markets, but there has to be more to the decision than if CVC is going to get a big payday. After all, do empty stands, failed tracks and bad races really look good for the sport and its long term future?

So, depending on who you believe, there was either not enough evidence to penalize Ferrari for team orders, or they did use team orders but the rule is ambiguous and others do it so you should not penalize Ferrari more. If there was not enough evidence how did the Stewards decide to fine them $100,000, and if they were wrong, why did Ferrari not get their money back? Same goes if everyone is doing it why uphold the fine? As Sir Frank Williams said, he supports team orders, maybe only in the second half of the Championship, some basis for that, but he asks as I do, how do you appease the die hard fans? This will be a test for diplomacy.

Nice comment during the Monza practice about how long the concrete banking has survived. Seeing as how the Romans invented concrete, and most of their structures from 2000 years ago are still standing, I cannot see why anyone is surprised.

Practice was pretty uneventful, except for poor Mark Webber, he seems to have bad Fridays, but good races. The most interesting moment for me was Hamilton's on-board going into the parabolica. The merest of lifts off the throttle and then straight back on it, incredible. How Massa missed that wall no one will know, especially Massa. Tomorrow's qualifying should be interesting, six cars potentially going for pole, do not count out Webber.

Peugeot quickest in practice for the first round of the Intercontinental Cup Le Mans Series race at Silverstone, no surprises there. Audi are going to have to hope Peugeot have not fixed the engine problem, but do not hold your breath.

Grand Am have their last race of the season at Miller this weekend, with Ganassi on pole, surprise, surprise.

Spent the day revisiting the site layout for Sol Real now we have land in escrow. Even though it is still the same size the orientation is now north-south, much better for the sun angle, and the views to the east are spectacular, so obviously with the afternoon sun we want most of the buildings facing east. There is a small section of flood plain too across the NE corner, so flipped the track vertically to make that the run off at the end of the straight. The net result is a anti-clockwise track instead of clockwise, and a few other bonuses to improve the overall site layout. All part of refining the design. Checked out the run off at key points too and all looks more than enough, which is just as well with the speeds we are seeing on the simulator. Haven't got the heart to tell the programmer I've changed the layout now he has it in the computer. Hope everyone remembers to turn left and not right now at the end of the straight!

So the World Council of the FIA decided Ferrari had been punished enough for the "team orders" at Hockenheim. It seems they are to revisit the rule so we can assume that team orders are going to be allowed in some form. Jean Todt obviously has a different view to Max Mosely on the subject, which I guess is no surprise as the man in charge at Ferrari when the issue arose in Austria that resulted in the rule. So, what will it be? Teams can order drivers to let their team mate go by as long as it is not done in a way to be seen or heard by the fans? If you listen to some teams that is what is happening anyway, and most fans know it is happening, they just do not want their nose rubbed in it. That is going to take the cooperation of the driver being told to move over, which is where the problem will lie. Rubens and Felipe both clearly wanted everyone to know what was going on. The bottom line is the average fan wants to see racing, and if one driver is quicker than the other then he should be able to pass him on the track without the help of team orders. If this were not the case then why is there an outcry when it happens? So good luck FIA in framing that rule.

The World Council also decided not to accept any of the entries for the additional team for the 2011 season. Not a  big surprise, but disappointing. I think the two applicants were probably better prepared than the three who joined this year, but it seems that the USF1 debacle, and the form of the new teams has made the FIA gun shy.

On a busy day they also released the 2011 schedule, with twenty races including India. Abu Dhabi lost the cherished last race spot to Brazil. That did not take long for that gloss to wear off. So who is going off for 2012, or are we seeing even more races? Bernie's mate Tavo has a date for 2012, if the track is ready, and we know Bernie wants Russia in, and then there is Qatar, Bulgaria etc. The teams are going to need that three week break in August.

Those of you who have followed my blog will know my views on the English Autosport weekly magazine as the best there is. It turned 60 this week, nearly as old as me, and celebrates with a whopping 330 page issue looking back on those 60 years, the cars, the drivers and the tracks. It is a keeper. Have not read it all yet of course, but a look through is enough to see the quality of what they have produced, so make sure you get a copy wherever you are.

The article on iconic tracks is interesting, and they did a great job on Adelaide, but then again I am biased. I'm sure Ron Walker from the Melbourne GP is getting ready to sue them over their comments that Melbourne has yet to reach the standard Adelaide set. It is interesting to see the other tracks from each decade. I would have got them wrong. 50's Pescara, 60's Suzuka, 70's Paul Ricard, 80's Adelaide, 90's Texas Motor Speedway!, and 00's Algarve. Of course the word "iconic" does not necessarily translate to the best, but there are some interesting omissions.

I forgot for instance that Suzuka was built in the sixties. You tend to think of it in terms of its' F1 life. What a track it must have been when built, quite unique, and still is. Paul Ricard is a good choice for the seventies, but Texas for the nineties? I am trying to think of its place in the development of the 1.5 mile tri-ovals of that period, and why that one is particularly special. Guess I will have to read that article. Then the noughties. I would have picked the Chinese F1 track for sheer extravagance, and the grandstand/pit complex is certainly iconic. But there you are, we each have our own opinions, and thank goodness for that.

Of course these are tracks built in those decades, so Spa, Monza or Monaco pre-date the magazine.

Talking of Spa, it is raining, imagine that. Spa is notorious for rain. It is one of those places where that old saying, "if you can't see the hills it's raining, if you can see the hills it is going to rain" is most apt. Makes for interesting races on an already amazing track. Hamilton is still confident there is more to come out of the McLaren, and he had better be right if he and Button are going to maintain a challenge for the Championship.  The real interest is still going to be the fight inside the Red Bull team, and the FIA's latest moves to beef up the testing of the front wings and floors. There are heavier test loads at Spa, and apparently even more stringent tests to come at Monza, especially on the floor. It will be interesting reading when someone finally explains how they did this.

In a previous issue of Autosport they had a half year review of how the F1 teams were doing, and of course the RB6 was the class of the field. Gary Anderson makes the point that it is just better everywhere, it is not just the exhaust blown diffuser or the front wing, it is the skill of Newey. I have a 90/10 rule that works for lots of things, and Gary uses it here. He believes Adrian understands 90% of what makes a car work, because no one can know 100%, where others only know 80%. So the 90/10 rule, you can calculate 90%, but the last 10% is instinct, experience, call it what you like.

Roll on tomorrow when we have F1 and MotoGP practice to get our teeth into. Can Valentino win at Indy, or does Yamaha want Lorenzo to be the new hero?