Bob Barnard Track Engineering

The winter wait is over as F1 cars and MotoGP bikes hit the track today for their first test sessions. New cars and drivers, and some old faces for both, so it is going to be hard to make anything of this first test. Alonso and Vettel both near the top of the timesheet, with Hulkenburg in the Force India putting in some surprising times to be right there with them.  Just showing Williams they should not have let him go? The Lotus Renault and Williams have followed Red Bull with the pull rod rear suspension, but the biggest surprise so far is the lack of exhaust outlets on the Renault. They obviously have them, they just do not come out of the top or the sides, so must be underneath. This is the team that promised to be "at the brave end of brave," and it seems they are trying something here. At the end of last season, when we had the diffusers, most teams were feeding the exhaust gas out through them to increase downforce, so we can only presume they are doing something with this gas flow to generate downforce under the car. I read an article a few years ago that said an F1 engine is just a huge air pump, so the volume of gas coming out of the exhaust must be massive. In fact at 18,000 rpm that is 2.4 liters by 18,000, or if my math is correct, 43,200 liters per minute. Imagine if your local gas pump ran at that speed?

At the other end of the timesheet Rosberg is slowest, then Barrichello, with the HRT quicker, go figure.

Over in Sepang Casey Stoner is fastest on day one 0.4 seconds faster than Lorenzo. Did not take Casey long to adjust to the Honda. Now Valentino is down in 12th trying to find a position on the Ducati that is comfortable. Someone suggested he is still sand bagging, but team mate Hayden is behind him, and what use is it to sand bag? Can you really set up the bike if you are running around off the pace? And I would have thought that the "head games" would dictate that you would want to put your stamp of authority on from the beginning? Maybe someone out there can enlighten me? Good to see the Suzuki somewhere on the pace unlike last year, and Ben Spies going OK, but then so is Colin Edwards on the second team Yamaha.

In other news, Bernie is not talking about bribes on the advice of his lawyers, and Mark Webber says he is up for another crack at the title and I'm sure he is given how close he was last year. What Bernie is talking about is new races, "If we have some new races, some others will fall out — we don’t need Australia, for instance." Nice one Bernie.

Great article on Superbike Planet today about Lorenzo's visit to the Kenny Roberts school of hard knocks at his ranch in Hickman. I included the training school in my book, and my frequent visits to the local urgent care with would-be racers, and how Kenny will stop the race as soon as he is leading. Lorenzo is reportedly shocked a guy 30 years older can beat him. Silly boy, he needs to realize Kenny can still beat anyone over a short race, say a lap! Here is the link.

http://superbikeplanet.com/2011/Jan/110117krlorenzo.htm

Sir Frank Williams, a gentleman of a similar age and will to win, is considering floating the Williams team. This could relate to Joe Saward's story yesterday about Qatar Holdings being interested in a connection with Williams. More power to Sir Frank, who is emphasising that this does not mean he is stepping back from his role in the team.

Now we hear today that Boullier is considering Grosjean as the "third driver" for the Lotus Renault team. Surely he means fourth? Or is it a tie for third with Fauzy? Strange doings. And Peter Collins is now saying his driver Luizzi  may not drive in F1 this year, so can we finally sort out who is driving Force India before the test starts in 12 days time? Sutil and Di Resta with Hulkenburg as the third presumably.

Terrible to hear about Dean Stoneman's illness, and I'm sure we all wish him a recovery to rival Lance Armstrong's.

Sounds like an interesting evening at the Sydney Speedway a week ago with Tony Stewart getting into an altercation with one of the track owners and the police getting involved. My old mate Garry Rush is also an owner of that speedway, and I could sell tickets if he and Tony got into it. Another dynamite old racer who can still do it when required, and I'm sure he will not mind the "old." They used to say "there are old racers and bold racers, but there are no old, bold, racers." Not sure that applies anymore. Perhaps he and Tony could have sorted it all out with a match race?

Martin Whitmarsh has stated that the FIA and FOTA will not let the movable wing "fail." They will "tweak" the rules, which as I have been saying, remain unclear, but here is perhaps the best explanation from his interview with Autosport.

"Drivers will have the system primed in the race when FIA-monitored GPS technology tells them they are less than one-second behind the car in front at a certain point of the circuit. This only becomes valid two laps after the start of a safety car restart.

However, to ensure that the wing boost advantage is not over-egged, the FIA will only allow use of the wing's speed boost at a single zone on the track. This will be carefully monitored and controlled to ensure that overtaking still remains a challenge - and this area may not even be on the main start-finish straight."

So, only in one spot, and the boys will know which zone that is and hopefully so will we. Drivers can use the KERS system either to defend or to help with the wing's reduced drag. So is this going to be better or not? Are they all going to drive around behind another car waiting for that spot, and not try anywhere else? Is that better than no overtaking? I'm sorry, this all seems contrived, like Bernie's "short cut" idea. Let them move the wing whenever they want. What happens though when to overtake at the end of the straight the driver leaves the wing in low downforce too long? His braking is compromised so he will lose out at the corner, or worse go off. Is the FIA going to have another "trigger" to turn it off at a safe distance from the corner?

I commented the other day that if Boullier wanted Grosjean in F1 then he should give him a seat at his team, so what does he do? He hires Fauzy, a 28 year old Malaysian who has shown nothing in his previous trip to F1. Must be the long arm of Proton the Malaysian car maker backing Lotus cars, and they need some backing. Joe Saward in his blog today presented their latest earnings (losses) figures and the need for $64 in finance with a $700m loan being sought. These are the guys who intend taking over the world?  The naming court case is due to start Monday, so they had better get talking if they want to settle this as Bahar says.

While the Canadians are expressing concern over the Lotus fag packet livery Marlboro confirms it will continue to sponsor Ferrari and Ducati. How does that work? Are the Canadians color blind. Do they not sell Marlboro in Canada so it's OK? More power to Marlboro, if it is legal to sell them then it should be legal to advertise, or is the tax too convenient? I am no fan of smoking, in fact if cigarettes were banned it would suit me just fine, but I have been on the receiving end of this hypocrisy.

Qatar seems to be quietly taking over motorsport, along with some of its Gulf friends. Qatar Holdings LLC. is buying more of Porsche, and strengthening links with Williams. Joe again believes that this is a move to bring in VW-Porsche to F1, but that was countered by Porsche saying today that Le Mans is more interesting, affordable and a lower risk of failure than F1. I am old enough to remember the last time Porsche ran in F1, and it was not pretty.

The Mayor of Rome now says he wants the Olympics in 2020 rather than the F1 race, so I guess that is over. Can my Italian friends keep an eye on Flammini's land deal?

A1GP is to be resurrected it seems as A10 World Series, whatever that is. Never quite understood what A1GP was about except losing bucket loads of money. This has to rely on a big series sponsor and the promoters paying lots of money to have a race, without any "name" drivers, at least none that the general punter would know, and in spec cars. "The ethos is completely different in terms of the business model." a spokesman for A10GP said. It had better be. The series will run in the off season in non-European countries, so perhaps these racing starved people will not care who is driving? Now I know there are a bunch of Englishmen who just love "Our Jens," but I have never bought in to the jingoistic "our nation is better than yours" concept in motor racing. I, and I would believe most fans, like drivers and cars from wherever. Drivers I admire because of their ability and character, not nationality, and cars for their engineering and style. I can admire both the Peugeot and Audi equally at a Le Mans race without being French or German, and in the case of A1(0)GP we do not even have the difference in nationality of the cars, other than the color, and who really cares about that? We already have the Superleague based on soccer teams, which probably has more chance of motivating followers, although despite the success of my soccer team's car, Tottenham, I personally am unlikely to walk across the street to watch it. Good luck.

I loved yesterday"s quote from Lotus Renault designer James Allison who said the design of this year's car "would be on the brave end of brave." That's what we want to see, and Chapman would be proud. Or was it Lotus drivers who were the brave ones?

It is interesting that Audi have gone from an open cockpit car to a closed for this year's Le Mans contender the R18, and Aston Martin has gone from a closed cockpit to an open. Can they both be right? Audi have preferred the open cockpit since they built the R8 due to the easier driver changes and less problems with visibility. They had power to burn presumably to overcome the extra drag. Now they say the restrictions on the engine mean they have to minimise drag, hence the closed cockpit. Allan McNish at the Autosport Show said that the petrol cars will be very competitive this year due to Article 19, and that the Aston was already very fast last year. So does Aston now have power to burn over the diesels and can therefore go to the open cockpit? I recall when Tony Dowe was running the Panoz he cut the roof off as the open cars at that time had some rule breaks which if I recall correctly allowed larger rear tires and a bigger fuel tank. Who makes this up? Although it did not have the elegance of the Coupe, it won races.  All part of the "knowing the rules and exploiting them" game that is motor sport.

Every journalist on earth must be at the Autosport Show or Wroom with Ferrari and Ducati. Not sure how much Ferrari and Co. spend on this bash but it is worth every penny in the PR onslaught they achieve at a time when there is not much else happening. Some one must have been in Venezuela to cover Maldanado in the Williams with Hugo Chavez and the deal with PDVSA. As I think Joe Saward commented, there ways of being a "pay for ride" driver without actually paying for it yourself, which is what most of these deals are. So Williams protesting that this is not a pay for play deal sounds a little far fetched. I don't really care if PDVSA give Sir Frank the money he needs to be competitive again  as long as Maldanado does not turn out to be another Eliseo Salazar.

I love Luca di Montezemolo, he says such great quotes. "maybe when others have won 10% of what Ferrari has won, then they can also have their say." He does not think Red Bull know how to behave as Champions, and is also using their overspending to point out the silliness of the RRA. And I love the comment on Brawn winning due to "technical drug taking." F1 on steroids. They presumably grew bigger diffusers.

On the home front I completed the text for my book, so now to find a publisher, edit and select the photos. I need a shot of me on the winners rostrum at Phillip Island in '89 if anyone knows a photographer who was there. I have a concept plan for the Circuit Grand Bayou and waiting on feedback from the client, who at first sight liked it a lot. Busy on a business plan for another project, so watch this space. Don't forget the Circuit Forum in LA in April, the program is just about done and will be out probably next week.

The "Great Leap Forward," sorry that was Chairman Mao not Vice Chairman Atherton, for ALMS coverage this year has met with mainly negative reactions. This I guess is indicative of how the die hard fans feel about it, so whether it really is the way we watch sport in future we will have to wait and see. The Last Turn Club has a nice thoughtful piece on the pros and cons, http://lastturnclub.com/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=1

I've watched Le Mans and Sebring and Petit on the web the last couple of years and actually prefer it as I can tune in to Radio Le Mans and be spared the TV commentators. The Radio Le Mans guys are passionate fans, and always seem to know exactly what is going on, not being distracted by an infomercial. I guess I will have to buy an HDMI connection to my flat screen.

HRT have either left FOTA or been thrown out for non-payment of dues depending on who you listen to. HRT are complaining that FOTA only looks after the interests of big teams, and that the distribution of the money is not fair. Who ever said F1 was fair? It has ever been so that the successful teams get more money. This is not the USA where the draft system tries to even up the competition, this is Bernie's world, and in Bernie's world you sink or swim. Aside from Ferrari think about where the other teams have come from. Sir Frank used to do business from a public phone box. These guys paid their dues and made it, they are not about giving the sucker an even break. F1 is merciless competition, on and off track. Having said that it seems Red Bull over spent by 60m Euros! That's more than the small teams spent, let alone overspent. That's probably HRT's real concern. They were lured into F1 with promises of resource limitation, and the RRA is certainly more "enabling" than restrictive.