Bob Barnard Track Engineering

I commented the other day about the time it took IMSA to respond to accidents and clear them. Nearly 6 hours in a 12 hour race does not keep the fans or drivers happy. So IMSA is looking into it. Hope it is not a mirror. Old joke.

Of bigger concern is the management of the accidents. Several marshals have now chimed in as to the new rules for them. IMSA used to have a dedicated response team that went to all the events, like IndyCar, but the new regime decided to use the NASCAR model and have a crew from each track. This is not necessarily a bad thing, F1 does the same apart from the Medical Car, but both NASCAR and F1 are a single class race,with almost spec cars in the sense that basic safety items are the same on each car. The fuel filler is in the rear quarter panel for example. Just check the Porches in sports cars. IMSA has four classes of cars with a variety of manufacturers and with very different designs. Getting to know where the cut off switch is in each one is not the work of a morning. 

Worse than this though is the decision to not let marshals respond until there has been a "conversation" with race control. Responding to an accident, especially a car on fire with someone in it is not a time for conversations. I well recall when Berger ran off at Imola and caught fire. I along with most viewers were screaming at the TV asking where was the fast response car? It seemed and eternity, but it turned out to be 22 seconds. I bet it felt like an eternity to Berger.

Race Directors need to make snap decisions, and so do the men on the spot, the marshals. Here in the US there is a reticence to marshals going over the wall, unlike most of the world. I do not know if this cultural, or an insurance issue, but going out under yellows ensures that someone is at a crash almost immediately. Who recalls at Sebring a few years ago the Jaguar almost fully engulfed but one brave soul had it out because he got there fast.

Marshal posts must have sight of each other, so a yellow at the preceding post should be automatic. We had a car in the tires at Turn 9 mid race, and again it seemed to me an age before someone turned up, and then it was a truck, and the driver was not getting out. Who knew how bad he was hurt?

In respect of the fire, why was a red flag not shown immediately as we had with the Turn 17 crash? We had marshals and fire trucks trying to combat a fire which would not go out while the cars paraded past. Crazy. Marty Kaufman and Gordon Gratiot where are you?

In this month’s Motor Sport Mark Hughes provides a view on what should change with the current F1. It occurred to me that with the asking price for the current F1 being around $10bn, when CVC decide to sell, it would be much cheaper just to start your own. What would it cost? $2bn?

Here in the US it is a time honored tradition that if you do not like something you start your own. Banks, churches, and yes even IRL. So, with John Malone reportedly interested in buying F1 I thought why can’t he just start his own? He has the money and the media, so what else would he need?

FIA Approval: If you are going to run an International Series you need FIA approval, but that is not hard to get. Look at Formula E just starting up. The FIA don’t really care as long as they get a cut and some say in the running. You could not use Formula One of course, but so what. With a good promotional plan you can sell anything.

Tracks: Thanks to Bernie and CVC there are loads of tracks that can no longer afford F1. The real fans would love to see a series that goes back to some, and races on real tracks not “Tilkedromes.” You could go back to my first track in Adelaide. It is still used and a reasonable fee would have kept the F1 there, so price it right and there you go. Same with France, who started this, Indy in the US or a street race, India now has a track available, as does Turkey. Imola in Italy, any of the Spanish tracks, they are all FIA Level 1, and maybe even Valencia would like it at the right price. Japan has Fuji and China Zuhai. We would need a South American leg, and we are starting to get a decent calendar. In England the Circuit of Wales is being built to Level 1 standard, but does not want F1. And I am sure some of the existing tracks would come over at the end of their Bernie contract.

Drivers: As with circuits there are a lot of very good drivers who cannot make it to F1 because of the existing business model and some who made it and could not stay. Paul Di Resta and Nick Heidfeld for just two, and I bet for every Kevin Magnussen there are ten guys who could not afford to pay for drives to get there. We need to find them early and provide a path based on talent. A sort of Red Bull scheme but managed by the series. Who knows, we might even have an American driver succeeding.

Cars: There are very good designers currently not in F1 that could provide a specification for the car. Gordon Murray and Gary Anderson for two. They still need to be a high tech vehicle, and certainly not a spec series, but more open to get back to the Can-Am and early F1 rule books that allowed ingenuity to be rewarded. Costs are always a factor, but with money staying in the series and being shared equitably then the teams would have the money they need.

Teams: As with all of this there are would-be F1 teams who just know they could not survive. Just look at how HRT, Caterham and Murussia have struggled. There should be some basis for rewarding success, but Bernie’s formula is a recipe to fail for any new team. Do you think Gene Haas would rather invest in a more equitable series? There are plenty of very good teams in GP2, GP3, European F3 and FR3.5 who could step up with the right balance of reward to investment.

TV: There are no shortage of specialist sports and motorsport TV channels to provide world wide coverage. With more reasonable fees I am sure with John Malone’s connections he could arrange for the series to develop a following.

So, a word used here a lot is equitable. There are business models that share the wealth. NASCAR does a good job, and so do the NFL and MLB. Yes the investor needs a return, but so do the other investors who built tracks, cars and careers. The current business model of F1 is fatally flawed, so who would risk $10bn to buy it? Bernie is talking about retiring so who do we get then, a suit? We need a series promoter who actually does reinvest in the promotion of the sport year round to support the individual track promoters, build a renewable base of stars, and listen to their fan base, not their pockets.  

If you doubt where the world is going with transport then just look at the latest Peugeot 308. A three cylinder turbo charged car which has demonstrated a fuel mileage of 99 mpg! The 308 is one of a long line of trick little cars, so no made for shopping hybrid here.

So the latest F1 cars are just where they need to be. F1 has always been about technology, and not how loud they are. They were in danger in being left behind by the WEC cars, so a move just in time. On the subject of fuel, Red Bull have yet to lodge an appeal and have until tomorrow, but you get the feeling they may not. Ferrari and Mercedes have come out supporting the FIA on the issue, and the FIA said that the meters meet their tolerance. It would be nice to know what that is. Almost any specification I have seen in my engineering life has a tolerance. Precision is for the gods not mere mortals.

Joe Saward, yes him again, said a month ago that CVC is letting us down gradually. That there is a method of drip feeding a message so that when it finally happens it is not a big shock to the system. So easing Bernie off a few boards of FOM was a first step to his going. Now we have Bernie saying that like all top sportsmen, you should go out on top. So he is thinking that this may be his last year as he will be 85 next year and has done this so long maybe he should do something else. Really? F1 is his life. So is this the next drip in the demise?

I hope you all enjoy my posts, but you should also be reading Joe Saward, I always do. It is not just that we agree on most issues with F1, but he has been there longer than most and still has his soul intact. Today's is a gem:

http://joesaward.wordpress.com/2014/03/18/f1-kowtowing-to-vultures-and-the-padding-used-in-ballet/#comment-184235

On the subject of track owners working together I tried without success to do just that at a meeting of the MotoGP promoters in Geneva back in 1991. This was at a time of turmoil with the FIM and I could see that someone like Dorna or Bernie would step in and we would go the way of F1. Maurizio Flammini was at the time the head of the promoters organization, but also ran World Superbike, so had an interest in not upsetting the FIM, so killed the idea. Not before I had the Japanese and several other promoters convinced that all we needed was the teams to make the show. The FIM and now Dorna just take money out. I doubt that promoters will ever agree, just like the F1 teams. At least in MotoGP the teams have IRTA to act as a single voice.

Many spectators and not a few drivers equate noise with power. When asked to put on a muffler competitors complain it will cost them horse power, even though my mate Tony Dowe tells me they put mufflers on one of the Jaguars and it increased power. This is totally possible if you ask the top muffler specialists.

Anyway, when I grew up F1 cars ran around with about 200hp, and were loud. Jack Brabham suffered from a common complaint called "Coventry Climax Ear," i.e deaf on the side the single exhaust came out. Now Helmut Marko is suggesting Mercedes have around 900hp, and people are saying they are too quiet. Have they not been to a WEC race lately and heard, or not heard in this case, the Turbo Diesel Audis. Despite the whispering whistle they are mightily impressive. Yes we like race cars to sound "sexy" as the Oz GP guys are saying, but that does not mean we all have to go deaf. I drive an Infinit G35 as much for the exhaust note as anything. Like organ music, sweet, but not intrusive.

So Melbourne are saying the new cars breach the contract to stage the race. I doubt there is a clause that says that they have to have a certain noise level, or degree of sexiness. Try writing a spec for that, worse than fuel flow. Is this just a negotiating ploy to reduce fees, or get out of a major loss for the Government altogether? Or is it Bernie's mate Ron Walker just stirring it up for his old mate.

Talking of fuel flow, a lot more has come out since I wrote yesterday. Red Bull are being pinged because they did not follow FIA instructions as the other teams apparently did. There are some questions about how accurate the sensors are, so the FIA said whatever you are seeing, do as we tell you. Red Bull may have been trying to prove a point, but it just cost them 20. This could go on for a while with the appeal, but this is not about whether they exceeded the flow rate but about not following FIA directions as stated in the regulation.

It was a busy weekend for us in the US what with F1, Sebring and NASCAR. NASCAR was in Bristol, a 100,000 + seat half mile bull ring that you used to have to wait for someone to die to get a seat. Not yesterday. It was a sparse crowd last year, but Sunday there were a few thousand brave souls. It rained, and it was forecast to rain, so the "commentators" suggested most of the crowd were waiting to see if it would start. Really? These are the same folks who sat in a thunder storm and tornado warning at Daytona for six hours? Well when we did start they did not rush in, and those that stayed until nearly 10 o'clock must think twice about doing it again as the race went under caution with two 15 second laps to go. Unbelievable.

No wonder NASCAR keeps promoting itself at every ad break. Never understood that. I am already watching so why advertise to me? Same goes for the Tudor Sports Car series, but of course that is run by NASCAR too now.