Bob Barnard Track Engineering

So here we are in Singapore, metaphorically speaking, getting ready for an important race in the World Championship. They are all important of course, but as we get closer to that last race the ability to recover from a bad race is much more difficult. McLaren say they have fixed the Hungary problems, let's hope so, we want a good close race not a Red Bull benefit, even though they are capable of losing anywhere even with the quickest car.

The engine limitation rule is about to bite someone.  Pedro de la Rosa has already had to use his ninth (Ferrari) engine in his Sauber and take the ten grid spot penalty, and Alonso and Massa are both on their eighth engine. Now Sauber had to go to the ninth as they had blown the others, which is not Ferrari's situation, but even though they say they are not worried there has to be a glimmer of concern. At best the engines might be a bit tired, at worst ready to grenade. Just when you thought it was all complicated enough with five guys still in the running, then we add this little twist. Red Bull are in the best condition with engines, despite the fact that they seemed to have a lot of problems this year, but I guess they were not terminal.

Rain is the other wild card this weekend. We've seen what happens in Malaysia when it decides to rain, and apparently that is what is going on each afternoon this week. The forecast is for more rain, which is always an issue with tracks anyway, but throw in the night race under lights and it gets us into the unknown. Now NASCAR runs under lights but not in the rain, and Le Mans does not have enough lights to potentially be a problem, but the Rolex 24 hour at Daytona does. I cannot recall it creating a problem for drivers, but then they are only turning left on the oval which drains well anyway and the infield is not lit. We have seen how spray hangs in the trees at say Monza, can you imagine it under the lights?

Water on a street track always creates it own problems, Adelaide was shortened at least once because it was impossible to drive on. Drainage on any road is a key element, but on a race track it is magnified ten times both in importance and difficulty of doing it. That is why I have included a presentation at the Cologne Forum specifically on drainage of tracks. Let's hope that Singapore is not marred by rain and we have a good straight shoot out. I know rain effected races can throw up some fun results, but it is not what I would be looking for at this time.

Bernie is quoted as saying he would welcome France back on the calendar, provided a promoter can be found to stump up the cash and someone can provide a track. Is that all? On that basis anyone could have a race, but where would you find space in the twenty race calendar we have now? Who is on the short list to be dropped? While we are talking about Bernie, he is raising his medal system again instead of points. As he said, the new points system did not change anything, but not sure I like the winner takes all approach a medal system implies, and who is going to buy the gold and silver for them? The Promoter I suspect.

World Superbike is at Imola, one of those great tracks that no longer host an F1 GP, despite upgrading the facilities as requested. It will be good to see it again. Imola was home to some of the best signage, large painted logos on the grass run off that was in perspective and looked like it was standing up looking at you, like the signs in Italian soccer if you watch it. Very clever.

The driver situation is heating up, even though there does not appear to be too many options. Paul di Resta is tipped to have a full time seat at Force India next season, so is Liuzzi out, or is Sutil off somewhere, or is Mallya just hedging his bets? Heidfield's ride is just to the end of the season, so is Massa really going back to Sauber as part of the Ferrari engine deal? All will be revealed soon I guess.

Had a great audience for our presentation last evening, room was full and buzzing. Nice to see the interest level, and it spurs a good performance by us presenters. The lap record for the Rahal BMW on the simulator was lowered to 2 minutes dead, and the ultimate record lowered in a BMW Sauber F1 car, which seemed easier to drive on this layout than the touring car for some reason, to 1 minute 50 seconds. Top speed was where I thought it would be at over 180mph, and saw over 170 at several other points. The average lap speed is now up to 111 mph even with some very tight and slow sections. I am sure that this time will be lowered as the driver was no expert, but drove surprisingly well. It will be fun to upgrade the model with the cross-falls and elevation changes I have designed.

Otherwise we are moving on with the permitting process, which seems to be going well, but it is early days. It is looking like next April/May to break ground, so end of 2011 to run on.

Been making the final arrangements for my travel to the International Circuit Owners Forum in Cologne (Koln) Germany in November. Some great sessions covering all aspects from conception, design and construction through operations and how to make money, the hard part. If you want to see the program log on to:

http://www.professionalmotorsportcircuit-forum.com/downloads/2010_programme.pdf

I can arrange a discount on the forum fee, so if you are interested in going contact me via a comment and I will respond.

Elsewhere the F1 circus is setting up camp in Singapore. Singapore says it wants to be a "must have" F1 race. Good luck with that, ask the French who invented this stuff, and Spa, Imola and other great tracks how that works and they will tell you it's all about the money. So, as long as your Government is happy losing megabucks every year then you probably can be a "must have" with CVC.

Rumors resurface about Kubica to Ferrari. As I have asked before, why would he want to do that? Alonso is not going to relinquish his number one status, and certainly not welcome someone as quick as Kubica. I can't see Kubica going there a number two, can you? I know he says all drivers want to drive for Ferrari, but is that correct, and under what situation? I can't quite see Lewis at Ferrari can you?

I thought the announcement of a new Russian sponsor for Renault would have secured Petrov's seat for next year, but it turns out they are only in for the remaining races this year, so maybe Kimi can still spring it. Or is Kimi replacing Kubica? The plot thickens.

It seems the boys in Austin are not getting the smooth ride through the planning process as they probably expected, bringing all that economic benefit to Austin after all. Seems the road system needs $15m spent on it to allow for the huge crowd that's going to turn up, and the State DOT wants to know who's paying. The Planning Board is also saying they do not have enough information to even start considering the project. I liked the lawyers comment, "We heard loud and clear … the information flow is going to open up." As they want to break ground by the end of the year you would have thought it would have been flowing thick and fast by now. You can read the whole story on ESPNF1 web site.

Who can foretell the future? A lot of people are trying lately in respect of motor racing. The discussion on LinkedIn Motorsport Professionals Group rolls on, with the latest social media being the focus of much of it. Then there is the article in GP Week, "F1's Chance to Change the World," which is focused mainly on the 2013 engine regs, and the chance to be "seen" as green by sponsors.

GP Week asks, "But will a greener Formula One really help in attracting more sponsors to the sport? Harry Gibbings is the Head of Global Sponsorship at TW Steel, a Renault sponsor, and he thinks it will make sponsors less intimidated to join the sport: "From a sponsor's perspective the green ethos is important and, from my point of view with TW Steel, Renault has pushed that to great lengths, taking the technology from the F1 programme and translating it to small fuel efficient cars," explains Gibbings."

"That's not the primary reason that we're in Formula One sponsorship. Obviously we're there to get a return on investment - it hits 450 million people at each round - so from our point of view, that's the important thing. But to have positive green credentials in the future is also an important aspect of it."

So, in the end it is about raising money, as I said yesterday. As you all know I continue to question why motor racing has to be "relevant" when no other sport has to?

In the same article Martin Whitmarsh, the thinking man's team principle, says that F1 must keep the sound, or noise as some would say. I agree, and it is likely that F1 and NASCAR will always be allowed to make as much noise as they want, but what about the rest of motor sport? Much is made of fuel efficiency when "green racing" is discussed, but you know, whenever I have been at a town hall meeting over a new or existing track no one ever raises the issue of fuel efficiency, it is all about the noise generated.

As we have seen with the Croft decision in the British High Court, noise restrictions have potentially a much bigger impact on the future of racing. Unless racers in most series agree to limit their exhaust emissions their opportunity to race will become limited to tracks in the middle of nowhere that they do not want to go to. No one is saying it has to noiseless, but a serious attempt has to be made to limit it to a reasonable level of say 90dba? Either that or we will be watching electric cars with noise makers in them to sound exciting.

Then there are the enormous numbers of tires used at a race. NASCAR seems the worst offenders with new tires fitted at every pit stop, and there are a lot of those thanks to the yellow flags. It cannot be a good advert for a tire manufacturer when their tires wear out after 100 miles or less. Tony Dowe is the only person I know who has raised this issue, but think of the resources and cost. Have a look in the Michelin or Goodyear tents next time you go to a  race. We now have engines and gearbox limitations that require teams to use them for more than one race. Did the world end as we know it? Most fans would not tell the difference from the old days of qualifying specials. So how about one set for a race weekend, unless you puncture? Use the set from the race before for practice and qualifying at the next. In the sixties it was not unknown to use a set for two or three races. Then maybe we will see who can drive to manage their tires.

So, back to the future of F1 and motor racing. Are they one and the same? If F1 died as we know it, it would survive, it always has done. Whatever was the next level of racing would by right would become F1. Would F1 survive if the rest of motorsport died? Probably, we all watch major events like the Baseball World Series, Superbowl, Tour de France, Le Mans, Indy 500 etc. as the best of the sport, so I suspect F1 would survive, but where would the drivers come from, a virtual GP2?

The future of the rest of racing as a spectator sport is definitely under question, but there will always be those that wish to experience the thrill of driving fast, and yes racing their competitors, and not just in a simulator.

Monetise, what an interesting word. George Lopez followed up on Martin Whitmarsh's comment the other week about F1 doing a better job to promote itself. Speaking to Autosport Lopez said, "Formula 1 does need to promote itself better as it is a global sport," Lopez told AUTOSPORT. "It probably also needs to monetise better, which is a different thing. Promoting means putting money into something and hoping you get known, monetising means making money."

So, what he wants is more money, not necessarily more fans. He goes on to talk about exploiting the Internet, "Lopez believes there are many other avenues on the Internet that can be pursued that would raise good finance for the sport.

"There is all the historic video content for example - and people would pay," he said. "I would, for example, love to really look at the Ayrton Senna/Alain Prost Suzuka accident, and I would pay to have monthly access to any race I wanted to watch." Well he may pay, but what he is really saying is that we can make money from existing fans by charging them to watch the good old days. Aren't existing fans getting soaked enough by high track entry fees? And didn't Bernie try to get us to pay for HD? That failed badly, one of Bernie's only missteps.

He has lots of other good ideas such as on-course betting. Again, getting money from those already at the race. His idea for new fans? Letting his drivers walk to the paddock without minders.

But maybe George has it correct. We had the Goodwood Revival race meeting over the weekend, a sell out, watching the old stars, both the cars and the drivers, so perhaps watching old races will pay? Perhaps returning racing to these good old days might also increase the audience.

Martin Whitmarsh had another interesting pronouncement the other day on Team Orders from a different perspective. He made the point that motor racing is dangerous, potentially lethal, and no driver should be asked to take that risk just to support his team mate. Good point.

The discussion continues on LinkedIn on spectator decline. A post today from David Harris, who presumably works for SPEED, tells us that viewing figures have grown from 20m when it was Speedvision in 1996, to 80m as SPEED today. Considering most people could not get Speedvision in 1996 I am not surprised. The problem is, are the 80m race fans or motoring soap opera watchers? Pinks, Dangerous Roads, etc. etc. to me do not constitute race fans. As I said yesterday there were great races going on all over the world that we did not see. Now, I do not blame Fox for chasing audience numbers of whatever sort, that is their business, to make money, but there is more to racing than endless NASCAR and "reality" shows.

That is George Lopez's business too, he runs a venture capital group like CVC, who own F1 and are in it for the money. That is great so long as that is not your only objective, all businesses have to make money to survive, but I doubt if you ask Sir Frank Williams, Patrick Head, Peter Sauber, and yes, that epitome of corporate correctness, Ron Dennis, what matters most, they will say the racing. Enzo Ferrari only built road cars to make it possible to go motor racing, not the other way round. Perhaps we have reached the root of the problem? Today's racing is run by "the suits," the grey men who only see the balance sheet, not the timesheet. They have forgotten what made the sport worth investing in in the first place, and will ruin it all.

Finally a mention for someone who does get it and lives it. Garry Dickinson returned to the track that nearly killed him two years ago and rode a couple of laps, virtually his first time back on a bike. Well done Garry, that takes real guts, not some fabricated made for TV BS. Where were SPEED when you did that?

Here we are on Sunday, and I do not know if it is just me, but there is not much getting my juices flowing. Congratulations to Casey Stoner for his win at Aragon, and just maybe Valentino has made a brilliantly timed move to Ducati. He is talking about missing the last two races to get his shoulder operated on, sounds like a very smart move to me.

I mentioned the discussion on LinkedIn the other day about the loss of TV audience for NASCAR. I commented, but I am having my doubts as to the value of such discussions. I am amazed at the lack of knowledge or analysis that people in these groups have about the sport that they profess to follow. It is as if they just watch the races and believe everything they hear from either commentators or promoters without question. I am seriously considering stopping my involvement, but then they will all talk to each other and promote more disinformation.

So, back to the racing. IRL went to Motegi because Honda supplies the engines, I doubt the number of spectators made the trip worthwhile. I watched a little of the race towards the end, but cannot get excited by it. Have I been spoilt or just getting jaded and old? DTM, WTCC, FRenault3.5, BTCC, FIAGT, and Superleague all raced, but we do not see any of it here despite having a dedicated race channel, sorry NASCAR channel, so it is hard to follow these and comment. The Fords have been winning in BTCC, but stirring up controversy over their engine package. Sounds like good racing, but it is going the way of most series with spec body shells by Toyota and engines by the series. Formula Ford or Formula Vee have been delivering close racing for probably over twenty years, but who watches?  Nice to see Donnington back in action though.

There are signs that the honeymoon for the new CEO of the IRL, Randy Bernard, is over. It seems the team owners are not happy about the new car for 2012, and I admit to being wrong when I said that teams like Penske and Ganassi would dominate because they had the money to design and build the aero for the bodywork. Penske has come out and said he will not be producing his own aero kit as he would have to commit to selling it to any of the other teams who want it, so we are back to a spec car again because they will buy the best package from whoever comes up with it. That whole idea sounded goofy to me when it was announced.  The Indy boss also wants to go back to Milwaukee because they have a tremendous fan base there. That is why the last couple of promoters at the track went broke.