F1 2024

[spitfire]

I think they will be evenly matched. I do think Vowles will turn Williams fortunes around.
Biggest shock? If he's managed to convince Newey to return to Williams.

Welcome aboard.

That would be quite the coup! And would fit with Carlos move...

 

[taperoo2k]

Welcome aboard.

That would be quite the coup! And would fit with Carlos move...

Thanks. I don't think he will return to Williams, but as Vowles said himself I think, you have to at least have a conversation
with someone like Newey. I expect we might find out where Newey is headed after the summer break.

 

[taperoo2k]

The wheels continue to fall off Redbull. Jonathan Wheatley is leaving Redbull to become the Team Principle
for the Audi F1 project.

Key Red Bull figure leaving to become Audi F1 team boss

Audi has recruited Red Bull's sporting director Jonathan Wheatley to be team principal of its new works Formula 1 team

www.the-race.com

 

[1%er]

I think they will be evenly matched. I do think Vowles will turn Williams fortunes around.
Biggest shock? If he's managed to convince Newey to return to Williams.

Word is he has signed a deal with Aston Martin. I'm shocked if that is true as I thought 100% he was going to Ferrari and the team told Lewis that to get him to sign for them.

I guess nothing is true until Newey says so, but people in the industry are claiming the deal is done with Aston Martin.

 

[Indeliblelink]

Rumour mill also seems to be saying Aston Martin are trying to get Max to drive for them in 2026.

 

[1%er]

What people at Alpine’s Enstone factory have been told about the potential sale of their F1 team​

Renault’s Formula 1 project appears to be in a precarious position with Alpine having a difficult 2024 campaign and question marks over their long-term place on the grid. Flavio Briatore’s return to the Formula 1 paddock with Alpine earlier in the season turned a few heads. It’s been a tough 18 months for the team after finishing 4th in the Constructors’ Championship in 2022.

Alpine then lost Fernando Alonso – and Oscar Piastri – and while Pierre Gasly is a very strong driver, it was a sign that things weren’t as rosy as their strong position in the standings that year suggested. Last season, Gasly and Esteban Ocon could only manage a single podium finish each but they would both be thrilled with that sort of return this year after falling even further down the pecking order. Alpine have scored just 11 points and it would take a serious upturn in form over the final 10 race weekends to even catch Haas or RB, let alone the top five manufacturers.

Among this disappointment, rumours about the potential sale of Alpine won’t go away. Two teams have potentially been identified as interested in Alpine although the message from the likes of Briatore is that they’re definitely not for sale. Speaking on The Race’s YouTube channel, journalist Scott Mitchell-Malm shared more details about the French team’s future. Alpine’s operations are split between Enstone in the United Kingdom and Viry-Chatillon in France where Renault’s engineer development takes place. Mitchell-Malm believes that Alpine’s staff have been assured that the team aren’t for sale, although whether that fills them with much confidence is another matter.

Alpine’s Enstone staff told the F1 team is not for sale
Speaking about the situation, Mitchell-Malm said: “Everyone involved in Alpine is adamant that the team is not for sale. “[Luca] De Meo has said it, the staff at its Enstone base were promised that recently and doubtless any potential buyer would be told it’s not available. Yet every move that’s being made points in that direction making it difficult to escape the conclusion that this is the likely end game. It’s not imminent, but it could be that Renault sees 2026 as the last throw of the dice before selling it off.”

Renault power unit set to be ditched as Alpine chase Mercedes engine
Although Alpine are telling their staff that a sale isn’t imminent, they also wouldn’t be going around exclaiming that they were if that was the case. The main sign that Renault might not be as committed to their Formula 1 team as before is their attitude towards their engine program. Normally, teams are desperate to be factory outfits and want to be in control of every aspect of their car.

The likes of McLaren and Williams, however, are both benefitting from Mercedes power units and Alpine want to be in that boat. Alpine tried to convince Carlos Sainz to sign by telling him they were pursuing Mercedes engines in the future. It didn’t work out but the plan remains in place for Alpine to use Mercedes power units and a team with a long-term future in the sport wouldn’t be making those moves.

 

[1%er]

Rumour mill also seems to be saying Aston Martin are trying to get Max to drive for them.

I think Honda have an exclusive partnership with Aston Martin that starts in 2026, so that will look good for Verstappen. All he needs now is for Helmut Marko to join Aston Martin and they have the full set, it seems. Honda, Newey, Marko and Max

 

[Limejuice]

I just read on farcebike - that bastion of truth and accuracy - that Adrian (we can be informal at this stage) is moving to Aston Martin on a four-year deal worth $100m. If true, Lawrence has indeed deep pockets.

As it was on social media I believe every snippet of that claim.

Yes, I am an idiot.

 

[1%er]

Investigation launched into Liberty Media over Andretti F1 rejection​

Liberty Media, the commercial rights holder of Formula 1, has been notified by the Department of Justice in the United States that it is being investigated by its Antitrust Division. The investigation, which Liberty Media has stated it is fully cooperating with, surrounds the rejection of Andretti Global's failed attempt to join the F1 grid. “This morning, we announced that there is a DOJ investigation,” confirmed Greg Maffei, Liberty Media's CEO, in an investor call. “We intend to fully cooperate with that investigation, including any related requests for information. Our determination, F1 determination, was in compliance with all applicable US antitrust laws, and we've detailed the rationale for our decision vis a vis Andretti in prior statements. We are certainly not against the idea that any expansion is wrong,” he added. “There is a methodology for expansion that requires approval of the FIA and the F1. We're certainly open to new entrants making applications and potentially being approved if those requirements are met.”

Andretti was one of four applicants when the FIA opened an Expressions of Interest process for new teams last year. It was the only to clear the first hurdle, with its application then assessed by Formula 1 itself. In January, it was announced that the effort had been rejected with a detailed statement was issued outlining the reasoning. That included the claim Andretti Global offered no additional value to Formula 1. Further, it argued the reliance on obligation to supply power unit regulations had the potential to damage the sport's prestige. Andretti had initially secured a supply with Renault, though as that agreement had lapsed, it had instead intended to use an FIA-mandated supply until General Motors arrived in 2028 with its own power unit.

The decision not to allow the team onto the grid caught the eye of law makers in the United States when Mario Andretti was called to Capitol Hill. Mario Andretti, 1978 world champion and father of team owner Michael, subsequently claimed he'd been intimidated by Maffei at an event during the Miami Grand Prix. “I was asked to go there,” Andretti told NBC. “And just as I was trying to explain that to Stefano, Greg Maffei, Mr. Maffei, broke in the conversation and he said: ‘Mario, I want to tell you that I will do everything in my power to see that Michael never enters Formula 1′. “I could not believe that,” he added. “That one really floored me. … We're talking about business. I didn't know it was something so personal. That was really — oh, my goodness. I could not believe it. It was just like a bullet through my heart.”

On May 1, a dozen Members of Congress wrote to Maffei requesting information on the decision and process. That was followed by a letter to Maffei and F1 CEO Stefano Domenicali from Jim Jordan, chairman of the Committee Judiciary asking for further information. In the wake of that, a letter from seven US Senators wrote to the Assistant Attorney General raising concerns at the rejection and calling for an investigation. “…we have serious concerns that the rejection of Team Andretti-Cadillac was based on a desire to exclude a rival from the racetrack, marketing opportunities, and prestige that competing in F1 can lend to a car manufacturer competing to sell cars across the globe,” that letter stated. “While the FOM claims that it did not consult with current teams before rejecting Team Andretti-Cadillac, it notably references consultations with “key stakeholders,” which likely include team sponsors, including car manufacturers that directly compete against General Motors and Cadillac. That F1 stakeholders may have engaged in concerted action to exclude Team-Andretti-Cadillac – especially after it met all technical requirements to join F1 – that merits investigation.”

Despite the rejection, Andretti has continued working towards an F1 berth, acquiring a new facility to house the project at Silverstone. That included securing the services of Pat Symonds, formerly F1's internal technical director who joined from the commercial rights holder in May.

[This investigation could be really bad news for F1, I wonder what Greg Maffei (Liberty Media's CEO), has against Michael Andretti?]

 

[1%er]

Alpine seat?
Could Zhou Guanyu get the 2nd seat at Alpine? Renault are going to stop making power-units for them, so they are looking to Mercedes to supply them. That will cost the team millions that the parent company Renault will not be wanting to foot the bill for. Zhou may well not be kept on by Sauber (Audi) as they have signed Nico Hulkenberg and would surely keep Valtteri Bottas over Zhou (unless money is a concern, which I guess isn't for Audi).

But Zhou is worth around £27m to any team, being the only Chinese driver he brings that sort of sponsorship cash with him. While Renault is also a massive company with lots of money, they will not be a name on the F1 car as they will not be suppçying the power-unit. The team is Alpine so I'm not sure the Renault board will be wanting to spend money on Mercedes power-units and Zhou could alone cover that cost.

As usual time will tell, Flavio Briatore is a real canny one and I can see him going for it

 

[spitfire]

Female employee’s appeal against Christian Horner verdict dismissed

The female Red Bull employee who accused Christian Horner of controlling behaviour has had her appeal against the investigation that cleared the team principal thrown out

www.theguardian.com

 

[taperoo2k]

I just read on farcebike - that bastion of truth and accuracy - that Adrian (we can be informal at this stage) is moving to Aston Martin on a four-year deal worth $100m. If true, Lawrence has indeed deep pockets.

As it was on social media I believe every snippet of that claim.

Yes, I am an idiot.

Pocket change for Stroll Sr, I think his net worth is something like $4 billion.

Female employee’s appeal against Christian Horner verdict dismissed

The female Red Bull employee who accused Christian Horner of controlling behaviour has had her appeal against the investigation that cleared the team principal thrown out

www.theguardian.com

Now we'll see if this goes before an employment tribunal in the UK.

 

[Limejuice]

Pocket change for Stroll Sr, I think his net worth is something like $4 billion.

Yes, I think so.

I love Bernie Ecclestone's (?) quip that the fastest way to become a millionaire was to be a billionaire, then buy a Formula One team.

Personally, I think F1 is a fine way for Mr Stroll to spend his money. And arguably Mr Newey is one of the best experts in his field in the history of F1.

 

[taperoo2k]

Yes, I think so.

I love Bernie Ecclestone's (?) quip that the fastest way to become a millionaire was to be a billionaire, then buy a Formula One team.

Personally, I think F1 is a fine way for Mr Stroll to spend his money. And arguably Mr Newey is one of the best experts in his field in the history of F1.

No guarantees Newey will work his magic in time for 2026. He can start around May 2025, work on the design of the
'26 cars starts in January 2025. Also we simply do not know which Power Units will be the best or absolute stinkers that
require catch up development work.

 

[Limejuice]

No guarantees Newey will work his magic in time for 2026. He can start around May 2025, work on the design of the
'26 cars starts in January 2025. Also we simply do not know which Power Units will be the best or absolute stinkers that
require catch up development work.

Perhaps Mr Stroll will invest equally hefty chunks in engine /PU design and build.

 

[1%er]

Perhaps Mr Stroll will invest equally hefty chunks in engine /PU design and build.

I think Honda will supply Aston Martin with power-units from 2026, so their starting from a good point

 

[1%er]

Another F1 2026 shake-up on the way as FIA confirm latest rule change​

The FIA has confirmed a further parts rule change will be introduced from 2026, with bespoke suppliers set to return. A standardised part in recent years, F1 teams from 2026 will be given the freedom to sign their own wheel rim suppliers in a reversion of a rule introduced in 2022.

BBS exclusivity supplier deal to end
In 2022, F1 switched to 18-inch wheels from its previous 13-inch technology and, with it, mandated a single supplier with BBS answering the call to tender for the prescribed part. In December 2019, BBS was confirmed as the single supplier with the deal announced publicly at the Tokyo Motor Show in January 2022 – allowing BBS to refer to itself, and market itself, as F1’s official wheel rim supplier.

Pirelli, which was granted an extension to its FIA supply deal following a tender process last year to continue supplying F1 with tyres up to and including 2027, will now find their products being fitted to a range of suppliers from 2026, as the decision has been made to open up the wheel rim supply. The request had been made by several F1 teams in order to select their own rim suppliers, with the FIA carefully evaluating the possibility of the prescribed parts posing a “performance differentiator”. But, having weighed it up, the wheel rims are not expected to result in terms of making efforts to develop the wheel rims in conjunction with their suppliers and, as a result, shouldn’t pose either performance or cost-related concerns.

But the teams can now work on new supply deals – and subsequent commercial agreements – with wheel suppliers. Examples from the recent past include Enkei, OZ Racing, and AppTech – and, with bespoke suppliers, the teams can react to defects or make changes as deemed necessary. There is also the possibility that, despite the opening up of the regulations, teams could all still opt to use BBS rims, given the manufacturer’s current experience at making rims to work with the Pirelli tyre supply. Whichever supplier teams opt for, the rims must still be made according to the technical regulations, with no changes forecast on this front – the plan to reduce from 18-inch to 16-inch wheels having been vetoed by Pirelli.

 

[taperoo2k]

Yes, I think so.

I love Bernie Ecclestone's (?) quip that the fastest way to become a millionaire was to be a billionaire, then buy a Formula One team.

Like Bernie's "Only gamble what you can afford to lose".

Personally, I think F1 is a fine way for Mr Stroll to spend his money. And arguably Mr Newey is one of the best experts in his field in the history of F1.

He's got a group of investors on board, it's not just him paying for everything. If AM have the
best car in 2026? Alonso will absolutely destroy Lance and AM to win that elusive 3rd title.

Perhaps Mr Stroll will invest equally hefty chunks in engine /PU design and build.

It's a works deal with Honda. AM only have that deal because of Honda deciding to leave
the sport, then changed its mind. Hence why RB went down the build its own engines thing.
From what I remember Ford are supplying the hybrid systems and they might also have lent
RB some of its expertise with combustion and turbo designs.

That's the fun for '26 - Which manufacturers have built the best PU's and which ones will need remedial work
as allowed under the regulations. I can see RB producing a PU that's fast but very fragile. I do love
an engine spitting out it's pistons and turbo.

 

[Limejuice]

Wake up! F1's back. Throw away the factor 50. Welcome warming casseroles. Start the Christmas sprouts. Count the shopping days til Winterfest. The nights are drawing in. Find that woolly cardy. Break out the galoshes.

The Netherlands GP looms. The UK telly times will be:

Fri 23 Aug
FP1 - 11:30
FP2 - 15:00

Sat 24 Aug
FP3 - 10:30
Qual - 14:00

Sun 25 Aug
Race - 14:00

Let's hope the unpredictability continues.

 

[MrCurry]

Wake up! F1's back. Throw away the factor 50. Welcome warming casseroles. Start the Christmas sprouts. Count the shopping days til Winterfest. The nights are drawing in. Find that woolly cardy. Break out the galoshes.

Thanks for your always entertaining info updates! Much appreciated and also @1%ers news snippets

A bit of F1 on the telly is just what I need after the summer drought.

 

[spitfire]

Thanks for your always entertaining info updates! Much appreciated and also @1%ers news snippets

A bit of F1 on the telly is just what I need after the summer drought.

Seconded.

 

[1%er]

‘Fiddle brake’ banned: The controversial McLaren braking system banned by the FIA​

In 1998, McLaren fell foul of an in-season rules change as the FIA clamped down on the team’s ‘fiddle brake’, which was discovered by an eagle-eyed photographer. A cunning (and cheap!) slice of ingenuity created by McLaren in 1997 was banned in early ’98, just as its MP4/13 had begun life in dominant fashion, with a second brake pedal having been discovered in the cockpit.

McLaren experiment with brake steer system on MP4/12
In 1997, McLaren came up with the idea for a unique brake-steer system, later dubbed a ‘fiddle brake’ by Ferrari‘s Ross Brawn, in which the drivers could brake just one of the rear wheels at a time, reducing understeer dramatically. It was a simple concept, with the independently operated rear brakes allowing the drivers to get back on the power earlier while continuing to brake the appropriate wheel behind them, but it was quickly discovered – although not by the FIA. McLaren told the story of the controversial technology on its website in 2017, where McLaren’s chief engineer Steve Nichols recounted how the idea came about. “I had this idea to put a rear brake on in the corners, to sort of dial out the understeer,” he said, speaking about the 1997 MP4/12. Paddy Lowe was head of R&D at the time, and this would be considered an R&D project. So I told him I wanted to try this thing where we have an extra pedal in the car, and we put the right-rear or left-rear brake on to balance the car. Eventually, he sanctioned the project. It sat on the test truck for months waiting to be tested, and finally, we’d exhausted every other test item. At 5 pm or something, at a Silverstone test, they said let’s try that brake thing!”

Chief test team engineer Tim Goss said that, on the regulation side, McLaren was confident of the legality of the braking system, and that it had been a very easy idea to implement as an extra master cylinder and a length of brake hose was fitted to a single caliper – the driver would then activate the system by swapping over to the extra brake pedal at his feet after using the normal brakes to slow the car for a corner. Race driver David Coulthard initially was against the idea, believing it to be “weird”, but Mika Hakkinen was up for trying out the system and, according to Nichols, it was a straight-forward addition of a pedal in the pedal box for the Finn as he was a left-foot braker. Almost instantly, Hakkinen went half a second quicker, even with the system only set up for a rudimentary experiment – meaning more work would be put into refining the system.

With Coulthard struggling to use a hand clutch, the Scot required a fourth brake pedal as McLaren began using the system for Grand Prix weekends. While starting to realise its potential, the Woking-based squad was still only at the point of being able to run the system braking one caliper at a time – selecting which rear brake caliper to link to the extra caliper based on the characteristics of each circuit on the calendar. “We were racing with it on just one side,” Goss explained. “So we’d pick which side we’d want to do, biased mainly to long high-speed corners where we had understeer. As you applied the brake mid-corner it would brake one of the rear wheels, and as you didn’t want to slow the car down, you’d open the throttle to compensate. As the drivers got more used to it they could drive the thing harder and harder, which reduced the understeer. You had the added benefit that you didn’t have to carry so much front wing on corner entry, so you ended up with a more stable car.”

Picking up the story, Coulthard said it required both he and Hakkinen to figure out how to drive a bit differently. “We had to learn how to work with it because you had to accelerate while you braked, otherwise you just locked the wheel,” he said. “You could feel it was an advantage because it yawed the car. So instead of riding over the front tyre, you could rotate the car without having to put steering lock on. And steering lock affects the aerodynamics quite a lot, so there was an advantage aerodynamically in having that. We could use it also to control a bit of wheel-spin on the inside wheel, coming out of tight corners. Independently, Mika and I both worked that out. The theory had been proven in tanks and things like that, but actually doing it at speed out on the track was always going to be a bit different!”

McLaren, who didn’t have the most competitive season in 1997, showed great flashes of speed in the latter half of the season, particularly after the system was introduced. For instance, in Austria, Mika Hakkinen was less than a tenth off pole position on the front row, but unreliability meant he couldn’t turn his first-lap lead into a significant result. At the following race, at the Nurburgring, Hakkinen did take pole and McLaren led with a 1-2 early on, only for both to retire with mechanical issues. But these performances had already begun to pique media interest and it was only a matter of time until someone figured out what McLaren was up to.

How McLaren’s ‘fiddle brake’ system was rumbled
F1 Racing magazine photographer Darren Heath, going through his photos from the Austrian Grand Prix, spotted that a rear brake disc on the McLaren was glowing – indicating brake application – at a point where the drivers shouldn’t be braking, such as accelerating out of corners. Brainstorming with his colleague and editor Matt Bishop – later to work with McLaren’s communications department – Heath came up with the idea of an extra brake, but how to prove such a system was in place? This meant trying to get near the McLaren and looking inside the cockpit. With both retiring at the Nurburgring, McLaren’s woes were to be added to as Heath approached the cars behind the barriers to attempt to get photos of the footwells. Coulthard had left his steering wheel on, blocking Heath from getting the shot he wanted, but Hakkinen’s steering wheel-less car gave the photographer enough room to place his camera inside and get the decisive image that proved the existence of an additional pedal.



The images Heath captured, and the resulting story, was F1 Racing’s big scoop for its November 1997 edition – the hidden brake system had been rumbled just two races after being introduced. With the existence of the system becoming public, chief designer Neil Oatley remembered how discussions with the FIA began to play out. “We didn’t check the system’s legality with the FIA before racing it because we never thought there was any question about it,” he said, as quoted by Motorsport Magazine. “It came to light at the Austrian GP, I think, when some pictures of the car showed the inside rear disc glowing and not the front disc. That alerted people. Then, at the Nurburgring, both our cars had failures and stopped just past the pits. A photographer took a picture inside the cockpit of our pedal arrangement. The FIA looked at the system and couldn’t see any reason for us not to use it, so we continued to for the rest of that year.”

McLaren finished fourth in the Constructors’ Championship in what had been a modestly competitive season, with its 1-2 finish at the season finale at Jerez coming about as Jacques Villeneuve and Michael Schumacher collided in their infamous title decider. But the hullabaloo over McLaren’s brake system would really kick off in early 1998 as the MP4/13 was an entirely different animal.

McLaren’s MP4/13 dominates in Australia
McLaren had signed famed designer Adrian Newey as technical director for 1998, with the British engineer overseeing the first car designed to the new narrow-body regulations. The innovative fiddle brake was included as part of the original concept, with a switchable system designed onto the car to allow the drivers to switch between the left and right rear brake caliper offering an advantage for every corner at every circuit. At the season opener in Australia, Hakkinen and Coulthard were untouchable. Taking first and second on the starting grid, the duo lapped every single other car – that was despite a little bit of intra-team drama as Coulthard ceded position to Hakkinen following an erroneous pitstop from the Finn. Yes, you’ve read that correctly. McLaren lapped the field, despite Hakkinen driving through the pits unnecessarily and Coulthard then slowing down to let him back through.

Unsurprisingly, this dominance resulted in drama as Ferrari lodged a protest over the braking system on the MP4/13 ahead of the Brazilian Grand Prix. The discussions focused on whether or not the system was a steering device or a braking device, given the drivers were able to apply the brakes on the rear wheels independently – the assist on turning and traction being the primary use of the system, rather than the braking itself. With the stewards ruling the system could be viewed as illegal for Brazil, McLaren didn’t use it at Interlagos – but still produced a 1-2 finish and a minute ahead of Michael Schumacher’s Ferrari. “The system was remarkably powerful,” Newey said of the fiddle brake system. “Its worth was circuit-dependent, obviously, but, on average, I would say it was worth 0.3sec per lap – that’s probably conservative, actually. The biggest effect on set-up was that you could run the car more ‘understeery’, more stable, so that you were less likely to have entry oversteer problems. And you could have better traction because you’d set the car up more towards understeer.”

“Nobody cottoned on to what we were doing,” Nichols explained. “Williams punted something into Charlie Whiting [of the FIA] that was all electronically controlled where they would turn off all the brakes except say the right rear, and just apply that one. And Charlie immediately said, ‘No, I think that’s going to be kind of unsafe!’ Various people were putting in various proposals. Ferrari claimed it was four-wheel steering, they sent the FIA pictures of tanks where they brake one track and that’s how they steer, but they still didn’t know what we were doing.”

continued below

 

[1%er]

The battle over the legality of McLaren’s fiddle brake
Once the rival teams had figured out exactly what McLaren was up to, the FIA moved to ban the system, much to team boss Ron Dennis’ chagrin as the system had been decreed as legal over the winter during discussions with the FIA and Whiting. “It was banned on the basis of four-wheel steering although, obviously, it was not realigning the wheels,” Goss explained. “We called it brake-steer, which was unfortunate when we tried to argue that it wasn’t anything to do with steering! It was a bad choice of name from ourselves. Then Ross Brawn coined the term “fiddle-brake” which is used by cross-country trial cars for a handbrake that works on each of the rear wheels to try and turn the car.”

While McLaren’s system was undoubtedly simply a brake, the fact that its intended use couldn’t be argued to be primarily used for braking and was, instead, a steering aid, resulted in the grounds for the FIA to ban it. To tighten up the wording of the technical regulations, the FIA refined Article 10.4.1 from “Four-wheel steering is not permitted,” to “Any steering system which permits the re-alignment of more than two wheels is not permitted.” Article 11.1 of the 1998 Technical Regulations is amusingly simplistic compared to its 1999 iteration. The 1998 wording simply states: “All cars must have a brake system which has at least two separate circuits operated by the same pedal. This system must be designed so that if leakage or failure occurs in one circuit, the pedal shall still operate the brakes on at least two wheels.”

Realising this wasn’t prescriptive enough in what was permitted on the braking system, the 1999 regulations for the same Article are as follows:
11.1.1 All cars must be equipped with one brake system which has two separate hydraulic circuits operated by one pedal, one circuit operating on the two front wheels and the other on the two rear wheels. This system must be designed so that if a failure occurs in one circuit the pedal will still operate the brakes in the other.

11.1.2 The brake system must be designed in order that brake caliper pressures in each circuit are the same at all times.

11.1.3 Any powered device which is capable of altering the configuration of the brake system whilst it is under pressure is forbidden.

11.1.4 Any change to, or modulation of, the brake system whilst the car is moving must be made by the drivers direct physical input, may not be pre-set and must be under his complete control at all times.

Other teams had complained about the cost of developing such a system, part of the factor in the decision to ban it, which was a source of amusement for McLaren as the initial version had been cobbled together with some spare parts in the back of their test truck. “I remember Alain Prost, who had a team at the time, saying we’ve got to ban this because it will cost millions in development,” Nichols said. “And it was fifty quid’s worth of parts that we already had in the truck!”

Newey, who hadn’t been part of McLaren in the early days of the idea, was nonetheless left frustrated by what he saw as indecisiveness from the governing body over the legality of the system. “The issue of who decides the legality of technical innovations in F1 was never settled; if anything the opposite,” he said. “It was the first of a whole host of examples where the FIA has said that in its opinion something is legal, so you build it and race it, then someone else says that in their opinion it isn’t, and you have to take it off again. Which is quite a frustrating business, as you can imagine. I have sympathy with the FIA because it is possible for a team to try to hoodwink it. But the net result is that teams sometimes spend a load of money in the belief that something is OK, only to find that it is subsequently banned.”

 

[1%er]

Red Bull's 'Sergio Perez replacement' unmasked with Christian Horner under pressure​

Daniel Ricciardo is reportedly the most ‘likely’ driver to replace Sergio Perez at Red Bull next season with Liam Lawson and Yuki Tsunoda forming the VCARB driver pairing. Team principal Christian Horner is feeling the pressure heading into the final 10 races after making the unexpected decision to afford Perez the remainder of the campaign. After failing to record a top-six finish in his last eight races, most expected the Mexican to face the sack during the summer break. Instead, Perez will see out the remainder of the campaign, but without a drastic resurgence, the six-time Grand Prix winner is still facing the exit door this winter. The conundrum of who will replace him at Red Bull has proved a difficult one to unravel though.

According to a report from F1 paddock insider Lawrence Barretto, Ricciardo is the man most likely to step up to the plate. He stresses Plan A is to keep Perez but that their back-up plan would see the Aussie replace him. That would also see Lawson moving into the RB seat alongside Tsunoda. Red Bull would then reassess for 2026, with all of Ricciardo, Tsunoda and Lawson having the chance to prove they deserve to be in the garage opposite Verstappen. It is possible that Red Bull could swap Ricciardo and Lawson around for 2026 or they could part ways with either to bring through another junior driver. Thankfully for Horner and Helmut Marko, Red Bull also have a steady stream of talent in the pipeline. Isack Hadjar is currently leading the Formula Two championship by a commanding margin and is set to be the team’s test and reserve driver next season.

Meanwhile, in Formula Three, 17-year-old Brit Arvid Lindblad is impressing. The teenager has already claimed four victories this season and is very highly rated by Marko, who implied earlier this summer that he may be in line for some F1 experience sooner than expected. For Ricciardo, the situation is clear. He has an opportunity to return to a frontrunning team. However, if he is to do so then the 35-year-old will need to improve relative to team-mate Yuki Tsunoda. The Aussie trails his VCARB colleague 22-12 in the intra-team head-to-head as things stand.

[I can understand why Red Bull would go for Danny Rick above Tsunoda, but I'm not sure if Danny has done enough in his currant seat. The big money in F1 is the constructors championship and I'm not sure Danny Ric would do much better that Perez]

 

[Sasaferrato]

Yes, I think so.

I love Bernie Ecclestone's (?) quip that the fastest way to become a millionaire was to be a billionaire, then buy a Formula One team.

Personally, I think F1 is a fine way for Mr Stroll to spend his money. And arguably Mr Newey is one of the best experts in his field in the history of F1.

Sort of like 'J' Class yacht racing. The land equivalent was standing under a cold shower tearing up £50.00 notes.

 

[taperoo2k]

Red Bull's 'Sergio Perez replacement' unmasked with Christian Horner under pressure​

Daniel Ricciardo is reportedly the most ‘likely’ driver to replace Sergio Perez at Red Bull next season with Liam Lawson and Yuki Tsunoda forming the VCARB driver pairing. Team principal Christian Horner is feeling the pressure heading into the final 10 races after making the unexpected decision to afford Perez the remainder of the campaign. After failing to record a top-six finish in his last eight races, most expected the Mexican to face the sack during the summer break. Instead, Perez will see out the remainder of the campaign, but without a drastic resurgence, the six-time Grand Prix winner is still facing the exit door this winter. The conundrum of who will replace him at Red Bull has proved a difficult one to unravel though.

According to a report from F1 paddock insider Lawrence Barretto, Ricciardo is the man most likely to step up to the plate. He stresses Plan A is to keep Perez but that their back-up plan would see the Aussie replace him. That would also see Lawson moving into the RB seat alongside Tsunoda. Red Bull would then reassess for 2026, with all of Ricciardo, Tsunoda and Lawson having the chance to prove they deserve to be in the garage opposite Verstappen. It is possible that Red Bull could swap Ricciardo and Lawson around for 2026 or they could part ways with either to bring through another junior driver. Thankfully for Horner and Helmut Marko, Red Bull also have a steady stream of talent in the pipeline. Isack Hadjar is currently leading the Formula Two championship by a commanding margin and is set to be the team’s test and reserve driver next season.

Meanwhile, in Formula Three, 17-year-old Brit Arvid Lindblad is impressing. The teenager has already claimed four victories this season and is very highly rated by Marko, who implied earlier this summer that he may be in line for some F1 experience sooner than expected. For Ricciardo, the situation is clear. He has an opportunity to return to a frontrunning team. However, if he is to do so then the 35-year-old will need to improve relative to team-mate Yuki Tsunoda. The Aussie trails his VCARB colleague 22-12 in the intra-team head-to-head as things stand.

[I can understand why Red Bull would go for Danny Rick above Tsunoda, but I'm not sure if Danny has done enough in his currant seat. The big money in F1 is the constructors championship and I'm not sure Danny Ric would do much better that Perez]

I think Danny Ric has done ok since returning to the RB fold. If he gets the RB seat then I think he'll know it's his last chance with a big team so that will probably
motivate him. RB will be in a right pickle if Max decides to leave to a different team for 2026.

Perez is inconsistent, which was fine whilst Redbull had the dominant car. But it looks like 2025 will see McLaren, Mercedes and Ferrari right up
there. They'll need a rear gunner for Max who can hold the other drivers up or can win races if Max can't.

 

[Limejuice]

It's a wet and windy weekend at the track.

Should be fun.

 

[1%er]

Dutch Grand Prix Free Practice 1 - Results​

Pos	Driver	Team	Time	Gap	Laps
1	Lando Norris	McLaren	1:12.322s		16
2	Max Verstappen	Red Bull	1:12.523s	+ 0.201s	12
3	Lewis Hamilton	Mercedes	1:13.006s	+ 0.684s	12
4	Carlos Sainz	Ferrari	1:13.074s	+ 0.752s	14
5	George Russell	Mercedes	1:13.142s	+ 0.820s	16
6	Alexander Albon	Williams	1:13.159s	+ 0.837s	13
7	Oscar Piastri	McLaren	1:13.230s	+ 0.908s	13
8	Nico Hülkenberg	Haas	1:13.563s	+ 1.241s	17
9	Kevin Magnussen	Haas	1:13.597s	+ 1.275s	14
10	Zhou Guanyu	Sauber	1:13.965s	+ 1.643s	14
11	Lance Stroll	Aston Martin	1:14.151s	+ 1.829s	13
12	Sergio Pérez	Red Bull	1:14.279s	+ 1.957s	11
13	Charles Leclerc	Ferrari	1:14.306s	+ 1.984s	14
14	Yuki Tsunoda	RB	1:14.418s	+ 2.096s	12
15	Fernando Alonso	Aston Martin	1:14.467s	+ 2.145s	14
16	Robert Shwartzman	Sauber	1:14.658s	+ 2.336s	15
17	Logan Sargeant	Williams	1:15.605s	+ 3.283s	11
18	Esteban Ocon	Alpine	1:15.796s	+ 3.474s	14
19	Daniel Ricciardo	RB	1:16.231s	+ 3.909s	14
20	Pierre Gasly	Alpine	1:22.036s	+ 9.714s	8

 

[1%er]

The passing on August 23 of two great racers​

Their paths intertwined, but as determined racers, Guy Ligier and Didier Pironi took very different routes to success in Formula 1.

The former hung up his helmet early on to blend his passion with his business acumen and set up his own team, while the latter applied his talent and fierce determination exclusively behind the wheel.

Success ensued for both, but tragedy remained anchored to Pironi's life.

Forced out of F1 after a horrific accident in 1982, the Frenchman put his skills to use in offshore powerboat racing. But this would lead to his tragic death on this day in 1987 in an event held off the shores of the Isle of Wight.

Guy Ligier's life was lived to the full, but coincidently he also died on this day, August 23, in 2015.

 

[1%er]

Problems for Haas​

Uralkali - Haas' former title sponsor, has reportedly asked the Dutch court to seize the team's F1 cars and spare parts at the Dutch Grand Prix, which would prevent them from racing in Monza next weekend. The Russian potash fertiliser company became the title sponsor of the North Carolina-based squad in 2021, and played a significant role in bringing Nikita Mazepin into the team.
However, after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Haas terminated their partnership with the company. Uralkali, who had already paid a large chunk of their sponsorship fee up front, took issue with this.

Now they are taking action. According to a reports, appraisers were present in the Zandvoort paddock on Thursday to calculate a valuation for Haas' cars and equipment. Uralkali are requesting that there be a full seizure of the team's assets after the Dutch Grand Prix comes to a close. This would prevent the team from racing in Monza the following weekend.

Addressing the reports, a Haas spokesperson said: "Haas intends to pay all amounts due to Uralkali pursuant to the arbitration award, and there is no dispute over the amounts due," it read. "Haas has been working with its lawyers to ensure that the payment complies with all relevant US, EU, UK and Swiss sanctions laws and regulations. We will continue to work with Uralkali in the coming days to definitively resolve this matter."

Should Haas fail to make it to the Italian Grand Prix, it could have a disastrous impact on the team's Constructors' Championship battle with VCARB. The American outfit trail Red Bull's sister team by seven points with 10 races remaining with an impressive P6 finish on the cards should Nico Hulkenberg and Kevin Magnussen outshine their rivals after the summer break.