The long overdue publicocrapometer thread!

DanielPT · Post by **DanielPT** » 11 Oct 2011, 17:49

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/95269

Absolutely not, sire! Aldo Costa was clearly no scape-goat. He was just blamed for Ferrari's lack of success in recent years.

Domenicali wrote:I've never seen him as a scape-goat, but it's also true that the responsibility for a car's project in the end is the technical director's. There were internal reasons: if the players don't get along with the manager, changing 11 players gets difficult.

DanielPT · Post by **DanielPT** » 22 Dec 2011, 17:13

Warning: It's about Montezemolo.

What? Ferrari wants an increase in F1 testing because it wants to help youngsters? How noble!

Obviously the idea of increasing testing to give youngsters careers a push is a good one, I am afraid that it is not what motivates Ferrari in their quest. Neither are those other reasons he pointed...

Autosport wrote:Di Montezemolo also questioned the effectiveness of such rigid test restrictions in terms of cost saving, pointing out that Ferrari agreed to restrictions because of the financial struggles of the smaller teams in F1. Ferrari has also had to invest heavily in new technology such as simulators to replace track time.

The simulator is one area in which Ferrari is believed to be a little less advanced than some of its rivals, despite making huge progress in recent years. That means that it's likely that the team would benefit from increased running in terms of car development. Despite that, di Montzemolo denied that Ferrari's on-site track, Fiorano, would be a major advantage as it is no longer suitable for F1 testing.

It is Luca di Montezemolo playing at politics again...

AndreaModa · Post by **AndreaModa** » 22 Dec 2011, 18:54

The thing is, I bet they have a point about the simulators costing so much, because I know for a fact that Marussia don't have one and are using McLaren's as are Force India I believe. I bet Toro Rosso are using Red Bull's too. How is this fair when those teams could pootle over to Silverstone one weekend and get a proper bit of running done during the European season, and get far more accurate data in real life than what they can get from some computer software. It seems like trading one expensive thing for another, and as far as I'm concerned is just plain dumb. Obviously there needs to be a limit to testing, but that limit should be set way higher than what it is now, because at the moment, its daft, it's exactly the same as last year except, oh wait we have one less test session before the year so we can have on in the middle! It's nuts! :evil:

Post by **mario** » 22 Dec 2011, 21:20

AndreaModa wrote:The thing is, I bet they have a point about the simulators costing so much, because I know for a fact that Marussia don't have one and are using McLaren's as are Force India I believe. I bet Toro Rosso are using Red Bull's too. How is this fair when those teams could pootle over to Silverstone one weekend and get a proper bit of running done during the European season, and get far more accurate data in real life than what they can get from some computer software. It seems like trading one expensive thing for another, and as far as I'm concerned is just plain dumb. Obviously there needs to be a limit to testing, but that limit should be set way higher than what it is now, because at the moment, its daft, it's exactly the same as last year except, oh wait we have one less test session before the year so we can have on in the middle! It's nuts!

Moving a test session from the beginning to the middle of the season does seem like a clumsy compromise, all things considered. I know that one alternative that has been raised would be copying the Moto GP test model where a test session is held at the same track after a race weekend - that proposal seemed to have a fair amount of popular support from several quarters (from the teams to Bernie and the FIA), since it would mean that most of the major costs (transportation etc.) have already been accounted for. Somehow, though, the idea seems to have got bogged down in the usual inter team arguments, which is a bit of a shame.

noisebox · Post by **noisebox** » 22 Dec 2011, 23:50

mario wrote:
AndreaModa wrote:The thing is, I bet they have a point about the simulators costing so much, because I know for a fact that Marussia don't have one and are using McLaren's as are Force India I believe. I bet Toro Rosso are using Red Bull's too. How is this fair when those teams could pootle over to Silverstone one weekend and get a proper bit of running done during the European season, and get far more accurate data in real life than what they can get from some computer software. It seems like trading one expensive thing for another, and as far as I'm concerned is just plain dumb. Obviously there needs to be a limit to testing, but that limit should be set way higher than what it is now, because at the moment, its daft, it's exactly the same as last year except, oh wait we have one less test session before the year so we can have on in the middle! It's nuts!

Moving a test session from the beginning to the middle of the season does seem like a clumsy compromise, all things considered. I know that one alternative that has been raised would be copying the Moto GP test model where a test session is held at the same track after a race weekend - that proposal seemed to have a fair amount of popular support from several quarters (from the teams to Bernie and the FIA), since it would mean that most of the major costs (transportation etc.) have already been accounted for. Somehow, though, the idea seems to have got bogged down in the usual inter team arguments, which is a bit of a shame.

Why not extend tyre allocations for the Friday of each GP weekend and mandate that each team runs a third driver for at least 50% of the races?

Post by **Londoner** » 30 Dec 2011, 09:30

This is just asking for trouble! :lol:

TomWazzleshaw · Post by **TomWazzleshaw** » 30 Dec 2011, 09:34

East Londoner wrote:This is just asking for trouble!

I was about to post that same article myself :lol:

AdrianSutil · Post by **AdrianSutil** » 30 Dec 2011, 16:59

Wizzie wrote:
East Londoner wrote:This is just asking for trouble!

I was about to post that same article myself

Christ! He's tempting fate. Especially as Caterham are supposed to make a big jump forward next year.

Klon · Post by **Klon** » 30 Dec 2011, 17:32

Well, perhaps he knows they have signed Rubens for 2012. If so, Williams won't get worse. If not, then there is no hope left.

DanielPT · Post by **DanielPT** » 30 Dec 2011, 17:36

Klon wrote:Well, perhaps he knows they have signed Rubens for 2012. If so, Williams won't get worse. If not, then there is no hope left.

The belief you place on Barrichello is what warms my heart and gives me hope for Mankind. Seriously, I wish more people were like you!

Captain Hammer · Post by **Captain Hammer** » 31 Dec 2011, 07:26

AdrianSutil wrote:
Wizzie wrote:
East Londoner wrote:This is just asking for trouble!

I was about to post that same article myself

Christ! He's tempting fate. Especially as Caterham are supposed to make a big jump forward next year.

Well, Maldonado's chin should give them at least six points - one Alonso - of downforce.

Peter · Post by **Peter** » 09 Jan 2012, 03:43

Six tenths, Hammer.

Maldonado has a point. Williams have probably been struggling so much this season, due to a similar reason Marussia were. Major technical restructuring within the team. Now they're on steady ground, and now that Exhaust Blown Diffusers are banned, and they now have a Renault engine, things are already looking better for Williams.

RonDenisDeletraz · Post by **RonDenisDeletraz** » 09 Jan 2012, 04:25

This^^^

Captain Hammer · Post by **Captain Hammer** » 09 Jan 2012, 07:53

Peter wrote:Six tenths, Hammer.

Downforce is not measured in tenths of a second, Peter. It's measured in points. One point is roughly equivalent to one tenth of a second.

RonDenisDeletraz · Post by **RonDenisDeletraz** » 09 Jan 2012, 08:01

I don't understand

Salamander · Post by **Salamander** » 09 Jan 2012, 15:15

Captain Hammer wrote:
Peter wrote:Six tenths, Hammer.

Downforce is not measured in tenths of a second, Peter. It's measured in points. One point is roughly equivalent to one tenth of a second.

... what? Downforce is measured in pounds. :?:

Peter · Post by **Peter** » 09 Jan 2012, 15:53

Captain Hammer wrote:
Peter wrote:Six tenths, Hammer.

Downforce is not measured in tenths of a second, Peter. It's measured in points. One point is roughly equivalent to one tenth of a second.

When you mentioned Alonso, I thought you were mentioning how Alonso is said to be worth another 6 tenths. My bad.

Post by **mario** » 09 Jan 2012, 16:54

BlindCaveSalamander wrote:
Captain Hammer wrote:
Peter wrote:Six tenths, Hammer.

Downforce is not measured in tenths of a second, Peter. It's measured in points. One point is roughly equivalent to one tenth of a second.

... what? Downforce is measured in pounds.

True, but the teams are never going to directly state the performance benefit of a particular component given the competitive nature of the sport. Using a slightly vague expression like "points of downforce" can indicate that they are bringing parts to a car which will yield a performance benefit without giving away exactly how much of a benefit it'll yield in terms of increased downforce.
[As an aside, I would say that strictly speaking downforce should be measured in Newtons rather than pounds or kilograms - what you are measuring is a force (negative lift) rather than an increase in mass of the body.]

RonDenisDeletraz · Post by **RonDenisDeletraz** » 09 Jan 2012, 23:08

eurobrun wrote:I don't understand

FMecha · Post by **FMecha** » 10 Jan 2012, 12:02

eurobrun wrote:
eurobrun wrote:I don't understand

No need to post like this again if you are still not understand. :roll:

RonDenisDeletraz · Post by **RonDenisDeletraz** » 11 Jan 2012, 00:12

Sorry, but I was hoping someone would explain it.

TomWazzleshaw · Post by **TomWazzleshaw** » 16 Jan 2012, 02:33

No, I can't quite explain it either.

They have more fundamental issues to deal with before making a deal like that (i.e. designing a half-decent car for starters :lol:

)

Peter · Post by **Peter** » 16 Jan 2012, 03:39

Wizzie wrote:No, I can't quite explain it either.

They have more fundamental issues to deal with before making a deal like that (i.e. designing a half-decent car for starters )

What's so wrong with that? Sure, it's not really the kind of negoiations with large firms that we were expecting, but it's a step forward at least. A good pitcrew nowadays really makes the difference between 10th and 17th place.

TomWazzleshaw · Post by **TomWazzleshaw** » 16 Jan 2012, 03:45

Peter wrote:
Wizzie wrote:No, I can't quite explain it either.

They have more fundamental issues to deal with before making a deal like that (i.e. designing a half-decent car for starters )

What's so wrong with that? Sure, it's not really the kind of negoiations with large firms that we were expecting, but it's a step forward at least. A good pitcrew nowadays really makes the difference between 10th and 17th place.

But not when they're no guarantees that the car will be any good and with the potential of having one of the weaker driver lineups in the field.

DanielPT · Post by **DanielPT** » 16 Jan 2012, 11:52

Wizzie wrote:
Peter wrote:
Wizzie wrote:No, I can't quite explain it either.

They have more fundamental issues to deal with before making a deal like that (i.e. designing a half-decent car for starters )

What's so wrong with that? Sure, it's not really the kind of negoiations with large firms that we were expecting, but it's a step forward at least. A good pitcrew nowadays really makes the difference between 10th and 17th place.

But not when they're no guarantees that the car will be any good and with the potential of having one of the weaker driver lineups in the field.

That might be the difference between staying in front of Caterham or not! You never know!

DanielPT · Post by **DanielPT** » 20 Jan 2012, 18:54

The place for this is not exactly here but I could not find somewhere better to put this. Anyway, here are the latest trend for 2 different sites and authors.

The first one comes from BBC formula 1 F1 Blog author, Andrew Benson in the 2th January 2012 and is about Williams available choices for the second seat:

Andrew Benson wrote:These include Barrichello, German Adrian Sutil, Brazilian Bruno Senna, Toro Rosso rejects Jaime Alguersuari and Sebastien Buemi and Italian Vitantonio Liuzzi.

The second one comes from Eurosport's Tech Talk (written by Will Gray) in the 19th January 2012 and is about Bruno Senna:

Will Gray talking about wrote:In his second GP2 season in 2008 he did manage to string good results together. Winning the title would have put him in a category alongside Nico Rosberg and Lewis Hamilton, both former winners themselves, helping him to slide aside that name and put himself there on merit alone. Instead, he finished second to Giorgio Pantano, a veteran F1 reject.

I notice a new trend coming up!

TomWazzleshaw · Post by **TomWazzleshaw** » 23 Jan 2012, 00:50

I'm not entirely sure if this qualifies but it's damn sure close to it

DanielPT · Post by **DanielPT** » 23 Jan 2012, 22:31

Wizzie wrote:I'm not entirely sure if this qualifies but it's damn sure close to it

If he is right about it and there is nothing that says he doesn't, then the CFD is a good base to build a car. People only need to complement it with some windtunnel. And that is precisely the approach of the other 11 teams!

Wirth was clearly ahead of his time.

Aerospeed · Post by **Aerospeed** » 24 Jan 2012, 01:52

Wizzie wrote:I'm not entirely sure if this qualifies but it's damn sure close to it

Well no friggin way... of course the car needs to be more aerodynamic

Should I rename Pat Symonds "Captain Obvious" now?

Peter · Post by **Peter** » 29 Jan 2012, 00:02

JeremyMcClean wrote:
Wizzie wrote:I'm not entirely sure if this qualifies but it's damn sure close to it

Well no friggin way... of course the car needs to be more aerodynamic

Should I rename Pat Symonds "Captain Obvious" now?

No, he is basically saying that mechanically, the car was capable of a lot more than just bringing up the tail end of the field, but it had the aerodynamics of a brick, which held it back a lot. H'es basically saying that if they sort out their aero department, which they can probably do now considering that they are using windtunnels to design the car, the car will already have everything underneath the bodywork working well for it, and so they will have a big improvement.

Post by **Londoner** » 01 Jul 2012, 17:30

BUMP

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/100854

Indeed you may have done so Reverend, but it counts for precisely sod-all if you still drive like a tool. :roll:

RonDenisDeletraz · Post by **RonDenisDeletraz** » 01 Jul 2012, 23:27

It dosen't matter how much you like the tyres, if you crash out every race you are still not going to get points. :roll:

FullMetalJack · Post by **FullMetalJack** » 01 Jul 2012, 23:32

eurobrun wrote:It dosen't matter how much you like the tyres, if you crash out every race you are still not going to get points.

Precisely!

Pastor, Y U NO COMPLETE RACES?

Aerospeed · Post by **Aerospeed** » 02 Jul 2012, 00:45

redbulljack14 wrote:
eurobrun wrote:It dosen't matter how much you like the tyres, if you crash out every race you are still not going to get points.

Precisely!

Pastor, Y U NO COMPLETE RACES?

Five bucks says Maldonado crashes himself out of points three more times by the end of the year... And gets second place in ROTY

EDIT - sigh...

Post by **Londoner** » 23 Aug 2012, 15:31

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/101874

Bottas takes the Captain Obvious award for this fascinating observation.

FullMetalJack · Post by **FullMetalJack** » 23 Aug 2012, 16:39

East Londoner wrote:http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/101874

Bottas takes the Captain Obvious award for this fascinating observation.

In other news, studies show that fruit and vegetables are indeed good for you!

Phoenix · Post by **Phoenix** » 23 Aug 2012, 20:20

East Londoner wrote:http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/101874

Bottas takes the Captain Obvious award for this fascinating observation.

Someone had to say it. For me, they have the 5th best car on the field.

RonDenisDeletraz · Post by **RonDenisDeletraz** » 24 Aug 2012, 04:15

East Londoner wrote:http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/101874

Bottas takes the Captain Obvious award for this fascinating observation.

No shite Sherlock. :roll:

But Williams could be doing even worse if he was driving one of their cars.

Post by **DemocalypseNow** » 24 Aug 2012, 19:42

Even though this isn't F1 related, it is publicocrap. And pretty dire publicocrap at that.

Microsoft wrote:That’s why the new Microsoft logo takes its inspiration from our product design principles while drawing upon the heritage of our brand values, fonts and colors.

ITS A GENERIC SERIF FONT AND FOUR F***ING PLAIN SQUARES!!!! PRODUCT DESIGN PRINCIPLES?! HERITAGE?! IF YOU MEAN YOUR PRODUCTS HAVE NO IMAGINATION WHATSOEVER PUT INTO THEM THEN I SUPPOSE YOU'RE RIGHT!!!!

Phoenix · Post by **Phoenix** » 24 Aug 2012, 21:01

kostas22 wrote:Even though this isn't F1 related, it is publicocrap. And pretty dire publicocrap at that.

Microsoft wrote:That’s why the new Microsoft logo takes its inspiration from our product design principles while drawing upon the heritage of our brand values, fonts and colors.

ITS A GENERIC SERIF FONT AND FOUR F***ING PLAIN SQUARES!!!! PRODUCT DESIGN PRINCIPLES?! HERITAGE?! IF YOU MEAN YOUR PRODUCTS HAVE NO IMAGINATION WHATSOEVER PUT INTO THEM THEN I SUPPOSE YOU'RE RIGHT!!!!

I think your post is more fitted for the "Rantbox" thread :lol: