Realistically, it was only going to be a matter of time until they got aournd the ECU. And Craig, there is nothing I love more then a good conspiracy theory, Especially coming out of McLaren!

Because what a speed limiter does, is to limit/reduce/controll the engine RPM when you step on the throttle. It will never engage the brake. So when activated, it will indeed slow you down when you are going over the speed limit, only because your RPM is too high/reduced. But that can never be as quick as using a brake pedal.

Even they can have a automatic braking system for entering the pit lane, I doubt that would be much useful. The problem entering the pitlane is, depend on your current speed, at which point you must start to brake so that you going exactly at the limited speed when your are crossing the line. Have an automatic brake button won’t solve the problem, as you still can push the button too early or to late, thus lose time or get a penaulty. That is the main problem. 

Or possibly land on an oilfield in Texas.  Which sounds a great deal until you find out that you can’t buy the rights to any oil beneath your property in Texas – you get the surface and that’s it!

I’ve always liked Ted. He seems to have an enthusiasm for the sport but is also willing to say "that race was boring" which isn’t something ITV normally admit to.

Cheers

"References to "selling the Brooklyn Bridge" abound in American culture, sometimes as examples of rural gullibility but more often in connection with an idea that strains credulity. For example, "If you believe that, I have a wonderful bargain for you…" References are often nowadays more oblique, such as "I could sell you some lovely riverside property in Brooklyn … ". George C. Parker and William McCloundy are two early 20th-century con-men who had (allegedly) successfully perpetrated this scam on unwitting tourists.[1]"

AJ…At the start of the race, the car accelerates better if there is no wheel spin or very little wheel spin. The best way to achieve minimum wheel spin is to have a low revving engine. But because a low revving engine will soon be overtaken by a higher revving one, it only makes sense to return back to your high revving ability. Its not like the teams are cheating, rather they are just using those 90 seconds margin as they deem fit. There is still no traction control in the cars anyway.

Something fishy going on there methinks.

Also, Ron seems to be taking the credit of "rebuilding" Heikki this year – blaming him for mistakes isn’t going to help with that unless he explained to him that it was for the good of the team…

Would be interesting to know if this results in a huge change in performance – sufficient enough to spin the car if it changed halfway round a corner.

Have we seen any incar footage of Heikki hitting the pitlane limiter?  If not, then McLaren’s willingness to offer that explanation may be because they actually have something "worse" to hide – perhaps he hit some kind of engine remap button instead which slowed the car down?

If this was even remotely dodgy then Ron may be keen to keep it quiet.  Or I could just be reading too much into it!

It doesn’t necessarily give any team an advantage, but the purpose of the traction and launch control bans was to make the driver rather than the software responsible for getting the car off the line as quickly as possible.

By using these optimised start settings the teams seem to have found a way around that – and it must be a fairly effective way around it as well, because the FIA have tried to stop them.

Ps. Keith, the link to Ted Kravitz article is incorrect. You are linking to the admin page of your blog

I am not sure about Ted – One hot day does not make a summer and while this is a good insight, I feel he lacks a certain technical prowess. I read his note book from each Grand Prix and it sounds like a work experience boy writing up his notes for revision.

Bridge? Do you mean London Bridge/Tower Bridge?