Force India aerodynamic test for Daly

F1 Fanatic round-up

Conor Daly, GP2, Hilmer, 2013In the round-up: American GP3 racer Conor Daly will test for Force India tomorrow.

Links

Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

Daly to make F1 test return for Force India (NBC)

“Conor Daly will perform a straight-line aerodynamic test for Force India on Wednesday.”

More on Formula 1 and Long Beach (MotorSport)

“From all I?m told there?s no doubt that Ecclestone, Zak Brown and Chris Pook are going to make a bid to buy the race in 2015 with plans to install F1 back in Southern California in 2016.”

Marrusia [sic] avoid prize money debate (Sporting Life)

Marussia sporting director Graeme Lowdon: “We can confirm we’ve not had any offer from CVC at all. At no time have we had any proposal.”

Pat Symonds Q&A (Sky)

“We couldn’t [keep Timo Glock] – it was a commercial decision – and I’ll say to anyone that listens that not only is Timo a great guy for the team but also such a nice guy, just the way he took the whole thing was really, really superb. So I was really concerned: we’d had a lot of changes and two rookies. But it’s not just that: a lot of our guys at the team are quite young, so it’s all quite difficult.”

Rosberg has ‘stronger voice’ after Schumacher (ESPN)

Nico Rosberg: “I now have a stronger voice. And to me that’s a beautiful process in which I can help Mercedes become the best team.”

Ferrari: no panic over ’14 tyre supplier (Autosport)

Stefano Domenicali: “Because there is no alternative we will find very soon a solution and I am sure that Pirelli has already given the sign that it wants to be here in the future.”

Williams Reports 2012 Annual Results (Williams)

“The Group, however, made a loss before taxation in the year of ??5.0m (2011: profit ??7.4m) as a result of the impact of a technical accounting treatment of one of the Group?s key receipts during the year.”

Bahrain 2013 – race edit (F1)

Video highlights from the Bahrain Grand Prix.

The story of the marque (McLaren)

“The more dynamic ??Speedy Kiwi? was introduced in 1967, once again designed by Michael Turner to emphasise the higher speeds at which Bruce?s cars were racing. It also took on a striking papaya orange colour which familiarly became known as ‘McLaren Orange’.”

Tommi P??rm??koski: The trainer behind a World Champion (MTV3)

Sebastian Vettel was another case though, a ‘special kind’. Tommi reveals a lot about Seb’s attitude in training and the way he approached it.”

Tweets

Comment of the day

As Ecclestone prepares to take more money away from the smallest teams, @GeeMac points out their value to the sport:

F1 never learns. Ten years ago at the start of the season all of the teams were banging on about cost saving and trying to do more to assist the smaller independent teams, saying that if something wasn?t done it could lead to them folding.

What happened? Nothing, and within three years the two smallest teams (Minardi and Jordan) were gone. We are still having debates about how to save costs and we?ve already lost one of the teams that joined the sport in 2010, taking away prize money from the last placed team will only make things worse with the result that we lose another small independent team. It?s pathetic.

I?ve said it so many times before, the battle at the back is as important as the one at the front. I don?t buy the argument that the smaller teams add nothing to the sport. They give up and coming talent a chance to shine, both drivers and designers.

Marussia have the promising Jules Bianchi who is doing a great job so far, Caterham have Charles Pic who is highly rated. Where would they be without Marussia and Caterham? Standing at the back of another team?s garage with headphones on feeling sorry for themselves, that?s where.

Of the teams that have died recently, Minardi gave us Alonso and race winners Webber, Fisichella and Trulli. Where would Ross Brawn and Adrian Newey be without the likes of Arrows and Leyton House? You need the teams at the back of the grid to grow and develop the sport, because that is where future champions cut their teeth.
@GeeMac

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Ccolanto, Mike Weilding, Oliver and Jake Kilshaw!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is by emailling me, using Twitter or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Roland Ratzenberger lost his life in a crash during qualifying for the San Marino Grand Prix on this day in 1994.

Image ?? GP2/LAT

Advert | Go Ad-free

63 comments on Force India aerodynamic test for Daly

  1. An extremely wise assessment of things in the COTD, excellent.

    • JCost (@jcost) said on 30th April 2013, 8:33

      Indeed.

    • TOP SPOT COTD.

      I think we fans are getting a bit ******-off what’s happening behind the scenes, we don’t want show at all costs, we don’t want the best teams ever-staying to the detriment of new/smaller teams. We want them all getting equality on those difficult economic topics, give them all the money they deserve or teams like Marussia, Caterham, or even Force India, Sauber could disappear.

      In F1, we adore team longevity like Ferrari, McLaren & Williams, so let’s give the others some chance of long-lived in our sport.

      I’m with you @GeeMac and still ever-proud of the F1 community.

  2. Umar Majid (@um1234) said on 30th April 2013, 0:21

    a cracking COTD today and i have to say i couldnt agree more. F1 is probably the best sport in the world right now imo and you would think these kind of mistakes shouldnt happen but they do, wouldnt be surprised if Caterham and Marussia end up merging the way things are at the moment with the finances

  3. Jay Menon (@jaymenon10) said on 30th April 2013, 1:06

    Great COTD! Well said.

    I wonder why a rich Russian or Sheikh isnt interested in owning an F1 team? I wouldnt consider Marussia to be Roman Abramovich rich and I am aware that a number of Sheikhs are share holders in teams, but we havent seen the same extravangace that we see in football.

    Why dont they come in with their money? Perhaps F1 is not an attractive investment anymore? Too political? Its not to say football teams provide instant profits…Chelsea ran at a loss for almost 6-7 years before they started turning a profit…cant say Man City are anywhere near profitable.

    • Aditya F. Yahya (@adityafakhri) said on 30th April 2013, 4:05

      because without having certain product (car, energy drink, etc), you can’t have your money back. in football, almost every fans buy the merchandise, the stadium is filled every week, the sponsor are much easier to get. F1 is not for everyone, it’s a sad statement indeed.
      example: we can see Tony Fernandes is more concerned with the recently relegated Queens Park Rangers than Caterham.

      • JCost (@jcost) said on 30th April 2013, 9:00

        @adityafakhri

        Formula 1 has global audience. Sponsors like packed stadiums, but above all they want sports with TV audience. In this regard, Formula 1 seems to be better positioned than professional golf, even though those two are of two very different breeds, I don’t recall pro golf facing shortage of wealthy sponsors… maybe F1 is not making good use of its perceived “prestige sport” status.

    • Journeyer (@journeyer) said on 30th April 2013, 7:16

      @jaymenon10 To quote Eddie Jordan, to make a small fortune in Formula 1, “start with a big fortune”. :)

  4. beneboy (@beneboy) said on 30th April 2013, 1:06

    While I agree with most of the COTD I think it should be noted that the only team that competed in the 2003 season that isn’t competing this season is Toyota, and they quit the sport due to their failure to build a competitive car. Every other team still exists today, albeit under different names and with new owners;
    Jordan = Force India
    Minardi = Torro Rosso
    Renault = Lotus
    Jaguar = Red Bull
    BAR = Mercedes
    Only Ferrari, WIlliams, McLaren & Sauber still operate under the same name but McLaren & Sauber have had some changes in ownership, or part ownership in the last ten years – although they’ve obviously kept their traditional names (naming rights apart).

    So out of the ten teams competing ten years ago, nine of them still exist and the one that doesn’t was a manufacturer team that was owned by one of the biggest automotive companies in the world, not a small independent team.

    • Great point.

    • matt90 (@matt90) said on 30th April 2013, 2:08

      That is a good point, although it is worth remembering Super Aguri’s brief foray.

      • beneboy (@beneboy) said on 30th April 2013, 14:24

        @matt90
        Super Aguri didn’t exist till 2006 and for the sake of not wanting to go on too long I just went from the 2003 team names to their current names otherwise I’d have had to add several more teams to the list too :-)

    • wsrgo (@wsrgo) said on 30th April 2013, 3:07

      Minardi is not EQUAL to Toro Rosso, they have/had different goals and completely separate motorsport niches. Just because they have the same base, doesn’t make them equal.

      I agree with the others, though.

      • celeste (@celeste) said on 30th April 2013, 3:15

        @wsrgo I don´t think @beneboy is talking about philosophy, ut the fact that the structure was the roots of the actual Toro Rosso

        • wsrgo (@wsrgo) said on 30th April 2013, 3:22

          @celeste So would you say Super Aguri=Arrows?

          • Fisha695 (@fisha695) said on 30th April 2013, 5:12

            Super Aguri was a new team created from scratch in relation to the “team entry card” which is what the other posters are talking about. At the start of the 2003 season the FIA officially nullified the “team entry cards” for both Arrows & Prost (Prost <- Liger <- Matra) much like the one for HRT was at the start of the 2013 season.

            Here is the breakdown for the current teams on the grid.
            Toro Rosso <- Mindardi
            Red Bull <- Jaguar <- Stewart GP
            Lotus <- Renault <- Benetton <- Toleman
            Force India <- Spyker <- Midland <- Jordan
            Mercedes <- Brawn <- Honda <- BAR <- Tyrrell
            Ferrari
            McLaren
            Sauber
            Williams
            Caterham
            Marussia

            For the purpose of this list I'm not counting the whole Caterham had the rights to Team Lotus so they ran as Lotus for a year or two before being sued, mess.

          • wsrgo (@wsrgo) said on 30th April 2013, 9:54

            @fisha695 How about Frank Williams Racing Cars->Williams? Or Virgin->Marussia?

    • bull mello (@bullmello) said on 30th April 2013, 5:56

      Point well taken. So, going forward what would be the best way for a new team to try to break into F1? Buy an existing team or start from scratch with a greater chance of being outside the top 10 payoff at the end of the season?

      • beneboy (@beneboy) said on 30th April 2013, 14:28

        @bullmello
        It doesn’t matter if you’re going into F1, accounting or any other business; it’s always easier to buy an existing company and then build it up they way you want it than to start out from scratch as along with the company you get the infrastructure, facilities, experience and staff that comes with it.

      • MagillaGorilla (@magillagorilla) said on 1st May 2013, 9:13

        @bullmello The only people that should have any business building from scratch are actual manufactures i.e. Ferrari, McLaren, Merc GP. If you are going to join as a privateer team then buying an outgoing team is best. But starting from scratch doesn’t seem smart if you don’t have the auto experience and automotive funds from car sells and other outlets to support the sporting effort.

        • bull mello (@bullmello) said on 1st May 2013, 16:04

          @magillagorilla , @beneboy -
          Good points. It also occurs to me that Bernie has inherently increased the value of all the top 10 teams. Meaning that if a team wished to sell and was in the top 10 teams, their value would be higher automatically than any teams outside the top 10. That is, if there are any more than 10 teams in F1 at the time of this hypothetical sale.

    • BasCB (@bascb) said on 30th April 2013, 7:12

      Doesn’t that rather prove the point of the COTD though, that it does matter what happens at the back?

    • GeeMac (@geemac) said on 30th April 2013, 7:21

      @beneboy I completely agree that the DNA of the teams from 2003 is still there, but the changes of ownership have had other effects.

      Jordan/Spyker/Midland/Force India took 2 more changes of ownership and a good few years to become completitive again (despite the Spa 2009 highlight, it was really only in 2010 that they became regular point scorers again). Toro Rosso are, rightly or wrongly, a high profile and expensive kindergarten that exists to be just competitive enough to give the Red Bull junior programme drivers a chance to shine.. Not exactly the Minardi mentality.

      • beneboy (@beneboy) said on 30th April 2013, 14:21

        @geemac

        I completely agree that the DNA of the teams from 2003 is still there, but the changes of ownership have had other effects.

        I agree but I don’t see how that’s much different to what’s happened at the teams that are still operating under their old names. Ferrari have changed a lot since Jean Todt et al left, apart from Frank Williams and Patrick Head Williams is almost unrecognisable from the team that existed a decade ago and McLaren have changed a lot since Ron Dennis stepped down.

    • Metallion (@metallion) said on 30th April 2013, 10:57

      @beneboy
      I agree with @bascb I think it just proves the point of COTD. All these teams have disappeared because of economy. It’s only been lucky that there were companies who wanted to invest into buying these teams and continue. Nowadays with the current economic climate, there’s no guarantee that the next teams that fold will be bought. They’ll just be left to die like HRT.

      • beneboy (@beneboy) said on 30th April 2013, 14:15

        @metallion

        As I said, I agree with most of what @geemac said in the COTD.

        All these teams have disappeared because of economy.

        On this though we do disagree;
        Jordan’s problems started when they lost the Honda engines to BAR, a series of poor financial and legal decisions over the following years compounded their problems and that’s what ultimately lead to Eddie Jordan selling up.
        Ford had been looking for someone to buy Jaguar almost as soon as they bought the team from Jackie Stewart due to a change in their senior managers and the economic downturn which also lead to them selling off several of the other brands, including Jaguar, that they had owned.
        Minardi had been struggling financially from day one and had been going nowhere (barring a few lucky results) for several years before they sold out.
        Renault left the sport because their new senior management team were more interested in promoting themselves through their advanced safety systems and the man on the board of directors who was their biggest motorsport fan had retired.
        BAR virtually imploded due to several years of incompetence, poor management, a lack of success and the ban on tobacco sponsorship.

        As far as I can work out not one of them left because of the economy of F1.

        I certainly agree with geemac that the way money is shared in F1 needs to be changed and, like others have mentioned, a system similar to the English Premier League where every team gets a share of the revenue just for being in the sport plus extra money for their finishing position would be a much better system than the one we have now.
        Personally I’d be much happier if at least 75% of the teams share of the money was shared equally amongst all the teams with what’s left being a performance bonus.

  5. bull mello (@bullmello) said on 30th April 2013, 1:10

    The COTD is spot on. Many valid points made. I would only add that it seems extraordinarily self defeating to the sport and the team left out to invite them in, let them invest millions and then jerk the rug out from under them.

  6. Pandaslap (@pandaslap) said on 30th April 2013, 2:00

    If the Korean GP featured Psy, will a Long Beach GP feature Snoop Dogg?

    Sorry, Snoop Lion

  7. Arijit (@arijitmaniac) said on 30th April 2013, 5:48

    This is how I see the problem right now.
    The technical rules have become so strict these days that there is lesser scope for innovation. The designers have very few opportunities to try something new. Rather they have to refine what they can achieve with the current regulations. And refinement takes time and resources – something that the smaller teams don’t have and thus they are unable to make much progress.
    While we see the top-tier teams bringing updates at almost every race, the mid-tier teams bringing updates at a reasonable pace, the same cannot be said for the smaller teams.
    I’m not saying that resources alone will improve car performance (look at Williams or Toro Rosso), nor am I saying that lack of resources hinders performance (Sauber were doing a pretty good job till their slight slump in form this season).
    What I’m saying is that to improve you do need to put in effort which require resources. Red Bull may be testing dozens of front wings which might look very similar but are subtly different to find that extra hundredth of a second. But I doubt that Marussia can do something like that.
    Red Bull is successful because these small “refinements” allow them to get closer to that perfect front wing design. Marussia or Caterham with their smaller budget need to pull out a miracle to find that perfect front wing design.

    And because these teams are not able to improve as much, they find it difficult to attract sponsors.

    And now with the removal of prize money to these teams, the situation might just get gloomier. So the smaller teams are stuck in a cycle: No Mmoney -> less improvement in pace -> no sponsors -> No money.

    So in my opinion its the combination of all these factors: tight regulations, high cost of improving, lack of sponsorship and if it turns out to be true, no prize money that becomes a problem for the smaller teams.

    P.S. Forgive the long post. I’m not good at putting things concisely :)

    • Baremans (@baremans) said on 30th April 2013, 11:31

      Bottom line: Bernie seems to have found a strategy of returning to a field of 10 teams/20 cars. Something he has expressed as his preference before.
      If he cannot actively work the 11th team out, he can let things sort themselves out this way. survival of the fittest – F1 style.

  8. GeeMac (@geemac) said on 30th April 2013, 6:17

    Didn’t think that rant would get a COTD. :)

    • Adam Tate (@adam-tate) said on 30th April 2013, 9:23

      One of the best COTD’s in a long time :)

    • Max Jacobson (@vettel1) said on 30th April 2013, 9:55

      …and thoroughly deserved @geemac, I could not agree more! What I particularly don’t like about how Ecclestone is treating the teams is that he has forgotten that no other team bar Ferrari has been in the sport since it’s inception, so they all have to have been upstarts at some point.

      What’s to say Caterham will still be backmarkers in 10 (or perhaps even less) years? So really, if Ecclestone is looking to get rid of the “mobile chicanes” as they were once dubbed, he should actually be helping them along – not cutting their funds.

  9. the_sigman (@sigman1998) said on 30th April 2013, 6:27

    What a year for Conor Daly!!!

    He has already driven GP2 and GP3 and he will drive this test (and I believe some FPs when we return to Asia and go to America) for Force India and the biggest thing – he will drive at Indy 500.

    I am really curious to see what he achieves!

  10. BasCB (@bascb) said on 30th April 2013, 7:15

    From what Marussia DOES say about the contract

    Despite the issue Lowdon was tight-lipped, adding: “Our understanding is all the parties involved in negotiating a new Concorde are not making any comment regarding various topics being discussed.

    its very clear that Bernie was mentioning not wanting to pay the 10th team for a purpose, because I just cannot image what would happen if Marussia does finish 10th but would not get money for it because FOM did not offer them a contract. Just think about the implications of that under EU-competition law – it would bring the FIA and FOM right back to the EU inquiries about unfair practices we had almost a decade ago.

    Pretty sure its part of negotiation, and maybe Bernie working towards that IPO never taking place.

    • verstappen (@verstappen) said on 30th April 2013, 20:38

      There’s always a game of chess going on regarding Concorde. I think Bernie needs something to blow it all to pieces and this probably is it.

      Why would he? Because he thrives in chaos and fall out and will get better deals.

  11. BasCB (@bascb) said on 30th April 2013, 7:29

    A really nice interview with Pat Symonds (I remember him on podcasts where he was great as well)

  12. Tomsk (@tomsk) said on 30th April 2013, 9:15

    That’s quite a big update to the McLaren for Barcelona. Is that the MP4-28B?
    He’s taking a good tight line round that cone, so it appears to have more grip than the old one.

    • John H (@john-h) said on 30th April 2013, 10:27

      Mclaren have jumped the gun with regards closed cockpit design. Good on them I say, but no doubt they’ll get bashed on here for developing a Hungarian car that they “struggle to understand”.

    • It seems to be running illegal tyre compounds at the moment though – I guess we’ll have to wait and see for how long it can keep such a tight line through the corners when it’s suited with a set of Pirelli’s. I’m hazarding a guess at 9 laps with the current tyre degradation?

  13. BBQ2 said on 30th April 2013, 9:48

    “Just think about the implications of that under EU-competition law – it would bring the FIA and FOM right back to the EU inquiries about unfair practices we had almost a decade ago.”

    Exactly my thoughts

    BasCB and I wish that French guy (Jules B.) makes a 10th or even 9th place finishing this season, then we will see how BE will come out of this…. what a joke!

  14. Max Jacobson (@vettel1) said on 30th April 2013, 9:51

    From the MTV3 article:

    “When we did training he was always asking why we were doing something. He tried to analyze everything and he was ready to do the training as long as he was able to master it. He was never satisfied until he was able to do something. There is no quit in his vocabulary. Also, the way how he loves winning is something I have never seen before. It didn’t matter if it was driving, badminton, or playing cards. He was ready to do whatever to win and if he lost you heard straight away the words ONE MORE!”

    I think that’s a very insightful interview into the mindset of a champion. The work and dedication Vettel has can only be good prospects for his future: if he keeps pushing himself, keeps improving, I think we could have another Schumacher on our hands…

    • wsrgo (@wsrgo) said on 30th April 2013, 9:58

      @vettel1 I read James Allen’s “The Edge of Greatness” from cover to cover. I am surprised to see how similar he is to Michael. It comes intrinsically, too, not as if he’s trying to ape Schumi..

      • @wsrgo I’ve never read that actually, I may well give it a look!

        I think that’s the main difference between say Kimi and Sebastian: Räikkönen, although undoubtably a hard worker, just doesn’t seem to be on the same level of work ethic as Vettel. I think we saw similar things with Senna and Schumacher in their times also; they just seem to always long to know more and are just a step ahead of the rest.

  15. A comment on the Will Buxton article:

    MoebiusStreet on April 29, 2013 at 10:46 pm said:
    I know some may accuse me of sticking my head in the sand, but I think that we won’t see a color blind world until we stop thinking about the world in terms of color — and we won’t overlook sexual preference until we stop thinking about people’s sexual preferences.

    When you’re driving, your gender, color, sexual orientation, religion, and so on have little bearing. Heck, when I’m karting I’ve competed against all sorts of people. Suited up, I can’t tell the demographics of my opponents even if I wanted to, but I’ve gotten out of the kart to find that I’ve been bested by drivers of all sorts — black and white, men and women. Of course, I don’t know what their sexual orientations were, and that’s just as it should be. It’s none of my business, and it has no relevance to the race.

    We should be thankful that all these things are irrelevant to the sport, and we should not try to drag that dirt in. A person’s sexual preference is a person’s own business, and of those he chooses to share it with. If they’re not making it part of their drive, neither should we.

    Let them be racers, nothing more, and nothing less.

    Very well said indeed.

    • Timothy Katz (@timothykatz) said on 30th April 2013, 12:18

      That looks very interesting @vettel1 . Sorry to be thick, but can you post a link to the original Will Buxton blog/article, I think it coud be worth a read.

      • @timothykatz No it’s me that’s been thick in thinking it was part of today’s round-up! Here you go. It’s a great read.

        • Timothy Katz (@timothykatz) said on 30th April 2013, 20:05

          Well, interesting read indeed and a super post from Moebius Street.
          Traditionally, sport – not just motorsport – is not one of the areas of human activity where gay men are supposed to turn up. Gay women possibly so. But the hackneyed image of the limp-wristed in pink trousers just doesn’t mesh with supreme athleticism.
          It’s easier being gay these days than it ever was, but there are still plenty of areas where it’s still pretty difficult – police, the forces as well as professional sports. One day a top athlete from motorsports will come out as gay and everyone will stand back shocked and surprised, and then they will say to each other “So what?” and get on with the racing.
          The way that motosports thinks of its audience is more difficult. I personally loathe the use of sex to sell racing; grid girls are ridiculous. And I wouldn’t want grid boys either. It’s just insulting to have someone try to switch on your excitement by using pretty flesh in an inappropriate setting. If motorsport can get away from using the testosterone switch to sell itself, there may be many more gay fans than just me. And maybe more female fans too.

    • celeste (@celeste) said on 30th April 2013, 16:45

      @vettel1 I agree, I can see why Jason Collins stament is important, but I do believe what a person does, who a person love, as long as doesn´t hurt anyone, it doesn´t matter to me.

      That´s a reason why I don´t follow F1 drivers in twitter, I don´t care about their personal life and why I don´t care who they date.

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.