Australian Grand Prix 2011, Albert Park Circuit - Race 1/19

ZG002 · 29 Mar 2011 at 00:28

Maybe he just struggles with being number 2?

As when things seemed all fair at the start of 2010 he wasn't doing half bad. As soon as the "no2 driver" talk started.. He fell off the edge.

I don't think he is too old per say, Just think unfortunately he has missed his biggest ever chance he was going to get. Maybe he feels this also?

Will give him this much, He has some proper grit! Loads of season left yet

Oh and thanks

JRS · 29 Mar 2011 at 00:34

ZG002 said:
Maybe he just struggles with being number 2?

As when things seemed all fair at the start of 2010 he wasn't doing half bad. As soon as the "no2 driver" talk started.. He fell off the edge.

I suspect that's the case. Some drivers can take No.2 status and work with it. Some get buried by it. Some can fight it and flourish - but to do that, you need the team to let you go out and win when you have the chance. Ferrari didn't do that with Massa in Germany last year, and I don't think RBR will do that with Webber now unless Vettel is waaaaaaaaaaaay out of contention in the race.

ZG002 · 29 Mar 2011 at 00:40

Now Massa I really do feel sorry for, So much great potential (sssooo close to WC) He is never going to be allowed to finish ahead of Alonso unless he gets a DNF.

I'm looking forward to the next race, Just hope someone can get close to Vettle in that absolute rocket he is sitting in.

Shimmy · 29 Mar 2011 at 00:42

People forgetting Mark Webber famously saying "Not bad for a number for a No. 2 driver" last year at Silverstone already? He got pole iirc and won despite the new wing being transferred to Vettel. He then went on a run outscoring Vettel before the last few races when Vettel came into form.

First race of the season and people already drawing conclusions.

ZG002 · 29 Mar 2011 at 00:46

If Mark really did take a look at Vettels car at the end of the race, Maybe he is also?

Zuban · 29 Mar 2011 at 03:13

CS||nuTs said:
Yes because F1 drivers dont go into corners as fast as possible already. Your statement is flawed

Just put in better rumble strips like Monza for example.

indeed, although button maybe didnt go into that as fast as possible as he only used every inch of the track available whilst keeping a wheel on the track

. regardless, it would have made no difference tbh as vettel was clearly much faster at this point and i think would have been ahead within a corner or two anyway, so i can understand why nothing was made of it, but tbh if it wasnt dubious then there wouldn't be so much talk about it, and it was interesting to see brundle bring it up in the post race forum, it is a messy area, if he could have made that move and kept at least one wheel on the track then he should have, otherwise it just opens up these kind of run offs to exploitation, poor bugger infront is driving within the lines, driver behind thinks ok i'll push my luck there is little to lose hopefullly the stewards wont notice and i'll just say i could have it was just safer not to, if you can make a move and cant keep the car on track as a result you should probably give it back, and try again. I think yes better rumble strips are one solution, but maybe cirumstances at the street tracks dont allow this for whatever reason? so this kind of thing should be cleared up.

FrankJH · 29 Mar 2011 at 14:44

CS||nuTs said:
This is totally different, do people honestly think we would spend 6 weeks, 100's of man hours and £1000's of pounds on a chassis we knew was slow? Seriously,think about it!

In the nicest possible way your arguement is slightly flawed also

Considering how dominant chassis A is - it is potentially possible to design differences into chassis B (or the wings etc) and still legitimately expect the latter chassis to come in 2nd (while not able to compete with chassis A)

Whats more you as a team have probably known how diminant it is for about a month (even given the unknown factor of McLaren's new parts especially)

It would be nice to see Mark race Kinky Kylie at some point - I highly doubt it will happen though

(I would like to point out I dont believe RBR will have done the above, despite last year, but its possible)

Sparky · 29 Mar 2011 at 14:56

FrankJH said:
In the nicest possible way your arguement is slightly flawed also

Considering how dominant chassis A is - it is potentially possible to design differences into chassis B (or the wings etc) and still legitimately expect the latter chassis to come in 2nd (while not able to compete with chassis A)

Whats more you as a team have probably known how diminant it is for about a month (even given the unknown factor of McLaren's new parts especially)

It would be nice to see Mark race Kinky Kylie at some point - I highly doubt it will happen though

(I would like to point out I dont believe RBR will have done the above, despite last year, but its possible)

Later in the year the scenario you mention would be possible. During the time from launch to race 1 we just would not have the time to make a crap wing for Mark!

Flibster · 29 Mar 2011 at 16:01

Sauber have changed their mind, they are no longer appealing their disqualification.

Mr Jack · 29 Mar 2011 at 16:02

Flibster said:
Sauber have changed their mind, they are no longer appealing their disqualification.

teknokid · 29 Mar 2011 at 16:17

Flibster said:
Sauber have changed their mind, they are no longer appealing their disqualification.

thats a shame, the performance on track by perez in particular was fantastic.

Flibster · 29 Mar 2011 at 16:18

Mr Jack said:

It was 5mm out of spec - the rules are very clear. The kit to check was available to the teams. The other spec wing they brought was legal, the one they raced wasn't.

Add to that they claimed that it was inconsequential as that part doesn't do much... *the topmost element of the rear wing?* and that it was an error during manufacture, on one, ok... on all of that spec? How bad are their quality control people not to spot that?

I don't think they would have had a chance if they had appealed.

FrankJH · 29 Mar 2011 at 18:14

CS||nuTs said:
Later in the year the scenario you mention would be possible. During the time from launch to race 1 we just would not have the time to make a crap wing for Mark!

Ok fair enough

I know its expensive stuff (even for F1 teams) and therefore difficult to source/ fabricate, but I was surprised when Martin mentioned on the grid walk that Carbon Fibre has a month's lead time

(I seem to recall him saying it in conjunction with the new McLaren parts that were covered /plated in titanium? instead or something)

Flibster said:
It was 5mm out of spec - the rules are very clear. The kit to check was available to the teams. The other spec wing they brought was legal, the one they raced wasn't.

Add to that they claimed that it was inconsequential as that part doesn't do much... *the topmost element of the rear wing?* and that it was an error during manufacture, on one, ok... on all of that spec? How bad are their quality control people not to spot that?

I don't think they would have had a chance if they had appealed.

To be fair wouldnt it be possible that the mould was inaccurate by that amount - and therefore anything coming from the mould would be exactly the same amount out ? CS will probably be able to say if this is correct or not but seems reasonable

Whats more with such a small margin - maybe the mould was fabricated with the outside at the correct dimensions instead of the inside (have no idea what the mould is made of or how thick it would have to be, just a guess)

sounds like they didnt have a leg to stand on, but I still feel for them - especially if it wasnt a performance enhancing part (but still rightfully dsq'd)

Lucky they have parts of the right dimension available for the next race, otherwise they could be totally fubar'd

Sparky · 29 Mar 2011 at 18:23

By the time you have machined the patterns,surfaced them,made the mould, prepped the mould, post cured it, then you can start to make the component! Next its cooked and trimmed to shape/tolerance, inspected and shipped to circuit. Yeh can take a while

Shimmy · 29 Mar 2011 at 18:26

CS||nuTs said:
By the time you have machined the patterns,surfaced them,made the mould, prepped the mould, post cured it, then you can start to make the component! Next its cooked and trimmed to shape/tolerance, inspected and shipped to circuit. Yeh can take a while

I found the RBR front wing secret!

Sparky · 29 Mar 2011 at 18:42

FrankJH said:
To be fair wouldnt it be possible that the mould was inaccurate by that amount - and therefore anything coming from the mould would be exactly the same amount out ? CS will probably be able to say if this is correct or not but seems reasonable

Whats more with such a small margin - maybe the mould was fabricated with the outside at the correct dimensions instead of the inside (have no idea what the mould is made of or how thick it would have to be, just a guess)

sounds like they didnt have a leg to stand on, but I still feel for them - especially if it wasnt a performance enhancing part (but still rightfully dsq'd)

Lucky they have parts of the right dimension available for the next race, otherwise they could be totally fubar'd

No chance, it would be picked up by the laminators before it got anywhere near being built. The inspectors would have rejected the pattern as that would be the first part of the whole thing that failed,miserably in this case!

Sauber knew what they were doing.

FrankJH · 29 Mar 2011 at 19:01

CS||nuTs said:
No chance, it would be picked up by the laminators before it got anywhere near being built. The inspectors would have rejected the pattern as that would be the first part of the whole thing that failed,miserably in this case!

Sauber knew what they were doing.

So the part in question is a performance related part then?

Surely there would be no other reason to purposefully mis-design / laminate etc etc than if it did produce some performance benefit?

If so - Im more ****** that the Sauber guy /gal directly lied to the press when stating it wasnt

Real shame

Flibster · 29 Mar 2011 at 20:26

FrankJH said:
So the part in question is a performance related part then?

The moving flap of the rear wing was more curved than allowed. If it wasn't a performance part, then why when the DRS was activated did it give 12kph more on the straight.

FrankJH · 30 Mar 2011 at 09:10

Flibster said:
The moving flap of the rear wing was more curved than allowed. If it wasn't a performance part, then why when the DRS was activated did it give 12kph more on the straight.

Im just going off what the Sauber press guy said on Sunday at /after the disqualification

Surely we will only know when the correctly proportioned part is in place and they lose that 12kph?

Maybe they have discovered something within the DRS which still allows for that kind of gain (not every new invention has to come from a big team after all

)

I appreciate that with the downforce etc involved especially on the front wing (for example) a little.....flexing... can make a huge difference. I am however surprised that such a massive speed advantage is gained from such a minimal measurement difference

Flibster · 30 Mar 2011 at 09:26

FrankJH said:
Im just going off what the Sauber press guy said on Sunday at /after the disqualification

Surely we will only know when the correctly proportioned part is in place and they lose that 12kph?

Maybe they have discovered something within the DRS which still allows for that kind of gain (not every new invention has to come from a big team after all )

I appreciate that with the downforce etc involved especially on the front wing (for example) a little.....flexing... can make a huge difference. I am however surprised that such a massive speed advantage is gained from such a minimal measurement difference

Umm, thats what the DRS gives pretty much all teams when activated.

There is a more compelling reason why it has some performance - they put it on the car. If it didn't have a reason for being on the car it wouldn't be.