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

[Indy500]

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.

Webber didn't have a single mechanical-related DNF in 2010, and crashed twice (still tying for 17/19 completed races along with Schumacher). His inconsistency of pace is what lost him the championship last year. One podium in the first four races with the best car is lacklustre. Eighth, ninth places just don't cut it.

Vettel seems to have fixed his issues as evidenced by him winning the last three GPs in a row (would likely have been five if not for the engine failure in Korea).

 

[NathanE]

Martin Whitmarsh just confirmed that their rush-job diffuser was made entirely from Titanium Think of the weight! Yet they still qualified 2nd!

 

[dannyjo22]

Martin Whitmarsh just confirmed that their rush-job diffuser was made entirely from Titanium Think of the weight! Yet they still qualified 2nd!

Knowing Mclaren when they make it out of composite it will either upset the balance of the car or fall apart. They should try making the whole car out of titanium

Titanium is pretty light anyway and the car would be the same weight, they would just have less ballast to play with.

I know they were second but they were still a mile off. I'm more interested to see how the Red Bull runs with Kers, or if Horner is bluffing again by saying it's going to be on the car for Malaysia????

 

[CaptainRAVE]

Martin Whitmarsh just confirmed that their rush-job diffuser was made entirely from Titanium Think of the weight! Yet they still qualified 2nd!

Must have added a fair bit of weight.

Still, the gap to RBR is huge and I am not convinced RBR are even showing their full hand.

As dannjo22 said, it will be interesting to see what happens with RBRs KERS system - we know they want to run with it, but it is curious that they are so reluctant to.

What McLaren really need though, is to implement a more flexible front wing because from some shots RBRs wing is crazy low.

 

[Dutch Guy]

Martin Whitmarsh just confirmed that their rush-job diffuser was made entirely from Titanium Think of the weight! Yet they still qualified 2nd!

Martin Brundle already said this in his gridwalk before the race

 

[Shimmy]

Webber didn't have a single mechanical-related DNF in 2010, and crashed twice (still tying for 17/19 completed races along with Schumacher). His inconsistency of pace is what lost him the championship last year. One podium in the first four races with the best car is lacklustre. Eighth, ninth places just don't cut it.

Vettel seems to have fixed his issues as evidenced by him winning the last three GPs in a row (would likely have been five if not for the engine failure in Korea).

I haven't said anything about mechanical failures, Vettel certainly had more bad luck in that regard and generally had a tenth or two in hand during qualifying over Mark. All I'm saying is that people shouldn't write off Mark after the first race, he started badly last year too.



And for those people that thought McLaren have managed to immitate the RBR front wing, they haven't, as I thought.

I don't know if you've seen their front wing but it's like trailing on the ground. That is massive downforce. Ours is much higher off the ground. That alone is like 20 points of downforce, like half a second, so as soon as we close that loophole or find out how to do that we will close that performance gap.

 

[CaptainRAVE]

McLaren may as well just copy the wing, once they work out how. The FIA aren't going to do anything about it. Not that I think it is the only thing on the RBR car that is making it quick.

 

[dannyjo22]

What I don't get is the FIA have photogrpahic evidence that the wing is running too low. Of that there is little doubt. Yet the car passes every flex test, fair enough.

So though did the michelin tyres prior to the indy gp. They tyres when tested passed all the tests but when the car was running at pace the tyre moved.

How is the tyre situation any different from the wing?

That said it's massively impressive that whatever RB have done it's remained a secret for so long and still has teams chasing the 'holy grail' for two years. Even if and when they do find it, I'm sure they will be dissapointed to find it doesn't give them the pace they think it will and RB will be quietly going about more upgrades while every chases their tail.

Kudos to Red Bull for not having Renault, Mclaren and Ferrari type bad apples to sell the plans and details on

If the wing is against the spirit of the rules I don't get why the FIA don't just put a small wear plate at points on the wing, so that if the wing lost say 10mm clearance with the track it would rub. Lose more than 20% off the wing get disqualified.

 

[Dutch Guy]

What Hamilton says is very interesting, he basically says the front wing is flexing because of the higher downforce the car generates, not because it is more flexible.

 

[zootfloot]

What Hamilton says is very interesting, he basically says the front wing is flexing because of the higher downforce the car generates, not because it is more flexible.

Thats the way i read it too, but what i dont understand is this....

The front wing is the leading part of the car, it cuts the air and starts the distribution process of air over and under the car, it is also one of the most prominent features of a modern F1 car and as such is almost entirely visible.

Why then if its a case of the RBR car generating more downforce havent the other teams just copied the design of the wing and then messed about in the lab etc with different composites to give them the same effect.

I just dont buy it.

There is in my mind definitely another force at play here, what it is i cannot guess but there is without a doubt something else happening.

 

[sunama]

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)

Are you seriously suggesting that RBR created a "special" car for Webber which would go slow on purpose?

Come on dude...that's taking things too far.

It is possible that certain (new parts) were not available for both cars and obviously, the No.1 driver gets any new parts first (if there is a out of stock issue), but to actually build a car to go slow on purpose...that's barmy.

For the record, Vettel has been out-performing Webber for a few races (on the trot) now, so Webber's slow performance in Australia isn't a big deal. Even if his car was slightly slower than Vettel, his car was still comfortably faster than the everybody elses.

On this forum, Webber has a lot of fans. However, you have to be realistic. Webber is not capable of leading a team. He is RBR's No.2 and Vettel is their No.1. RBR will have looked at many factors before deciding on this.

JRS seems to be transfixed on Webber's performances 7-9 years ago. In that time, many new drivers have appeared - Vettel, Hamilton, etc. Webber simply isn't "that" good. Live with it.

 

[Shimmy]

Not completely barmy, Irvine revealed on the forum last year that his Ferrari was often made slower than Schumi's. But then again it was written in his contract that he would play 2nd fiddle to MS, not that Eddie cared too much when he was raking it in.

I certainly don't believe that to be the case with Webber and RBR though. Australia did seem a little strange, Webber has never done well there since his Minardi debut, but imo he isn't 0.8 sec slower than Vettel and he also required an extra pit stop over Vettel.

 

[sunama]

Not completely barmy, Irvine revealed on the forum last year that his Ferrari was often made slower than Schumi's.

Irvine's car was never "designed" to be slower.

In general, what would happen is that MSc would always get the newest/most advanced components on his car. If there was a shortage on these new parts (which is normal for new parts), MSc will get them.

The same thing happened last year when Vettel got the most advanced (new) front wing.

The above is quite normal where the No.1 driver gets preferential treatment. This is all part and parcel of being the No.1. This is also the reason why a lot of drivers would rather be a No.1 (or joint No.1) in a lesser team than No.2 in a championship winning team.

What happened with Irvine, Barrichello and now Webber is quite normal.

The proposal of having a slower car, being designed especially to go slower...that is crazy.

 

[sunama]

I certainly don't believe that to be the case with Webber and RBR though. Australia did seem a little strange, Webber has never done well there since his Minardi debut, but imo he isn't 0.8 sec slower than Vettel and he also required an extra pit stop over Vettel.

I don't think he "needed" an extra pitstop. It was more that Webber was in traffic and the team felt that Webber might gain something by having him on newer tyres. As Vettel was time trialling in the lead, he could manage his tyres better and control the gap to Hamilton. Webber on the other hand was in a genuine race and was having to compete with other cars around him.

It is quite normal that when you run in the dirty air of a car in front OR if you are involved in wheel to wheel racing, you car is stressed to a greater degree than if you are running ahead, in free air and controlling your pace, from lap 1.

 

[Shimmy]

Where exactly are you getting your information from?

I'm regurgitating what Eddie Irvine said himself, once retired. You need to remember back then Ferrari were dominant, and could afford to run a little slower, not a lot.

 

[Dutch Guy]

I seriously doubt RBR intentionally make Webbers chassis worse, I think it's more a case of Vettel alone getting newer bits if there aren't two pieces ready yet.

CS||nuTs, can you confirm that there sometimes isn't enough time to bake two parts and that there could be a difference between the cars or aren't you allowed to say?

 

[sunama]

Where exactly are you getting your information from?

I'm regurgitating what Eddie Irvine said himself, once retired. You need to remember back then Ferrari were dominant, and could afford to run a little slower, not a lot.

I too am talking about Irvine's comments.

He never stated the Ferrari designed a car especially for him. What he felt is that he didn't get equal equipment. This ties in with what I stated in my earlier post.

You need to understand that in order to create a car to go slow on purpose is not an easy thing to do. Ask any team (CSI NUTS is here)...would a team, on purpose, create a car to go slow? This would be unbelievably risky and could cost the constructors title. It would also require extra resources and would just be a little silly.

CSI is here...he should be able to give a definitive answer on whether this actually happens.

 

[Sparky]

I seriously doubt RBR intentionally make Webbers chassis worse, I think it's more a case of Vettel alone getting newer bits if there aren't two pieces ready yet.

CS||nuTs, can you confirm that there sometimes isn't enough time to bake two parts and that there could be a difference between the cars or aren't you allowed to say?

Yes that can and does happen regarding time to make components.

I too am talking about Irvine's comments.

He never stated the Ferrari designed a car especially for him. What he felt is that he didn't get equal equipment. This ties in with what I stated in my earlier post.

You need to understand that in order to create a car to go slow on purpose is not an easy thing to do. Ask any team (CSI NUTS is here)...would a team, on purpose, create a car to go slow? This would be unbelievably risky and could cost the constructors title. It would also require extra resources and would just be a little silly.

CSI is here...he should be able to give a definitive answer on whether this actually happens.

Did answer this very thing further up [sort of] No team in their right mind would make a chassis slower, they are identical and have to be to pass FIA crash tests.

 

[Shimmy]

He never stated the Ferrari designed a car especially for him. What he felt is that he didn't get equal equipment. This ties in with what I stated in my earlier post.

I didn't say Ferrari designed a 2nd slower car for Irvine or a different chassis. Just that even if there were 2 sets of new parts available, he'd sometimes still be left with the older (slower) one.

Teams can't afford to do that now.

 

[sunama]

Yes that can and does happen regarding time to make components.

...and of course, when this happens (ie. there isn't enough parts for both drivers, the No.1 driver will almost always get the first pick of the (new, advanced) parts. This of course is the advantage of having No.1 status.