Weirdly, the engines in the current configurations are eligible for use in the WEC and Le Mans. Which would make it more viable if you wanted to supply other race series. Naturally, you'd need to modify them to increase their lifespan in order to survive the 5000+km of Le Mans
F1 2015 - Teams and Drivers - Who goes where?!
- Thread starter ~Mike~
- Start date
Didn't Ferrari kick up a massive fuss about the proposed move to Inline-4 engines and say it had no relevance to their road-going division, and the FIA changed it based on the veiled threat of Ferrari walking away if they didn't get their way?
Soldato
Just following on with what I was saying about Marrussia and their 9th WCC place.
Despite their absence, Marussia will retain ninth place in the Constructors’ Championship provided neither of the two teams below them in the standings – Sauber and Caterham – fail to score points in the remaining three races of the campaign. Caterham were themselves placed in administration last week and have already been ruled out of both the U.S. and Brazilian Grands Prix.
Were they to retain ninth place, Marussia would reap a prize-money windfall in the region of £35m, a prospect which has already attracted interest from brothers Baljinder Sohi and Sonny Kaushal, who made their fortunes in the steel industry.
http://www1.skysports.com/f1/news/1...-brothers-in-buying-beleaguered-marussia-team
Despite their absence, Marussia will retain ninth place in the Constructors’ Championship provided neither of the two teams below them in the standings – Sauber and Caterham – fail to score points in the remaining three races of the campaign. Caterham were themselves placed in administration last week and have already been ruled out of both the U.S. and Brazilian Grands Prix.
Were they to retain ninth place, Marussia would reap a prize-money windfall in the region of £35m, a prospect which has already attracted interest from brothers Baljinder Sohi and Sonny Kaushal, who made their fortunes in the steel industry.
http://www1.skysports.com/f1/news/1...-brothers-in-buying-beleaguered-marussia-team
Soldato
Why do I get the feeling they are just up for buying the team and not actually going to run it, just to get their money on the prize fund!?
Soldato
Because they're in debt which is why they've got into administration.
Soldato
How much are Marrusia in debt by?
That might give us some indication as to who if anyone might buy them. £50m in debt, someone might take a punt. £500m in debt, no chance.
That might give us some indication as to who if anyone might buy them. £50m in debt, someone might take a punt. £500m in debt, no chance.
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 6,056
That should read "... provided neither of the two teams below them [...] manage to score points". Also it's inaccurate; a single 10th place finish from Sauber or Caterham would still not be enough to take ninth from Marussia, and I believe Caterham would need to beat Marussia's tally or lose on countback.
Sky Sports - truly deserving to cover F1.
Soldato
Can't see it happening.
Alonso is loaded, he doesn't need money. Assuming the teams do have to run third cars in 2015 he will be able to pick any seat he wants and I can't see the other teams catching up with Mercedes any time soon.
Soldato
Alonso was going to form a cycling team, maybe he might be tempted to part-buy one of this financially struggling F1 teams instead, where he would be a driver-manager?
but that heavily depends on what the FIA decide that 3rd car to be (ie whether it counts towards championship points or not)
Surely it will be the two highest placed cars/drivers on race day that are counted for points. Means you won't get team orders and it 'encourages' all of the top teams to get on board with running three cars.
No championship with a miss match of car numbers per team has ever worked on that principle. Its always been designated cars that score. Sometimes defined before an event, but usually defined at the beginning of the season.
Having the top 2 always score means that teams with 3 cars can have 1 car retire yet still score maximum points. It would allow the big teams with bigger budgets to run at a 33% failure rate, while smaller teams only able to run 2 cars would need a 0% failure rate to even be in with a chance of competing with them? Seems rather unfair.
Having the top 2 always score means that teams with 3 cars can have 1 car retire yet still score maximum points. It would allow the big teams with bigger budgets to run at a 33% failure rate, while smaller teams only able to run 2 cars would need a 0% failure rate to even be in with a chance of competing with them? Seems rather unfair.
And be at the back of the grid?
Unless he went totally mad, I highly doubt he will do this.
And thats the reason why I think it will happen. Why should Bernie go out of his way to incentivise the teams to run three cars, when with the rules set up in this fashion all the big teams will have to run a third car of be at a disadvantage.
Interesting to know the historical approach though, can imagine that leads to lots of interesting tactics.
Caporegime
Not needing money and not wanting money are completely different things, q.v. every investment banker ever.
But doesn't that create a championship where to have any hope of being competitive you must run 3 cars? Which then means teams that can't afford too should just not bother? That's just going to lead to even more teams leaving. If your going to allow a mix, you have to make it fair, otherwise it's just all back to whoever has the biggest wallet again, which is why we are in this situation.