FormulaSP

Brawn Gp

431 posts in this topic

Brad, you could have always come to our bar (when we had it). It was the only thing that appeared open on Sunday mornings (5am). But in reality we'd open only if someone who wanted to see the race knocked XD (My mum wouldn't let us watch in the house so early, so she kicked us out in the bar XD)

:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well bollocking hell, I found the article referring to 'spirit of the regs', and on further reading (with my eyes open this time) I noticed it was pure opinion - so my post was a load of toss. At least for now, I predict the future rather well :lol:

9 days ago the FIA introduced a clarification for sporting and technical regs, you can it here: http://www.fia.com/en-GB/sport/regulations...ampionship.aspx

Apparently it's normalish for them to publish these docs to tidy up grey areas....

Have a lie down, old chum - you've done your bit. Or......go to Specsavers!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Have a lie down, old chum - you've done your bit. Or......go to Specsavers!!

Cheeky sod :P Anyway, back to the point (I know there's a diffuser row thread, but we started first :lol: ), I can't be arsed going through it all again, but the F1technical.net forum has plenty of useful stuff about the diffusers.. and by the the letter of the regs I'd deduce that Williams and BrawnGP are in the clear, and Toyota aren't - but it's a bloody big explanation why!

There's also quite a bit of info on the 'spirit of the regs' (which of course don't exist!), but that decisions concerning legality will be influenced by the purpose for which they were introduced (which is stated in the regs), hence judgements are influenced by this.

I'm not one for instability, but it really is time FOCA set up on their own for a few years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cheeky sod :P Anyway, back to the point (I know there's a diffuser row thread, but we started first :lol: ), I can't be arsed going through it all again, but the F1technical.net forum has plenty of useful stuff about the diffusers.. and by the the letter of the regs I'd deduce that Williams and BrawnGP are in the clear, and Toyota aren't - but it's a bloody big explanation why!

There's also quite a bit of info on the 'spirit of the regs' (which of course don't exist!), but that decisions concerning legality will be influenced by the purpose for which they were introduced (which is stated in the regs), hence judgements are influenced by this.

I'm not one for instability, but it really is time FOCA set up on their own for a few years.

FOTA should consult on all new regs and agree the parameters of interpretation amongst themselves. Red Bull have come out and said all three diffusers are illegal. This is just sour grapes and not backed up in fact. Their R&D prototype for a similar piece of engineering was viewed in a negative light when presented to the FIA. However, the FIA did not say it was illegal. Nevertheless, Red Bull dumped it and now they're whining. I take the same view as you, Meds - that BGP and Williams are within the innovative limits allowed and Toyota are not. The teams in question couldn't possibly manufacture and deploy new parts before Barcelona. So, if the other teams successfully challenge the validity of the diffusers at Melly, presumably the teams who are censured will lose any points they may have gained until the FIA call it one way or another. My personal feeling is that it will end up at the Council for adjudication. Please, can we have a panel of professional stewards - now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure how admin are with this? - please delete and bollock me if it's naughty (or PM me for the source?)... For those interested in BrawnGP, it's an up-to-date review of BrawnGP from someone 'that writes somewhere else', the writer is AFCA, 'thank you' for great info.

Some more on the team and the car (msa) :

- The seed money for 2009 comes from from FOM (

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure Brawn won't find getting sponsors on board after the first race difficult!

Edited by Jenson_Rules!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, love to see some glossy sponsors on the car.

I can see points finishes for Australia.

Interseting info though Med!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Frank Williams has said today that he expects Brawn cars to disappear into the distance on sunday! So they really are being taken seriously.

I'm still not getting my hopes up, i'll be glad if they can challenge for 4th/5th, cos thats still a massive improvement.

Williams, Toyota, BMW, Ferrari & Renault all think they've made a huge step forward and they cant all be first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cheeky sod :P Anyway, back to the point (I know there's a diffuser row thread, but we started first :lol: ), I can't be arsed going through it all again, but the F1technical.net forum has plenty of useful stuff about the diffusers.. and by the the letter of the regs I'd deduce that Williams and BrawnGP are in the clear, and Toyota aren't - but it's a bloody big explanation why!

There's also quite a bit of info on the 'spirit of the regs' (which of course don't exist!), but that decisions concerning legality will be influenced by the purpose for which they were introduced (which is stated in the regs), hence judgements are influenced by this.

I'm not one for instability, but it really is time FOCA set up on their own for a few years.

Ah yes, the old Mischief rule. From a literal interpretation of the rules, the diffusers may well be legal, but probably don't fit the purpose of the rules. It's difficult to write a massive set of regulations and cover every possible loophole (especially with a team of trained up and talented engineers searchings for said loopholes); hence why the FIA/WMSC retains the power to ban anything they want to if it isn't fit for the purpose of the rules. Hopefully, once a decision is reached, it won't apply retrospectively, that is if Brawn's Boys go and win the first race with a diffuser that is later deemed illegal, then they should be able to keep their points anyway (as with Ferrari in Melly 07, I think). Lets see.

Thanks to AFCA (off that other forum) and you for the info!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ah yes, the old Mischief rule.

Impressive; do you study contract law? (I have studied it in insurance contracts)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Impressive; do you study contract law? (I have studied it in insurance contracts)

Nah! But my dad was a law lecturer once upon a time, and sometimes a long long time ago when I was a wee lad (a very wee lad, like 5) I would sit at the front of the class while he taught, maybe some of it went in! :lol:

Gave me a slight interest in law though, so I read up :P (all hail the internet)

Edit: As for the diffusers, I see them getting through scrutineering and then being banned later on in a court room.

Edited by Rainmaster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The seed money for 2009 comes from from FOM (€ 47 million) and the risk premium from Ecclestone (€ 35 million).

Come again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They won't ban anything unless the team starts winning all the time.

But yeah, hopefully all points will still count etc.

Ferrari will be behind it as well I bet (unless they too are bending the rules)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nah! But my dad was a law lecturer once upon a time, and sometimes a long long time ago when I was a wee lad (a very wee lad, like 5) I would sit at the front of the class while he taught, maybe some of it went in! :lol:

:lol:

Nice. Then he got the call from OJ Simpson...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what happens when you cross the Poison Dwarf:

At the World Motor Sport Council meeting earlier this month, Brawn GP applied for a simple name-change. Simple it wasn't. The WNSC deemed Brawn would be considered a 'new entry' for this season.

"The contract the original team had with the FIA was to run as 'Honda', which they are no longer in a position to do," the FIA said. So, Brawn go to the end of the pit lane and draw the high numbers for 2009.

Problem is, 'new' teams cannot draw a full revenue share from F1's commercial arrangements. Swiss specialist publication, Motorsport Aktuell has brought this point to light. It reports that though Brawn could not officially keep Honda's financial status, the teams unanimously agreed that they should, in a combined effort to get them on the grid for Melbourne. However, Ecclestone vetoed the move. Consequently, BGP is 22 million euros short of it's 2009 budget target. Why did Bernie use his veto? Two words - words we usually associate with 10-year-olds - temper and greed. In February, Ross and Fry turned down the F1 chief executive's offer to help complete the buyout. I believe it was

Edited by Insider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is what happens when you cross the Poison Dwarf:

At the World Motor Sport Council meeting earlier this month, Brawn GP applied for a simple name-change. Simple it wasn't. The WNSC deemed Brawn would be considered a 'new entry' for this season.

"The contract the original team had with the FIA was to run as 'Honda', which they are no longer in a position to do," the FIA said. So, Brawn go to the end of the pit lane and draw the high numbers for 2009.

Problem is, 'new' teams cannot draw a full revenue share from F1's commercial arrangements. Swiss specialist publication, Motorsport Aktuell has brought this point to light. It reports that though Brawn could not officially keep Honda's financial status, the teams unanimously agreed that they should, in a combined effort to get them on the grid for Melbourne. However, Ecclestone vetoed the move. Consequently, BGP is 22 million euros short of it's 2009 budget target. Why did Bernie use his veto? Two words - words we usually associate with 10-year-olds - temper and greed. In February, Ross and Fry turned down the F1 chief executive's offer to help complete the buyout. I believe it was

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Let us pray some disaster befalls this nasty little man and that he finally gets his just desserts.

Ecclestone's lost his grip on reality and the disaster has befallen the rest of us.

I suppose you've read his latest rambling about "better come at him with a loaded gun" or some such nonsense. If I cared about the man, I would be sad.

Over dinner with friends, a few days back, we amused ourselves hypothesizing what the English press would say of this bunch of clowns if FIA was run, instead of by British, by Italians or Spaniards, by Japanese or Chinese, by Arabs or Nigerians... the stream of racist and xenophobic remarks would be endless... exactly as it was when motoGP was bought off, btw... and which, interestingly, is now far better managed than F1 has been for a long time (if ever) although, of course, this is not saying much...

Less than two days for lift off...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm. His latest pronouncement is that F1 doesn't go to the US any more because the teams wanted too much money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmm. His latest pronouncement is that F1 doesn't go to the US any more because the teams wanted too much money.

Balderdash!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Over dinner with friends, a few days back, we amused ourselves hypothesizing what the English press would say of this bunch of clowns if FIA was run, instead of by British, by Italians or Spaniards, by Japanese or Chinese, by Arabs or Nigerians... the stream of racist and xenophobic remarks would be endless... exactly as it was when motoGP was bought off, btw... and which, interestingly, is now far better managed than F1 has been for a long time (if ever) although, of course, this is not saying much...

Being British has nothing to do with it and I'm not aware that Brits in the media or otherwise hold the FIA close to our hearts - witness for example all the press around Max when he went all "spanky" on us.

FIA are incompetent, end of story. Brits, media and otherwise recognise that and take them to task. The problem is that Max and Bernie feel that they are immune from challenge, press comment, public opinion, etc. How wrong could they be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly Chris.

Although I can't resist noting that it's Brits who rose to the top of F1...

And I kind of disagree that Max, Bernie and Tamara are incompetent.

Nevertheless, great post!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Balderdash!!!

First time I see that word used somewhere! I might even have to look for its meaning :lol:

Exactly Chris.

Although I can't resist noting that it's Brits who rose to the top of F1...

And I kind of disagree that Max, Bernie and Tamara are incompetent.

Nevertheless, great post!

Yes, we know. I wonder how come you're still free to roam about :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And I kind of disagree that Max, Bernie and Tamara are incompetent.

Nevertheless, great post!

:P

Let me rephrase my earlier comment:

FIA are incompetent, end of story. Brits, media and otherwise apart from Murray who is Max's secret love-child recognise that and take them to task. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol:

Max and Tamara, sitting on the News of the World website, K-I-S-S-I-N-G. You're just jealous she didn't give suck to you.

Yes, we know. I wonder how come you're still free to roam about :P

Balderdash and piffle! You know I'm locked in a cellar with Max right now.

Edited by Murray Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You know, this is weird. What happens when Team McLaren become Team Vodafone Mclaren Merceds (or whatever, you gt the drift), and when Tyrell was changed to BAR, then Honda etc etc.

There are plenty of name changes with the teams over the years, yet there's nothing in the regs to differentiate between the degree of change (including the 'original maker' name or not).

I can't find a precedent for what has gone on here, can anyone else cast some light on why this case is different to the others?

I smell fish, and there's only two things that smell of fish........ I also smell sour grapes, but I like wine.

I want an answer to this and I have mailed WMSC, FOTA, FOM and the FIA. Honda had already paid their annual registration fee for 2009 which they asked to be transferred to BGP. FOM and the FIA found this to be acceptable. Though the contract with FOM has the name 'Honda' on it, the registration fee transfer was allowed. So, why not the name change? Most teams have contracts based on their original name like Ferrari, McLaren, Williams and so on - that's the getaround. Brawn GP is not Honda and that is that. It could of been waived but in came Bernie's veto. Bernie demanded long-term commitment agreements too which he knew STR and BGP couldn't possibly sign as STR was up for sale and Ross didn't have the cash. Why is BE being so obstructive? You may well ask. Try this. Bernie wanted an in to FOTA through BGP and was willing to part with huge sums of money to get it but Ross saw it coming. All these problems, including the diffuser [ which I am betting will be passed as legal by the scrutineers, by the way] would not exist if Ross had taken the senile dwarf's poisoned bait. He didn't and more power to him for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now