Horner and Boullier call for in season testing rethink

[andartop]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/99338

A couple of points from the above article to kick off the discussion:

- Mr Horner believes it would be better value for money to include an extra GP in the calendar rather than go testing. He then argues that "the season is gruelling for the guys and we disbanded test teams some while ago".

- Mr Boullier says that Lotus didn't really need this, and would rather avoid it.

So, my questions are:

Would it be easier for the team staff to have another GP weekend (potentially somewhere in the Middle East) instead of 3 days of testing?

Was Lotus forced to participate in the test against their will?

And of course:
Is there another "sport" in which competitors are not allowed to test/practice in order to improve their performance???

Would be interested to see what other team principals and drivers think about it.

[banibhusan]

I don't think they were forced to take part in the testing. They could have skipped it if they wanted, just like HRT did.

Somehow I really don't like Horner. Somehow I feel he never stops cribbing about things. Last year we had 4 pre-season tests and he was happy about it and now we have 3 pre-season and 1 in-season tests and he is crying again.

On the contrary, wouldn't it be a nice idea to extend the practice session on Fridays of a race weekend to 6 hours instead of 3 hours and ban testing on isolated venues. For example, let's say, we can have 3 pre-season tests as usual. And 1 in-season test of 3 days, i.e. 24 hours, divided throughout the European GP race weekends(because teams anyways don't test outside of Europe). If a team chooses to test at Barcelona for example, then they can buy 3 more hours on Friday apart from the FPs and test their new parts. The total extra testing time used by any team should not cross 24 hours during the season. This additional 24 hours would be optional to the teams and they can choose to use it during any of the European GP weekends. And if the number European GPs reduce in coming years, then teams can either test on Thursday or get extra few hours on Friday.

By doing so, they can get past the additional cost of bringing equipments and personnel to independent venues. If this testing happens during race weekends, then it won't cost teams too much since it's part of a race weekend. This is not a well thought idea yet, since it just popped into my mind and I wrote it. So anyone with some good suggestion is most welcome.

EDIT: And one more advantage would be, it will give teams more freedom in their development plans and more opportunity to gain good performance mid season.

[Nando]

They have reasonable good cars, obviously they will have that opinion, Boullier even stated it in the interview.

If you have a shitty car then yes you will want every test you can get.
If your car is "good" then it might not be the most important thing in the world and could in some cases work against you as other teams catch up and pass due to whatever.

[bhall]

Red Bull inaugurated the ban on in-season testing in 2009 with four cars from which to collect data at every race. (STR4 was identical to RB5.) That's a very convenient way to usher in not only a new era of severely restricted testing, but also a complete overhaul of the regulations. I think the results from about the halfway point of that season until the end of last season speak for themselves.

All of that's to say that I think it's a bit disingenuous for Christian Horner to question the value of testing. As a result of acquiring double the data of anyone else during the crucial beginning stages of the current formula, his team has been playing with a stacked deck for the last 3+ years.

Boullier's outfit simply can't afford to test, because it seems like every sponsorship they touch turns to coal. To him, I'd say, "It's only F1, big guy. You don't have to be here."

Sometimes I get the distinct feeling that F1 is governed by spins of a veritable Absurd Wheel of Fortune.

[marcush.]

says it pretty much .f1 is a bit selfish?
I´m rather disappointed by the teams not really packaging their cars to be able to take on board dedicated evaluation tools and really using the free practise sessions-or is this forbidden and you have to fully comply in all points to the regs at all times during the weekend?

[Neno]

i think boullier and horner say this in diffirent way. in season testing is not necessary. winter testing serve for that, ofcourse they will participate on this testing because of competition, but was it really necessary to have testing in middle of season, for me is answer NO!

[andartop]

They have reasonable good cars, obviously they will have that opinion, Boullier even stated it in the interview.

If you have a shitty car then yes you will want every test you can get.
If your car is "good" then it might not be the most important thing in the world and could in some cases work against you as other teams catch up and pass due to whatever.

Fair enough, but if they feel they don't benefit from testing they might as well not participate.

I understand their (selfish) motives, just find it hilarious that both teams run the test and then started bitching about how expensive and/or unnecessary it is..

[PlatinumZealot]

While F1's team principals have been sceptical about the benefits of the test, drivers were more positive about the value of the three-days of extra running.

[donskar]

If I had Newey designing my cars I wouldn't want other teams to test either.

[Lycoming]

I believe their comments were partially the result of the venue; mugello is different from most F1 tracks. A bit like testing at monaco... doesn't necessarily yield much useful data. The drivers like it because its a fast track.

Moreover, mid season tests are worse than pre season tests for the mechanics, who don't get much of a break now until august.

[bhall]

I've seen that said about Mugello quite a few times this week, and I don't quite understand. If the testing venue is that important, why do teams carry out straight-line tests when F1 is far from a series of drag races?

[marcush.]

I think all the talk is just about team members having a microphone in front of their mouth urged to voice something meaningful without having really thought about it.

Mugello is just as good as any track for testing components and getting a handle on setting up the car.It´s a different challenge -but that ´s true for every track -you imagine Monaco being the same as Hungary ...not at all ...they are only quite close in average speed but seriously I don´t think many parameters are even close ..starting from rideheights ,camber etc etc...

Also the Barcelona track is very well known and all teams should know how to handle that track -but is the timegaps any closer when racing there?
I´d think from a setup point of view testing is not necessary anymore ,so testing at the track is well covered by FP1-3.

Testing aero upgrades ....you need corners in the biggest variety to get an idea where your new parts net improvements.
The lack of slow corners makes the Mugello track very useful as traction related issues are not overly important so you can concentrate on the aero

[Paul]

I can see some teams being frustrated with not being able to design and produce big enough upgrade package for the test. Which means they miss both on testing their own significant upgrades, and also see others test new parts and gain advantage from it.

[ESPImperium]

I have a solution. Lets have 3 in season tests, teams can only attend 2 tests. And heres another rule, race drivers can only do one of the 6 days in season testing that are available, where drivers can't be subbed in the middle of the day, drivers must be in the car for the full day.

Value, this way there is value for test, reserve and development guys for the drivers side.

Another thing. Teams must submit a list of 120 guys that can only attend tests and races. Teams can only send 50 to one, and one guy can only go to 65 to 70 of around the 100 to 110 days that they are at a track. In other words run a A team and a B team of mechanics and data engineers at the track.

This would mean they would have to run in tests to make sure that both teams were running as one.

Teams need to use their man power more smartly.

I laugh, this test does have value, they are just trying to justify it using stupid reasons.

If in the next 3 or 4 races the teams bring a host of updates, this test is valid and will remain for 2013 and quite rightly so.

Personally i think that teams should test on non calendar tracks as his way they have to make more use of the time they have testing and also it means that they have to work harder in Practice Sessions. However if they want to test at a track they have raced at can be on a test schedule. Say a test at Sliverstone 2 days after the GP is fine.

[RAF]

I can see the teams point. Set-up work for this track will be redundant as they are not racing there. You have to factor in the cost of the logistics and the mileage, parts, wear, etc. I agree with Horner (as much as I dislike him) that you might as well just have another GP.

If the teams really all have that much of a problem with it, why not simply have 2 GP's during the season that are non-championship races in place of the tests. Both teams and drivers could get their precious testing time, the fans would get to watch a race and the money from both events could go to charity. You could have for example 'The Cancer Trust' GP. The F1 rights owners could coincide these 2 grand prix with popular charity events such as 'Children in Need' or 'Comic Relief' in order to get as much exposure for the sponsors in order to help cover the cost towards the running in these events. Given that these events would be for charity and that real world championship points would not be scored would relieve a lot of the stress for the staff of the teams.