About the F1 Resource Restriction Agreement

[bhall]

Not sure about the foxy loxy bit mind...

Yeah, he called me "diddums" yesterday.

A couple of things that I would also suggest is that we not get bogged down in a conversation about the intent or "spirit" of the rules, because that's a subject which is always open to interpretation, nor should we attach any particular weight to statements made on behalf of or against the team, because people have a tendency to defend what they believe to be righteous and to attack even perceived threats. In other words, I think we should leave the PR to the PR people and transcend as much as possible the bullshit that's thrown either way. We have the rules; we have the numbers; we don't need anything else - although a copy of the RRA would be fantastic.

[WhiteBlue]

Be very careful. You've seen the reports. Disputing that entry list now is tantamount to accusing your favorite team of fraud. (And you'll probably do it anyway.)

That is entirely inconclusive. How do you know the company name on the FiA list is the nominated entity for RRA purposes. There is no proof that Red Bull use the same company for both purposes. You would have to show me an entry in the RRA to convince me of your point of view, which you obviously cannot do. Do you have the slightest idea with how many shells Bernie Ecclestone has played around in his time with F1? Give Red Bull a bit of credit that they are not much dumber.

[bhall]

I further suggest that some people should probably be left out of this conversation entirely.

Craig, what's the point of a Resource Restriction Agreement between Formula One teams if the teams themselves don't have to sign the --- thing? Are you really such a [your choice] that you think a team can conceivably enter the FIA Formula One World Championship and then nominate a lemonade stand for the purposes of the Resource Restriction Agreement? Why would other teams sign such an agreement? Why would the FIA sign it?

No wonder you think a budget cap can work. You'd allow my expenditures on Formula One to stand for those made by Ferrari in Formula One.

EDIT: The only thing more pathetic than your indefatigable fatuity is the fact that I keep responding to it. So, I'm not going to do that anymore.

[gato azul]

So it appears that the resource capping for 2011 has been set to 280 head count for team personnel. I do not think that anything else has been revealed about the resource restriction agreement before, so this is at least one corner stone of information. One has to assume that the 2010 figure must be significantly higher than that. Considering that some teams employ in excess of 600 persons I could make an educated guess that the figure will probably be close to 450-500 next year. This would be based on the previous argument that employment cannot be reduced sharply in one go but in several steps.

o.k. - let's try to talk some numbers, and see what we KNOW about the RRA
Seeing the development of employment numbers, there does not seems to be any indication, that we approaching the
numbers mentioned in the opening post.
Looking at the numbers published @ companies house, they still seem to hover around the 500-650 mark, for total operations.
And it is somewhat unreasonable to assume, that teams use 250-300 backoffice and marketing stuff.
So what has the RRA really achieved in this respect? (headcount)
Seeing that Mercedes as an example (but also Red Bull) have increased there staffing levels from 2010-2011 and McLaren
did not decrease their staff significant from 2009-2010 (no 2011 numbers yet)
There is an interesting phenomena in the McLaren numbers, where the Racing Ltd reduced 15 staff, and at the same time the automotive ltd increased by 15 stuff.
But McLaren Racing Ltd. still employed well over 600 people.
So, was the whole RRA saga just a hollow marketing exercise &/or decoy to a peace the FIA, the boards and the general public, with more or less meaningless 2-3 week factory shutdown over the summer? That seems to be the only "tangible" result of it as far as I can see.
What else do we really know about it? (no guesses educated or otherwise - let's try to collect some numbers pls)
- max. windtunnel model size 60% ??

[bhall]

The max size for wind tunnels is defined by FIA regulations. I don't think we really know anything at all about the RRA except that it's apparently never officially been breached.

[FoxHound]

Rules which could potentially otherwise be breached by a team, that cannot be breached by a supplier.

1. Bhall's example.
2. 22.10 No wind tunnel testing may be carried out at a speed exceeding 50 metres/second.
3. F1 regulations prevent teams going over 40 teraflops of data at any one time.

More later.

Edited.

[CHT]

Rules which could potentially be breached by a supplier.

1. Bhall's example.
2. 22.10 No wind tunnel testing may be carried out at a speed exceeding 50 metres/second.
3. F1 regulations prevent teams going over 40 teraflops of data at any one time.

More later.

Source please.

[Cam]

Rules which could potentially be breached by a supplier.

1. Bhall's example.
2. 22.10 No wind tunnel testing may be carried out at a speed exceeding 50 metres/second.
3. F1 regulations prevent teams going over 40 teraflops of data at any one time.

More later.

After following these conversations quite closely - even I'm now confused by this one. How can any action by a 'supplier' be a potential breach?

[banibhusan]

I think the only way this whole cost cutting s**t can work is if the FIA limits the teams from having outside suppliers. A current team on the grid can only supply services to any other team on the grid. No team would be allowed to have any sort of technical collaboration with an organisation outside of the official F1 grid. By doing this, the FIA can audit the teams and their account books.

This is just a wild thought that popped up in mind without any rational thinking involved.

[bhall]

Rules which could potentially be breached by a supplier.

1. Bhall's example.
2. 22.10 No wind tunnel testing may be carried out at a speed exceeding 50 metres/second.
3. F1 regulations prevent teams going over 40 teraflops of data at any one time.

More later.

After following these conversations quite closely - even I'm now confused by this one. How can any action by a 'supplier' be a potential breach?

Indeed. Any entity that's not specifically entered into the FIA Formula One World Championship or is not party to the Concorde or Resource Restriction agreements naturally doesn't have to follow any of those rules. Otherwise it would be like asking travelers on a German autobahn to adhere to speed limits set in Guatemala.

[FoxHound]

I have edited the post. Rules which could potentially otherwise be breached by a team, that cannot be breached by a supplier.

The source is the FIA regs as listed on their website.
http://www.formula1.com/inside_f1/rules ... ions/8713/

Indeed, the FIA has introduced rules that limit the number of hours
of CFD modelling each team can perform within its data centres to a maximum of 40 teraflops in any one eight week period,
dependent on how many hours the car spends being tested in a physical wind tunnel

Sources: eandt.theiet.org/magazine/2011/10/it-in-F1.cfm?SaveToPDF (copy and paste to search)


http://www.csc.com/smart_business/ds/33 ... ata_driven

[bhall]

Again, that's wide open. Let's say I enter the FIA Formula One World Championship as Blue Bovine Racing. I could purchase a complete car from Blue Bovine Technology next door, and the only rules they'd be obliged to follow are the material rules for the car itself. That means my car's design could be the product of a 1-yottaFLOP CFD application, honed 24 hours a day in a full-scale wind tunnel, and further refined with daily track testing. As long as the car was made to the proscribed dimensions and with allowable materials, everything about the car would be 100% legal if the delineation between Blue Bovine Racing and Blue Bovine Technology remained clear.

I believe this is why the 2014 rules refresh was canned yesterday. Development and cost-cutting are conflicting goals in the real world, and the FIA, along with the teams, decided to pursue the latter, which has effectively rendered the RRA obsolete. The cars will be spec by the end of next year.

[Nando]

So basically you can create these suppliers and strip down the actual team until it only consists of the team personels paycheck and run everything else through suppliers?

[bhall]

Pretty much. Red Bull Racing proper, for instance, is little more than those who travel to each grand prix to work on the cars. It employed 52 people in 2011.

[Nando]

Ok so if I set up a team I'll just make suppliers,

meaning my aero supplier runs 100% tunnel 24/7 and they have a personal test track that also runs every day to verify the parts.
I then put in a billion or so in that company to finance everything including the driver's paycheck etc.

what more can you do to go around this obvious flaw in the RRA? sky is the limit?