The effect of the RRA on 2012 design ...

[gridwalker]

I have posted a comment to this effect on the McLaren MP4-27 thread, but I think this query deserves its own topic.

Given the evolutionary nature of the MP4-27 and the admission that Caterham had to focus on specific parts of their car rather than refining the full design, what effect do you think that the differing interpretations of the RRA will have on the design and performance of different teams?

Will this be the year of Ferrari and Red Bull, both of whom have withdrawn from FOTA over the issue of allowable resources? Will these 2 teams produce more extreme designs when compared to FOTA teams? Did the RRA force McLaren into an evolutionary approach, when revolution may be required to shake off Red Bull dominance?

Any thoughts will be appreciated!

[beelsebob]

Aren't RBR and Ferrari still bound by the RRA? It's not determined by membership of the FOTA, but instead, by the fact that they signed the contract on it.

[gridwalker]

This may be true, but they left FOTA due to differing opinions of how it should be interpreted and policed; this means that there is likely to be a disparity in how the teams apply their resources and I am curious as to whether anyone thinks this will affect the machines built for the start of the 2012 campaign.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

I think you can expect Ferrari and Red bull pull away from the rest now.
Sadly.

[Giblet]

This may be true, but they left FOTA due to differing opinions of how it should be interpreted and policed; this means that there is likely to be a disparity in how the teams apply their resources and I am curious as to whether anyone thinks this will affect the machines built for the start of the 2012 campaign.

They have left FOTA because they don't think that FOTA can come to an agreement over how to manage the RRA for everyone.

Still, resources aside, they are limited with the most important things, and these things are what shows a good team thinking on its feet and reacting properly.

Ferrari have traditionally thrown lost of money at engineering a car, but this was when they had unlimited tunnel time, and unlimited testing, and unlimited CFD time. Especially at their home track of Fiorano.

The money thrown at the car does not stick as much as before, in terms of development over the season. They have to focus on one or two development paths early on and commit, instead of running a few in parallel to select the best one.

I actually think this is why MS is having so much trouble with the car in quali, is that he is a driver who needs 1000's of clicks in testing to get truly on top of the car and understand, or feel it.

[dren]

I think technically they are still in the FOTA even though they pubically left. There is a time period in there before it is official.

[raymondu999]

2 months' notice

[Robbobnob]

As of the 1st of February Red Bull is no longer a member of FOTA, not sure when Ferrari withdrew.

[ESPImperium]

I voted no, as Pirelli will be told by the FIA not to supply teams that go testing outside of the 3 pre season and one in season test with race spec or long life demo tyres unless they are using a 2 year old car, conducting a shakedown or straightline day.

No tyres, no testing.

However back at base, things may be another issue, id expect 2 or 3 tunnels going, CFD being done on "black-ops" computers and more consultants or "work experience staff" than you can shake a stick at to produce more iterations of clever devices or front wings for example.

To me, if Ferrari want testing, i say let them, as long as its done by development, young or test drivers and not Alonso and Massa. As for testing, id make it that at least 9 teams at a test session at the same time, and only Pirelli can supply developmental rubber, no current spec rubber. ALso, testing has to be done at a track where no F1 events will be held that year as well, only using that venue once a callander year, in order to give a income stream to tracks for testing. Also 5 venues tops per year for in season testing. It would mean the larger teams would have to pay smaller teams to come allong, so the feild is as level as posible.

Im unsure what Red Bull want, but give it to them, however do it in a clever way so that all get a benifit. Im sure there is some regulation they want changed, so change it, if its active ride, get a key part manufacured to a spec for all to use, and have its useage monitored by the SECU.

Id give them what they want, but be clever about how you get them back, basically, if you give, they have to take in a way.

[WhiteBlue]

All teams are bound by the RRA until 2015. Unfortunately this does not include engines and the energy recovery from 2014 on. The RRA is enforceable with the single majority of teams. So no team can really afford to violate it seriously. There are grey zones which are subject to interpretation but over all the RRA is accepted as beneficial. The big disagreement between Ferrari and Red Bull wasn't as much about the past as it is about extending the RRA to engines and chassis in the future. Red Bull think that Ferrari and Mercedes have a massive advantage because they develop energy recovery (currently) in the engine departments/firms and do not have it included in the RRA budget and resources. Red Bull has to use RRA resources for the job. In the future those manufacturers will also benefit from engine development outside the RRA unless Red Bull somehow achieve a new agreement.

[mx_tifoso]

But yet RBR might be throwing countless money into the P.U.R.E operation? How ironic would that turn out to be if it is true and they've been buggering the manufacturers about their powertrain budgets.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Well I'm going to Vote yes. Yes it will affect the teams negatively below RB and Ferrari.

Purely and simply because we know there to be disagreement the way Red Bull defines its spend.
Ferrari pushed hardest of all the teams to get some form of balance, because the test ban favours Red Bull the most due to their set up.
They have the most talent, with the best equipment making mind bending(excuse this) equipment. You could argue Ferrari had this advantage during the Schumacher years.
But in all honesty, I dont think we really want to see Vettel walk his next 3 championships....

I digress!
As testing is banned in season(3 days in Mugello this year aside), Advantages are harder to overcome. Red Bull have all the aces with aero as we know these last 2/3 years.
We also cannot verify exactly what Red Bull spend. The bone of contention for Ferrari was that they would not sit idly by while Red Bull flaunted the RRA.
A fact backed up by the Dutch audit company CapGemini which conducted audits on McLaren, Ferrari, Mercedes and Sauber prior to the Singapore GP in 2011, the violations where evident.

Apparently the accounts where not correctly filled in, and in many cases left blank.
There are further musings that Red Bulls allotted wind tunnel time was overshot by as much as 40%.
Red Bulls' reasoning were that it was an invasive audit that would yield competitors its Intellectual Property(IP) inadvertently.

As for the wind tunnel, Marko had this peach....

Our wind tunnel is an antique, 80 years old and three times bigger than a modern one,” Marko explained. “It just takes longer to get going, and so only when it is (running) do we begin to measure (the time).”

And who decides that Mr Marko??? Newey?

The other big three teams obviously wanted to reach further agreement so that all team sang from the same hymn sheet. This was not forthcoming at any of the following meetings, and hence why the only team capable of chasing Red Bull, Ferrari, broke FOTA ranks.

So without real fear of audits that other teams within FOTA face, these 2 teams can crack on and have their own little spending war and fully neglect to fill in accounts without fear of reprimand. Why? Because audits appear to be optional rather than compulsory and FOTA is toothless without FIA teeth.

[bhall]

Red Bull think that Ferrari and Mercedes have a massive advantage because they develop energy recovery (currently) in the engine departments/firms and do not have it included in the RRA budget and resources. Red Bull has to use RRA resources for the job.

Thems the breaks if you're "just a drinks company" competing against car manufacturers in Formula 1.

I think Red Bull has likely enjoyed a comparable advantage because they were able to collect effectively double the data - RB5/STR4 - of the other teams in 2009. It certainly didn't hurt, as they won the development race that year and haven't looked back since. That's a hell of a way to kick off an entirely new formula in the age of severely restricted testing.

[WhiteBlue]

So without real fear of audits that other teams within FOTA face, these 2 teams can crack on and have their own little spending war and fully neglect to fill in accounts without fear of reprimand. Why? Because audits appear to be optional rather than compulsory and FOTA is toothless without FIA teeth.

I disagree. It is now even easier to call an audit which neither Ferrari nor Red Bull will be able to avoid if a majority of FOTA teams demand it. They have every reason to stick to guide lines that they can reasonably argue because there is real danger of having their resources or external service budgets reduced for the running year if they are found guilty of breaking the RRA.

But back to the issue of this thread. I believe that the RRA will have a supportive effect on Mercedes as they did not fully utilize their resource quota in the past and are only now coming up to the full contingent of engineers the other teams have been using in the past. So I could imagine that Merc are going to be closer to Ferrari than they have been last year. If you look at the combined odds for WDC you can see that the betting money sees Ferrari at 85.3 Mercedes at 100, McLaren at 16.2 and Red Bull at 18.8.



OK, there is a driver influence. I would bet my money on Newey for the fastest car this season but it could be a very close race between McLaren and Red Bull as the odds seem to indicate. The difference between Merc and Ferrari could well be the Alonso factor. Merc have nobody with his performance level and experience. Schumacher is simply not fast enough particularly in qualifying and Rosberg hasn't got the experience if he has the speed - which we don't know. So from the expectations of the fans we do see Merc and Ferrari on a similar level.

[bhall]

What are the penalties anyway? If it's a budget reduction, who acts as the firewall between a company and its own money?

(Oh, I had forgotten about those infernal odds. One car has been rendered digitally and one more has seen the light of day, yet people are content to toss money into a ring formed by rumors.)