Rory Byrne is back

[donskar]

[...] The fact is Rory Byrne is a legend & has worked in similar roles under Ross Brawn when ferrari owned the entire grid. Wether he does the same with a Fry as TD remains to be seen but it does sound very stupid & self-righteous that all teams will make structures to please fan forums. They know what they are doing.

I agree with the content of your [...]. Montezemolo, though much-hated in this forum, is driven by results. He will do whatever it takes to get Ferrari competitive again. Titles and org chart aside, the best man will rise to the top. (Yes, I know that at Ferrari "best" = technical AND political ability. Byrne seems to be strong in both areas and to have plenty of support within the hierarchy.) If true, this is great news. I see Byrne playing a much larger and more creative role now than he has recently.

[shelly]

Mr S, what do you mean with your post? What do you mean when you wite "make structures"? Do you mean publish their structure (which they do, btw)?

The point of this part of the thread is highlighting the organisational differences between teams, and see how ferrari could involve more Byrne (who has kept part time working with them).

[munudeges]

This is what they seem to have gone back to with Aldo Costa going and the role of TD being abolished. It is still confusing nontheless because in that structure it's clear that Brawn and ultimately Byrne are calling the shots. There are now three positions reporting to Domenicali - Chassis Director (Fry), Production Director (whatever that is - Corrado Lanzone) and Electronics Director (Luca Marmorini). There is no one person ultimately calling the shots on the car, and if Byrne is being brought into that then it muddies things still further.

So in fact, they do make things public and we can deduce rather a lot.

They know what they are doing.

They'll know what they are doing when they start winning. As it is that doesn't mean it can't be discussed and criticised on a forum.

[Mr.S]

If Ferrari do not want 1 guy to be responsible for the car & it is their call. They can have any structure they are confident with. Without EBD Ferrari had the best car as demonstrated in Silverstone & they will be strong challengers come next year. Even last year they undoubtedly had a fantastic car in the 2nd half winning in diverse circuits like Monza & Singapore.


Anyway Ferrari do not seem to believe in a structure like Newey & neither do I think that it every team has to have a 1 Man COMMANDOR responsible everything to be successful. Newey won 2 straight titles,well & good but Ferrari won 5 straight titles from 2000 to 2004. They know what they are doing & it is amusing to see Internet trolls berate Ferrari.

[donskar]

munudeges, you wrote:

There are now three positions reporting to Domenicali - Chassis Director (Fry), Production Director (whatever that is - Corrado Lanzone) and Electronics Director (Luca Marmorini). There is no one person ultimately calling the shots on the car, and if Byrne is being brought into that then it muddies things still further.

Just a thought: it is quite possible that Byrne will be the

one person ultimately calling the shots on the car

. He certainly has an excellent track record with Ferrari and before Ferrari. IIRC, Byrne is a person who both does not crave notoriety AND is a good team player. He could well fit into any sort of (dis)organization. We are making all sorts of assumptions here based on slim evidence, but why not?

[Gerhard Berger]

If Ferrari do not want 1 guy to be responsible for the car & it is their call. They can have any structure they are confident with. Without EBD Ferrari had the best car as demonstrated in Silverstone & they will be strong challengers come next year. Even last year they undoubtedly had a fantastic car in the 2nd half winning in diverse circuits like Monza & Singapore.

At Silverstone, the level of off throttle blowing was limited, but the EBD was still very much present. We'll have to wait and see how it effects the team, but i'd be inclined to agree with you and say that it will disadvantage Ferrari the least since they seem to have not fully exploited this area (judging from the interviews with Pat Fry).

Last year the car was very good mechanically - hence it could do well at tracks like Monza and Singapore (one is low downforce, the other high downforce, but both require good traction and braking, which is where the F10 was strong), and other "point and squirt" circuits like Hockenheim and Montreal.

Anyway i will be interested to see how they do with Fry and Tombazis in their new roles, with Byrne being more influential and hopefully with the wind tunnel problems resolved. People are quick to judge, but we have to wait until the opening races next year.

[Gerhard Berger]

This is what they seem to have gone back to with Aldo Costa going and the role of TD being abolished. It is still confusing nontheless because in that structure it's clear that Brawn and ultimately Byrne are calling the shots. There are now three positions reporting to Domenicali - Chassis Director (Fry), Production Director (whatever that is - Corrado Lanzone) and Electronics Director (Luca Marmorini). There is no one person ultimately calling the shots on the car, and if Byrne is being brought into that then it muddies things still further.

So in fact, they do make things public and we can deduce rather a lot.

They know what they are doing.

They'll know what they are doing when they start winning. As it is that doesn't mean it can't be discussed and criticised on a forum.

Hello. May i ask where you found that hierarchy? It's very interesting.

[timbo]

Hello. May i ask where you found that hierarchy? It's very interesting.

That is operational diagram from 2000. Taken from this book http://www.amazon.co.uk/Ferrari-Formula ... 927&sr=8-1

[Gerhard Berger]

Hello. May i ask where you found that hierarchy? It's very interesting.

That is operational diagram from 2000. Taken from this book http://www.amazon.co.uk/Ferrari-Formula ... 927&sr=8-1

thanks! Would you recommend the book?

Also, what is Costa's role? i can not see it because of the flash. And where does Tad Czapski fit in?

[timbo]

thanks! Would you recommend the book?

Also, what is Costa's role? i can not see it because of the flash. And where does Tad Czapski fit in?

Costa is the head of so-called "Rolling chassis projects" and responds to Byrne. There's no mention of Ted Czapski in the diagram and in the book. Not sure why.
As for recommendation -- if you are Ferrari fan, and won't mind quite a hefty price-tag then definitely! Overall 2000 car is obviously dated but there's a ton of info that quite broadens a perspective of an F1 fan IMO.

[munudeges]

Full credit to Timbo for revealing it. He brought it up on the Merc thread.

You look at all the successful cars produced over the years and they have always had one guy whose head is on the block - Colin Chapman, John Barnard, Gordon Murray. They made any final decisions. Formula 1 development is not a democracy and it is very much a black or white environment. There are no shades of grey.

For me the most impressive thing is that Byrne managed to do anything within that spaghetti organisation at all.

[timbo]

You look at all the successful cars produced over the years and they have always had one guy whose head is on the block - Colin Chapman, John Barnard, Gordon Murray. They made any final decisions.

Well, not the case for '90's Williams. As for Chapman, the famous 78 was made by Rudd heading Bellamy as chief designer.

[Jeffsvilleusa]

Also wasn't McLaren's '07 & '08 essentially by committee?

[munudeges]

Well, not the case for '90's Williams.

Yep, it was. The Williams of the 90s was all about aerodynamics and the active suspension was as a result of Newey pushing to get the car closer to the ground. There is always really one person who was behind a really successful car.

In Chapman's case he knew who to bring in as all very good engineers do, but nevertheless it was another in a long line of cars produced under his stewardship.

You sometimes have to read between the lines but the correlation is pretty clear. Formula 1 is not design by committee.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Formula 1 is not design by committee.

I actually agree with that. But there is more to it than just one person. I think its having other designers understand exactly the concept the lynch-pin of the team(Newey in Red Bulls case and Byrne in the Ferrari hey days) have set the others. No single person can design the entire car from scratch, but that person can plant ideas as to what he needs and requires for "his" car.

Once the design team understand where they are headed and what is needed, they can even apply some of their own ideas(2 heads better than one etc.)

Looking at the Red Bull team, the iconic flexing wing, exhaust blown diffuser, over runs, platypus nose, coke bottle shaped rear and even the actual body shape may not all have come from Newey.
I would guess he was responsible for alot of that but, perhaps integrating these ideas into the real thing is where Red Bull are nailing it.