Rory Byrne is back

[munudeges]

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

I think you have to read between the lines a bit there with these things. The 2007 and 2008 McLaren was built with the last remnants of Newey's thinking from 2006 (thin nose etc.), and indeed, when he was at Red Bull in 2006 he said that once the Bridgestone tyres were fitted to the McLaren it would play right into their hands. He was spot on.

McLaren simply had the base of a winning car all there ready for them they could make adjustments and modifications with. I'm not convinced they really understood what they actually had on a fundamental level.

[timbo]

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

Yes, you have to read between the lines, and that's why until we do not know the actual process from the inner circle of the design team there's not much we can tell on how the team works. It applies for Ferrari, RedBull, Mercedes, McLaren etc.etc.
Because I often see a tendency to put correlation backwards — i.e. if a car is successful then there's a particular process into its design. And it's wrong to assume such thing.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

if a car is successful then there's a particular process into its design. And it's wrong to assume such thing.

Completely agree,
I think its an evolutionary process. No single way is the "correct" way. But I think what is important in any team is lines of communication and direction.
Without these 2 ingredients you could be the best designer on earth and still develop a heap of junk.

What is good for Red Bull, may not necessarily be good for anyone else. Consider the individuals involved, how the interact and what their roles are. Its unique.
Consider also that head to head, Newey will out-think any other head designer. Red Bull have made great capital of that, and I dont think any other team can use an identikit structure and expect the same results....Byrne included.

[munudeges]

Not that I'm bashing Byrne here in any way. You can nitpick on a few things but his record speaks for itself. The trouble is that I have never seen these kinds of working structures work, especially in a black and white environment where things either work or they don't. I've never seen a successful Formula 1 car designed by a committee. That might appear to be the case sometimes, but it's really not.

As far as I am concerned I wouldn't have pussy footed around and I would have offered Byrne the top Technical Director's job and been done with it.

[timbo]

The trouble is that I have never seen these kinds of working structures work, especially in a black and white environment where things either work or they don't. I've never seen a successful Formula 1 car designed by a committee. That might appear to be the case sometimes, but it's really not.

The structure from 2000 obviously worked.

As far as I am concerned I wouldn't have pussy footed around and I would have offered Byrne the top Technical Director's job and been done with it.

Would he want to? Would it be to hard for him (he's quite old, and for all we know top level management in F1 works damn hard)? We have no idea what he's actually doing and what's his input.

[marcush.]

Newey is really penciling the car out on paper till today ,but he is in constant discussion on a daily basis with the team leaders in that process .
He stated that his drawings get scanned for the detail designers to work from that .
Actually you can go a long way with the drawings made witth french curves etc and get them digitised.
CAD systems are not just Solids -Lego style work...far from it.

I´m pretty convinced Newey has found the ideal environment for his style of work at RB and simply he could not do this at Mclaren or Williams to be a satellite of sorts with his creative process .
Mteschitz has made this possible andf they formed their team around him and something tells me they would not struggle too much without him as the basic thinking and work ethos has now filtered down to the last guy and you will not get the ghost back into the bottle.
This sort of footprint is what Byrne left over when he stepped back at Ferrari ,in the same way as Barnard banged proceedures and philosophies into their heads before ,as he had done already at Mclaren ,or Benetton.

[raymondu999]

I agree marcush. Newey is usually attributed to leaving Williams/McLaren back then because he was never given leeway to be his own guy doing things his own way

[timbo]

This sort of footprint is what Byrne left over when he stepped back at Ferrari ,in the same way as Barnard banged proceedures and philosophies into their heads before ,as he had done already at Mclaren ,or Benetton.

I'm not sure Barnard's Ferrari years are a good example of team organization=)

[raymondu999]

Actually marcush; Scarbs also reckons that now Prodromou is very much an unsung hero of the Red Bull aero department

[marcush.]

This sort of footprint is what Byrne left over when he stepped back at Ferrari ,in the same way as Barnard banged proceedures and philosophies into their heads before ,as he had done already at Mclaren ,or Benetton.

I'm not sure Barnard's Ferrari years are a good example of team organization=)

Barnard may not have been very good( read easy) with people but he sure laid the foundation in terms of proceedures and facilities to lead Ferrari into the next millenium.
Barnards single biggest fault was not to accept working in Italy as this was something impossible back then and I´d rather tend to the opinion it is still not very efficient todays.You just need to be close to all important people physically to get all details right and avoid lengthy useless discussions.

I think Newey is really someone challenging his guys with his concepts and this sort of constant challenge will lead to extraordinary results.
The usual way is the other way round the head of it all does decide on the ideas popping up around him and maybe the big item is the teams are too small to really have the plausinbility checks made by people not having toyed out that very idea..
and so the TD has a hard work in figuring out which ideas are worth all the effort and wich are the ones to discard.

[timbo]

Barnard may not have been very good( read easy) with people but he sure laid the foundation in terms of proceedures and facilities to lead Ferrari nto the next millenium.

Actually, the problem with Barnard was that by not moving in Italy he did nothing to streamline Ferrari operation and upgrade facilities. That was the main problem Todt, Brawn and Byrne had to overcome to make the system work.

Barnards single biggest fault was not to accept working in Italy as this was something impossible back then and I´d rather tend to the opinion it is still not very efficient todays.You just need to be close to all important people phsically to get all details right and avoid lengthy useless discussions.

From what I read it transpires that there were not much of "discussion" going with Barnard and that was a big problem. He did design in his office in English, manufacturing team in Italy had to somehow make it work in Italy. Brunner did much of a practical work of maintaning and upgrading Barnard's designs.

Note that I don't say his designs were bad, they were apparently very good, but that lack of communication was the reason they suffered on track.

[marcush.]

that´s what I said ,mate!

[thatnoone]

newey left mclaren because of politics & Ferrari, right? Michelin?

[marcush.]

one has to consider that newey had signed up with Jaguar already when Bobby Rahal was leading the team for a few hours and it was Ron Dennis who somehow was able to jump over all shadows (and pay millions to jag in compensation)just to make sure Newe<y was not working for someone else .So it´s fair to say Newey never really felt at home at Mclaren.

[raymondu999]

I can't remember where but I seem to remember someone; or maybe Newey himself, that Newey didn't like that he was never given his own technical freedom; somehow he was underused or something? Can't completely remember though