In the round-up: Some team principals voice support for the imposition of a budget cap in F1.
Links
Top F1 links from the past 24 hours:
F1 teams open to reviving budget cap (Autosport)
Eric Boullier: 'There are three ways: budget caps, maybe a more conservative technical and sporting regulations because I am sure there are changes to be made in sporting one to save money, and the RRA.'
Hamilton should stay at McLaren, says Kovalainen (Daily Mail)
'If I was him, I would stay there. McLaren is a great, great team and every year they are there or thereabouts and if they have some difficulties they are able to come back.'
New front wing for Caterham (Sky)
Heikki Kovalainen: 'It is slightly different and should give us a straightforward performance increase, some more downforce and hopefully makes our car a bit quicker. Other than that, there is nothing major, just a few small updates. The front wing is the main thing we will have this weekend.'
Mercedes upgrades get green light (Autosport)
'Mercedes now plans to fit the new exhaust layout to both Schumacher and Rosberg's cars in Friday practice in Singapore. If the testing proves successful, then the team will commit to racing it on the Marina Bay circuit too.'
Taking Toro Rosso forward (ESPN)
James Key: 'With regards to the Sauber car and the current Toro Rosso, the Sauber is clearly working well. There's been a lot of work over the past two years and that's certainly showing now. I think as the Toro Rosso stands there are probably a few things ' they are technical details so I've got to be careful ' but there are a few things that are perhaps quite clear straight away. We will maybe try to do something this year with the time we have, perhaps on the mechanical side to try to balance the car.'
Goodwood Revival, 2012: celebrating Daniel Sexton Gurney (Peter Windsor)
Pictures from the Goodwood Revival.
Singapore Grand Prix Survival Tips (Up the tempo)
'Since I've been for every single instalment of the night race, here's a quick round-up of some small things you can do to make your time at the race track easier and more enjoyable!'
- F1 fans' guide to the 2012 Singapore Grand Prix
Intervista a Kubica: 'Ho ancora voglia di correre!' (Omnicorse)
Interview with Robert Kubica (in Italian).
Tweets
Still find this mad each year in Singapore, it's 12:30am and Im thinking about plans for dinner.
' Paul Di Resta (@pauldirestaf1) September 18, 2012
One of the Force India personnel was measuring the Singapore track it looked like. Between Turns 21 and 22 #F1 twitter.com/ubaidparkar/st'
' Ubaid Parkar (@ubaidparkar) September 18, 2012
Already in Singapore and its training time. Gone for a run at the same time FP1 will be taking place on Friday !! twitter.com/maqinghuaF1/st'
' Ma Qing Hua (@maqinghuaF1) September 18, 2012
Comment of the day
Yesterday's look at gearbox change penalties provoked an interesting discussion about whether the efforts of a driver and a team can ' and should ' be considered separately in the eyes of the rule-makers. Here are views from opposing sides of the debate:
I voted no, because I agree with what is written in the article : drivers shouldn't be punished for something beyond their control.
The best alternative would be to do the same thing done for the engines : a limited number of gearboxes for the hole season, and a total flexibility about how and when they are used. That way, we can really hope the reliability will improve, we won't see too much shuffle grids, and it could really help average drivers to improve (it's quite frustrating to have a penalty after a strong qualifying for a driver who isn't used to high grid positions).
@Dan_The_McLaren_Fan
I voted yes. You can't see the team as separate from the driver. The driver is a member of the team. Drivers often suffer as a result of things outside of their control, it's just that in this instance the result of mechanical unreliability is a grid penalty rather than a race retirement. At the end of the day there is no reason why teams can't build gearboxes that'll last the whole season if they wanted to. The problem is that they compete to build in the minimum required mechanical strength in order to minimise weight and size. This is why they fail to last, and this is a decision the team themselves take when designing the gearbox. If the rule were unfair, and it was impossible to build a gearbox which did what they are asking, then I would say that the rule is unfair. But it's not, and so the drivers must bear the consequences really.
I do think that we're seeing far too many of these penalties, but I think the responsibility lies with the teams for building unreliable gearboxes, rather than with the rules.
@MazdaChris
From the forum
- Jake Humphrey will quit the BBC's F1 coverage at the end of the year
- Video of Flavio Briatore in the Italian version of The Apprentice
- McLaren P1 ' successor to the McLaren F1 ' revealed
Happy birthday!
Happy birthday to Robk23!
If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is by emailling me, using Twitter or adding to the list here.
On this day in F1
This time last year we had a look at how the team mates had stacked up against each other in the season so far.
It provoked an interesting debate in the comments, not least over whether Lewis Hamilton would overhaul Jenson Button in the championship before the end of the season:
- Button edging Hamilton, Alonso thrashing Massa: team mates so far
Image © Lotus F1 Team/LAT
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar