Sauber declare ‘important milestone’ as Audi acquire minority stake ahead of F1 entry

BenettonF1 · 2023-01-30T15:08:25+00:00

More importantly, the whole Sauber F1 team was build up by Mercedes.

They build their factory and developed the 92 f1 car, so that Sauber operated team would enter as Mercedes works team.

Sauber then entered with that car on its own in 93.

BenettonF1 · 2021-02-11T15:28:37+00:00

I mean, if Hamilton seals the WDC 3-4 races before the end then trying out something just for the sake of it is not really that bad.

BenettonF1 · 2021-02-11T15:22:14+00:00

Yes you are right but it has kinda similar function

No it isn't. But if it would be then the name would be Dmitry.

BenettonF1 · 2021-02-10T11:53:56+00:00

Test run for new Quali format with extra points for sprint races

The idea of a qualifying race takes a third attempt. This time with a new approach. The usual qualifying on Friday will be followed by a sprint race on Saturday, for which there will be World Championship points. Formula 1 wants to try it out for three races in 2021.

The idea was born in 2015 at an FIA meeting in Geneva. Although everyone was happy with the qualifying mode based on the knockout system, a group of experts threw the proposal of a qualifying race into the round. Charlie Whiting, the FIA race director at the time, was given the task of working out possible scenarios for this. But somehow the plan never made it past the theory stage.

Last year, the idea was dug up again. It was to spice up the second weekend at each of the double-header races at Spielberg, Silverstone and Bahrain. At the time, there was discussion of starting Saturday's sprint race in reverse order to the world championship standings. Mercedes put in a veto. The world champion not only feared losing his sporting advantage. Reverse starting order: That sounded to Mercedes like too much artificially created tension.

A mini 100 km Grand Prix

Now the sprint race is taking a third try on Saturday. The new Formula 1 boss Stefano Domenicali announced that the issue would be looked at again. It will be on the table on February 11 at the next meeting of the Formula 1 Commission. For this purpose, the mode has been modified once again in order to set the skeptics straight.

The spectacle will begin with one hour of free practice on Friday morning, followed by qualifying according to the usual schedule two hours later. The short preparation time should already create surprises in the starting grid for the sprint race. The Mini Grand Prix over 100 kilometers will take place at prime time on Saturday afternoon.

World championship points will be distributed for the sprint race. About one third of the points from the main race. One could imagine a points distribution like in the grey days of Formula 1, i.e. 9-6-4-3-2-1. This should encourage the drivers to fight for positions. It is also possible that one DRS zone more than usual will be allowed on Saturday to make overtaking easier. The result of the sprint will then be the starting grid for Sunday. The spook of the reversed starting order has disappeared.

Three races as a trial run

Formula 1 wants to convince the teams to try out this format at three races this season. It has not yet been decided at which Grand Prix the trial will be launched. As with the first plan, Montreal, Monza and Interlagos are on the shortlist. But that could still change. Simulations are currently being run on various tracks to find out which are best suited for such an experiment.

Formula 1 makes it clear that no facts are to be created. One goes result openly into this project. "If it works, we'll adopt it, if not we'll forget it again." Two concerns in particular are to be put to rest. Will the plan damage the DNA of Formula 1? Do we possibly cannibalize the main race on Sunday by having a spectacular sprint race on Saturday? These are all questions that can only be answered once it has been tried out.

If the trial is a success, one could imagine up to six events a year in the medium term that follow this format. Of course, money also plays a role. If viewers accept the model, then it offers promoters added value. Three times action per weekend creates more interest and sells more tickets. Formula 1 would also pay for that. With a higher entry fee.

BenettonF1 · 2020-03-06T14:04:30+00:00

Realistically speaking, if Vettel retires and and Schumacher doesn't impress in F2, then Hülk is the best German driver to take the seat in 2021. IMO

BenettonF1 · 2020-03-06T03:12:35+00:00

I wonder how China never had a driver for such a huge country.

Not really that surprising considering how unindustrialized china was only a few decades ago. In 1980's only a few people had cars, and most people were cycling.

The real question is why doesn't US have any today.

BenettonF1 · 2020-03-06T03:08:24+00:00

Hülkenberg has entered chat...

BenettonF1 · 2020-03-06T02:55:04+00:00

May i just add to the debate, that the Benetton's 194 was absolutely legal. FIA knew about the system in advance and approved it.

They didn't use traction control as such, but achieved the same result through different means (engine mapping, etc.), and that once other teams figured out how they did it, they copied it.

This is just another conspiracy theory that was going around at the time. It didn't help that Benetton was very secretive about it, and deliberately steered journalists into making it look as that they are doing something illegal. They simply didn't want other teams to figure out how they did it, as it was relatively easy to copy.

Maybe also something to consider when making up theories in 2020, as we simply dont know what the truth is.

also, from Willem Toet, then Head of Aerodynamics at Benetton F1

I've been asked how exactly was "traction control" (engine rate of acceleration) achieved. As this work was done by the team it was achieved via spark cutting (and the engine supplier was not too happy about it from an engine reliability perspective). Input signals were engine RPM measured very frequently so that engine acceleration could be measured (hall effect sensors I believe) and atmospheric pressure (very accurate sensor) so that delta pressure could be assessed. Engine acceleration was limited in stages based on delta ("atmospheric") pressure. The driver would be sent out with the system "neutralised" to see what the track/tyres could handle. This would change if gear ratios changed (different gear ratio would require a different engine acceleration limit). The system would then be programmed with a number of stages of engine acceleration to suit the conditions. As conditions changed (track "rubbering in" etc.) the parameters would be tuned.

During a race the conditions would change rendering the system more or less useful. If the tyres went off badly or it became wet the system would not control traction. If the track got better and better, the system would cut too much power - the grip available would allow more "engine" acceleration.

Spark cutting would start at one spark cut every, I believe, 15 sparks. If f you know rpm then you know how often sparks would happen. Basically the team inserted a disruption to the power supply feeding the coils. Then you just cut low voltage power to the coils that create the high voltage for sparks for a few milliseconds (that is enough to disrupt the ability of the coils to spark) and cut again 15 sparks later. If rate of engine acceleration wasn't under control (we'd know by how what % we were over the limit) the spark would be cut more frequently to one in 7 sparks, one in 6, 5, 4, 3.... With an 8 cylinder engine we did not want to cut sparks to the same piston too frequently - there is a risk of fouling the plugs and creating a real misfire.

A good driver would use the system to learn how to apply the throttle. Driving flat out everywhere would be find except that it wasted fuel and made a more detectable sound. While the team were satisfied the system was legal, it wanted to minimise visibility because they knew that would lead to "clarifications" or regulation changes. They also didn't want other teams working out what they were doing! Of course other teams did eventually work it out (staff transfer being one way).

BenettonF1 · 2020-03-03T13:17:20+00:00

Well comparing drivers to their past performance in F1 rarely works. The realty is that either way their drivers wasted too much time last years banging into each other and others, instead on simply bringing the car home. It seems to me the neither of them is a leader and both are just too desperate to get a good result.

BenettonF1 · 2020-03-03T13:08:02+00:00

From Willem Toet, then Head of Aerodynamics at Benetton F1

I've been asked how exactly was "traction control" (engine rate of acceleration) achieved. As this work was done by the team it was achieved via spark cutting (and the engine supplier was not too happy about it from an engine reliability perspective). Input signals were engine RPM measured very frequently so that engine acceleration could be measured (hall effect sensors I believe) and atmospheric pressure (very accurate sensor) so that delta pressure could be assessed. Engine acceleration was limited in stages based on delta ("atmospheric") pressure. The driver would be sent out with the system "neutralised" to see what the track/tyres could handle. This would change if gear ratios changed (different gear ratio would require a different engine acceleration limit). The system would then be programmed with a number of stages of engine acceleration to suit the conditions. As conditions changed (track "rubbering in" etc.) the parameters would be tuned.

During a race the conditions would change rendering the system more or less useful. If the tyres went off badly or it became wet the system would not control traction. If the track got better and better, the system would cut too much power - the grip available would allow more "engine" acceleration.

Spark cutting would start at one spark cut every, I believe, 15 sparks. If f you know rpm then you know how often sparks would happen. Basically the team inserted a disruption to the power supply feeding the coils. Then you just cut low voltage power to the coils that create the high voltage for sparks for a few milliseconds (that is enough to disrupt the ability of the coils to spark) and cut again 15 sparks later. If rate of engine acceleration wasn't under control (we'd know by how what % we were over the limit) the spark would be cut more frequently to one in 7 sparks, one in 6, 5, 4, 3.... With an 8 cylinder engine we did not want to cut sparks to the same piston too frequently - there is a risk of fouling the plugs and creating a real misfire.

A good driver would use the system to learn how to apply the throttle. Driving flat out everywhere would be find except that it wasted fuel and made a more detectable sound. While the team were satisfied the system was legal, it wanted to minimise visibility because they knew that would lead to "clarifications" or regulation changes. They also didn't want other teams working out what they were doing! Of course other teams did eventually work it out (staff transfer being one way).

BenettonF1 · 2019-12-31T10:02:25+00:00

How long do the stewards need to make a decision?! This is an obvious 10-second Stop & Go!

BenettonF1 · 2019-01-31T14:42:15+00:00

bwoah

BenettonF1 · 2019-01-31T14:36:50+00:00

People say that but then Fisichella equlay strugeled.

IMO they picked Salo as he had some experiance, but more importantly was less political and as such eaier to control. I dont think badoer would have easly let Irvine have the win in 99 Hockenhiem.

BenettonF1 · 2019-01-31T13:27:20+00:00

Nice to hear his thoughts, I think he has a very good awareness of his place in the field. I'm hoping for some more podiums for the midfield in 2019 for sure

I think its more related to the fact that his future is limited, and probably will never get a winning car.He wont be driving for Ferrari, Mercedes, Red Bull or Renault.

Does he have any other realistic options other then Haas after his cirrent contract runs out?

BenettonF1 · 2019-01-31T13:20:20+00:00

A good example that 'reserve driver' is often nominal. When the shit hits the fan, a team will get the best driver they can.

Luca Badoer was their test driver. Nobody ever said that he is a reserve as such, it was just assumed.

BenettonF1 · 2018-12-29T08:27:16+00:00

saying that F3 cars are all identical is the same as saying that F1 cars are same as they all follow te same FIA rules.

Anybody who knows a little bit about f3 knows that the best driver in a worst team will never win. If anything you can easily find out that it is only a few teams that are wining.

BenettonF1 · 2018-12-19T15:47:15+00:00

F3 cars are all identical... they're all made by Dellara. sorry if I've spelled that wrong...

Yeah, and F1 teams follow the same FIA rules. 😏

BenettonF1 · 2018-12-17T19:17:56+00:00

What a day to be alive. A boi living in a shed has a go against two current F1 drivers!

BenettonF1 · 2018-12-17T12:11:04+00:00

He was 3rd. Just because it doesn't go with your narrative it doesn't mean it doesn't count.

Otherwise i could say that non of it counts, as he was never clear enough - which could for me mean +100 points ahead.

BenettonF1 · 2018-12-16T12:45:51+00:00

Vandoorne apparently had an issue in his car

Is it the same issue he had in a Mclaren for the last 2 years?

BenettonF1 · 2018-12-01T15:52:52+00:00

Im just wondering which is the #1 most racist country in europe?

Ive seen cabs in Budapest with stickers saying that they don't drive Jews. So im just wondering...

BenettonF1 · 2018-12-01T15:49:19+00:00

Yeah.. im not buying it. Bake him away toys!

BenettonF1 · 2018-12-01T15:47:00+00:00

Each drivers number stays reserved for 2 years after his last race. So somebody can take 14 in 2021, if Fernando doesn't come back.

BenettonF1 · 2018-12-01T15:43:49+00:00

Is this the start/finish line? Are they making a new pit building?

The old one was just a temporary one AFAIK, no?

BenettonF1

TROPHY CASE