It’s little under two weeks before the United States Grand Prix from 18-20 October – the first of six races to decide the destiny of the drivers’ and constructors’ titles.
Teams tend to keep these kinds of matters to themselves until the very last minute, thus neither side has confirmed anything as of yet.
There is reported to be a potential Verstappen will have take another engine before the end of the season – and hence get a five-place grid penalty. However, that is not verified.
Norris has not been mentioned in any of the suggestions. He has not yet received a penalty. He has used all his authorised four engines already – but the same is true of every driver.
In Singapore, RB supported Red Bull. Could Lando Norris receive the similar treatment from the other Mercedes-powered teams? Does Mercedes give a damn if a customer team comes out on top? – John
It was definitely contentious when Daniel Ricciardo of RB beat Lando Norris of McLaren to win the fastest lap award in Singapore.
Although they stated they wanted Ricciardo to end his career on a good note if this ended up being his final race, which it was, RB has refused to acknowledge that this was the reason Ricciardo went all out.
Clearly, there was some scepticism regarding that explanation, and McLaren brought this up as a concern during the F1 Commission meeting last week.
The fundamental point here is that the relationship between Red Bull and RB is considerably different from that between Mercedes and McLaren.
Mercedes’ engine division is the sole owner of McLaren, whilst Red Bull and RB are owned by the same business. Apart from that, Red Bull and RB do not approach McLaren and Mercedes like competitors on the track; they do as such.
Being in the running for a championship is, according to Mercedes, “a great point of pride” for the crew at their F1 engine base, known as HPP. They also take pride in being “the only power-unit manufacturer for whom customers have won titles in recent history.” This alludes to Brawn’s 2009 performance.
“But the works team is the priority, and that’s the project we are all working to make as successful as it can be,” they continue.
Isn’t the concept of a Renault Mercedes a ridiculous joke, a sign of a humiliating and total failure at Renault headquarters? – Jonathan
This concerns the decision made by the Renault Group to discontinue its F1 engine development for the upcoming season and force its team, known as Alpine since 2021, to start using customer engines in 2026.
The action appears to go against the conventional wisdom in Formula One.
Being an engine and chassis maker theoretically gives a team an advantage over rivals because the two designs may be combined at the source, as most Formula One drivers would agree.
In contrast, a team that becomes a customer is obligated to accept the engine layout that its partner comes up with. It can not be in line with the perfect car arrangement that team desires.
This setup undoubtedly helped the two most successful F1 teams in history, Mercedes from 2014–21 and Ferrari from 2000–04.
The next best scenario is for a team to have a factory engine arrangement, in which the manufacturer and the team collaborate harmoniously but remain independent organisations. Red Bull did this with Renault from 2010 to 2013 and with Honda since 2019.
Brawn won a championship in 2009; the previous team to do so without one of these two setups dates back to the Cosworth era and Keke Rosberg’s 1982 drivers’ crown for Williams.
Renault forfeits this potential benefit by scrapping its engine program.
However, there is also another side to the debate, which centres on Renault’s current circumstances as well as the recent changes to the F1 regulations.
Customers may now install engines in their cars with less difficulty thanks to certain standards, like clearly marked mounting locations.
Teams now have a harder time gaining an advantage because of the stricter chassis requirements.
And look at what’s occurring this year – McLaren, a customer of Mercedes, are leading the constructors’ championship with six races to go and favourite to win it against Red Bull, Ferrari and Mercedes, who all fit one of the aforementioned models.
And then there is Renault’s own dilemma; since 2014, their engine division has lagged behind in the age of turbo hybrid engines and has not demonstrated any indications of catching up to the competition.
Under those circumstances, Renault management has determined that acquiring Mercedes engines—a transaction that is anticipated but not yet finalized—is not only significantly less expensive but also more likely to increase the team’s competitiveness.
According to Renault CEO Luca de Meo, the company’s loss in competitiveness and technological behind have made the team “invisible” to the outside world.
Despite Renault’s pledge to establish a “F1 monitoring unit” that “aims to maintain employees’ knowledge and skills in this sport and remain at the forefront of innovation,” the move also discards nearly 50 years of history and expertise.
De Meo disputes the widespread belief in Formula One that the Renault team is being streamlined to make it simpler to sell. Executive adviser for Renault F1 Flavio Briatore adds that the team does not intend to eliminate positions at the UK F1 facility in Enstone.
Do teams need to speak in English on the radio after the controversy about swearing? Speaking French would make more sense for the Alpine folks, wouldn’t it? – Will
English is the lingua franca of F1, to blend languages. It is the default language used by everyone, including teams from nations where the two drivers speak a different native tongue.
This is because the majority of teams in the sport are British, and it was once owned by a British firm (Bernie Ecclestone) until being taken over by an American one. This is unaffected by the regulatory body’s locations in France and Switzerland.
Drivers and crew from all over the world are employed by teams in this very international sport. Furthermore, English is kind of the default second language worldwide for all the obvious reasons related to US dominance and history.
Even in situations where, for instance, a French journalist is questioning a French driver, the default language used for press conferences and such events is English. However, teams of drivers and journalists from the same nation frequently plan separate press conferences so that they can communicate in their native tongue.
For instance, even though Charles Leclerc and Carlos Sainz speak Italian and the team is Italian, all engineering meetings at Ferrari are held in English. Interestingly, team principal Frederic Vasseur doesn’t.
With its base in Enstone, Oxfordshire, Alpine is essentially a British team despite having two French drivers and a French owner (for the time being). This makes it significantly different from other teams.
Therefore, no, it wouldn’t make more sense if, for example, the Alpine drivers spoke French over the radio.
Not only that, but there are plenty of people in F1 who know more than one language, so many people would be able to comprehend anyhow, so it’s not like what they were saying would be a secret. Of course, some people would find it offensive to swear in any language.
How likely is it that Lewis Hamilton will be able to participate in Ferrari’s post-season testing in Abu Dhabi? – Laura
None. Hamilton’s contract with Mercedes expires at the end of the current season, and they have informed him that he cannot test for Ferrari at that point since they have a lot of goodbye and promotional work to complete after 12 years of partnership—18 of which have been with Mercedes engines.
With F1 broadly arranging races by location, why is Canada in the middle of the European season? Will that probably change? – J.J.
To avoid making the additional trip across the Atlantic in the heart of the “European season,” Formula One has long wished to shift the Canadian Grand Prix to May, when it falls on the same weekend as the Miami event. This is just common logic, as well as factors related to sustainability and logistics.
Liberty Media/F1, the proprietors of the commercial rights, have been pressuring the Canadian organisers on this for a number of years and they still do. However, Montreal has declined to change the date thus far.
The Canadians contend that the weather in May poses more of a risk in Montreal, that construction of the track in the park on the Ile Notre Dame requires time after the long Quebec winter, and that the early June date fits in better with the city’s overall social calendar.
F1 is still hammering home the point that, as a sport aiming to achieve net-zero carbon emissions by 2030, it simply does not make sense to have races in Europe taking place five or six weeks apart between Miami and Canada. But we are currently at a standstill.
There are other concerns about the Canadian Grand Prix thrown in with this one. A growing number of complaints concerning various areas of the organisation in Montreal, including parking, traffic control, and other logistical concerns, have been made in recent years.
Following the race this year, F1 informed Montreal that this could no longer be tolerated, and the organisers were ordered to devise a strategy to enhance the event for the following year and beyond.
Although that scenario is still open, it’s easy to understand how Formula One might choose to exploit the race date controversy as leverage at some point.
GET MORE NEWS ON LIFESTYLEROOM.NET
Leave a Reply