Formula 1 - 2017

[MIKA27]

BRITISH GRAND PRIX: FASTEST PITSTOP BY WILLIAMS

One week after their success in Austria, Williams again took the DHL Fastest Pit Stop during the 2017 British Grand Prix.

Felipe Massa was equipped with new tires in an amazing time of 2.02 seconds, which was the fastest pit stop of the season to date.

Massa finished his team’s home race at Silvestone in tenth place thanks to a good start and his speedy pit stop. “I’m definitely happy with the race after starting 14th, having had a very good start and opening lap, to finish tenth,” said the Brazilian with satisfaction.

The Mercedes crew, who completed the second and third quickest pit stops of the race, were also on good form. Lewis Hamilton was sent back out on his way in 2.23 seconds. His team-mate Valtteri Bottas needed 2.26 seconds for his tire change. Eleven of the 26 pit stops at Silverstone were completed in under three seconds.

Bottas storms his way to the podium

Most drivers were on one-stoppers because of low tire degradation. That would also have been the plan at Ferrari, but following damage to tires in the final stages of the race, Sebastian Vettel and Kimi Räikkönen were forced to head for the pit lane a second time.

Valtteri Bottas benefited from their misfortune and finished second. The Mercedes driver had started on soft tires from ninth place on the grid following his gearbox change before qualifying and then put in a longer first stint than his rivals, who began the race on supersofts.

The strategy paid off. Bottas gradually worked his way up through the field and spoke of one of the best races of his career after the checkered flag had fallen.

“We could actually go longer than expected in the first stint on the softs, and the tires were really good,” said the Finn. “In the last stint, the team told me to just take care of the tires, because we saw a few failures out there for some other teams, but for me they were fine.”

[MIKA27]

Renault: No excuses for poor reliability after Silverstone issues

Renault boss Cyril Abiteboul says there is "no reason" for the team to have such poor reliability after problems cost Nico Hulkenberg fifth place in the British Grand Prix.

Hulkenberg enjoyed his strongest performance of the year at Silverstone, but suffered an ERS issue in the late stages due to a holed exhaust.

The subsequent loss of power helped Red Bull's Daniel Ricciardo to sweep past him and Hulkenberg went on to finish in sixth.

"In the last couple of laps I lost some power and deployment," Hulkenberg said. "Not sure what happened, but sure we lost some straightline speed.

"It was easier for Daniel to overtake me, otherwise perhaps I could have kept him behind me. But it is what it is, I think we should be happy with what we've got. The team did a very good job all weekend long."

After teammate Jolyon Palmer retired on the formation lap, Abiteboul said Renault's focus must be on sorting its reliability issues as soon as possible.

"We're still unhappy with reliability because if you look at it, the two cars have been hurt today. We know this our weakness, and we need to get that right," he told Motorsport.com.

"Frankly there is absolutely no reason to have to suffer to that extent, given where we are now in our programme. That has to be the focus, performance is pointing in the direction that we want, so our focus is reliability."

Abiteboul celebrated the team's strongest weekend so far, but reckoned Hulkenberg could have kept Ricciardo behind without the problem.

"A strong race, no mistakes, perfect execution, and a good strategy," he said. "And quite a moment at the end when we thought we had some form of exhaust leak, that caused the loss of energy recovery, which is the reason why we were absolutely unable to contain the attack of Ricciardo.

"I believe without that we would have been able to hold him, but the objective at this point in the last laps was to bring the car back home, and we need to understand the details of that small leak, which could have had a big effect with more laps to go."

Renault introduced a new floor which the team said will be the "triggering event" to many more car updates, and Hulkenberg is hoping the developments translate into a stronger second half of the season.

"This was an important thing for us to bring this floor, and for it to deliver a big impact," the German said. "I know there are more things coming, even already for Budapest.

"I think the first half was decent, that was always my expectation, to be in the points now and then, but still a little bit behind the main midfield.

"I very much hope that at this rate of progression we can have a stronger second half, and battle the likes of Force India, Haas and Williams more, and take points off them."

 

[MIKA27]

New aero rules, Shield on Strategy Group agenda

Formula 1's aerodynamic regulations beyond 2020 and the Halo and Shield cockpit protection devices are among the items on the agenda when the Strategy Group meets on Wednesday, Motorsport.com understands.

It is believed the subject of tyre compounds and the F1 weekend timetable will also be discussed at the meeting, which will take place in Geneva.

F1's aero rules were revamped for this season to create aggressive-looking and faster cars with wider front and rear wings and bigger tyres.

F1 bosses want to further improve the show and therefore want to explore ways - such as changing the aero rules - in which it can do that in the long term.

The Shield will be discussed after Ferrari's Sebastian Vettel cut short the first run of the device in British GP practice because it made him "dizzy" and he did not like it.

The FIA is exploring the idea of having a final version of the shield ready for introduction for 2018, but if not, the halo - which has its critics - will be used instead.

A progress update on plans regarding cost reduction will be given while there is also expected to be further discussion on the post-2020 engine rules.

The availability of drivers for events such as F1 Live in London is on the agenda and it is understood there is a desire to lock down between three and five appearances per driver over the course of a season.

Also on the agenda is the subject of exhaust blowing, oil being burned as fuel and the engine cover, including the fin.

[MIKA27]

ANALYSIS: WHAT WAS GOING ON BEHIND THE SCENES IN F1 BRITISH GP AND WHY DID THE RACE END AS IT DID?

The British Grand Prix turned out to be a dominant win for Lewis Hamilton and Mercedes, but the strategy that underlined the rest of the race outcome was fascinating as teams were caught in two minds whether to go with two stops or one.

And many, having opted for the latter due to low degradation in the opening stint, found themselves with tyre problems at the end of the race. Ferrari suffered two costly tyre failures in the closing stages.

Vettel pitted early to undercut Verstappen, having lost time behind him in the early laps. But later in the race, with Valtteri Bottas coming up quickly from behind on a one-stop reverse strategy (soft tyre first, supersoft second), Vettel didn’t have the scope to do a two stop strategy without losing position to the Finn, so he went for the finish on the same set of tyres.

Conversely both Bottas and Daniel Ricciardo defied these issues and forced their way through the field from 9th and 19th places respectively with offset strategies, which took advantage of the ‘overcut’ (running longer than your rivals) and of the powerful DRS advantage at Silverstone.

The key to doing well was having strong front tyre stability through the high-speed esses at Maggots/Becketts, which gave a good exit onto the Hangar Straight for an overtake into Stowe corner. We saw speed differentials of over 30km/h there between cars with and without DRS, but only if the front tyres were holding on.

Another thing that caught out several teams was that the pit loss time was longer than in previous seasons, as the cars were travelling more quickly on the track relative to the cars in the pit lane. For teams that were limited on engine mileage in practice and were not able to devote three laps to a simulation of this, positions were lost in the race.

So what was going on behind the scenes and why did the race end as it did?

Pre Race Expectations

Pirelli decided to bring the supersoft, soft and medium tyres to Silverstone; a revision to their original plan of a step harder. The idea was to try to create more variability in the strategies as most races this year have featured only two of the compounds and have largely been one-stop affairs.

Friday practice running was not interrupted by rain and the teams covered a good mileage. Mercedes did not do much long run work on the soft tyres, while Ferrari did a good back-to-back comparison with both cars.

The data showed that Mercedes had a long run pace advantage on supersoft of around three to four tenths of a second to Ferrari, while Red Bull was over a second off, followed by Williams, Force India and an improved Renault.

Degradation on Friday looked like it would tend towards a two-stop race, with the undercut looking quite strong (ability to pit for a new set of tyres before the car ahead and jump him when he stops). The indicator for that is when the degradation is around 1/10th of a second per lap, or more.

But we have seen the Pirellis behave differently on a Sunday compared to a Friday many times, so strategists were looking to the degradation rate in the first stint as the key indicator or whether to go for one or two stops.

On Sunday the degradation was much lower than expected on supersoft so everyone could increase his first stint length. However the degradation was ‘sinusoidal’ which means that it didn’t degrade in a linear way, but had accelerated phases and calmer phases. Managing that and the stint length was very important and one of the reasons why Bottas and Ricciardo did so well.

The other surprise as that the soft tyres were not as fast as expected. The front tyres became the limitation, rather than the rears. Blistering appeared, which didn’t affect the lap time performance but was worrying for the teams, as it often goes down to the canvas.

Bottas had finished the race in Austria with a large blister on his front tyre and in the Grand Prix at Silverstone it wasn’t only the faster cars that push their tyres hardest which suffered. Even Sauber, that has the least downforce of any team, suffered blisters at the end.

The debate then was whether to make a precautionary late pit stop, even if it meant sacrificing track position. When you are well up in the points, as Ferrari and Max Verstappen were, this was a tough decision.

When the Ferrari tyres failed and both drivers had to pit, that allowed Verstappen to make his cautionary stop just before the end, without losing position.

Valtteri Bottas and Daniel Ricciardo on a roll

One of the standout drives was Daniel Ricciardo in the Red Bull, who had to start 19th after a power unit issue in qualifying. Like Bottas, his best strategy was to offset himself against the other cars and create opportunity to pick up places when they stopped or by overtaking them. He managed to go to Lap 32 on a set of supersofts, giving him an offset of almost 10 laps against the Force India cars and Hulkenberg.

Ricciardo made many overtakes in this race, especially into Turn 15, Stowe corner. He managed to maintain strong pace and keep the front tyres alive so that when he exited the high speed esses onto Hangar Straight he had a high closing speed that when the DRS was then opened, he could easily pass. For example when he passed Perez in the Force India, he was doing 320km/h with DRS and Perez was doing 288km/h. Although Perez has a Mercedes engine in the back of the car, he could not cope with that speed differential. Ricciardo also passed many cars into Turn 6, Brooklands, at the end of the other DRS zone. He passed both Saubers, Kvyat, Stroll and at the end of the race Hulkenberg into there.

This was an extreme example of a phenomenon we have seen a lot this season; on a track like Silverstone the DRS is very powerful as the drag is higher in the first place on these cars and the front tyre limitation accentuated that on Sunday.

Valtteri Bottas was forced to start 9th after a gearbox change penalty and used a reverse strategy of starting on soft tyres, then using supersofts at the end. Mercedes were hoping that Ferrari and Red Bull would get into a strategy battle where one undercut the other, which would give Mercedes the chance to go long with Bottas to Lap 32 and overcut Verstappen. He was also able to get Vettel because the tyre offset at that point when Bottas caught Vettel meant he was on fresher Supersofts with Vettel on older softs.

This is exactly what happened with Vettel on Verstappen.

However, Bottas would not have caught Raikkonen had the older Finn not hit problems with his front tyre at the end.

There was a point in the race, between Laps 35 and 40, when Ferrari could have been forgiven for thinking about switching their cars around, with Bottas closing in on supersoft tyres and Raikkonen just 4 seconds ahead of Vettel.

In fact there wasn’t even a discussion about it on the radio.

On the face of it, it would have made sense as it would have given Vettel protection from Bottas in the closing stages and the flat spot he got on his front tyre -fighting with Bottas – that later failed, could have been avoided.

But the reality was that Raikkonen was out of reach of Bottas and by slowing Raikkonen down to let Vettel pass, the team risked losing both positions to Bottas. It would have needed Raikkonen to fight with great commitment to hold Bottas at bay.

So this was an interesting decision. If Ferrari’s interest was purely Vettel’s drivers’ championship campaign, they might have tried it. But here the decision was to try to secure second place for Raikkonen, who had been the stronger Ferrari driver at Silverstone anyway.

Vettel’s race was compromised by losing a position to Verstappen at the start and then by pitting early to make the undercut on Verstappen, which meant he had a longer second stint than ideal on the soft tyres.

Verstappen can now afford to be very aggressive in races as his chances of winning the championship have gone, so that is something Ferrari and other rivals have to bear in mind when thinking of race strategy. Ferrari had to go even more aggressive on him to get Vettel ahead and ultimately paid a price.

The other small point worth noting is that Esteban Ocon finished ahead of Sergio Perez in a race for the first time, having passed him off the start line.

[MIKA27]

HAMILTON: I DON’T HAVE ANY PLANS TO SWITCH TO FERRARI

For some reason the Lewis Hamilton to Ferrari stories surfaced after his victory at the British Grand Prix, but the Mercedes driver has revealed that he is quite content where he is and has no plans to change teams.

ESPN report that Hamilton was asked by a fan if he was considering a move to the Italian squad, to which he replied, “I don’t have any plans to.”

“I really wanted to make sure that when I came to the sport I wanted to experience being at two different teams, and to win at two different teams. People were like: you’ve won with McLaren, but can you do it with another? So I’m glad I did that.”

“I’m a big fan of Ferrari, it’s a fantastic team, but I love where I am. The atmosphere in my team is incredible and there are something like 1,800 people in my team just to build those two cars. It’s pretty unbelievable. I love the environment and the work,” added the triple F1 World Champion..

The latest reports linking the Briton to Ferrari clearly annoyed his boss Toto Wolff who scoffed at the idea.

[skalls]

I don't know why I'm just so eager to the silly season this year but I am lol.  Ham to Ferrari just doesn't make any sense at all.  If Ham were in a lesser team sure, but not at Merc.

[MIKA27]

INSIDE LINE: PATH TO FORMULA 1 IS A STROLL IF YOU HAVE BILLIONS

By all accounts there are two types of very wealthy fathers: those who give their off-spring very little and want them to earn their own money the hard way and those who give their off-spring whatever they want.

The children that fall in the latter category either wallow in that money partying and drugging themselves though life or those who go out there and make something of their lives.

Lawrence Stroll is worth $2.6 billion and apparently that fortune is growing at a consistent rate.

He has two children: Chloe and Lance. The latter, at eighteen is a Formula 1 driver thanks to his father’s billions.

There is no doubt that young Stroll is a Williams driver thanks to his father’s bucks. Without the budget that has been allocated to getting him to Formula 1 he would most certainly not be racing against the best drivers in the world right now.

Nevertheless his career is littered with success. The championships he has entered he has won, one can point to unlimited budgets as being instrumental to his success. Even during his early karting years young Stroll only had the best of the best at his disposal.

As he progressed into single-seater racing he again lacked for nothing. It is well known that father Lawrence bought the Prema F3 team and put respected Ferrari engineer Luca Baldisserri in charge to oversee his son’s campaign. He was the clear number one in the team. He won the 2016 FIA European F3 Championship.

Formula 1 was next on the radar and elder Stroll looked around and targeted Williams for the next step in his son’s rapid progress to the pinnacle of the sport.

It can be argued that the lad is struggling in his first season of Formula 1 thanks to an obvious lack of experience. The new cars are tough to drive and his debut season has not been a stroll in the park. Although a fine third place (almost second) at the recent incident packed Azerbaijan Grand Prix has gone a long way to justifying his presence on the grid and temporarily silencing the cynics.

But that has come with a cost of tens of millions of dollars. Some estimates are that $80 million has been the cost to get Stroll where he is. But honestly relative to the $2.6 billion in the family bank, that amount is loose change.

Fellow Canadian and former F1 World Champion Jacques Villeneuve has labeled the teenager the worst rookie ever and allegedly got a ban from the Williams motor-home. The team refuse to comment on the ‘ban’ they imposed on the driver who bagged their last drivers’ title back in 1997.

Money talks, it also buys influence and in this instance cash may well make a grand prix winner of a driver who has a bag full of talent, but his arrival on the F1 scene is at least two seasons premature. A couple of years in the hustle and bustle of Formula 2 would no doubt have polished the rough diamond.

But why wait?

That was no doubt the obvious question Stroll senior asked himself. With money in abundance to blow he sat down with Williams and they concocted a programme to get Lance race ready for Formula 1, because they could. Money was not an issue.

For Williams, who are a shadow of the grand team they once were, the financial windfall was far too tempting to turn down. In motor sport it is no secret that the more money you throw at things the more chance you have at success.

Of course this unique mode of fast-tracking a teenager from a karter to a Formula 1 driver in record time, has attracted criticism and a load of detractors. But from what I can discern billionaires don’t give a sh!t what others think. It’s their way or the highway.

And honestly if I had $2.6 billion in my bank I would do exactly the same.

My son loves karting and is pretty handy at it too. So why not bankroll and speed up his path to Formula 1 if that is his dream. Had this been a path that fate had intended for us (including the billions in my bank) I too would want the absolute best for him without compromise.

The journey would start with a trip to TonyKart to arrange a factory drive for him. If they refused I would simply buy the company. Then a trip to the best kart engine builder and ensure he gets the best of the best. Any objections then again I would simply buy the company.

Then I would buy the biggest and best motorhome in existence (with driver of course) and off we would go and do karting every weekend across Europe.

• What about school for the little guy?
• No problem. Will sort out a couple of the best tutors available to provide schooling as we traveled.

Because he has some talent, coupled to the best equipment at his disposal, he wins many races and championships, shining on the karting stage.

• Next up a season or two in Formula 4?
• Why he is 16, let’s put him in Formula 3 now!
• But he has no experience…
• Okay you are fired for being negative, now let’s find a team who believes my boy can be a Formula 3 driver and have capacity to provide him the best car.
• Sorry boss no one wants to take the risk.
• Okay then let’s find the best F3 team and buy it. Also go head hunt the best brain in Formula 1 to oversee my son in his single seater debut season.

A couple of years later my son wins the premier F3 title.

• Now what?
• Formula 2 obviosuly so he can learn the tracks and develop his race craft.
• No, I want Formula 1. Find a team that will take him, provide him unlimited testing in a four year old F1 car and let’s go to every grand prix venue and test, test,test.
• But that will be expensive…
• How much?
• About 20 million.
• No problem do it.
• But there are many very talented young drivers who are more deserving of a step up into F1.
• Why does this matter to us? Tell someone who cares. Get him into a F1 team asap. Just do it!

A willing F1 team is found. A mega-bucks deal is struck. A year or so later, with tons of F1 testing miles on my son’s CV he will be the best prepared driver in the recent history of the sport.

• Time to get him on to the Formula 1 grid for real.
• Seriously?
• Yes, you have a problem with that? Last negative guy got the boot…
• Okay spoke to the team and $30 million gets you a season with them.
• LOL that’s cheaper than I thought. Do the deal but throw in $10 million more and make sure they have an experienced guy as his teammate to partner him and guide him.

Thus the journey into Formula 1 for my son is complete. Invariably the learning curve in the deep end is steep. My son is struggling with the cars. Making quite a few boo-boos along the way.

• Why is everyone laughing and being so mean to my boy?
• Because F1 is a different animal and people are not intimidated by money.
• Not fair he is not doing so bad. Okay he is one second down on a slowing veteran who is his teammate. But other rookies are also struggling against their teammates.

So my son’s rookie season trundles along and then one day the stars align in such a way that he finds himself, against all odds and predictions, on the podium.

• You see he is amazing. We knew he could do it! It was all worth it. Chump change and he is an F1 driver with a podium to his name in his rookie season.
• Yes amazing now let’s see who will throw the first punch.

Enter a Jacques Villeneuve style villain who labels my kid rubbish, podium was a fluke.

• What’s with this guy and why is he in the team’s motorhome. Get him out of here.
• Sure boss, spoke to team chief and despite the fact that he is their last F1 World Champion he has been banned from the motorhome.
• Great. Don’t need negativity around my boy. And also he did so well to get the podium, send our yacht to the med. Find a hot starlet and let them hang out together before the next race. Oh yes, alert the paparazzi.

But after the podium euphoria the struggles continue for my lad. The talent is still there of course but the state of readiness obviously not.

• What now boss?
• My lad is here to stay. We will continue throwing money at this thing until he is established. Make a three year deal with the team and throw them another $100 million as a sweetner.
• Deal is done boss, team very happy to carry on and they loved the extra 100. They believe in him…
• Time will tell if my boy becomes a grand prix winner. Whatever the case, eight races into his career and he already has a podium to his name. Guys like Nico Hulkenberg have never stood on a podium despite seven years of trying! So there.

Okay that is my fantasy story of being a billionaire father guiding my son to his dream. Back to reality and the $26 balance in my bank account as opposed to the $2.6 billion.

If you fall in the category of a father that wants only the best for his son, and remember money is absolutely not an issue. The cash spent on getting Lance what he wants is petty cash for Lawrence.

Would you not do exactly the same for your son what Lawrence has done for his boy? Because I know I would.

MIKA:

 

[MIKA27]

6 minutes ago, skalls said:

I don't know why I'm just so eager to the silly season this year but I am lol.  Ham to Ferrari just doesn't make any sense at all.  If Ham were in a lesser team sure, but not at Merc.

Mate it hasn't even begun  Once the break starts after Hungary, that's when we'll hear all sorts of Shize. I might even stop posting altogether after the first week of breaks.

[skalls]

Well you'd have to take a week of vacation to keep up lol

[MIKA27]

HORNER: THE SHIELD FEELS IMMATURE IN ITS CONCEPT

Formula 1 should hold fire on introducing a new “shield” cockpit protection system until the device has been fully tested and refined, according to Red Bull team principal Christian Horner.

Ferrari’s Sebastian Vettel said the transparent open canopy made him feel dizzy when it was tested briefly, and for the first time on track, at Silverstone last Friday in British Grand Prix practise.

The German also said forward vision was not very good, with some distortion from the curvature of the screen, and he felt his helmet being pushed forward on the straights.

“Based on the comments that I’ve read from Sebastian, it didn’t sound to be too popular,” Horner told reporters after the weekend at Silverstone.

“It feels immature in its concept at the moment to introduce for next year. I’m sure it will be discussed in the strategy group on Wednesday.”

The “shield” is designed to protect the driver’s head from flying debris and had emerged as the governing body’s favoured choice after previous trials of a “halo” concept whose looks drew criticism.

Force India deputy principal Bob Fernley, who will attend Wednesday’s meeting in Geneva, said the technical regulations for 2018 already provided for either the halo or the shield.

“We’re committed to do something, it’s just a question of which direction we decide to go down,” he told Reuters on Tuesday. “That’s for discussion tomorrow.

“The best solution would probably be to build in the mountings for the shield and continue to work on it and introduce it as and when it is perfected,” added Fernley.

“We’ve just got to make a decision on which one we’re going to evaluate fully.”

While the shield might be better at deflecting minor components and debris, the less aesthetically pleasing halo could offer greater protection against bouncing wheels and heavier objects.

A meeting of the Strategy Group in April decided to give priority to the shield. Decisions made by the group have to be approved by the FIA’s World Motor Sport Council but that is usually a formality.

The meeting is also expected to discuss future aerodynamic regulations, the race weekend timetable and an obligation on drivers to attend a number of promotional events, such as a recent one in London.

Vettel was asked about that on Sunday and sounded non-committal.

“Without getting too political, we have contracts with the team and not with the commercial rights holder,” he said.

[MIKA27]

Dear God No! FIA confirms 'Halo' will be introduced next season

Formula 1’s governing body, the FIA, has confirmed that the ‘Halo’ head protection device will be used in 2018, despite opposition from the majority of teams.

Formula 1 has strived to increase head protection for drivers, with a number of options explored, and the Halo was trialled extensively in 2016.

The Halo was originally scheduled to be introduced for 2017 but this was delayed by a year, while an alternative, the ‘Shield’, was explored.

The Shield was trialled by Sebastian Vettel during practice at Silverstone but the Ferrari driver commented that the device made him dizzy, and it was removed from his car after one lap.

On Wednesday, the FIA confirmed that it will push through the Halo for use in 2018.

“Following the unanimous agreement of the Strategy Group, in July 2016, to introduce additional frontal protection for Formula One and the repeated support from the drivers, the FIA confirms the introduction of the Halo for 2018,” read a statement.

“With the support of the teams, certain features of its design will be further enhanced.

“Having developed and evaluated a large number of devices over the past five years, it had become clear that the Halo presents the best overall safety performance.”

All 10 teams were present during the Strategy Group meeting, with representatives from Renault, Toro Rosso, Sauber and Haas joining the regular members. It's believed the majority voted against the introduction of the Halo, but the FIA chose to override them on safety grounds.

Other matters were discussed during the meeting, including the new power unit set to debut in 2021, with the FIA confirming that "further analysis will be completed over the summer which will be reviewed at the next meeting of the Strategy Group in September."

Cost control and improving the show were also tabled for discussion. The statement added that "a new approach to cost control was presented and received unanimous support". Though no further details were given.

[MIKA27]

And For Some Great News: Cosworth set for F1 return in 2021 under new engine rules

Cosworth is set to return as an engine supplier to Formula 1 when the tweaked engine formula comes into force, which is expected to be in 2021.

The Northampton-based company was last involved as an engine supplier in 2013 when it supplied the Marussia outfit – the sole survivor of the three new entrants which joined in 2010, before its own collapse last year under the Manor banner.

Cosworth supplied all three at the time; Virgin, HRT and Lotus, as well as Williams, with a 2.4 litre V8 engine, but exited the sport when the current power unit was introduced, partly because of the development costs involved on the hybrid side, but also because it couldn't secure enough customer teams to make the project profitable.

But with a simpler engine formula set to be introduced in 2021, Cosworth confirmed to Motorsport.com that it is exploring a return and has actively been involved in framing what the new engine will look like, alongside current manufacturers, and potentially interested new entrants including Porsche/Audi and Aston Martin.

"I think that we've got sufficient support from the existing teams, and we've had discussions with some, that enable us to make the commitment to proceed [with returning]," said Hal Reisiger, CEO of Cosworth.

Reisiger even confirmed that Cosworth has some agreements already in place to supply "some existing and future teams", enough that "would enable us to be a sustainable engine partner".

With an expected debut in 2021, or even 2020, Reisiger says Cosworth will need to begin development and testing soon.

"We would typically start in 2018. I know there is some discussion about moving it ahead by a year, and that would mean working really soon," he added.

[MIKA27]

Zak Brown: London GP would be a 'tall order', expects Silverstone to stay

McLaren chief Zak Brown believes Silverstone will remain the home of the British Grand Prix in Formula 1 beyond 2019, after labelling any proposed race in London as a “tall order”.

Silverstone hosted the inaugural World Championship race in 1950 and has maintained an uninterrupted presence on the calendar since 1987.

However, Silverstone’s owners, the British Racing Drivers’ Club, last week triggered a break clause in its 17-year contract, signed in 2010, allowing it to drop hosting duties after 2019.

Both Silverstone and Liberty Media have spoken of their respective desires to ensure the British Grand Prix continues to take place, although the latter body has not specified a location, with London mooted as a potential venue.

“I think it’s a good way to test markets,” Brown said of last week’s F1 Live London event in the capital.

“Now people are taking about a London Grand Prix, which I think in this particular instance is a tall order and Silverstone will remain the home of Formula 1 racing in England.

“I think the infrastructure that would be required to put on a London Grand Prix would be unlike any other street race, unless you did it maybe around the Olympic Stadium.

“[But] I think it’s a great race at Silverstone.”

Brown expects senior figures to thrash out a solution to ensure Silverstone remains on the Formula 1 calendar into the next decade.

“I think if you look around the track, sat down – which I’m sure they [BRDC and Liberty] will do – and say ‘we’ve got a revenue gap here, how can we together generate revenue from the British Grand Prix... I think there’s ways to do that,” he commented.

[MIKA27]

Supersoft tyres preferred for Hungarian GP

Formula 1 teams have favoured the Supersoft tyres for next weekend's Hungarian Grand Prix, while the Medium compound has been rejected.

Pirelli will bring the Supersoft (red), Soft (yellow) and Medium (white) compounds to the Hungaroring and, as per usual, drivers have been given free choice for 10 of their 13 allocated sets of tyres.

On Wednesday morning, those choices were communicated, and every team but Haas has selected either nine or 10 sets of the Supersoft tyres, while conversely each driver will have just Pirelli's allocated set of Medium tyres available, with the compound not favoured.

One set of Supersofts must be put aside for use only in Q3, while either the Softs or Mediums must be run for one stint of the 70-lap Grand Prix.

[MIKA27]

Marchionne issues rallying cry

Ferrari president Sergio Marchionne expects an “immediate reaction” from all at Ferrari after a crushing defeat the British Grand Prix.

Although Ferrari have not won a race since May’s Monaco Grand Prix, this past weekend’s result was arguably their worst.

Kimi Raikkonen was pipped to pole position by a massive half a second by Lewis Hamilton before a late tyre issue dropped him to third place in the race.

As for Sebastian Vettel, the German never had the pace to challenge the Mercedes and was on course for fourth place when he too suffered tyre issues that dropped him to seventh.

“I know you are the same team from Monte Carlo and the start of the season,” Marchionne said in a speech at Maranello.

“We cannot mourn this negative result but instead I expect an immediate reaction.

“We have always known our opponent was very strong and dominant for years.

“But I am convinced we will get back where we were.”

[MIKA27]

Haas will dictate ‘our driver’ decision

Haas will decide their own driver line-up for 2018 without any influence from Ferrari, says Guenther Steiner.

While Romain Grosjean and Kevin Magnussen are Haas’ current line-up, neither driver is guaranteed a seat for next season.

But while Grosjean is hoping that for a step up to Ferrari, who power Haas, Ferrari youngsters Antonio Giovinazzi and Charles Leclerc are keen to make their move into a F1 race seat.

Steiner, though, is adamant Haas will be making their own driver decisions.

The Haas team boss told Ekstra Bladet newspaper: “We are waiting a few more races, but we have control of our drivers (decision).”

The team boss was full of praise for his current line-up, saying Haas couldn’t be making the improvements they have been “without our current drivers.”

He added: “Romain is sometimes criticised for how he gives his feedback during practice. We are okay with this because he helps us grow as a team. As long as it does not get personal.

“Then we have Kevin, who has so far taken a good step forward.

“The team has become more mature, and the drivers had much to do with that.”

[MIKA27]

F1 driver market beyond 2018 influencing Mercedes' Bottas decision

The potential movements in the Formula 1 driver market in 2019 and '20 are playing a part in Mercedes not rushing to extend Valtteri Bottas's deal beyond this season.

Bottas has settled in well after being thrust into the Mercedes line-up at short notice following 2016 world champion Nico Rosberg's shock F1 retirement, winning two races already and sitting third in the championship behind Sebastian Vettel and Lewis Hamilton.

While Mercedes is happy with the Finn's performances, and the more relaxed atmosphere in the team since his arrival after three years of tension between Hamilton and Rosberg, team boss Toto Wolff said the longer-term landscape of the driver market will influence any decisions.

"He's almost a no-brainer," said Wolff on extending Bottas's initial one-year deal. "I would just like to get the puzzle together.

"It's not only about 2018, it's about looking forward and what happens in '19 and '20, the risk and opportunities.

"That's why after Budapest [in two weeks], and hopefully a good race again, I'm going to contemplate on a beach about what's right and wrong for the team."

Hamilton's current Mercedes deal runs to the end of 2018, while at Ferrari both Vettel and Kimi Raikkonen are yet to finalise deals for next year.

Red Bull has both Daniel Ricciardo and Max Verstappen locked in for next season, with team boss Christian Horner recently saying the latter's deal also covers 2019.

Red Bull has also taken up its option on Carlos Sainz Jr to remain at Toro Rosso for 2018, while his fellow Spaniard Fernando Alonso is out of contract with McLaren at the end of this year as things stand.

Bottas expects talks with Mercedes about his future to begin during F1's summer break after the Hungarian Grand Prix.

"First we need to really speak about it before doing any announcement or making contracts," he said.

"We are getting to the middle of the season, the August break will be there soon, so normally discussions will start.

"We're not going to hear anything for the next few weeks.

"Like I said before, the main target is to have a long relationship with the team, that's what I want.

"We'll still have to wait a few more weeks and see how things go."

HAMILTON DRIVING 'BETTER THAN EVER'

Bottas's team-mate Lewis Hamilton's future was the subject of fresh speculation at Silverstone, with Mercedes having to dismiss rumours he could move to Ferrari and Hamilton intimating that he did not know what would happen after the 2017 season.

Hamilton quickly clarified that leaving F1 was "very unlikely" and said he feels he is in the best form of his whole career.

"I really, really do feel within myself I'm driving better than I've ever driven," he said.

"I may have said that in the past, perhaps with less conviction. Within myself, I know that right now I'm at my best."

[MIKA27]

Podcast: What Hamilton's British GP win means for F1 title fight

Lewis Hamilton's British Grand Prix win, and what it means for the Formula 1 battle between Mercedes and Ferrari, headlines the latest edition of The Autosport Podcast.

Grand Prix Editor Ben Anderson and F1 Correspondent Lawrence Barretto join Autosport Editor-in-Chief Edd Straw to ask whether the dominance was a one-off, or if the pendulum is swinging towards Mercedes in the fight for the world championship.

Ferrari's tyre failures, Sebastian Vettel's relative lack of pace and the battle between the world championship leader and Max Verstappen are other hot topics.

Daniel Ricciardo's charge from the back to finish fifth and how good an ambassador the Australian is for F1, plus the plans for the mooted introduction of cockpit head protection in 2017 - and the reaction to Ferrari's trial of the 'shield' - are also discussed.

Then there's the question of the future of the British Grand Prix after Silverstone activated the break clause in its contract, not to mention the possibility of a race on the streets of London in the future.

The Autosport Podcast is available free to subscribe to via iTunes and all other podcasting platforms.

[MIKA27]

TECH TALK: SAY HALLO TO PROBLEMS WITH THE HALO

The FIA announced that the highly controversial halo cockpit protection will be introduced in 2018, despite nine of the ten Formula 1 teams voting against it for introduction in 2017 – now apparently they have all agreed.

The late decision (teams would ideally have known about this early this year) will provide constructors with significant aerodynamic and structural challenges in the design process for the 2018 cars.

Putting aside the visual reservations for a moment, the halo will most likely result in cars that are slower next year than this. Firstly, the bulky structure will increase drag, reducing straightline speed for a given power unit and wing level.

More importantly, the weight of the car will rise; it is often suggested that for every 10 kg extra of fuel added to a car’s tank, there is a 0.3 of a second loss in laptime. Given that the halo will be mounted very high up (raising the Centre of Gravity), and the weight penalty will be at least 10 kg, it can be assumed that more than half a second per lap per lap will be lost in this regard.

But perhaps the largest problem will be a significant loss in aerodynamic downforce, as airflow to the rear wings is disrupted by the unstreamlined shape of 2018’s cockpit protection. Unlike fully closed cockpits in Le Mans, where the entire car is integrated with this concept, the halo is very much an afterthought, both in terms of appearance and engineering.

With the rear wings losing downforce, in order to ensure balanced aerodynamics, load from the front wing will also be reduced, lowering the overall grip of the car. Expect teams to use devices such as mirror stalks to divert as much air inboard and outboard of the halo, minimising disruption to rearward aerodynamics.

Ultimately, the cars should be noticeably slower than this year, although not quite back to 2016 levels.

However, with a great deal of this year’s championship excitement being about the faster, better looking cars, especially at a venue like Silverstone, it appears that the FIA has lost touch with reality here.

There will be those who argue that Mercedes was still fastest in FP1 at Spa last year with the halo, but the team was dominant, the rear wings were higher and less affected by the cockpit protection, while the halo was not a structural part at that stage, but merely made from carbon fibre.

For now the junior single seater series, where drivers are less experienced and more likely to crash, will not have the halo, and nor, at this stage, will Formula E, another FIA series run largely on narrow street tracks where debris is more likely to enter the cockpit area.

Thanks to the disruption caused by the halo, teams will be looking to maximise the distance between the back of the halo and the rear wing, resulting in longer wheelbases (they have already been increased for this year thanks to the greater bargeboard area freedom), making overtaking even more difficult as the driver behind has a larger distance to make up in the braking zone.

Where will the halo actually prove beneficial?

It was the only protection to remain largely unaltered when a tyre-wheel arrangement was fired at the structure at 150 mph. But this is highly unlikely to happen – it is almost impossible for the tyres to come off the car during a crash thanks to wheel tethers and their subsequent strengthening. This could be taken a step further for enhanced safety.

Jules Bianchi’s fatal head injuries, incurred in the tragic accident at Suzuka, would not necessarily have been prevented by the halo.

The spring which hit Massa’s helmet in 2009 may have been diverted, but the halo still leaves a significant opening through which debris can fly and hit the driver.

Additionally, when a pit-stop goes wrong and a wheel is not properly secured, drivers and teams often realise by the time a car has reached the end of the pitlane, before it is safely stopped – think Kimi Räikkönen at last year’s United Sates Grand Prix. It would be much more sensible to prescribe a minimum pitstop time of five seconds, all but preventing human error.

Further to this, the late timing of the decision means that those teams with tall drivers who sit high up in the car, most notably Hulkenberg (Renault) and Ocon (Force India), will have to redesign their chassis at a stage when they would almost be signing it off.

This is because the driver will have to be as low down as possible next year such that the top of the halo does not obscure their vision. Of course, this favours the better resourced teams, furthering widening the gap on the grid.

The FIA also stated that the drivers have repeatedly supported the halo, but this is not the full story. When a vote was held among drivers over the winter, the conclusion on the halo cockpit protection was one against its introduction, with a vote of seven against to four in favour, with five abstaining.

To make matters worse, Formula 1 fans are thoroughly opposed to the halo, and this decision will more than undo all of Liberty’s good work so far.

MIKA: I am at a complete loss and shock at this stupid and ugly concept. No words, but my thoughts bring the below to mind...

[MIKA27]

INSIDE LINE: THE HALO MARKS THE END OF AN ERA FOR FORMULA 1

Confirmation that the halo cockpit safety device will be mandatory, from 2018 and beyond, is sure to trigger heated debate among Formula 1 fans, I for one am saddened by the fact that the system will further hide drivers from view but at the same time have to acknowledge that if is saves one life then it is worth it.

I was privileged to have photographed the sport (above) during an era when you could see straight into the cockpit, drivers toiling at the wheel as they attacked the track.

It’s been a while since those days when you could view into a driver’s workplace, since then the cockpit ‘grew’ to almost submerge the driver behind protection as it is these days. 

Granted the halo does not hide the driver much more, but in my mind it further divorces the man inside the cockpit from viewers on TV and those attending a grand prix live.

The ethos of single-seaters will shift radically when the halo is bolted on to F1 cockpits permanently, as per the rules soon to be published. 

Reuters reports that the FIA said in a statement that it had tested a large number devices over the past five years and it had “become clear that the halo presents the best overall safety performance”.

The decision to implement the halo comes less than a week after a transparent cockpit ‘shield’ was tested for the first time on track at Silverstone last Friday in British Grand Prix practice.

Cockpit protection has become a priority since the deaths of drivers in other series after being hit by wheels and flying debris.

The halo, which is fixed at three points including a central pillar in front of the driver that supports a protective loop above his head, was extensively tested last season with a mixed response.

The halo was first not universally accepted by drivers, with Lewis Hamilton saying in March last year, “It’s the worst modification in Formula 1 history. If it is going to come in I hope we have an option to use it or not because I will not be using it on my car.”

But persistent lobbying by the FIA turned his opinion, and six months later his views had reversed, “The FIA have done a fantastic job in the last 20-odd years in always making increments and steps and while it doesn’t look great, we know that, but that 17 percent we can’t ignore.”

He was referring to a demonstration in which the FIA claimed the halo would protect them in all recent accidents in which a driver’s head was vulnerable to impact from a large object, such as a wall or loose wheel, and that it reduced their risk of injury by 17% even from small flying debris.

But in February this year others who tried the device were not all convinced:

Fernando Alonso: “When I tried the halo in Singapore, one of the things I noticed was getting out of the car is a little bit uncomfortable, where you have to put the feet and where you have to jump.”

Lewis Hamilton: “Apart from getting into the car, I didn’t notice much difference. I didn’t really notice it, apart from blocking my mirrors – I couldn’t see the rear wing.”

Nico Rosberg: “It doesn’t disturb me when driving. I could go fast straight away and even set the best time of the session with it this morning so I think that was a success. My opinion is that it represents a big step forward in terms of safety. Following the fatalities we have experienced in recent years in racing that halo would have saved lives, so we absolutely need it.”

Kimi Raikkonen: “First impression on the visibility test is positive. The structure does not hamper [visibility].”

Romain Grosjean: “As drivers we certainly do not want safety to stop improving, but we also cannot delete the DNA of Formula 1.”

Sebastian Vettel:  “It was not great. There is quite a bit of impact in terms of visibility.”

But the FIA are carrying this torch with relentless commitment and in the end, no matter what, you cannot argue against a device that augments safety for drivers.

No doubt the clever people researching and developing the device have thought this through thoroughly and fears that the halo may trap a driver in an overturned car or should a fire engulf the cockpit are perhaps unfounded.

However, I am curious to know if in an emergency the ability of a driver to alight a cockpit or marshals/ medical teams access a stricken driver rapidly, is at all hindered by the halo. I would like some proof that in scenarios such as this, and of fire engulfing the cockpit, a driver is not compromised.

In other words: this halo one solution does not create a host of other dangerous problems.

But, as mentioned, I am sure the halo ticks all the boxes on the FIA’s list of checks, and sincerely hope they have also thought this concept out the box too.

I for one accept that the halo is another episode in the inevitable march of the progress of safety in our sport, but at the same time am saddened by the end of an era in Formula 1.

[MIKA27]

LAUDA: THE HALO IS THE WRONG DECISION

Formula 1’s decision to introduce the halo cockpit protection device as from next year is a mistake, according to former world champion Niki Lauda.

The Austrian, who is non-executive chairman of world champions Mercedes, told Auto, Motor und Sport on that he recognised safety had to be improved where possible.

However a convincing solution had yet to be found to protect drivers’ heads from debris.

“We tested the Halo, the Red Bull Aeroscreen and Ferrari’s Shield as a cockpit protection. None has convinced 100 percent. You have to make the right decision in such a situation. The halo is the wrong one,” he said.

Lauda, a triple world champion who retired from racing in 1985 after a near-fatal fiery crash in 1976, said the halo destroyed the “DNA of a Formula One car”.

“The FIA has made Formula 1 as safe as it gets. Also the danger of flying wheels is largely eliminated, because the wheels are always more firmly attached. The risk to the drivers has become minimal.

“We are just trying hard to get new fans for the sport with fast cars and getting closer to the spectators, and now this is destroyed by an overreaction.”

The governing FIA announced on Wednesday that the halo would be introduced for 2018 rather than the transparent ‘shield’ tested at Silverstone last week.

The halo, which is fixed to the car at three points including a central pillar in front of the driver that supports a protective loop above his head, has been widely criticised on aesthetic grounds.

Some have compared its appearance to the toe strap of a flip-flop. Former Dutch F1 racer Giedo van der Garde posted a photograph on Twitter of himself holding a sandal to his head as an example.

Commentator and former racer Martin Brundle said it was ‘plain ugly’.

[MIKA27]

CAREY: WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE MORE GERMAN TEAMS

Despite being a relative novice when it comes to motorsport, the Formula 1 chief Chase Carey is well aware of Germany’s legacy in the history of the sport and apart from seeking to establish the German Grand Prix on the roster, he is also keen to attract more German manufacturers to the pinnacle of the sport.

Speaking to Sport Bild Carey said, “We have a reigning German champion, a German car as world champion, a German who is fighting for the title this year, the German Grand Prix has a great history and we would like to have more German teams.”

Mercedes were world champions with Juan Manuel Fangio in the fifties. The three pointed star also powered Mika Hakkinen to two world titles and Lewis Hamilton in 2008 with McLaren, and then were champions again with Jenson Button and Brawn GP.

In the current era, the Silver Arrows star have been the dominant force in the sport for the past four years, however they are not alone with German success in Formula 1 over the years.

BMW enjoyed success powering the Brabham of Nelson Piquet to the F1 title in 1983. They also powered Sauber in a factory effort from 2006 to 2009.

Porsche built TAG engines dominated for three years in the eighties, claiming F1 titles with Niki Lauda (1984) and Alain Prost (1985 and 1986).

These three manufacturers have the pedigree, capacity and know-how to return to Formula 1 under the right conditions. As does Audi who recently terminated a hugely successful stint in the World Endurance Championship, where they pioneered and developed hybrid technology to the highest level.

Carey said, “Naturally our goal is that such companies are enticed to own race teams in Formula 1. That is why we will adjust the technical and financial conditions to make this an attractive prospect.”

The American F1 chief is also well aware of Germany’s greatest legend, “Michael Schumacher defines the ultimate Formula 1 racing driver. We will name one of the conference rooms at our headquarters, in London, as a tribute to him.”

[MIKA27]

WEHRLEIN: MY TARGET IS TO BE IN A TEAM WHERE I CAN WIN

Pascal Wehrlein is somewhat off the radar as he toils at the wrong end of the field in his second year of Formula 1, this year at Sauber he has scored points twice for the Swiss team and still dreams of one day winning races with a big team.

The Mercedes junior driver told the official F1 site, “My target is to one day be in a team where I can win races, get on the podium regularly and fight for championships. Right now I don’t have these tools to make it happen.”

“The weekends where we score points are very, very special for us because we don’t have the car to finish in the top ten often – only if the stars are in the right place!”

“And then we have to take the opportunity and bag the points. I am very happy that when the chance was there I was able to grab it. I want to be there when it counts.”

Wehrlein admits that he does not know what 2018 holds for him and accepts that right now a drive for his backers, Mercedes, is not something he thinks about, “I have no idea what is happening next year. Of course, I have heard all these rumours as well.”

“I cannot influence such a decision, so worrying about things that you cannot influence is wasting your time and wasting your strength and efforts. Yes, Valtteri is doing a good job and he deserves it.”

As for his second season at the pinnacle of the sport, Wehrlein was honest in his summary, “It is no secret that my start to the season was very difficult. The injury matter was pretty tough. Going to Australia and not driving was hard and having to skip China was another notch on the horror scale.”

The start to 2017 in Bahrain was not bad. It felt like I had never been away, never been injured. The first qualifying took me to Q2 and I nearly finished in the points with P11- with the Sauber car! Since then it is going smoothly and pretty much in the right direction.”

“Twice I scored points, with the clear highlight of Barcelona, which was exceptional for us finishing in P7 – even if with the penalty it was finally P8. But imagine: P7 with the Sauber!”

“Yes there have been difficult races since then, but we knew that this would happen,” revealed the 22 year old, whose points scorning means that Sauber lies ahead of McLaren in the championship standings.

[LLC]

TECH TALK: SAY HALLO TO PROBLEMS WITH THE HALO



The FIA announced that the highly controversial halo cockpit protection will be introduced in 2018, despite nine of the ten Formula 1 teams voting against it for introduction in 2017 – now apparently they have all agreed.

The late decision (teams would ideally have known about this early this year) will provide constructors with significant aerodynamic and structural challenges in the design process for the 2018 cars.

Putting aside the visual reservations for a moment, the halo will most likely result in cars that are slower next year than this. Firstly, the bulky structure will increase drag, reducing straightline speed for a given power unit and wing level.

More importantly, the weight of the car will rise; it is often suggested that for every 10 kg extra of fuel added to a car’s tank, there is a 0.3 of a second loss in laptime. Given that the halo will be mounted very high up (raising the Centre of Gravity), and the weight penalty will be at least 10 kg, it can be assumed that more than half a second per lap per lap will be lost in this regard.

But perhaps the largest problem will be a significant loss in aerodynamic downforce, as airflow to the rear wings is disrupted by the unstreamlined shape of 2018’s cockpit protection. Unlike fully closed cockpits in Le Mans, where the entire car is integrated with this concept, the halo is very much an afterthought, both in terms of appearance and engineering.

With the rear wings losing downforce, in order to ensure balanced aerodynamics, load from the front wing will also be reduced, lowering the overall grip of the car. Expect teams to use devices such as mirror stalks to divert as much air inboard and outboard of the halo, minimising disruption to rearward aerodynamics.

Ultimately, the cars should be noticeably slower than this year, although not quite back to 2016 levels.

However, with a great deal of this year’s championship excitement being about the faster, better looking cars, especially at a venue like Silverstone, it appears that the FIA has lost touch with reality here.

There will be those who argue that Mercedes was still fastest in FP1 at Spa last year with the halo, but the team was dominant, the rear wings were higher and less affected by the cockpit protection, while the halo was not a structural part at that stage, but merely made from carbon fibre.

For now the junior single seater series, where drivers are less experienced and more likely to crash, will not have the halo, and nor, at this stage, will Formula E, another FIA series run largely on narrow street tracks where debris is more likely to enter the cockpit area.

Thanks to the disruption caused by the halo, teams will be looking to maximise the distance between the back of the halo and the rear wing, resulting in longer wheelbases (they have already been increased for this year thanks to the greater bargeboard area freedom), making overtaking even more difficult as the driver behind has a larger distance to make up in the braking zone.

Where will the halo actually prove beneficial?

It was the only protection to remain largely unaltered when a tyre-wheel arrangement was fired at the structure at 150 mph. But this is highly unlikely to happen – it is almost impossible for the tyres to come off the car during a crash thanks to wheel tethers and their subsequent strengthening. This could be taken a step further for enhanced safety.

Jules Bianchi’s fatal head injuries, incurred in the tragic accident at Suzuka, would not necessarily have been prevented by the halo.

The spring which hit Massa’s helmet in 2009 may have been diverted, but the halo still leaves a significant opening through which debris can fly and hit the driver.

Additionally, when a pit-stop goes wrong and a wheel is not properly secured, drivers and teams often realise by the time a car has reached the end of the pitlane, before it is safely stopped – think Kimi Räikkönen at last year’s United Sates Grand Prix. It would be much more sensible to prescribe a minimum pitstop time of five seconds, all but preventing human error.

Further to this, the late timing of the decision means that those teams with tall drivers who sit high up in the car, most notably Hulkenberg (Renault) and Ocon (Force India), will have to redesign their chassis at a stage when they would almost be signing it off.

This is because the driver will have to be as low down as possible next year such that the top of the halo does not obscure their vision. Of course, this favours the better resourced teams, furthering widening the gap on the grid.

The FIA also stated that the drivers have repeatedly supported the halo, but this is not the full story. When a vote was held among drivers over the winter, the conclusion on the halo cockpit protection was one against its introduction, with a vote of seven against to four in favour, with five abstaining.

To make matters worse, Formula 1 fans are thoroughly opposed to the halo, and this decision will more than undo all of Liberty’s good work so far.

MIKA: I am at a complete loss and shock at this stupid and ugly concept. No words, but my thoughts bring the below to mind...

Totally agree Mika. What a stupid idea and is more the type of misguided reaction you'd expect from a politician or city planner. Brutal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MIKA27]

PIRELLI TESTING AT SILVERSTONE AND MAGNY COURS

With the hustle and bustle of the British Grad Prix over, Pirelli were hard at work testing Formula 1 wet weather tyres at Silverstone and Magny Cours.

As part of their 2018 tyre testing campaign, Pirelli were running McLaren’s Stoffel Vandoorne at the former French Grand Prix venue, evaluating the full wets earmarked for the 2018 Formula 1 season.

Vandoorne, circulating alone, completed 135 laps on Wednesday, with another full day scheduled for Thursday.

On Tuesday and Wednesday at Silverstone, Ferrari reserve Antonio Giovinazzi, at the wheel of a Haas, and Williams driver Lance Stroll were also on testing duty for Pirelli.

In dry and warm conditions, on Tuesday, with the track temperature peaking to 39 degrees, the pair covered 225 laps testing a variety of 2018 protoype tyres.

On Wednesday rain fell over Silverstone which enabled the two drivers to complete 103 laps between using prototype slick, inter and wet tyres.