My Motorsport Blog

I just love it when a report starts with “a source within….”!I immediately think of politicians. You see, once a politicians lips start moving you know they are lying or covering up for something. When I read a report in a motorsport page and it stated that “a source in Brawn GP says they have more coming in future races”…. It just freaked me out. This is not really a surprise and certainly not news so why try to make something about it? Jenson Button already said there will be more to follow in Australia!!!!. Brawn GP are members of the Formula One fraternity and if they had nothing more to offer in the “forthcoming attractions” they should close the doors at Brackley. This is common knowledge and common sense.

We know all teams have more to offer in the future but understand the issue they have. The real problem lies in testing and development due to the lack of what I would call ”Track Time”.  I might be wrong but they have no testing days left and thus development will be on computer simulations (computational fluid dynamics) and testing new components during practice which, ideally, should be used to get the correct car setup for the race .

They are not allowed any wind tunnel testing and based on the following extract from the FIA 2009 Formula One Sporting Regulations in Article 22 (on page eight) this include full scale wind tunnel development on components and cars at full speed or capacity.

“h) No wind tunnel testing may be carried out using a scale model which is greater than 60% of full size.

i) No wind tunnel testing may be carried out at a speed exceeding 50 metres/second.”

I am in the dark about why wind tunnel restrictions should apply. If a team owns a wind tunnel why not be allowed to test in it? Ferrari has one (actually two, sorry) so does McLaren, Toyota, BMW and Renault. These are long term investments and I see no reason why it should not be used effectively. I do believe they could cost in the region of $ 30 to 50 million to build, and remains a cost which is well spent and the teams like Brawn GP who had one completed in 2006 (under Honda banner) actually save money in testing and development, but this new rule actually negates this investment and it really makes no sense why it is there.

I am sure teams have the technology to develop aero-packages within these restrictions and then apply them to the real/full scale car. The development costs in a smaller scale cannot be much less than on full scale. If a component is developed on the smaller scale (below 60% of scale), then enlarged and applied to the full scale car only to fail by not performing will actually increase costs to fix. ( to read about wind tunnels.Ferrari, BMW, Brawn GP, Renault, Williams, Interesting) It is clear that they have the facility to test a full scale car in wind tunnels and use of tunnels should not be restricted.

Since all the 2008 aerodynamics have been removed which makes the cars look smoother and cleaner (except for the large front wing). There must be a limit to what wind tunnel testing can provide. I suppose this is simplifying things but the money spent on the tunnels have already been spent so let them use it, just make sure the regulations do not allow teams add more external components to the current cars.

Now I really do not want to stir up anything but this clause h in article 22 does specify a “scale model” and it really does not exclude a full race track ready car specifically. Just a thought!!!!!