What’s more they gave Badger a rare treat, the sort of thing money can’t buy – a few hours hanging out backstage in the paddock and the pit lane on the Thursday afternoon.  We were collected in one of the oh so funky F1 golf carts and escorted to the paddock complete with fancy paddock passes.  It’s a somewhat surreal experience being free to roam around the paddock, having a chat with Peter Sauber who was enjoying a fat cigar, bumping into Liuzzi, Heidfeld and Virgin’s own, Timo Glock as well many other of F1’s unsung heroes (that’s the engineers folks!) before having a tour of Virgin’s hospitality area and enjoying the view.

We even had the chance to have good look around an F1 team’s pit garage, which resembles more of a laboratory than a garage with it being squeaky clean and organised with loads of odd but complicated looking gadgets neatly aligned.  The engineers were hard at work on the cars, ensuring they’re ready for Friday practice.  Seeing such activity close up really brings home how intricate and perfect F1 engineering is, check out the photos:

Car in progress

The F1 engineers tool box

Under the covers

We explored every nook and cranny of the VR garage and have compiled some facts that you may not have known already (we didn’t!)

• Smoke alarms – well things that look like one above the cars are there to monitor whether any work is being done during Parc Ferme (and no, putting a bag over it won’t work)
• While Virgin Racing is pretty much Manor GP, with Branson turning up only to selected GPs, the Virgin brand definitely helps with getting sponsors (have you seen Sauber’s blank canvas this season!?)
• Geoff, the wonderful Technical PR chap at VR often tweets direct from the pit wall
• The team’s CEO Graeme Lowden is a thoroughly nice gent and one of few (if any?) CEOs present in the paddock throughout the GP weekend
• How hot is F1 fuel – very, around 80 degrees – so hot that it begins to vapourise, so very special pumps are needed to pick up the fuel to feed the engine.
• The team’s new front wing for Silverstone had a camera mount that wasn’t machined, but ‘grown’ – a method formally known as sintering
• Under no circumstances must anyone (Badger or otherwise) photograph the floor pan of an F1 car
• Each car has over 300 sensors on it, which send data back to garage – a seriously bonkers amount (see one of the screens below)
• There actually is a bloke that says ‘gentlemen start your engines’ – he’s the one who’s monitoring all the data on the car before it leaves the garage.
• The front wishbones on an F1 car can’t support the weight of the car alone, without the suspension, dampers and what not – i.e. if one thing goes then it’s game over – there really is nothing extra in F1 car design, it’s playing at the limits of every single component.

Timo's controls

Datatastic

Geoff assured us that engineers aren't usually head-scratching

The 'smoke' alarm FIA Parc Ferme monitoring gizmo

The Cosworth engine with oil tank mounted on

Your editor with Badger's senior member, Uncle Badger

So there you have it, that’s Badger’s exploration of the Virgin Racing pit garage, if you have any other questions or comments, use the comments box below.

Here at Badger we wish VR all the best for the rest of the season and will be keeping a close eye on their progress during the 2nd half of the 2010 season.

• Follow the team on Twitter here: @VirginRacing
• Follow the Badger on Twitter too: @f1Badger
• Buy VR team merchandise here: VR Shop
• And read their reports and features: VR Online

But what’s really got people talking, in the paddock and beyond, is the introduction of adjustable rear wings, which the FIA hopes will increase overtaking in the sport. Views on this have so far been largely negative but, before we make up our minds, let’s take a look at just what they are.

The new device will allow the drivers to adjust the rear wing and thereby reduce drag, much as the McLaren-pioneered F-Duct does. But, unlike the F-Duct (which is banned for 2011), this is purely to assist with overtaking, and will be a standardised system for all. And, to quote the FIA, “it will only be enabled if the driver is less than one second behind another car at any of the pre-determined positions around the track”, and will be switched off when the driver begins braking for the next corner.

McLaren pioneered the F-Duct this season, but it's an FIA controlled adjustable rear wing system for 2011. © Sutton/Autosport

So, this new piece of kit is basically an overtaking helper. Get close to the driver in front and you’ll be able to use it to drop the wing-angle, thus reducing drag and giving you a speed advantage of approximately 15kmh. The driver in front can’t use it until he’s been overtaken, so unless  he decides to put you in the wall you’re probably going to get past.

A good idea? It will certainly increase overtaking. Picture the scene: Lewis Hamilton charges up to the tail of Fernando Alonso. Lewis has the quicker car, but Fernando is making his Ferrari very wide and, stuck in the dirty air, the McLaren can’t make a move. But, as Lewis inches the gap down to 1 second the adjustable rear wing is activated. He’s suddenly much quicker on the straight, and nails Fernando in to the hairpin. But, exiting the corner, Alonso is under 1 second behind Hamilton. His rear wing drops, he gets a speed boost, and the position is retaken in to the next corner. Repeat for 25 laps, whilst fans watch in rapt excitement and Bernie rubs his hands together thinking of increased TV viewing figures.

The idea of more overtaking is undoubtedly something almost all F1 fans are positive about- but is this the way to achieve it? There are concerns that it’s a gimmick, that it will make passing too easy in a formula that prides itself on having the most skilled drivers in the world, and level the playing field for racers who haven’t honed their attacking skills. In other words, it could eliminate the art of overtaking,  making it as simple as engaging a device and breezing past your opponent.

Raikonnen put a stunning move on Fisichella at Suzuka '05- would this have been quite as special with adjustable rear-wings? © LAT/Autosport

And if that were the case think of all the great overtakes we’d have missed out on. One move immediately springs to mind for this writer: Mika Hakkinen’s brilliant pass on Michael Schumacher at the 2000 Belgian Grand Prix. As the two lapped the BAR of Ricardo Zonta Mika dived right whilst Michael went left, giving the McLaren the line in to Les Combes. The Finn used all his daring and cunning to make that move, and it’s rightly remembered of one of F1’s finest. With the adjustable rear wing Mika wouldn’t have needed Zonta, or any quick thinking- he’d just have powered past Michael a few laps earlier.

Some of the drivers have voiced negative opinions too. “Overtaking moves should be about pressurising, being skillful, and tactical,” said Red Bull’s Mark Webber. No word from teammate Sebastian Vettel- perhaps he’s not keen on bringing up the subject of overtaking after what happened in Turkey.

Renault star Robert Kubica though has joined Webber in voicing concerns: “if the wings move a lot we will see the cars overtake in a straight line and I don’t think there’s a lot of excitement in that,” said the Pole. Force India’s Adrian Sutil recognises that the new rules could spice up the on-track action, but isn’t to keen from a racer’s perspective: “It’s very good for the show, but it’s not so good from a driving point of view, because if you defend your position well it doesn’t really matter. If there’s a car behind you and he has the advantage of the slipstream anyway, and then he turns down the wing and he will gain another five or 10kmh”.

Webber’s worries were made terrifyingly real by his massive accident in last Sunday’s European Grand Prix. One of the primary reasons for the crash was the he was approaching the corner at a far greater speed than the Lotus of Heikki Kovalainen, and when the Finn braked slightly earlier his car became a launch ramp for Webber’s Red Bull. The combination of adjustable rear wings and KERS would make this sort of differential in corner approach speed common. If the driver in front did move to defend his line the chances of an accident similar to  this- one the likes of which we’ve seen little of in F1 lately- would be far greater. Webber was incredibly lucky to walk away from that shunt unhurt. The more it happens the more likely it is that someone will, eventually, not be so lucky.

Many paddock voices reckon the adjustable rear-wing will make accident's like Webber's in Valencia more common. © LAT/Autosport

It’s also been suggested that it’ll prevent defensive driving, a skill in itself. No matter how honed your ability to defend you position is you’re still going to get blown away when the car following you is 15kmh quicker on a straight. Tracks like Monza, Silverstone and Shanghai to name but three, all of which have very long straights, would see plenty of overtaking, with the driver trying to make the pass likely to breeze by on the straight. What about Ayrton Senna and Nigel Mansell’s battle to the flag at Monaco in 1991? If Nige was able to pick up the extra speed this device will bring he’d probably have cruised past Senna in to the Nouvelle Chicane. We’d have lost what was a stunning battle to the flag.

There’s also a nagging feeling that this is a move towards more standardised cars, something F1 fans are largely against. The F-Duct has been a great addition to F1 2010. It was fantastic to see one team pioneer a new aero device, and then watch the competition work furiously to produce their own versions, with each hitting upon a different way of getting the system on to their cars. A standard FIA system removes the element of technical intrigue and development so many of us love to see in F1.

Undoubtedly then there are some pretty negative aspects to this idea. But there’s also no doubt that it would increase overtaking in Formula One, something fans are always crying out for more of. It’s also a step towards ‘green’ racing- no turbo boosts here, just good, old fashioned aero trickery. So is this the way forward? Make your opinion heard- cast your vote in the poll below and let us know just what you think in the comments section.

Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.

Bridgestone announced their decision to quit late last year, influenced by the poor global economy and the departure of both Japanese teams, Honda and Toyota,  in the previous 12 months.

After entering F1 in ‘97, supplying a number of smaller teams, Bridgestone became sole supplier for 1999 and 2000 before being joined by Michelin in 2001. The French company withdrew in 2006, returning Bridgestone to sole supplier status. With their contract ending this year they decided not to renew the deal, sparking a battle to replace them as F1’s rubber of choice.

Pirelli supplied F1 tyres for the first 8 years of the championship (1950-1958) and returned for much of the 1980s. To date Pirelli shod cars have started a total of 200 Grand Prix, notched up 44 wins and taken 6 drivers world championships. Their last race victory came courtesy of Nelson Piquet’s very fortunate triumph at the 1991 Canadian Grand Prix.

© LAT/Autosport

Pirelli motorsport boss Mario Isola is confident of a happy reunion between his company and F1. “Pirelli has been involved in motorsport for more than 100 years. In all our history, we’ve showed that we have the technical ability to build motorsport tyres– in the past with F1, and recently with the World Rally Championship. I think the teams recognise that we have the ability to do it.”

Among the other companies who’d been looking to win the F1 tyre tender were Bridgestone’s most recent rivals Michelin, Cooper Avon and Korean manufacturer Kumho.

As well as F1 Pirelli will also supply feeder series GP2 and GP3 in 2010. With the path to F1 so clearly defined nowadays some drivers are going to forget any other tyre brands even exist.

Unlike Pirelli, who are happy with the monopoly system, Michelin had wanted competition between multiple manufacturers if they were to return to F1. There are clear pros and cons to a tyre war- which do you think would have been best for increasing on-track action for the 2011 F1 season?- but Pirelli’s new contract guarantees them at least three years as F1’s tyre of choice.

With the championship currently so nip and tuck it seems fair to say that the title will, in the end, go to the team who best develop their car over the remainder of the season. This is certainly how McLaren team principal Martin Whitmarsh sees things: “It is a classic case: if we don’t develop the car at a quick enough pace then we won’t win races and we won’t win this championship,” he said after Canada. “So we won’t stand still.”

And nor, you can be sure, will McLaren’s chief rivals Red Bull nor title dark horses Ferrari. Both have aggressive upgrade programmes ready to roll for the next few races, with Valencia and Silverstone likely to see a raft of changes to their cars.

McLaren have so far proven themselves the most development savy team of 2010. In Bahrain their quickest car- that of Lewis Hamilton- was over a second shy of poleman Sebastian Vettel. A hefty gap, and one that had both drivers a little worried. But by Turkey things had changed- Lewis was less than two tenths slower than Mark Webber in qualifying, and this at a track where Red Bull were estimated to be gaining between two and four tenths through a single corner. Canada completed the turnaround, as Hamilton snatched pole from Webber by two tenths.

The F-Duct (or blown rear wing) has been Mclaren's trump card in 2010. © Sutton/Autosport

Of course, each track is different, and some fluctuations in pace can be put down to this. Hamilton’s second on the grid in Turkey, and the way he and Button held on to the Red Bulls in the race, was actually more impressive than pole and victory in Canada, considering the different characteristics of these two tracks. But what can’t be disputed is that McLaren have made big gains between early March and now.

But they’ve still got plenty of work to do. “We have an underlying development programme, and we are trying to cut 0.15 to 0.25 seconds off every race,” says Whitmarsh. “We have a reasonably big upgrade that we are fighting to have for Silverstone, and if that’s there then I would be disappointed if it’s not a much bigger step than that. If we don’t- if we fail to develop the car- we will get overhauled and beaten by more teams than just Red Bull.”

Among other things McLaren look set to introduce a Red Bull-esque exhaust system in Silverstone, and will hope to feel the advantages on quick corners like Maggots and Stowe.

And that brings us on to Red Bull. They started the season with the quickest car, which to an extent makes development more difficult. They were already enjoying the benefits of the RB6’s mighty aerodynamic grip, so the season so far has seen their competitors develop the same bits they already have and cut the gap. The fact that McLaren and Ferrari will both introduce Red Bull-style exhausts in the next two races is a great example of that. Red Bull are already gaining from this, and can’t squeeze much more from it. Their rivals, on the other hand, have much to gain- if they get it right.

Mind boggling levels of grip through fast corners have been the key to Red Bull's success- but can they keep it up? © LAT/Autosport

Despite concerns that McLaren have surpassed them on pace Red Bull haven’t been fully pegged in yet. Canada, with its long straights and total absence of fast corners, was a track they knew they wouldn’t dominate. It played in to McLaren’s hands, what with them having the best developed F-Duct, whilst also not highlighting Red Bull’s strength. Adrian Newey won’t be tearing what little hair he has left out to revolutionise the car.

Speaking of the F-Duct Red Bull did trial it in Turkey, but decided not to run with it, concerned that it drained downforce. Downforce- lots and lots of downforce in high speed corners- is what makes the RB6 so mega. Whether they’ll introduce it at a later date remains to be seen. What’s certain is that it wouldn’t be worth compromising other areas of what is already a superb car just to have an F-Duct.

Because make no mistake, the Red Bull is still the quickest car. If F1 was at Silverstone next weekend there’s little doubt they’d decimate the competition in qualifying and go on to win the race- barring technical problems or a coming to together between Mark and Seb. But with their rivals ringing the changes over the next two races can they remain the quickest- can they develop their car as well as McLaren and Ferrari?

Undoubtedly they developed well in 2009, particualrly considering that they had to make major changes to the RB5 to incorporate the must-have double diffuser. This year will see a similarly aggressive development of the RB6, a car that’s already gone through several changes throughout the season. Back-to-back wins in Spain and Monaco were aided in no small part by a new front wing and changes to the floor of the car. The rear of the Red Bull was already top-notch, and by maximising the front they put themselves in a strong position to win- and win they did.

So what about Ferrari, who have seemingly gone back backwards in 2010 but remain at the sharp end of the points? They started the season strongly, qualifying close to the Vettel’s Red Bull in Bahrain, keeping him in sight during the race and then inheriting the win when he suffered a technical problem.

Can Ferrari match the development pace of Red Bull and McLaren? © LAT/Autosport

But since then they haven’t been in contention for victory, and by Turkey had slipped back in to the battle between Mercedes and Renault.

Ferrari have attributed this in part to their pursuit of speed from the infamous F-Duct, also known as the blown rear wing. It shifted focus away from other crucial areas of the car, and the team clearly lost pace between the flyaway races and the European events. By Turkey Alonso couldn’t even get his car in to Q3, whilst Massa has regularly started at the wrong end of the top ten.

“We concentrated too much effort on the blown rear wing,” addmitted team principal Stefano Domenicali. “In Valencia we will have some significant updates, but then we must continue to improve the car to be in the fight right to the end,” added the bespectacled one.

Really? Did they really lose all that pace chasing dash from their duct, or is this Ferrari’s attempt to cover up the underlying failures of the F10? That’s one for you to decide.

Back to matters at hand: in Valencia Ferrari will intorduce what they hope to be their biggest breakthrough of the season: the much-mentioned Red Bull-style exhaust system. The so-called ‘exhaust-blown rear end’, which, put very basically, manages rear-end airflow more efficiently, is thought to be worth over half a second per lap, and simulations of its potential have had Ferrari’s tech boys’ eyes out on storks. Whether their system can match that of Red Bull on track remains to be seen.

In Valencia Ferrari should be at the sharp end regardless of upgrades, though Silverstone will be a different story. Its fast corners will really show whether the Scuderia have got anywhere near a Red Bull level of downforce.

It’s going to be mighty interesting to see how these developments affect the front-running cars over the next few races, and how that impacts on the championship. The title will, in a very big way, come down to who develops their car best over the next four months. If anyone takes a wrong turn, or wastes valuable energy chasing shadows, then their chances of clinching the world championship will take a near-fatal blow. But if they get it right success could be right around the (high-speed) corner.

It’s become as common as “for sure” and “turning the wheel” but “improving the show” seems to be one of the sport’s newest common phrases and is one of the great concerns at the moment, sparked off from the first grand prix being snubbed as ‘Bore-rain’.

We may have had the thriller of a race downunder in Melbourne and a pretty good race in Malaysia only a week later, but without wanting to sound negative, you’d be a fool to miss the fact that the main reason these last two races were good fun was purely to the weather causing slippery tracks and mixed up starting grids.  It’s a worrying truth that the rest of the races in 2010 (especially Valencia) stand a good chance of being as entertaining as watching paint dry with a re-run of Bahrain 2010 on in the background.

The ridiculous

As a result, rather predictably, good ol’Bernie has said to the press that he likes the idea of reverse grids, i.e. qualify on pole position and you’ll be in 24th for the race and so on or some kind of similar turnaround to put the quick cars at the back.  Then, to go up a notch there are suggestions for a qualifying lottery.

Although, on the face of it, the reverse grid idea sounds feasible, in reality it would be as good as Bernie’s idea to have shortcuts on the tracks.  The idea of sprinklers to artificially recreate the thrills witnessed in Australia would work in theory, but would also make a mockery of the sport.  As for the lottery idea, well that would just take qualifying away from us – i.e. often the most exciting part of a race weekend.

To KERS or not to KERS

So what else could be done to “improve the show” – KERS (the energy recovery systems that give effectively a power boost) was introduced and then quickly dropped by some of the teams in 2009 and they’ve agreed to not run it at all in 2010 due to costs.  In our eyes, KERS could be a double hit of goodness for F1 – it would boost the current lack of any real ‘green’ emphasis and if worked out properly could definitely go someway to add a touch of entertainment.

KERS failed largely due to the costs, but also due to the ridiculous limitations – limited power boost and the fact that it could only be used for 7seconds per lap – with the added weight, the benefits were clearly outweighed – just ask McLaren and Ferrari who arguably put a great amount of effort into the system and consequently had dire seasons, whereas BrawnGP and Red Bull had beautifully developed cars, KERS-less but quick and we all know how well they did in 2009.

Cleaning the ‘dirty air’

The ‘dirty air’ phrase has been used in every race so far in 2010 and no doubt will be for the rest of the season.  In short, ‘dirty air’ is the name given to the wake behind an F1 car.  When another car is following, looking to possibly overtake they get stuck in this ‘dirty air’ and lose grip and hence, cannot overtake.

The best analogy for this is if you look to boats – i.e. imagine a large boat on the seas powering along – the water it’s approaching and traveling through is calm and uniform, whereas the water behind it is all over the shop, going off in different directions and would be referred to as ‘rough’ and unpredictable.  If another boat was following this one, it would have far less control when following, with the wake left from the boat ahead compared to when it was happily sailing along all alone.

Back to F1 – how can this ‘dirty air’ be cleaned – simple – lose the reliance on wings – the massive regulation change  of 2009 forced cars to lose the little intricate ‘winglets’ and went someway towards reducing this reliance, but with double diffusers and the huge front and rear wings the dirty air is still a problem.  Back in the 70s, 80s and early 90s, with less effective aerodynamics the cars were able to follow more easily, and further more, back in the 60s with no wings at all, dirty air wasn’t much of an issue.  So is that the answer – go back in time?

See the evolution of grand prix cars in this video:

Putting your foot down

Often referred to when accelerating hard, but back in the day, drivers had to put their foot down hard on the brakes too to ensure they stopped in time and the skill of out-braking the competition made for terrific action and overtaking manouvres.  With modern brakes being so powerful the cars can stop in the blink of an eye.  Also, ignoring Vettel’s issues in Australia, the brakes aren’t of great concern in terms of reliability and can easily last a race.

Should the brakes be less powerful?  It certainly would reintroduce the skill of out-braking other drivers because there would be a greater margin to for braking and just as with tyres, if they are over-used they’ll wear thin.  What’s more we’d also hear the commentators using the classic “he’s the last of the late brakers there” – again this going back in time…

Tired of tyre talk

The ban on refueling for 2010 was music to our ears here at the Sett – in one swift change, grand prix racing is back to being grand prix racing rather than short sprint races.  In theory.  The only problem is that over time, the tyres in F1 have got so good that they can last an entire race, even the softer, grippier ones.  Also, the difference in performance of a set of rubber that’s done half a race distance isn’t too different from a brand new set.  The only reason the drivers are pitting to change tyres is because they have to, due to one of the most ridiculous rules ever introduced – drivers must use both types of tyre during a race.

The rule ensures Bridgestone tyres are the talk of at least some of the race weekend, which will please their marketing chaps and also Bridgestone won’t make tyres that don’t last a race weekend because that will make their product look ‘weak’ and creates a potential PR disaster – a little short-sighted if you ask us.

Seriously though, imagine that rather than having a rule that said drivers must change tyres, instead they introduced a super-duper soft tyre that took over 2 seconds off the laptime, but would be worn out within 20 laps – that would be mega exciting, generate over-taking opportunities and also ensure that tyres get as much publicity as possible.  The rule for drivers to change tyres would become defunct. Good idea?

Looking for freedom

If you look through any grand prix history book, you’ll find yourself reading about cars with turbos, skirts, active suspension, having fan-power, six, or even twelve wheels as well as strange wings and layouts – so much so that the starting grid could look more like whacky races than the current, more uniform grid of samey looking cars, resembling a company car park for sales reps (go with us hear, we’re fully aware that an F1 car is better looking than a Focus)

There are pros and cons to design and engineering freedom and if you asked any engineer in the sport, they’d relish the chance to design a car from a blank canvas rather than to the tight restrictions of modern day regulations.  It could create more excitement too, but by equal measure could create a grid of cars that differed in performance so much that no one would be able to overtake anyone.

Back to the future

Now, from reading this, it’s clear that we (as in fans of F1) aren’t short on ideas, and that there are definitely ways to ‘improve the show’ but the only problem is that most of these points are looking back at previous decades of F1 and then there’s the argument that F1 is the pinnacle of technology as well as the pinnacle of motorsport, so why should they not be allowed all the wings, fancy tyres etc.  Tough call, but here at Badger we just want the sport to live up to our tagline “Formula 1 isn’t boring…” – if that means taking onboard lessons learned from the past, then so be it.

Do you have an opinion?

Of course you do – share it below in the comments and enjoy some Badger banter.

• Further reading:
• Doughnuts and other ways to make F1 more appealing
• Breaking the Formula – Rules are there to be.. changed?

Thanks to Chris Labrooy for use of his stunning graphics, see his website for more and hi-res versions

Now then, it’s a Badger fact that Formula One has seen more rules changes than Jordan* has seen tabloid headlines and more changes than Toyota have recalled cars – and that’s a lot.  So many that every year, rather than tweaking them a little bit, they change three or four different rules.  That may sound clever, but if it’s a great season or even more crucially, if it’s a poor season, how will they judge which rule change is the cause of it is?  They won’t be able to – how very clever.

WHO ARE ‘THEY’ ?

Who are ‘they’ you should ask – ‘they’ are various ‘groups’ involved in F1 – namely the ‘Overtaking Working Group’, the ‘Sporting Working Group’, and then there’s the teams’ association known as FOTA and the governing body, the FIA.  Now that’s a lot of groups of folk sitting around large tables having discussions about the racing, the sport and the overall spectacle F1 – sounds quite fab doesn’t it.

There’s only one problem – they seem to work about as efficiently as many public sector organisations do, i.e. meetings about meetings that only end up reversing what has been done before or missing the point entirely – that may sounds harsh, but seriously, what good has come of all these people having a natter?

if only F1 had a Haynes manual eh?

WHAT’S THE POINT…?

2010 follows the recent trend and sees a tsunami of changes – but this time mainly looking at the races rather than the cars – they did that in 2009.  First up, it’s the much hyped points system.  For many many years points were awarded to the top 6 finishers, 10 for the win, 6 for 2nd and then 4, 3, 2 and 1 point for 6th – this worked pretty well, there were some super close races for the finishing line with the 2nd place driver always challenging as much as possible for 1st and the championship battle often went down to the last few races at least with the points gap never being more than a handful.  Then, the powers that be made the system that we’re all familiar with today – 10 for the win, 8 for 2nd and so on, down to 8th position.  This also worked well – or so we thought…

…because the subject of ‘points’ was obviously on their agenda for 2010 and now there’s a brand new (or MotoGP inspired) points system where the winning driver receives a massive 25 points – a full 150% more than the previous decades of F1.  They’ve also realised that if the driver in 2nd place is due significantly less points than he would get if he were 1st, he’d try harder for the win so now the 2nd place driver is in line for only 18 points, with 3rd getting 15 (see the new scale here) – now that’s genius isn’t it – they’ve worked out that if there’s an incentive to go for 1st, there will be more exciting racing – well that’s the plan.  In reality – every driver (bar Piquet Jr – he’d rather crash) goes into motorsport to win, so the greater points incentive is unlikely to make the massive difference it’s intended to… (oh and it means comparing historical points scores a whole new nightmare for statisticians…)

BANNING OF THE HOSEPIPE

Next up for 2010 is the removal of re-fuelling during grands prix.  The reason – to cut costs.  Now this is a good idea, but hardly rocket science – the fact that they ever introduced it into F1 at all is beyond us here at Badger.  It does nothing for the sport.  What used to be an test of endurance, speed, skill and stamina for the chequered flag became 2 or 3 part sprint race.  Why would you risk a manoeuvre when you could wait a average maximum of 20 laps to do it via a pit stop.  Ok, so we had flames now and then and of course Massa’s comical Singapore pit stop in 2008 – but that hardly makes re-fuelling worth while.  It’s good that it’s banned – there may be some real racing now, with drivers making their tyres last as long as possible…

Not just the Ferrari livery changed for the 2010 season © Autosport

…except ‘they’ have gone and changed rules to do with tyres too – the intelligence and forward-thinkingness of these ‘working’ groups continues to astound us.  Now a new rule has been put in place that means the top 10 drivers after qualifying all have to start the race on the tyres that they did their final qualifying laps on, whereas the other 16 drivers can do as they please.  You don’t have to be Einstein to see what the idea is – to introduce another level of strategy for the leading drivers, i.e. play safe or take a punt for pole and pay for it at the start of the race.  Again, we have to ask – is this rule really needed – all it does is give the commentators something to talk about and makes the sport seem even more complex than it is to the new and casual fans. Well done.

AS IF WE AREN’T ‘TYRED’ ALREADY

‘They’ must like tyres because they are also keeping the ‘drivers must use both types of tyre’ during a grand prix – jay-sus, are they actually trying to make talking about F1 racing as exciting as not winning the lottery – if so well done again, that’s another tick in a box.  Whether it’s true or myth, the story that Bridgestone wanted this rule in place so that people would talk about its tyres is worrying.  What if Tango want everyone to talk about its fizzy orangeade – are drivers expect to drink some during a pit stop… we hope you’re still following…

…now, the other significant change is that the front wheels and tyres on 2010 cars are narrower than they were in 2009 – that’s exciting isn’t it.  It’s as clear as day an admittance on the OWG’s part that the massive car regulation changes introduced for last season didn’t have the desired effect so they are reducing the grip by ensuring there’s less rubber on the road in 2010.  Great, but then that’s directly against what they set out to do – i.e. to enable cars to race nose-to-tail for overtaking and out-braking manoeuvres – with less grip at the front of the car, surely that’s going to make it more trickier than before… no?

OUR FINAL THOUGHT

So that’s it – here at Badger we’re all looking forward to the new season and are hoping it’s a close-fought, action-packed fun fair with a few office politics and not yet another step to make F1 an over technical, inaccessible sport – don’t get us wrong, we love it, but just wish there was more freedom for teams and drivers with less of the tiresome geeky rules that do nothing for the spectacle except reduce its appeal.

One final thought before we go – the FIA have launched their annual survey for fans to fill in and submit – that may seem like a good idea on the face of it – the FA do the same for Premier League fans (only if they have been to a match), but with the plethora of fan-driven F1 sites scoured across the interweb you would think hope ‘they’ have heard of a little website called Google – it will tell them what the fans are thinking.

If you do fancy filling our the FIA fans survey, you do so here, but we can’t guarantee they’ll read, acknowledge or act on your comments – tickets prices still increase year on year and despite the majority of fans being European or from across the pond from here in the UK, ‘they’ continue to stage races on the other side of the planet – know any Korean, Singaporean, Malaysian or Bahrain based F1 drivers?  Thought not.  Do us a favour and add a link to this article on your survey response…

*as in Katie Price, not the Irish fella that once owned an F1 team

FIA check & approve BrawnGP

As we have come to expect from Formula 1 – politics seem to be taking over the racing in the headlines and after the recent Lewis/McLaren fibbing saga, the real story is set to unfold early next week – over the legality of the Brawn, Toyota and Williams cars.  There were murmurs from upset teams over the diffusers before Australia, but the Aussie stewards deemed the three teams’ cars to be legal.  In response to this news, Ferrari, Red Bull and Renault appealed the decision.  This appeal will be heard on Tuesday (April 14th) and could affect the championship rather dramatically.

“Hang on a minute… what exactly is a diffuser?” I hear you ask.  To be straight-forward, a diffuser is the name give to an aerodynamic part of the car that you’ll find underneath, at the rear.  Many high-performance road cars have diffusers because, just as F1 cars do, they need lots of down-force to give them grip.  When air rushes under a car at speed it creates down-force (the fast moving air underneath compared to slow moving above creates pressure pushing down on the car) which is great until the air reaches the back of the car where things can become untidy.  Diffusers help the air and it’s transition from being at high-pressure under the car to the ambient pressure around the car.  See below for an Road/F1 car comparison.

There’s not a great deal different in the general appearance between this Ferrari road car and the BrawnGP F1 car and the same can said for the appearance of the F1 cars designed by Red Bull, Renault and Ferrari.  The diffuser is the plastic-tray like gizmo bit that sweeps up from under the car with fins on it.  F1 cars have always had such aerodynamic additions, but with a new set of rules giving the designers more of a blank canvas than usual, there was always going to be an argument somewhere over what’s legal and what’s not.

The reason that the BrawnGP, Williams and Toyota cars are being deemed as illegal by the protesting teams is because their diffusers have an additional gap. This additional gap (or hole) is between before the end of the ‘floor’ of the car and the diffuser, which means the airflow from under the car is split into two channels just as it reaches the diffuser.  This means air can be rushing under and also through the diffuser.  With this airflow through and a around, a cleverly designed diffuser shape could effectively create an additional wing, which would create some extra down-force at high speed.  All other teams, bar these few do not have the additional gaps with cleverly designed diffusers and believe that such a design contravenes the rules and regulations created for the 2009 season.

Left: Brawn: arrow points out the hole to feed air. Right: Ferrari - no holes, just the diffuser fins to channel air (credit - f1.com)

So, what’s with all the handbags style protesting then? The main problem is a lack of clarification within the wording of the rules.  Nowhere in the rule book does it state that a design such as on Brawn is forbidden, but it seems that many of the F1 teams have seen what the rules are getting at and have acted accordingly – with no holes in the floor of the car acting a way of ‘feeding’ air through the diffuser to create additional down-force.

The two sides to the argument:

1. The opposing teams (Red Bull, Renault, Ferrari and co) missed a trick to gain extra down-force – a loophole in the rules if you will and should just get on and make their own new diffusers.
2. The Brawn, Toyota and Williams teams have acted in a manner and designed cars that are not in the “spirit” of the rules and should be penalised and their diffusers should be outlawed.

Before we go on to look at the possible outcomes of the appeal hearing on Tuesday, let’s just make one thing clear – the FIA appointed stewards declared the diffusers legal at the Australian Grand Prix and all the three teams were allowed to race.

Possible outcomes for Tuesday – complete with Badger’s “likelihood rating.”  We’re 100% sure something will happen and the percentage weights after each statement indicate, which we believe the more likely:

• BrawnGP, Williams and Toyota designed diffusers are found to be illegal and an infringement of the rules.  For the FIA to now go back on their Melbourne judgement and penalise the teams would be far more than farcical – possibly apocalyptic for Formula 1’s credibility.   Badger’s likelihood rating: 20%

• The ‘alternative’ diffusers are deemed to be legal and well within the rules.  The rest of the teams rush out and design their own clever diffusers for the forthcoming races.  This will be tricky with very limited testing allowed, but no doubt the majority of these teams’ designers will have already started/finished their new gadgets.  Badger’s likelihood rating: 50%

• The opposing teams win their appeal with the ‘alternative’ diffusers not being in the spirit of the rules and they are outlawed from here on for the rest of the season, leaving Toyota, Williams and BrawnGP with some work to do.  For anyone to win a case in courtroom claiming something was not ‘in the spirit’ of a situation would be just ridiculous and prompt the usual Ferrari International Assistance conspiracy theorists to rise from the wood work.  Badger’s likelihood rating: 25%

• Something else happens.  Badger’s likelihood rating: 5%

From elsewhere in the media; David Coulthard has said:

“They said in Melbourne that the cars were legal and I think the FIA will confirm that judgement on the fourteenth.  The other seven teams are probably going to have to change their cars.”

DC: Wise words

In response to the fact that 7 teams having to spend lots of money on new diffusers in the midst of a recession DC responded:

“That is right, but it does not mean that the diffusers are illegal, you shouldn’t necessarily be punished because you have interpreted the rules differently and thus taken an advantage. Those three teams also spent money to develop their aerodynamics, so that money would also be wasted.  Formula one is not just about saving money, it is also a championship!”

Well said David.  Then we have Flavio Briatore – who’s well known for Alonso-like childish outbursts and who took a shot at Ross Brawn who heads up the Overtaking Working Group (OWG they collectively designed the new rules) by saying that Brawn should have told everyone else what his designers were up to – you can imagine how this made the rest of the F1 paddock chuckle!  F1 designers are sworn to secracy and keep their cards close to their chests – as you would with many millions of pounds at stake in front of a global audience.   Flavio’s outburst clearly indicates the fact that his team’s appeal doesn’t have much of a leg to stand on – he’s just annoyed that his car isn’t as fast as the Brawn, Williams and Toyota cars.

Also, to add salt to the wound that is likely to be the result of an embarrassing outcome for Ferrari, Renault and Red Bull is Williams and their little jab at around the time of the Australian Grand Prix.   After the protests were announced, Williams launched a counter-protest at the legality of the Ferrari and Red Bull front wings, only to later withdraw this protest and publicly state that they did so in the ‘interests of the sport‘ – a brilliant PR stunt makes a mockery of the current diffuser confusion.

One has to hope that come Tuesday, a sensible decision is made and that F1 can have it’s next grand prix in China without any more controversy over aerodynamic bits of cars – here’s novel idea – why don’t we see who can go the fastest over a long period of time and then make them the winner.  Genius.

• For another take on this subject, take a look at Maurice Hamilton’s piece in the Guardian

The Science Museum: Looking at the flipside of F1

With the off-season reaching an end and the Honda story resolved, the F1 media seems to be struggling to find a story worth reporting.  Rather than run a feature on testing in Spain the Badger is looking slightly closer to home and giving you the latest from right here in London, UK.

This morning, the Science Museum opened the doors to it’s latest exhibition: “Fast Forward: 20 ways F1 is changing our world” so F1 Badger took the opportunity to visit this world famous museum and find out what it’s all about.

Ron Dennis of McLaren opened the exhibition with the Museum Director, Prof Chris Rapley CBE.   Dennis explained how many industries outside of F1 have benefited from the innovation and engineering within the sport and that the exhibition isn’t just to show this off, but that it is here to “inspire the next generation of Britons to embrace science, technology and engineering to innovate and provide answers to the challenges of tomorrow.”  So what are these mysterious products created by F1 ingenuity?

I’ll tell you – the exhibits include wellington boots, a leg brace, a bicycle, a wheelchair, fishing equipment and a table but our favourite has to be the “Servo 300 Ventilator” and more so, the story that went with it.

It transpires that doctors from Great Ormond Street Hospital (who happened to be F1 enthusiasts) saw a fitting similarity between cardiac surgery procedures and the art of a perfect F1 pit stop.  It’s not as mad is sounds because like a cardiac surgery scenario, pit stops involve many specialist skilled people working under immense pressure where if something were to go wrong it could be disastrous. (maybe not quite as life threatening as an iffy heart surgery procedure but you get the idea)

The Servo 300 Ventilator - straight from the (pit)wall to the ward

In an F1 pit stop, one team member is responsible for the overall activity and this would be the chap with a lollipop holding the driver on his marks.  The doctors now assign the anesthetist to take this role during cardiac surgery, to ensure all team members are working effectively and all is in order.  This and other observations have led to more streamlined handover procedures to ensure the whole process is as efficient as possible, much like a pit stop.  The ventilator (pictured) ensures patients can be moved around easily when needed and that all is in order.  Other hospitals are now reported to be looking at F1 techniques.

Many of the exhibits on display are, although stunning, not the kind of objects you could go and buy to enhance your own home. (carbon fibre stairs looked awesome but not cheap!)

An exception to this was the “Boiler Buddy.”  This handy bit of kit helps your central heating system from clogging up with debris and reducing the amount of load on your boiler.   It was built upon the technology used in F1 engines to remove tiny iron particles from oil and therefore out of the intricate engines and gearboxes to avoid risk of a failure.    We’ve all seen how catastrophic an engine failure in F1 can be and similarly the ‘Buddy can ensure you don’t receive a catastrophic gas bill.

It does this by using magnetic filters to remove unwanted particles from the water fed to your boiler and therefore reduces the amount of sludge you’ll no doubt find collecting inside the copper water pipes.  Without the build up of sludge your boiler can relax and warm your pad more efficiently and in turn produce less carbon emissions.  Since it’s said that as much as two thirds of Europe’s CO2 emissions are from household boilers, a gizmo such as this could make a massive difference to the environment.  Larger scale versions can be used in power stations to achieve an even greater positive impact.

I won’t spoil it for you here by explaining every exhibit, but as a teaser, today’s visit enlightened us by showing just the sheer scale and diversity the work in F1 affects each and every one of our lives in some form.  Did you know that:

• Military tanks are using fuel filling equipment from F1
• Offshore wind turbine blades are produced using F1 inspired manufacturing techniques
• US marines use F1 derived hydraulic dampers to avoid knee injuries
• Your family car’s tyres can help you not to have a massive accident in the event of puncture due to F1
• The same technology used in F1 cockpits help to transport critically ill newborn babies

Stairway to heaven?

Besides viewing the exhibits, the Badger used its press privileges to have a chat with Stephanie Millard – the exhibition’s Head of Content.  She explained that despite the hot topic of cost cutting, innovations such as those on display would continue to be developed because they are spawned from engineers having fun with the technologies available to them.  Perhaps the cost cutting will in fact further the development of more cost effective items.  The stairs on display (pictured) demonstrate the possibilities presented from material research within F1.  As a cheaper alternative I suggested the idea of a carbon fibre toothbrush.  (you heard it here first).

When asked about how the exhibition came to be it turns out that it is largely thanks to the museum director who is a big fan of F1, as well as being the county’s most important climate change scientist.  (there’s a hope for ‘green’ motorsport yet!)

White Wellies : Trendy

And finally, I mentioned at the top of this article that Wellington boots formed part of the exhibition – it’s true and for a second don’t think of the fashion items you’ve seen Kate Moss photographed wearing in the papers, oh no these are “Anti Slip Guardian” wellies and were developed with F1 tyre manufacturers.  The end result is a pair of the ultimate in non-slip wellies, even on the greasiest of floors.  There’s some bonkers statistic that someone gets hurt in the workplace twice every minute in the UK but during a seven-month trial these trendy white boots ensured not a single person had a slip or fall.  Huge health and safety compensation payouts are a thing of the past!

This exhibition is fantastic and definitely worth a visit, and, if nothing else, provides another rebuke to throw back at the those who criticise the sport for its decadence and expenditure.  Yay Go Science!

F1 isn’t just about cars going around in circles.

More info:

• Official Photos of the exhibits
• Science Museum online
• Where is the Science Museum (it’s free to visit)
• McLaren Applied Technologies

Fancy a ride? This F1 inspired bike made it's premiere today. It features monitoring technology that collects unbelievable amounts of data enabling atheletes to train on the bike outside in the fresh air rather than couped up in Virgin Active

The F1 Drivers Choice?

The pre-season hot topic has been KERS – the new technology for F1 in 2009.  It stands for Kinetic Energy Recovery System and in english this means that rather than wasting energy that’s created through braking it can be re-used in the form of boost.  Sounds like a Whacky Races type gadget and almost as cartoon like but it’s for real.

F1 cars can brake from 200mph to just 60mph quicker than a bank can collapse – which is every few seconds if you believe the media hype.  The energy created is massive with the brakes glowing red hot and reaching temperatures in excess of 1000 degrees.  Blimey.

Rather than have this energy wasted in the form of heat, with KERS it’s stored in a battery which drivers can then use to give them whats equivalent to a turbo boost of power in a straight line.  Sounds magic and which ever team can make this work best will have a massive advantage in the 2009 season.

There’s one problem, the batteries used are not the double A ones you’ll find in your TV remote, they are as you’d expect pretty big and therefore very heavy.  The lighter drivers are ok but those over 5′6″ will struggle more.

For example: Mark Webber is the Australian pilot of Red Bull Racing and his team mate is the German youngster Seb Vettel, the latter is the size of jockey and weighs less than an empty crisp packet whereas Mr Webber is a big lad who on this relative weight comparison weighs more than 5 packets of Walkers ‘Big Eat’ crisps.

The combined weight of driver and car has to meet the F1 regulations and the cars are often made lighter than this on purpose so teams can put ballast in areas of the car to make it handle better.  By this measure little Seb will be fine but the Australian is at a severe disadvantage. So the question all fans have been asking is which teams have been pondering using KERS at all for the start of the season.

As yet no team has confirmed that they are to employ KERS, but F1 Badger really hopes someone does because it could inject a further slice of excitement pie into Grand Prix racing and the little boy or girl in all of us would see a ‘turbo boost’ button on the steering wheel as being very cool…  If this means Mark Webber and other tall drivers have to enjoy less pie and look to Slim Fast(er) then so be it.

The KERS effect...