Is Coughlan trying to save himself ??
Discussion
kenthardy said:
Does the move where the court case was stopped and Mike Coughlan has 'made a statement' followed by the FIA charges against McLaren mean he is saving his skin and dropping everyone ese in it?
F1 hasnt been a sport for years but this is 'Sun territory' !!
One would not wish to speculate on what has been going on, but one has to believe that Ferrari could not care less about Mike Coughlan, whilst at the same time their fondest wish on earth must be to see McLaren harmed.F1 hasnt been a sport for years but this is 'Sun territory' !!
flemke said:
kenthardy said:
Does the move where the court case was stopped and Mike Coughlan has 'made a statement' followed by the FIA charges against McLaren mean he is saving his skin and dropping everyone ese in it?
F1 hasnt been a sport for years but this is 'Sun territory' !!
One would not wish to speculate on what has been going on, but one has to believe that Ferrari could not care less about Mike Coughlan, whilst at the same time their fondest wish on earth must be to see McLaren harmed.F1 hasnt been a sport for years but this is 'Sun territory' !!
If I was an F1 constructor and had huge amounts of my intellectual property stolen and found in the posession of a competitor's employee I would want to get to the bottom of it and would want to see due process.
I am sure that if the roles were completely reversed then McLaren would be pursuing it with all vigour.
As I have said before, if your chief designer has all your competitors secrets in his head for months it is bound to influence what he does on your car. It is very strange that the donkeys were quicker till Coughlan got this information. Then the silver arrows were suddenly faster. Then when the theft becomes public the donkeys are suddenly faster again. To a cynic it looks like Coughlan had parts made with his Ferrari knowledge that made the McLarens faster and that these parts were removed when he was found out.
loneranger said:
It is very strange that the donkeys were quicker till Coughlan got this information. Then the silver arrows were suddenly faster. Then when the theft becomes public the donkeys are suddenly faster again.
Because Ferrari are the only team who can design a winning car?Would McLaren not have been better trying to 'borrow' some of Renault's secrets/designs instead? After all, they were the constructors champions, not Ferrari...
Regardless of the motives behind yet, its just sad that a title may be won or lost in the court room again and not on the track. Negative publicity is not good publicity in this case?
I'd agree with above though. If I had spent £millions designing something, then your closest rival/competitor ripped it off (even without their direct knowledge) then you wouldn't sit back and let them beat you would you?
Try a different business but similar situation. Chief designer of Ford lands himself the full design of the new Vectra/Astra/whatever. Ford don't know he's got it, but then somehow produce a car that is better at all the things that the planned Vauxhall would have been good at. If you were them, you'd be a little suspicious, and wouldn't sit on your hands watching you being out sold 10 to 1.
I'd agree with above though. If I had spent £millions designing something, then your closest rival/competitor ripped it off (even without their direct knowledge) then you wouldn't sit back and let them beat you would you?
Try a different business but similar situation. Chief designer of Ford lands himself the full design of the new Vectra/Astra/whatever. Ford don't know he's got it, but then somehow produce a car that is better at all the things that the planned Vauxhall would have been good at. If you were them, you'd be a little suspicious, and wouldn't sit on your hands watching you being out sold 10 to 1.
loneranger said:
If I was an F1 constructor and had huge amounts of my intellectual property stolen and found in the posession of a competitor's employee I would want to get to the bottom of it and would want to see due process..
Granted.loneranger said:
It is very strange that the donkeys were quicker till Coughlan got this information. Then the silver arrows were suddenly faster. Then when the theft becomes public the donkeys are suddenly faster again. To an imbecile it looks like Coughlan had parts made with his Ferrari knowledge that made the McLarens faster and that these parts were removed when he was found out
However, I've corrected that last bit for youEdited by hornetrider on Friday 13th July 08:56
loneranger said:
To a cynic it looks like Coughlan had parts made with his Ferrari knowledge that made the McLarens faster and that these parts were removed when he was found out.
No, to a real cynic it looks like Ferrari have engineered things to look this way. 
Anyway, why does this merit its own thread?? It's just a re-working of the existing thread.
Could we keep all the speculation and Daily Mail reporting in one thread before the rest of us lose the will to live.....
I thought Fezza's drop in performance was because they went the wrong way with there revised suspension they had after the first couple of races??
To be honest it's all getting a bit out of hand - how on earth are the FIA going to determine if anything on the Mclaren is related to the Fezza?? I mean I the bloke from Mclaren looked at the drawings etc and thought 'thats a good idea - but I think I can improve on it' how can they 'police' his thought process?? as the revised bit (that he's improved) might not look like the Fezza bits.... if you know what I mean....
Let's have the battle settled on the track........
GO KIMI!!
Chris
To be honest it's all getting a bit out of hand - how on earth are the FIA going to determine if anything on the Mclaren is related to the Fezza?? I mean I the bloke from Mclaren looked at the drawings etc and thought 'thats a good idea - but I think I can improve on it' how can they 'police' his thought process?? as the revised bit (that he's improved) might not look like the Fezza bits.... if you know what I mean....
Let's have the battle settled on the track........
GO KIMI!!Chris
I am so curious to find out how you would all be reacting if McLaren were accusing Ferrari of such skullduggery. I'm sure the bonfires would already be lit. But no, McLaren seems to occupy a moral higher ground. Yes Flemke, Ferrari has a history of bending the rules. Yes they might not be to everyones taste, but its too early to tell where this is going, IMHO nothing will come of it.
runnersp said:
I am so curious to find out how you would all be reacting if McLaren were accusing Ferrari of such skullduggery. I'm sure the bonfires would already be lit. But no, McLaren seems to occupy a moral higher ground. Yes Flemke, Ferrari has a history of bending the rules. Yes they might not be to everyones taste, but its too early to tell where this is going, IMHO nothing will come of it.
To be honest I'd react exactly the same way if it were RedBull and Spyker - it's all dragging F1 further down 
Chris
loneranger said:
flemke said:
kenthardy said:
Does the move where the court case was stopped and Mike Coughlan has 'made a statement' followed by the FIA charges against McLaren mean he is saving his skin and dropping everyone ese in it?
F1 hasnt been a sport for years but this is 'Sun territory' !!
One would not wish to speculate on what has been going on, but one has to believe that Ferrari could not care less about Mike Coughlan, whilst at the same time their fondest wish on earth must be to see McLaren harmed.F1 hasnt been a sport for years but this is 'Sun territory' !!
If I was an F1 constructor and had huge amounts of my intellectual property stolen and found in the posession of a competitor's employee I would want to get to the bottom of it and would want to see due process.
I am sure that if the roles were completely reversed then McLaren would be pursuing it with all vigour.
They probably would be more focused on learning what actually had happened, however, and less on working the media.
loneranger said:
As I have said before, if your chief designer has all your competitors secrets in his head for months it is bound to influence what he does on your car. It is very strange that the donkeys were quicker till Coughlan got this information. Then the silver arrows were suddenly faster. Then when the theft becomes public the donkeys are suddenly faster again. To a cynic it looks like Coughlan had parts made with his Ferrari knowledge that made the McLarens faster and that these parts were removed when he was found out.
The essence of this year's Ferrari, and McLaren, was finalised a year ago.Once the basic confirmation of your car is established, you are severly limited in what you can do to improve it. What will optimise it has almost nothing to do with what will optimise another package - especially one based on a fundamentally different wheelbase philosophy.
A great number of the aero parts on F1 cars are avialable every race and testing session for competitors to view. Why do you think that no one is copying the Ferrari or McLaren aero bits? For the simple reason that they have no direct application to any other car.
D_Mike said:
Flemke's point concerning the lack of applicability of other cars' aerodynamic parts to a car with an already established design is neatly illustrated by the Honda. They wouldn't bother with a B spec car if they could just bolt on ferrari aero and be at the front of the grid.
You are both conveniently ignoring the facts.Loads of features have been copied from car to car in F1, in fact it is the norm.
Here are some that spring to mind:
Moveable flexi floors.
Barge boards.
Mass dampers.
Biplane front wings.
loneranger said:
D_Mike said:
Flemke's point concerning the lack of applicability of other cars' aerodynamic parts to a car with an already established design is neatly illustrated by the Honda. They wouldn't bother with a B spec car if they could just bolt on ferrari aero and be at the front of the grid.
You are both conveniently ignoring the facts.Loads of features have been copied from car to car in F1, in fact it is the norm.
Here are some that spring to mind:
Moveable flexi floors.
Barge boards.
Mass dampers.
Biplane front wings.
For one thing, little that is used in F1 is technologically unique; it's usually been adapted from another discipline. There is almost no pure research in F1.
For another thing, there is frequent, almost constant, turnover of personnel as designers, engineers and mechanics move from one team to a rival. They bring all their knowledge wtih them to the new team, which is indeed half the reason that they've been poached.
The most competitive cars are that way because the basic concept was good (such as Ferrari's wheelbase extension this year to optimise the new Bridgestone's similarity to an older tyre), and because that good concept was then developed into an integral whole. The success of a car derives from the quality of development and integration of its constituent parts, as Ferrari showed to devastating effect in '02 and '04.
Anything that you do in one area has knock-on effects across the car, which is why you cannot bolt one constructor's front wing onto someone else's car (well, you could if you really wanted to, but you'd be wasting your time).
In this case, some Ferrari syncophants are suggesting that Coughlan got a ton of inside information from Stepney, went in to work the next day and said to his colleagues, "I've got an idea, why don't we do ....(unique and brilliant Ferrari concept)?", which idea the rest of the team loved and duly designed, developed and built into their fundamentally different McLaren racing car in a matter of days. This ingenuous theory continues that this is the only possible explanation for why the McLarens were faster than the Ferraris at several races.
Since he was sacked by Ron Dennis three years ago, David Coulthard has not been sparing in his criticism of McLaren. Yet even he is saying:
"I don't doubt Ron Dennis and McLaren's position on it," Coulthard said in his column for ITV's F1 website. "They are too clever and their integrity is too high to be involved in that. As to who's responsible and how far it goes, it will all come out in time I'm sure.
In the meantime, the Ferrari love-slaves can continue to revel in delusions of how McLaren could only have done well because it took an immoral advantage, whilst poor Ferrari was the wronged virgin.
Is it just me who couldn't actually give a damn if designs have been copied/adapted/plagiarised? It's been happening for years and year, the only issue now is that motorsport and F1 in particular has become so "closed doors" that if one idea/design philospohpy is seen to work, everyones starts using it, and no matter how detailed a design I have for a Ferrari widget it is still a square peg in a round hole when I try to fit it into my McLaren. You can't simply bolt on bit of car a onto car b and be sure it will work and be safe, Coughlan may of used a Ferrari idea but the guys in Woking had to make it fit.
If you look back through history, Benneton (I think) were the first to use the raised nose idea, it worked, everyone used it for years after, maybe Benneton should ask for a hearing. I think a comparison between Shadow and Arrows is a bit extreme, what about all the Chapman innovations that everyone uses now (or Champan plagiarised!)? suspension bolted to the engine/gearbox etc etc.
If you look back through history, Benneton (I think) were the first to use the raised nose idea, it worked, everyone used it for years after, maybe Benneton should ask for a hearing. I think a comparison between Shadow and Arrows is a bit extreme, what about all the Chapman innovations that everyone uses now (or Champan plagiarised!)? suspension bolted to the engine/gearbox etc etc.
Chassis 33 said:
Is it just me who couldn't actually give a damn if designs have been copied/adapted/plagiarised? It's been happening for years and year, the only issue now is that motorsport and F1 in particular has become so "closed doors" that if one idea/design philospohpy is seen to work, everyones starts using it, and no matter how detailed a design I have for a Ferrari widget it is still a square peg in a round hole when I try to fit it into my McLaren. You can't simply bolt on bit of car a onto car b and be sure it will work and be safe, Coughlan may of used a Ferrari idea but the guys in Woking had to make it fit.
If you look back through history, Benneton (I think) were the first to use the raised nose idea, it worked, everyone used it for years after, maybe Benneton should ask for a hearing. I think a comparison between Shadow and Arrows is a bit extreme, what about all the Chapman innovations that everyone uses now (or Champan plagiarised!)? suspension bolted to the engine/gearbox etc etc.
It's true that one cannot effectively patent something just for his own racing car.If you look back through history, Benneton (I think) were the first to use the raised nose idea, it worked, everyone used it for years after, maybe Benneton should ask for a hearing. I think a comparison between Shadow and Arrows is a bit extreme, what about all the Chapman innovations that everyone uses now (or Champan plagiarised!)? suspension bolted to the engine/gearbox etc etc.
Having said that, there is a big difference between, on the one hand, picking up a competitor's idea because it is visible, or via a rumour, or from someone who's joined you from the competitor and carried the idea in his head, and, on the other hand, being in physical possession of non-public material (including software) that belongs to someone else.
One can't blame Ferrari for being very bent out of shape and indignant - assuming that they sincerely believe that their physical material was taken illicitly.
One can blame them for all the drama and over-egging, and for apparently stirring up (if not instructing) the FIA to over-react as well.
flemke said:
Chassis 33 said:
Is it just me who couldn't actually give a damn if designs have been copied/adapted/plagiarised? It's been happening for years and year, the only issue now is that motorsport and F1 in particular has become so "closed doors" that if one idea/design philospohpy is seen to work, everyones starts using it, and no matter how detailed a design I have for a Ferrari widget it is still a square peg in a round hole when I try to fit it into my McLaren. You can't simply bolt on bit of car a onto car b and be sure it will work and be safe, Coughlan may of used a Ferrari idea but the guys in Woking had to make it fit.
If you look back through history, Benneton (I think) were the first to use the raised nose idea, it worked, everyone used it for years after, maybe Benneton should ask for a hearing. I think a comparison between Shadow and Arrows is a bit extreme, what about all the Chapman innovations that everyone uses now (or Champan plagiarised!)? suspension bolted to the engine/gearbox etc etc.
It's true that one cannot effectively patent something just for his own racing car.If you look back through history, Benneton (I think) were the first to use the raised nose idea, it worked, everyone used it for years after, maybe Benneton should ask for a hearing. I think a comparison between Shadow and Arrows is a bit extreme, what about all the Chapman innovations that everyone uses now (or Champan plagiarised!)? suspension bolted to the engine/gearbox etc etc.
Having said that, there is a big difference between, on the one hand, picking up a competitor's idea because it is visible, or via a rumour, or from someone who's joined you from the competitor and carried the idea in his head, and, on the other hand, being in physical possession of non-public material (including software) that belongs to someone else.
One can't blame Ferrari for being very bent out of shape and indignant - assuming that they sincerely believe that their physical material was taken illicitly.
One can blame them for all the drama and over-egging, and for apparently stirring up (if not instructing) the FIA to over-react as well.
flemke said:
One can blame them for all the drama and over-egging, and for apparently stirring up (if not instructing) the FIA to over-react as well.
Do you have any evidence at all that they are doing any of this?They aren't giving interviews and everything they have issued to the press thus far is strictly factual.
It is the press that are the drama queens of this story.
loneranger said:
As I have said before, if your chief designer has all your competitors secrets in his head for months it is bound to influence what he does on your car. It is very strange that the donkeys were quicker till Coughlan got this information. Then the silver arrows were suddenly faster. Then when the theft becomes public the donkeys are suddenly faster again. To a cynic it looks like Coughlan had parts made with his Ferrari knowledge that made the McLarens faster and that these parts were removed when he was found out.
Good god you're an idiot. You're absolutely right, of course the resurgence of Ferrari has nothing at all to do with the fact that Magny Cours and Silverstone both suit its car better, since the 2007 Ferrari has a longer wheelbase than most and both those tracks are high-downforce, unlike Monaco (very twisty, favors short wheelbase), Montreal and Indy (low downforce).Did you eat paint chips as a kid?
Edited by Dr JonboyG on Friday 13th July 15:27
Dr JonboyG said:
loneranger said:
As I have said before, if your chief designer has all your competitors secrets in his head for months it is bound to influence what he does on your car. It is very strange that the donkeys were quicker till Coughlan got this information. Then the silver arrows were suddenly faster. Then when the theft becomes public the donkeys are suddenly faster again. To a cynic it looks like Coughlan had parts made with his Ferrari knowledge that made the McLarens faster and that these parts were removed when he was found out.
Good god you're an idiot. You're absolutely right, of course the resurgence of Ferrari has nothing at all to do with the fact that Magny Cours and Silverstone both suit its car better, since the 2007 Ferrari has a longer wheelbase than most and both those tracks are high-downforce, unlike Monaco (very twisty, favors short wheelbase), Montreal and Indy (low downforce).Did you eat paint chips as a kid?
Edited by Dr JonboyG on Friday 13th July 15:27
Right.
It is pretty obvious who the idiot is here.
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff