Williams F1

Author
Discussion

TheDeuce

618 posts

5 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
sgtBerbatov said:
From the article I read about Kubica on Motorsport.com, it seems like the floor of the car has been damaged. It'll be fixed for Saturday apparently, but this line is quite confusing/telling:

It is understood that damage picked up can be repaired for Saturday and Williams does not face a spares shortage, although Kubica said the team did not have "a lot of spares".

So you don't have a spares shortage, but you don't have a lot of spares either? What's that? I don't know where the first part of that sentance came from, but it was certaintly contradicted by Kubica.

This leaves us with a glaring issue with Williams (I Think): The team have cashflow issues so are doing the bare minimum to get a car on the grid.

It might very well be the cars are going to run that little bit slower to just not squeeze within 107% tomorrow, so that they don't have to participate in the grand prix on Sunday and so they can go home and maybe come back with a proper car with actual spare parts for the next race. Something like what Arrows did a few years ago, except actually post a qualifying time and not just go out on an out lap and come back in.

For a team where the Deputy principle said their best chance of scoring a point in Monaco was for there to be a massive pile up in front of them, I don't think it would be beyond the possibility.
This isn't the interview I first watched, but this is more or less the same: https://www.formula1.com/en/video/2019/3/Robert_Ku...

He is very clear about the parts situation. They are repairing parts for Saturday, so that they can save the spare parts for Quali and race. So their 'spare parts' are not even plural. they have one/one set of whatever is collapsing on that car. Shocking.

At around 2:20 he says "hopefully the car will stay in one bit". Which I roughly translate as "hopefully this pile of sh*t won't collapse underneath me at 180 mph".

They could deliberately flunk quali and just go home. I really question if they should even be allowed to enter the race though. They have a untested car with a known structural fault, and it's slow enough for most other drivers to need to pass it twice - not good, a pointless risk really.

Fundoreen

633 posts

22 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
Will they regret the signing of Kubica?
At the moment he seems to be fueling all the internet speculation. Hardly a team player.

rallycross

9,691 posts

176 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
Fundoreen said:
Will they regret the signing of Kubica?
At the moment he seems to be fueling all the internet speculation. Hardly a team player.
More like does he now regret seeing his £11m investment go down the tubes to be at the back at every race - that’s not what he signed up for.

TheDeuce

618 posts

5 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
Fundoreen said:
Will they regret the signing of Kubica?
At the moment he seems to be fueling all the internet speculation. Hardly a team player.
I think Kubica has regrets for signing to Williams perhaps. He's not a happy chappy.

In his defence, I think internet speculation was rife, and for the most part accurate long before he opened his mouth. His words just confirm the rumours most people had already accepted in any case.

Besides, who else would have had that seat that is better than Kubica likely still is? They need him. He's the only bit of positive publicity they are getting.

HustleRussell

15,939 posts

99 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
TheDeuce said:
He is very clear about the parts situation. They are repairing parts for Saturday, so that they can save the spare parts for Quali and race. So their 'spare parts' are not even plural. they have one/one set of whatever is collapsing on that car. Shocking.

At around 2:20 he says "hopefully the car will stay in one bit". Which I roughly translate as "hopefully this pile of sh*t won't collapse underneath me at 180 mph".

They could deliberately flunk quali and just go home. I really question if they should even be allowed to enter the race though. They have a untested car with a known structural fault, and it's slow enough for most other drivers to need to pass it twice - not good, a pointless risk really.
What is 'collapsing'? I haven't heard anything about 'collapsing'?

Is the car in danger of 'collapsing'?

What is this 'known structural fault'?

The car is under-developed and aerodynamic parts aren't durable enough yet- but the car is well within the limits to qualify for a grand prix weekend.

You should have a look back into grand prix past to see some genuine liabilities and embarrassments.
Advertisement

Supersam83

194 posts

84 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
stevesuk said:
Mastercard Lola's performance in the 1997 Australian GP also sprung to my mind. But they were 11 or 12 seconds off the pace on that occasion. Although, who knows what will happen in qualifying?
Yeah I seem to remember they bought cars to the GP that didn't even see a wind tunnel and used out of date Ford V8's.

I think they were around the same pace as F3000 cars at the time.

TheDeuce

618 posts

5 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
HustleRussell said:
What is 'collapsing'? I haven't heard anything about 'collapsing'?

Is the car in danger of 'collapsing'?

What is this 'known structural fault'?

The car is under-developed and aerodynamic parts aren't durable enough yet- but the car is well within the limits to qualify for a grand prix weekend.

You should have a look back into grand prix past to see some genuine liabilities and embarrassments.
If the shock of kerbs is causing damage, then something somewhere is structurally suffering. Whatever it is, it will ultimately fail/collapse/snap/crack, whatever. The fact it's the shock travelling upwards from the kerbs that are a concern suggests it is something that flexes when that happens - further to which Motorsport.com have reported the car is 'understood' to have floor damage.

Surely the take home point is that at neither testing nor FP1 they were able to do anything approaching race distance without running into this problem. Whatever is being damaged can't be said to have a reasonable chance of surviving a race - unless, they think, if they avoid the kerbs.

I'm not imagining the car will literally fall to pieces. But there isn't very much on these cars that can fail in a way that doesn't reduce safety on some level.




Fortitude

327 posts

131 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
Russell: Williams could break 107% rule in qualifying
15-03-2019 09:05 by Jake Williams-Smith

https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/32721/russell-willi...


Australian GP: Kubica limited by spares issue
By Andrew Hooper
March 15 2019

The Friday practice practice for the 2019 Australian Grand Prix would see ROKiT Williams driver Robert Kubica when interviewed after the final session would highlight the fact that his session was compromised by the fact that his car had sustained damage during the session and that a shortage of spares would see him having to limit his use of the kerbs

http://www.f1network.net/main/s107/st198487.htm

Frimley111R

9,409 posts

173 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
HustleRussell said:
I feel that Claire should step down.
TBH I agree. Williams has suffered considerably under her leadership and although not everything is her fault i think the team needs a stronger and better leader. Williams was built by Frank and Patrick, both outstanding people. They need another outstanding leader now

Petrus1983

1,752 posts

101 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
Frimley111R said:
TBH I agree. Williams has suffered considerably under her leadership and although not everything is her fault i think the team needs a stronger and better leader. Williams was built by Frank and Patrick, both outstanding people. They need another outstanding leader now
Ron Dennis or Flávio Briatore would both whip the team into shape. Would be great to see.

Petrus1983

1,752 posts

101 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
thegreenhell said:
I mentioned this a few pages back - the reality is they are - they’re 2secs off p18 which is massive in F1.

TheDeuce

618 posts

5 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
Petrus1983 said:
I mentioned this a few pages back - the reality is they are - they’re 2secs off p18 which is massive in F1.
I know it's his first F1 seat and he's very excited.

But is he insane?

"We've obviously got our improvements to come and fine-tuning to make, but I don't think we're a million miles from our optimum."

- Fine tuning won't achieve 2 seconds.
- If it did, you're still fighting not to be last.
- If you're currently not that far away from 'optimum', then your optimum is hopelessly noncompetitive.

He's a likeable guy, but there is some reality missing here.

Daston

5,445 posts

142 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
Henry Fiddleton said:
I think factory backed teams will not stick around.

Factory Teams are all ready jumping into Formula E, and with the Sky pay wall not helping viewing figures the appeal of F1 is on a downward trend.

(I am an F1 fan btw) The overall show has been poor for the last few season (4-9 years).

Whether Williams can hold out, or jump ship else where who knows - are budget in FE significantly less?

F1 may well be independent only teams in the next 4-5 years.
You say that, but look at all the manufactures building hypercars to compete in the new WEC/le mans class. Granted a lot cheaper than F1

TheDeuce

618 posts

5 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
I sometimes think (dream) that only makers of road cars should compete. It just makes sense to me that the teams are fighting for their own marque, not for random sponsors. Given budget caps, I'm pretty sure Ferrari, Mclaren and Renault could afford to self fund. The drivers could then go back to being sponsored instead of salaried, which would also help keep the budgets realistic.

Not that I want a Williams road car. The prospect of a late delivery, disappointing performance, an inability to drive over a bump and a complete lack of spare parts isn't much of an advert headache

RichB

41,296 posts

223 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
Remember that Ferrari raced before they built cars, as did Mclaren.

TheDeuce

618 posts

5 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
RichB said:
Remember that Ferrari raced before they built cars, as did Mclaren.
Not in my time they didn't smile

I did know that, but look at the trade off they have now. Road cars fuel massive budget, and then they sell more road cars because the owners get to say "yea.. well, dunno if you know but.. There is genuine F1 technology in my car.." Which is absolute BS really, but it works.

It just makes sense to me. I think also the wider public would 'get it' more if the racing marques were related more to real cars.

But as I said, a pipe dream. I know that if non auto makers want to throw millions in, the sport will flex to let them in.

rallycross

9,691 posts

176 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
Maybe they are just running it as a profit making business and have zero interest in results these days, is that even possible?

HighwayStar

2,223 posts

83 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
rallycross said:
Maybe they are just running it as a profit making business and have zero interest in results these days, is that even possible?
No...
unless you’re getting big prize money from finishing 3rd or 4th or selling f1 related tech which isn’t going to happen at the moment... no meaningful success, mediocre sponsors... there’s no real hope of maintaining a profit on the F1 side for Williams.

poppopbangbang

1,022 posts

80 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
Teddy Lop said:
that's all really interesting, I was under the impression it was a bit like ex military jets where 50, 100 year old stuff is fairly straightforward for blokes with grease under their fingernails to keep chugging away but the stuff that retired yesterday is so mega complicated and generally worn out too that only insane resources not generally available to enthusiasts will keep it going.
The organisation I work for exists to provide those enthusiasts with the resource required to run them..... amalgamated across tens - a hundred of cars it is not insane on a per car basis.

Teddy Lop said:
Do you modify the engines much for usability? I'm thinking the incredible tolerance they run too (seized when cold etc)
That's an internet myth I'm afraid. If they were seized when cold how would we ever build them? When cold the clearances are below the design limit, so if you were to start one cold you'd have extremely rapid wear to piston skirts/bores and the oil system would struggle due to the viscosity of the oil. On some engines you'd also give the valve train a hard time.

With regards modifications we run them as they were designed. There would be no point throwing away many 1000's of KMs of development, validation and durability testing by changing them significantly.

Teddy Lop said:
if you wanted to start a separate thread to post about what you get up to I'm sure I'd be well received.
I don't really have the time and to be honest when I last did it turned into a massive pain of people messaging demanding an answer to their question or getting upset because you've explained why they are wrong about something. Happy to dip in and out and contribute when the opportunity presents itself though.