Mosley strikes again!
Discussion
It seems that following the recent sliming of McLaren, Max is rather full of himself.
Not only has he personally denigrated Jackie Stewart, but he now appears to want to turn F1 into a spec chassis series (see bold type at end of article).
He really is mad!
[k]
edited for schpellink
Not only has he personally denigrated Jackie Stewart, but he now appears to want to turn F1 into a spec chassis series (see bold type at end of article).
He really is mad!
[k]
edited for schpellink
Edited by [k]arl on Tuesday 25th September 10:23
ELAN+2 said:
from the Autosport Article:
Max Said:
"If it did not waste money on pointless, hidden and duplicated technology, Formula One would be an immensely profitable business"
In light of the Mclaren fiasco? Hypocrit
And here was me thinking it was a SPORT not a BUSINESS - you know, you put money in and get performances out.Max Said:
"If it did not waste money on pointless, hidden and duplicated technology, Formula One would be an immensely profitable business"
In light of the Mclaren fiasco? Hypocrit
[k]arl said:
He really is mad!
No, that would just excuse his behaviour.Why does he insist on giving us the impression that he is little more than a spiteful juvenile??
And as for: "The technical contest should be limited to items which are visible, understood and potentially useful"
understood by whom? If MM has to understand it before it gets FIA approval then god help the teams...
what are those 12 departments thinking, spending all that money on R&D.
I mean they must be nuts, everybody knows it's tha taking part that matters, not the winning...........
No, what they all need, is a simple 2 man tent, a transit van, trailer, a set of tyres, a can of petrol and a formula ford car. Cheap as chips.
Who on earth does this bloke think he is?
I mean they must be nuts, everybody knows it's tha taking part that matters, not the winning...........No, what they all need, is a simple 2 man tent, a transit van, trailer, a set of tyres, a can of petrol and a formula ford car. Cheap as chips.
Who on earth does this bloke think he is?
Le TVR said:
[k]arl said:
He really is mad!
No, that would just excuse his behaviour.Why does he insist on giving us the impression that he is little more than a spiteful juvenile??
And as for: "The technical contest should be limited to items which are visible, understood and potentially useful"
understood by whom? If MM has to understand it before it gets FIA approval then god help the teams...
I read the Daily Mail article this morning - I'm not sure that the writer agreed with Mosley.
One a more positive note it did mentioned that he had said he would be retiring in 2009 if not before. Maybe the reason for his current spasm of activity. Such things - matters of urgency - seem to be all the rage these days.
He has a point about spec. cars and there again misses the point of F1 as a technological pinnacle and its justification (to those in the melee on the technical side) that there may be engineering benefits and that is offers opportunity for training engineers and management that would not otherwise be easy to create.
If there were no net benefits the manufacturers would not be there. Before the manufacturers came in (ignore Ferrari for a moment as they were a specialist manufacturer ...) there was a large element of shared technology and spec. components for the very reason that it was the only cost effective way to operate. It was not enforced, just a natural development of the economics in the 'halcyon' days.
Engines came from Cosworth (but were not necessarily identical and could be maintained elsewhere). Gearboxes mostly came from Mr. Hewland's offerings. Brakes were provided by a limited number of manufactureres with specialist facilities. Fuel bags were bespoke but mostly came from the expertise of external suppliers, just in different shapes. Many other components though of in house design were manufactured by external specialists - exhaust piping, wings and so on. Even tubs.
Mosley would know this of course. Indeed in many ways the March connection would have given him a feel for just that approach.
The Spec car approach in any formula may or may not produce more exciting racing. It certainly seems to produce more collision incidents though. Drivers can be at the back of the grid and suddenly win a race then disappear from view once again. This works in NASCAR for those who do enough to secure a career and allow them to develop into 'hero' status. To some extnet the same could be said, from time to time, of the potential of CART and IRL over the decades.
The public attendance and interest (and the merchandising revenues) relies on heroes, IMHO.
Most of the EU feeder formulas are spec. formulas. They might be good for team managers to identify potential talent but I'm not sure they make for exciting championships unless you have a limited number of drivers ging head to head - GP2 and Hamilton/Piquet Jr for example. But GP2 is seen only as a stepping stone to F1 is it not? Careers in GP2 are likely to be short - the drivers will move on up or fail to attract backing in the medium term.
Or am I wrong?
One odd thing about Mosley's apparent view on that is that the spec. car scenario would seem to not favour Ferrari - it would surely be rather pointless for them? Unless they got the engine supply contract perhaps?
Love it or loathe it I rather suspect that the commercial success of F1 as it is relies on the interest and revenue from the 'once a year' enthusiasts. The racing is secondary to their heroes winning. They, and the media, are attracted by the excess - which is the point that Bernie recognised and developed so successfully.
If you want 'pure' and exciting spec car racing try, perhaps, the Renault Clios or, maybe even better, the Legends cars. Just don't expect the great and the good (and of course the hangers on and free-loaders ...) to turn up to massage the publicity machine.
One a more positive note it did mentioned that he had said he would be retiring in 2009 if not before. Maybe the reason for his current spasm of activity. Such things - matters of urgency - seem to be all the rage these days.
He has a point about spec. cars and there again misses the point of F1 as a technological pinnacle and its justification (to those in the melee on the technical side) that there may be engineering benefits and that is offers opportunity for training engineers and management that would not otherwise be easy to create.
If there were no net benefits the manufacturers would not be there. Before the manufacturers came in (ignore Ferrari for a moment as they were a specialist manufacturer ...) there was a large element of shared technology and spec. components for the very reason that it was the only cost effective way to operate. It was not enforced, just a natural development of the economics in the 'halcyon' days.
Engines came from Cosworth (but were not necessarily identical and could be maintained elsewhere). Gearboxes mostly came from Mr. Hewland's offerings. Brakes were provided by a limited number of manufactureres with specialist facilities. Fuel bags were bespoke but mostly came from the expertise of external suppliers, just in different shapes. Many other components though of in house design were manufactured by external specialists - exhaust piping, wings and so on. Even tubs.
Mosley would know this of course. Indeed in many ways the March connection would have given him a feel for just that approach.
The Spec car approach in any formula may or may not produce more exciting racing. It certainly seems to produce more collision incidents though. Drivers can be at the back of the grid and suddenly win a race then disappear from view once again. This works in NASCAR for those who do enough to secure a career and allow them to develop into 'hero' status. To some extnet the same could be said, from time to time, of the potential of CART and IRL over the decades.
The public attendance and interest (and the merchandising revenues) relies on heroes, IMHO.
Most of the EU feeder formulas are spec. formulas. They might be good for team managers to identify potential talent but I'm not sure they make for exciting championships unless you have a limited number of drivers ging head to head - GP2 and Hamilton/Piquet Jr for example. But GP2 is seen only as a stepping stone to F1 is it not? Careers in GP2 are likely to be short - the drivers will move on up or fail to attract backing in the medium term.
Or am I wrong?
One odd thing about Mosley's apparent view on that is that the spec. car scenario would seem to not favour Ferrari - it would surely be rather pointless for them? Unless they got the engine supply contract perhaps?
Love it or loathe it I rather suspect that the commercial success of F1 as it is relies on the interest and revenue from the 'once a year' enthusiasts. The racing is secondary to their heroes winning. They, and the media, are attracted by the excess - which is the point that Bernie recognised and developed so successfully.
If you want 'pure' and exciting spec car racing try, perhaps, the Renault Clios or, maybe even better, the Legends cars. Just don't expect the great and the good (and of course the hangers on and free-loaders ...) to turn up to massage the publicity machine.
chrisbr68 said:
Useful for what exactly? I am sure the teams dont do things that are not useful... Or does he mean stuff that would filter to road cars? Downforce aids are not that useful for road cars I expect
Part of the drive for all things 'green' I suspect.If so what may or may not be useful is open to debate.
But raising the subject gains kudos from the 'authorities' in governments. Something to retire on and still be occupied and influential as one slips into ones dotage.
Mad Max quote:
"No rational person would run a business in which 12 departments duplicate each other's research work"
Hang on Max, you've just hit McLaren with a $100million fine when they were trying to share data with another one of the 12 departments on the grid?
This man has lost it...
"No rational person would run a business in which 12 departments duplicate each other's research work"
Hang on Max, you've just hit McLaren with a $100million fine when they were trying to share data with another one of the 12 departments on the grid?
This man has lost it...
LongQ said:
One a more positive note it did mentioned that he had said he would be retiring in 2009 if not before. Maybe the reason for his current spasm of activity. Such things - matters of urgency - seem to be all the rage these days.
Roll on 2009 and we can all have a 
or two...me thinks this is Mad Max trying to setup his F1 legacy!!
Better still, as Mad Max is always trying to introduce new rules a year in advance, why can't he retire a year early
motormania said:
Mad Max quote:
"No rational person would run a business in which 12 departments duplicate each other's research work"
Hang on Max, you've just hit McLaren with a $100million fine when they were trying to share data with another one of the 12 departments on the grid?
This man has lost it...
Er, doesnt he run the business with Bernie? And also, isnt Bernie one of the richest men in the world!? Sounds like a pretty good business to me. Perhaps he is missing the point behind competition."No rational person would run a business in which 12 departments duplicate each other's research work"
Hang on Max, you've just hit McLaren with a $100million fine when they were trying to share data with another one of the 12 departments on the grid?
This man has lost it...
AKA8 said:
But who would take over from him???? Insecure self fister he might be, but can you imagine the scenario if someone like Toadt got that job??
I know. The whole show would suddenly start to revolve totally around Ferrari, with spurious penalties being levied against teams that looked like beating them, disproportionate representation within the FIA and WMSC, drivers managed by Jean's son suddenly landing the best drives and... oh.
Some more comments here
"There are still some great mysteries: was Nigel Stepney passing on information for free?" said Mosley. "That's very unlikely. Therefore who paid him and why?"
"Everything will come out in detail and we will all be surprised," Mosley told The Daily Express. "I feel the only way to have a fair championship in 2008 would have been to exclude McLaren but that would probably have put them out of business."
He seems to be implying that there is further information that has yet to be revealed. If that is so, why was the WMSC hearing so restricted in its length, and why was no further evidence presented at the hearing? Every time he opens his mouth it looks more like a personal vendetta.
"There are still some great mysteries: was Nigel Stepney passing on information for free?" said Mosley. "That's very unlikely. Therefore who paid him and why?"
"Everything will come out in detail and we will all be surprised," Mosley told The Daily Express. "I feel the only way to have a fair championship in 2008 would have been to exclude McLaren but that would probably have put them out of business."
He seems to be implying that there is further information that has yet to be revealed. If that is so, why was the WMSC hearing so restricted in its length, and why was no further evidence presented at the hearing? Every time he opens his mouth it looks more like a personal vendetta.
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff