F1 frontline with Mark Hughes

Browse pages
Current page

1

Current page

2

Current page

3

Current page

4

Current page

5

Current page

6

Current page

7

Current page

8

Current page

9

Current page

10

Current page

11

Current page

12

Current page

13

Current page

14

Current page

15

Current page

16

Current page

17

Current page

18

Current page

19

Current page

20

Current page

21

Current page

22

Current page

23

Current page

24

Current page

25

Current page

26

Current page

27

Current page

28

Current page

29

Current page

30

Current page

31

Current page

32

Current page

33

Current page

34

Current page

35

Current page

36

Current page

37

Current page

38

Current page

39

Current page

40

Current page

41

Current page

42

Current page

43

Current page

44

Current page

45

Current page

46

Current page

47

Current page

48

Current page

49

Current page

50

Current page

51

Current page

52

Current page

53

Current page

54

Current page

55

Current page

56

Current page

57

Current page

58

Current page

59

Current page

60

Current page

61

Current page

62

Current page

63

Current page

64

Current page

65

Current page

66

Current page

67

Current page

68

Current page

69

Current page

70

Current page

71

Current page

72

Current page

73

Current page

74

Current page

75

Current page

76

Current page

77

Current page

78

Current page

79

Current page

80

Current page

81

Current page

82

Current page

83

Current page

84

Current page

85

Current page

86

Current page

87

Current page

88

Current page

89

Current page

90

Current page

91

Current page

92

Current page

93

Current page

94

Current page

95

Current page

96

Current page

97

Current page

98

Current page

99

Current page

100

Current page

101

Current page

102

Current page

103

Current page

104

Current page

105

Current page

106

Current page

107

Current page

108

Current page

109

Current page

110

Current page

111

Current page

112

Current page

113

Current page

114

Current page

115

Current page

116

Current page

117

Current page

118

Current page

119

Current page

120

Current page

121

Current page

122

Current page

123

Current page

124

Current page

125

Current page

126

Current page

127

Current page

128

Current page

129

Current page

130

Current page

131

Current page

132

Current page

133

Current page

134

Current page

135

Current page

136

Current page

137

Current page

138

Current page

139

Current page

140

Current page

141

Current page

142

Current page

143

Current page

144

Current page

145

Current page

146

Current page

147

Current page

148

Current page

149

Current page

150

Current page

151

Current page

152

Current page

153

Current page

154

Current page

155

Current page

156

Current page

157

Current page

158

Current page

159

Current page

160

Current page

161

Current page

162

Current page

163

Current page

164

Current page

165

Current page

166

Current page

167

Current page

168

Current page

169

Current page

170

Current page

171

Current page

172

Current page

173

Current page

174

Current page

175

Current page

176

Current page

177

Current page

178

Current page

179

Current page

180

Some years ago I wrote a column outlining the case against wind tunnel use in F1, pointing out the horrendous amount of energy they consume, all essentially devoted to making racing less entertaining.

I suggested we switch ’em off. It was an idea that found no traction at the time, but if you wait long enough it’s funny what comes around. Today it’s being seriously considered – and the suggestion this time is coming from an ostensibly surprising source: the boss of the team that has ruled the aero roost to the tune of four consecutive world championships. Christian Horner has seriously proposed a ban on the technology that his resident genius Adrian Newey has used to dominate the sport.

To get it into focus, you need to stand back and see it in a different context. As part of the wider picture of what’s happening in F1, it makes perfect sense that Horner is the one suggesting it. Behind the scenes, there is a lot of pressure being applied to render the sport’s current governance structure null and void. The F1 strategy group that decides policy is effectively locked into dysfunction with no one person able to unlock it. The FIA has been deprived of its former power as part of the agreement that secured it a big income from F1 to spend on other projects, such as road safety and mobility in the third world, subjects close to the heart of president Jean Todt. Intertwined with the broken economic model of the sport – essentially it’s way too expensive for what it offers and the money that’s around is distributed in a way that’s guaranteed to put several teams out of business – it’s guiding F1 towards the rocks. There has been a growing acknowledgement of this from within in the past few months and now, with various parties applying the pressure, there is the prospect of European Union law being invoked to neutralise the damaging agreements.

To ward off possible EU investigation, the big teams are coming under increasing pressure to make serious concessions to smaller rivals. Handing over a greater share of the income is not a good option for them, given that the sizes of their facilities and employee base are formed around that income. So they are looking at what else they might be able to surrender. They cannot agree on what this could be, but Red Bull’s suggestion is wind tunnels. Switching to full CFD design would be cheaper, would enable a swingeing cut to the cost bases of the financially pressured smaller teams – and might give F1’s arguably most intuitive aerodynamicist, Newey, renewed scope and motivation.

Ferrari’s James Allison is against the idea, saying: “We do our best as teams to take our technical budgets and turn them into lap time. Aerodynamics are a huge part of car performance and you need to be confident, when you’re spending that budget, that you’re going to deliver to your investors and your team the performance you hoped you would do. At the moment you wouldn’t find too many aerodynamicists who would recommend developing using just CFD. It’s too error-prone and you need the wind tunnel to keep dragging you back to reality. Without that you’re at very high risk of spending your investors’ money foolishly and not delivering.”

I’m sure he’s right. But, as a sport, do we care about the investors’ return? Do we care if one team gets it badly wrong and another spectacularly right – creating competitive volatility unconnected with budget? That might be quite interesting…