Autosport Plus O5 2015

8/9/2019 Autosport Plus O5 2015

1/60

Features published on AUTOSPORT+ Jan 29, 2015 - Feb 4, 2015

Technical analysis: McLaren MP4-30 - by Craig Scarborough•

F1 needs 1000bhp - but not at any cost - by Jonathan Noble•

Secret mechanic: All is not as it seems in F1 pre-season - by The Secret Mechanic•

Technical analysis: Ferrari SF15-T - by Craig Scarborough•

Has Vettel got his mojo back? - by Ben Anderson•

Technical analysis: Mercedes W06 - by Craig Scarborough•

Technical analysis: Red Bull RB11 - by Craig Scarborough•

Is it a drama or a crisis at McLaren? - by Jonathan Noble•

Can back-to-front work for Nissan? - by Gary Watkins•

The other F1 engine in trouble - by Jonathan Noble•

Can Haas succeed where others failed? - by Dieter Rencken•

Is the Ferrari recovery real? - by Ben Anderson•

Features published on AUTOSPORT+ Jan 29, 2015 - Feb 4, 2015 1

http://plus.autosport.com/ © 2015 autosport.com


2/60

Technical analysis: McLaren MP4-30The first car of the new McLaren-Honda era was eagerly anticipated, and the first shots didn't disappoint.

CRAIG SCARBOROUGH analyses the new design from Woking

The McLaren-Honda MP4-30 was the most anticipated of the 2015 Formula 1 cars, and its launch did not

disappoint - with the design clearly different from both the '14 McLaren and all the other new cars unveiled so

far.

It has benefited from Honda designing a bespoke power unit for McLaren's requirements and its

aerodynamics being developed over the winter by ex-Red Bull aero chief Peter Prodromou, resulting in a far

tidier rear end packaging and a (so far) unique long nose to meet the revised regulations.

McLAREN'S TOUGH 2014

Last year's MP4-29 did not prove as well suited to the new regulations and power units as other teams'designs.

Even with the powerful Mercedes engine, the McLaren lacked top speed. This was partly down to the

dramatic rear suspension fairings designed to regain downforce lost from the banning of the middle beam

wing. While no doubt effective for downforce, the mushroom shaped suspension fairings added a lot of drag.

Aerodynamics were further hindered by downforce found in the windtunnel not translating to the track, which

made the car 'peaky' and inconsistent to drive.

Part of the winter restructure was to bring Prodromou from Red Bull to re-organise aerodynamic design and

operations, but his arrival late in 2014 meant this could not be a truly clean-sheet design for the new signing.

AUTOSPORT+ feature: Technical analysis: McLaren MP4-30 2

http://plus.autosport.com/premium/feature/6365/ © 2015 AUTOSPORT.com

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/112341


3/60

Many major structures would have been defined in production under Tim Goss and Matt Morris's leadership

prior to Prodromou starting.

CHANGES ON THE MP4-30

It's the nose that catches the eye. McLaren has opted for the longest possible nose and a fared tip to avoid

having a thumb-like extension.

This longer nose places its under-surface over the front wing to work in conjunction with the wing and its

heavily twisted mounting pylons. This combination will be used to create a powerful vortex along the Y250

axis (250mm from the car's centreline) to keep clean airflow over the centre of the car.

The front wing will be a key aerodynamic development area for McLaren this year. The new wing brought to

the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix at the last minute after Prodromou began work confirmed that a new direction was

required, and some of the concepts from that upgrade will start to appear in pre-season testing.

Aside from the new nose tips, the other technical change to the front of the car for 2015 is a sloped front to the

chassis.

This new geometry is evident on the McLaren, as the high, flat top to its chassis slopes steeply just above thedrivers' feet. McLaren has chosen to cover this area with a single large access panel, which smoothly merges

the chassis top into the nose's upper surface.

This area also houses the camera pods, mounted in the style of the 2014 Mercedes with right-angled mounts

to make best aerodynamic use of their mandatory positioning.

The MP4-30's front suspension is a conventional pushrod and double wishbone design, with the steering rack

mounted high and aligned with the upper wishbone.

The wishbones are mounted near-horizontal, as also seen on the Lotus, for a conventional geometry with




4/60

better mechanical grip.

McLaren states that the wishbone features torsion bars, but increasingly teams are exploiting hydraulics,

albeit not interconnected as was possible with the now-banned FRIC systems, for the ideal suspension

control.

ALL EYES ON HONDA

That the Honda engine packaging is especially low and slim is proven by the cockpit area, where the side

padding is set at a regulatory height, but the area around it is shrunken and lowered to improve airflow to the

back of the car.

Above the cockpit the rollhoop inlet is split with ducts, with a further two smaller inlets formed below them.

One of the rollhoop ducts will feed the engine's airbox and another is likely to feed the gearbox oil cooler

behind the engine, meaning the two small inlets are most likely to feed local cooling air to the electronics

around the engine.

Despite the high-profile faults that hampered McLaren's first test with Honda in Abu Dhabi, there are rumours

that the engine has a strong power output when compared to the 2014 Mercedes.

The power unit design has followed Mercedes' lead with a split turbo, low heat rejection and tight exhaust

packaging, which - along with other Honda-specific details - has allowed McLaren to shrink the bodywork

tightly around the rear end.

McLaren has pushed much of the power unit's radiators, intercoolers and oil coolers to the front of the

sidepods, meaning the heat from these is vented through a tight coke bottle rear end and through relatively

small outlets formed low down over the rear suspension and with a smaller outlet above the exhaust.

When viewed from above, this minimal sidepod size and the open space created ahead of the diffuser are



http://plus.autosport.com/premium/feature/6307/the-secrets-of-the-mclarenhonda-packagehttp://plus.autosport.com/premium/feature/6307/the-secrets-of-the-mclarenhonda-package


5/60

clear to see.

As McLaren required extra openings in the MP4-29's sidepods for the Abu Dhabi test, there must be question

marks over whether this launch specification would provide enough cooling for the motor.

FAREWELL TO THE MUSHROOMS?

Attached to the engine is McLaren's own carbon fibre gearbox. This supports the rear suspension, which was

a unique feature of the 2014 car. It is suggested that Prodromou was no fan of the mushroom suspension

concept, but the wishbones and trackrods are still arranged to place two elements angled back so they are

over the diffuser's trailing edge.

These do not have the dramatic fairings attached, on the launch car at least, but panels on the floor suggest

these and the small winglet that sits below them could still be fitted for testing.

The new car's suspension arrangement could have predated Prodromou's arrival and as it is a major

structural part of the gearbox and rear crash structure, it may have been too late to change it for a more

conventional layout.

The theory that the fairings are not part of the aerodynamic plan, despite the suspension arrangement hintingat them, is also supported by the lower position of the sidepod cooling outlets. In their new position they would

severely choke the airflow passing over the shaped rear wishbones should that concept return, so it appears

unlikely that the 'mushrooms' could work with the new slimmer sidepod concept.

Not unusually for a launch car, the rear of the MP4-30 was missing some key elements - both the rear wing

support and the Y100 'monkey seat' winglet were absent in the photos but appeared on the 3D car on the

McLaren website.




6/60

On the digital model it could be seen that the rear wing was supported by a dog-legged mounting pillar and

the monkey seat was mounted to the rear crash structure.

The launch car also featured a rear wing with a serrated leading edge to its flap.

This was a mid-season development in 2014 and it is believed to help the airflow reattach to the wing when

the DRS is closed.

It was only raced at certain tracks last year so may be an optional solution in the team's armoury for 2015

rather than a permanent fixture.

Overall the MP4-30 is a step in the right direction for McLaren in design terms, and a little more conventional

and back to basics - the new nose notwithstanding.

It's the unseen internal re-organisation that McLaren has undertaken that may be more influential for the

team's form this year.

Our the course of a season, management decisions on design directions and working practices are far more

critical to finding more speed than the shape of the nose.

Honda's learning curve will also be a key factor, and the fact it is now allowed a limited amount of in-season

development will be especially useful when ironing out development issues with a brand new and highly

complex power unit.

Don't expect the start of the season to reveal McLaren-Honda's true potential. Judge the team as its

development curve catches up with the leaders for it should be much more competitive by the season's end.




7/60




8/60

F1 needs 1000bhp - but not at any costThe push for 1000bhp Formula 1 engines is not just an empty gimmick, argues JONATHAN NOBLE, but the

rulemakers need to tread carefully when making the change

The fans want it. The drivers want it. I want it. Even Formula 1 supremo Bernie Ecclestone wants it.

In fact, you would be hard-pressed to find anyone who does not support the plan to get F1's engines spitting

out more than 1000 horsepower from the start of 2017.

What's not to like about the prospect of F1 getting back some of the magic that existed in the mid-1980s?

Who could not be enthralled at the prospect of drivers turning up their turbo boost to the maximum for

qualifying and threading their rocketships around what must have felt like a very thin strip of asphalt?

Breaking that mythical 1000bhp barrier again would be good for F1 on so many levels.

It gives the sport an iconic power figure; it will make cars harder to drive and therefore more of a challenge for

drivers; and it will showcase just how impressive new hybrid technology is.

AUTOSPORT+ feature: F1 needs 1000bhp - but not at any cost 8



9/60

Grand Prix Drivers' Association chairman Alex Wurz, a man who has experience of 1000bhp from his Toyota

LMP1 car, thinks F1 drivers would fall over themselves for the chance to get back to the mega power the stars

had in the mid-1980s.

But he reckons the biggest benefit of all will be to F1 itself, because being able to sell the headline power

figure would be so easy.

"It is a cool direction that we speak about but this is far more than just about the driver," he explains. "There is

a big marketing effect too.

"When we announced with Toyota last year that that we were going to have 1000bhp, it was amazing to see

the response of the hardcore fans.

"Everyone was talking about it - even people who had no idea about motorsport. Everyone was just going

'wow'."

But there is danger in this water. Not from the fact that more powerful cars could lead to more spills on track.

Instead, it's from the threat that another change to the engine rules could pose to the long-term health of the

F1 grid if it is not implemented properly and costs spiral further out of control.

Perhaps the biggest mistake of the switch to V6 turbos last year was not the lack of noise, or the lack of power

but that there were no price limits laid down for what customers had to pay.

At a time when a majority of F1 teams have been struggling to find the budgets to compete, either through

falling sponsorship revenue or the increased costs of going racing, it was a double blow that teams faced a

dramatic hike in engine bills too.

Lotus boss Gerard Lopez said last year that his team's annual power unit bill had jumped from eight million to

40 million Euros.




10/60

Of course, this increase has come about because of the huge development costs of the new V6s and hybrid

technology.

Manufacturers have sought to recoup these by selling their power units to the small teams.

No cap meant manufacturers dictated the figure that suited their business plan. Renault, for example, wanted

payback for its investment over a much shorter period than Mercedes - so the cost of its power units was

more.

With a potential new change to the engines coming for 2017 - and it is gathering momentum because

everyone wants it - F1 cannot allow this situation to get even worse. Limits must be put in place.

Perhaps it needs the FIA or Bernie Ecclestone to wade in, and only allow the change to happen if there are

guarantees that any extra costs for manufacturers are not passed on to the smaller teams.

After all, this is a process being put in motion to help make F1 more marketable; to make more fans excited -

and to make more of them want to go out on the Monday after a race and buy a Mercedes, a Renault, a

Ferrari or a Honda. Why should Sauber, Force India or Lotus be forced to underwrite such an affair?

Wurz agrees that F1 has to look at the bigger picture here. He believes that the attraction of a bit more powerunder the right foot of drivers should not come at the cost of driving outfits out of business.

"We have to learn from the past," he says. "Currently engine manufacturers run their engines under a

business model whereby they finance the development of engines by putting the costs back to the customer

teams with quite high fees.

"So if the current turbo engines go through their intended business cycle, then in the end the customers, the

F1 teams, would have somehow subsidised marketing of the manufacturers. Why should they be a charity?

"There needs to be a quite clear maximum annual cost cap on the whole power unit per team. That way we

might make sure that small teams and F1 doesn't pay too heavy a price.

"We can't have more teams suffer, more people made redundant, because of expensive development being

priced into the power units."

My colleague Edd Straw raised some of his own concerns about the 1000bhp push this week, and I agree it is

not the miracle cure for all of F1's ills.

But I'd argue that a move to 1000bhp provides exactly the kind of marketing benefits that modern grand prix

racing needs.



http://plus.autosport.com/premium/feature/6362/1000bhp-the-latest-cureall-f1-imposter/http://plus.autosport.com/premium/feature/6362/1000bhp-the-latest-cureall-f1-imposter/


11/60

Love it or loathe it, but perception counts for a lot these days: and anything that makes F1 more attractive and

silences critics is positive. It has to be done properly though, with thorough analysis of its impact and benefits.

The rewards for F1 making the jump to 1000bhp in 2017 will be great - but it cannot come at any cost.




12/60

Secret mechanic: All is not as it seems in F1 pre-seasonAs the countdown to the first F1 test nears its end, our SECRET MECHANIC reveals some untold stories from

behind the scenes of teams preparing for a new campaign

January and February are always a tough time for a Formula 1 mechanic. The Christmas holidays draw to a

close after just long enough to remind you what life used to be like in the real world, with friends, family and

not living from an open suitcase in the corner of a hotel room.

Much as we all love our jobs, the rare opportunity to synchronise time off with loved ones, and have free

choice over what to wear, means the dreaded back-to-school feeling often sets in as the first days of January

approach.

Those first few days back can often be a little tedious for the race team, depending on how close the factory is

to its intended production schedule. If the parts aren't made, we can't do much.

AUTOSPORT+ feature: Secret mechanic: All is not as it seems in F1 pre-season 12



13/60

The first public appearance for the car tends to be the press launch, shortly before the first test. The days of

the extravagant, glitzy launch parties seem to be over, but even so, if the world's media are coming to your

factory to see the new challenger, it better at least look like a finished product.

I've been in teams so far behind schedule as the car's press launch approaches that we've had to quickly 3D

print pretend parts to make the car look complete on its display stand.

One year we had to 'print out' a set of plastic upper front wishbones, because we'd had a problem with thefirst iteration and version two was still days away from reality. A quick coat of black paint from a spray can out

the back of the factory and with them very carefully placed into position using a combination of tape and

tie-wraps nobody would ever know!

Of course had anyone so much as coughed a bit too loudly in the vicinity of the front end it probably would've

slumped to the floor like a dog wanting to play.

In another desperately chaotic January, we approached the much-hyped media launch knowing that our

engine partner was struggling to deliver a powerplant in time to assemble the car. A much lower-tech solution

got us out of that little mess as we got the fab-shop to urgently knock up a very rough steel frame that we

could bolt to the back of the chassis and in turn bolt the gearbox to and we built the car around that.

With bodywork on and a couple of bits of spray-painted steel tube taped in position to look like exhausts, no

one was any the wiser and the photographers snapped away and talked admiringly about attention to detail

like they always did.

Of course when you do eventually hit the track and your hopes or fears are given a glimmer of realism, there's

a lot of hard work in getting through the test programme with any new car.

Even once through a day's running, the car needs stripping down so everything can be inspected,

crack-checked or non-destructive-tested and then carefully re-assembled, fired up and set up for the next day,

when the entire process will be repeated.

Spare parts are generally scarce, even by the time the cars head off to Australia for the first race, so the last

thing anyone needs is the driver going off and putting it into the barriers in testing - which is exactly what

happened to me a few years ago, the day before we were due to pack our race car into the F1 freight plane

headed Down Under.

Our test team had taken my race car, one of only two in existence at that time, for a day of last-minute

straightline aero testing, before we packaged it up that night for the first race.

When the call came through mid-afternoon to say that somehow, in a straightline test, they'd managed to

smash the car into the wall and destroyed the front end, it didn't go down too well at all, I can tell you.




14/60

When the car was rushed back and we began what was now looking like being a very late night in the factory,

it was discovered that the lower wishbone had in fact punctured through the base of the chassis and it was

effectively destroyed.

That was about the worst news a team can get at this time of year and whilst any salvageable parts were

stripped from the tub, all focus turned to the T-car bay across the factory floor. Those poor boys had to give

up their lovingly, but partially, built car to us to finish off overnight and had their flights to Australia delayed

while they stayed behind to do what they could with the next bare chassis that was now being acceleratedthrough the carbon shop.

That goes down as a bad day at the office and was the start of a bad year as I recall.

Despite the driver's persistent claims of a system malfunction, I still like to remind him of the occasion on a

semi-regular basis and how the experience traumatised my colleagues and me for some time.

HOW IS YOUR YEAR SHAPING UP?

There's a lot of work that goes into getting to that first test. By mid-way through January everyone in the

factory is working flat out, doing long hours and working weekends to meet the various targets.

The first month of the year brings with it an enormous sense of anticipation and hope throughout any F1 team.

Despite fans and media looking for any clue, no matter how tenuous, to the expected success of each of the

new cars, the reality is that even we have no idea.

We can measure the numbers in the windtunnel or through the CFD simulations; we can talk to the designers

or to management over coffee and gauge their optimism; we can even begin to get our hands on the real thing

and see for ourselves what remains, or has evolved, from the previous year.

These things can all give us some rough idea of our relative performance in certain areas compared with last

year's car, but never much more than that.

It's useful to know that we have indeed learned from all the hard work of last year, but what we really want to

know more than anything else, is how this new pile of bits that we're meticulously assembling into a racing car

is going to effectively shape our lives over the coming 11 months?

Are we going to be enjoying success, accumulating a giant win bonus and spending our days honing the finer

points of performance and polishing the car that the rest of the pitlane wants? Or, will we be the last ones at

the track each night, fighting fires, fixing broken parts, struggling to work on an impractically designed car, or

just downright slow compared with everyone else?

These things can govern the season ahead, steer the mood and morale in the garage and ultimately affect the

life of an F1 mechanic. And yet it's not until the car hits the track in February that we get the first preliminary




15/60

picture of our chances.




16/60

Technical analysis: Ferrari SF15-TAfter a dismal 2014 for Ferrari, there's a lot riding on the SF15-T. CRAIG SCARBOROUGH analyses what the

team has done to regain ground so far

Ferrari enters the 2015 Formula 1 season with a new management structure and an all-new approach to its

car after last year's management turmoil and poor on-track performance.

Its SF15-T has been designed both to counter the technical problems of 2014, handle the new nose

regulations and take advantage of the chance to develop its power unit.

Despite such major changes, the car still bears strong resemblances to its predecessor, though this is belied

by the long slender nose.

It may take time to see the real progress under the skin and how the car has improved on track.

The long flat nose has similarities to that seen on the McLaren. There is no attempt to shrink the end back and

form a thumb tip.

Yet unlike McLaren, Ferrari's front-wing pylons are quite simple and straight, not twisted to create an

aerodynamic wake. Thus in many respects Ferrari has the simplest interpretation of the new nose regulations.

Even where the nose meets the front of the monocoque, rather than a vanity panel blending the nose into the

sloped front section of the tub, the tub is instead shaped to form the exterior bodywork. This somewhat ties

Ferrari into this nose design and means it cannot easily make major changes mid-season.

AUTOSPORT+ feature: Technical analysis: Ferrari SF15-T 16



17/60

More adventurous are the new front wing and endplates, a step on from the simplistic front wing of recent

years.

Ferrari's new wing extends the current trend of ever more elements near the outboard tip. No less than eight

aerofoil elements make up the outer section of wing, the greatest number seen to date!

This wing also follows the other trends of simpler cascade winglets and straighter vanes forming the endplate.

Despite these elements' apparent simplicity, their function of twisting the airflow around the front tyre remains

highly influential.

This outwash effect is also aided by what appears to be a return of the blown front axles. Last year Ferrari

trialled the hollow front axles designed to have air ducted through them at several races. Although the concept

was discarded by mid-season, at the time technical chief James Allison wouldn't confirm they were a dead

end and the flat-faced front axles on the SF15-T suggest this is still a valid development path.

For the media and fans, there remains a fascination over whether the front pullrod suspension will be kept on

the car, amid a myth developing that some drivers prefer the feel of a pushrod front end over a pullrod

version.

In terms of compliance and grip, the suspension-operation method employed makes little difference. Allison

confirms the main difference is the aero benefit for a pullrod set-up over the weight saving for a pushrodset-up, as the 2015 Ferrari has retained the pullrod approach.

Elsewhere on the front suspension, Ferrari is following Mercedes' format of a front lower wishbone where the

two legs of the V-shaped arm are closer spaced and their profiles overlap to form a conjoined single

aerodynamic profile. Still having to clear the pullrod where it enters the monocoque, the Ferrari version of the

wishbone is less aggressive and still sports a large open area between the inner ends of the arm.




18/60

In terms of suspension geometry, Ferrari has gone for the high-mounted inboard suspension pivots, with the

front upper leg attaching right on the top shoulder of the chassis.

Little has been said about the internal layout of the suspension, so it remains unclear whether it's purely a

sprung and damped set-up, or still employs complex passive hydraulics.

Aside from the regulatory slope to the front of the monocoque, externally the Ferrari appears similar to last

year. The triangular rollhoop inlet feeds the airbox for the turbo and at the moment no other inlets are added

to this area, just one small example under the chin of the rollhoop to cool electronics inside the engine bay.

However there are some split lines covered up on the launch car and some additional inlets could be added

for testing.

This approach is strange as Ferrari has strived to slim the sidepods, while also carrying a larger heat-rejection

requirement for the power unit as it is developed to create more power.

Moving the coolers away from the sidepod and having them fed by separate ducts is a good way to reduce

sidepod size. Ferrari's sidepods, while neat, are not as compact as perhaps the McLaren's.

Within the sidepod, Ferrari has altered the angle of the radiators and changed the specification of their cores

to improve cooling.

The 2014 Ferrari power unit was as disappointing as its chassis. Its layout was compromised to enable better

chassis integration, which was to the detriment of its power output.




19/60

The petrol engine was some 40bhp down on power, the ERS-H was ineffective in races and the overall unit's

driveability was poor.

For 2015 Ferrari's development tokens have been spent in improving these three key areas, but it appears

that a wholesale repackaging of the engine hasn't taken place.

In 2014 Ferrari's rear-mounted turbo, which was split to have the MGU-H in between the two turbines of theturbo, fed the engine via a water intercooler mounted inside the 'V' of the engine. This created issues for both

power production and the ERS-H.

It's likely the turbo has now been unsplit, moving the MGU-H in front of the turbo and having the compressor

and turbine coupled closely together, albeit retaining the V-mounted intercooler.

Aerodynamics at the rear of the car feature some interesting details. The rear wing remains mounted by a

single pillar, with the slim support reaching in front of the rear wing and mounting it with a swan neck shape.

This pillar also neatly supports the Y100 monkey-seat winglet via a slim, single, central support.

Partially covered up at the launch, the rear-wing endplate features some new louvres, not seen on an F1 rear

wing before.

It's been common for the bottom of the rear-wing endplate to feature vertical louvres, but the SF15-T also

sports some horizontal louvres ahead of these.

Judging by their shape, they appear to be trying to vent airflow out behind the rear wheels, reducing drag and

creating more low pressure behind the diffuser. The diffuser itself was covered off at the launch, but from the

overhead shots we can see it expands aggressively outwards as a means to increase its expansion effect

within the limited height allowed by the regulations.




20/60

In creating the SF15-T Ferrari has been mindful to address the problems of the 2014 chassis and power unit.

Its car is a logical and neat evolution of what went before, but there doesn't appear to be a key change or

innovation that will create the step change in performance needed to chase Mercedes.

After the technical and management struggles of last year, Ferrari perhaps needs a year of consolidation to

get its operation back up towards its pedigree.




21/60

Has Vettel got his mojo back?His time-topping laps on day one at Jerez probably don't mean much, but it was clear Sebastian Vettel's

motivation was back as he began life at Ferrari, reckons BEN ANDERSON

A furtive glance at the timing screens after the first day of 2015 pre-season Formula 1 testing at Jerez would

suggest Sebastian Vettel and Ferrari are both back in the game.

After a difficult morning - compromised by a telemetry problem with the SF15-T - Vettel emerged from the

Scuderia's garage, into the afternoon sun, and promptly outpaced the erstwhile dominant Mercedes of 2014

world championship runner-up Nico Rosberg.

Of course it is foolish to read too much into laptimes so soon in the season - affected as they are by

incomparable fuel loads and variable testing programmes across the different teams.

But a driver will have a fair idea straightaway whether his new steed is something he can learn to love, or a

complete dog that he would rather discard. In this regard, Vettel must surely feel encouraged.

AUTOSPORT+ feature: Has Vettel got his mojo back? 21



22/60

Ferrari pointed to the fact Kimi Raikkonen set the fastest time on day one of pre-season testing last year - and

we all know how shaky the foundations of that house of cards turned out to be - in an effort to play down

Vettel's performance, but as the ex-Red Bull driver himself said afterwards: "surely it's better to be closer to

the front rather than a long way behind".

Vettel wasn't giving much away when he spoke about his first experiences of Ferrari's latest design, but he

looked content, happy even. There were plenty of times during his swansong with Red Bull that you couldn't

say that...

"I haven't driven the 2014 Ferrari, but I think as a starting point it was a good day," he told reporters after his

first taste of contemporary Ferrari machinery in F1.

"Obviously there are a lot of things that are different: the steering wheel layout, the steering wheel itself, the

strategies. In the end all the buttons probably do the same or similar things, but they are all different so it does

take some time to get used to that.

"Of course the car feels different - it's a different philosophy behind it and it's made by different people. But

fortunately I could use the time in the winter to make sure I feel comfortable. I could really focus on the car.

"We didn't run a lot today, but what we did felt good as a starting point. More I cannot say and I don't want tosay, because it's way too early for that."

Many churlishly wrote Vettel off after a 2014 season in which he was comfortably defeated by Red Bull rising

star Daniel Ricciardo, and Christian Horner revealed ahead of this first test that Vettel had lost a bit of his love

for F1 amid massive regulation changes, a car he didn't enjoy driving (or like the sound of), and a team-mate

that could put him under pressure consistently.

But you don't win one Formula 1 world championship by accident - let alone four - and those who

underestimate the transformative power of a fresh challenge and a fresh environment on a world class driver

do so at their peril.



http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/117542http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/117542http://plus.autosport.com/premium/feature/6304/raikkonen-and-his-annus-horribilishttp://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/112324


23/60

The same goes for the team, which can grow stale built around the same foundations for too long. Ferrari has

swept a new broom right through its F1 squad over the winter. This change could be just what both Ferrari

and Vettel need right now.

"Last year was a difficult year and there was plenty of work - therefore, you might not have as much time to

laugh and joke around as usual," explains Vettel. "But starting off this year is a different story - a new

challenge, a new team, everything is new, and I feel very motivated.

"But I'm not sitting here and saying last year I was down and therefore wasn't performing; I was giving

everything I had and surely it wasn't enough, but that's why you keep coming back and trying again.

"Obviously it's a big change [coming to Ferrari], but so far it keeps getting better. I used the time during the

winter to go to Maranello a couple of times. From what I've seen it's really impressive. The potential is huge.

"Obviously there is a lot to do, but it's a big time of change - a lot of people leaving, a lot of people coming,

and a lot of people getting promoted into different places, so it will take some time, but I think definitely

motivation is high.

"I'm quite happy where I am and definitely the feeling is different. I don't regret any time I had at Red Bull. I

had a very, very good relationship with the people there, but I think - to sum it up - Ferrari is something

special."

The hope for both parties is that their burgeoning relationship will turn into something special too - in time. It

will surely take time, though, because of the relentlessness of the current Mercedes operation.

Vettel beat Rosberg to the fastest time on day one of pre-season testing, but Mercedes by far racked up the

largest number of laps - something Vettel clearly felt was more significant to the emerging storyline of F1

2015.

"I think in terms of laps there's still a lot of improvement we can do," he says. "The reference is still Mercedes

- they did 150-200 laps today, so they've proven they start off with a very reliable car.

"Hopefully not as quick as last year - I think that's what everyone is hoping for! But you have to give fair credit

to them - they're doing a very good job. It will be a surprise if they're not as strong as they were last year."

Early testing has not been Mercedes' forte in recent years, which is perhaps ominous given how strong it was

on day one at Jerez in 2015.

Two years ago Rosberg managed 11 laps on the opening day before a wiring loom failure forced him out; and

a day later Lewis Hamilton ended up in the barriers with brake failure. Last year, Mercedes endured another

fraught opener as Hamilton crashed again after suffering wing failure.



http://plus.autosport.com/premium/feature/6330/the-winds-of-change-at-ferrari/?_ga=1.228313236.888183981.1401964661


24/60

There was to be no such trouble this time around: as Rosberg managed a whopping 157 laps, having also

made sure his team was first out of the garage again bang on 9am.

The opposition certainly could not fail to have been slightly disheartened by what Mercedes showed - even

though no one really expected anything different from the team that was so dominant in 2014.

Adrian Newey, whose Red Bull team had a much better testing opener than the disaster of 12 months ago,

was well aware of how tough it is going to be to close that gap to Mercedes.

"It doesn't surprise me," he said about the Mercedes form. "It was always likely to be the case. The engine is

well sorted, they do all the research to get the chassis reliable, so it's not a total surprise.

"Our car, so far we haven't had any mechanical problems on the chassis side, but we have had a couple of

problems that have stopped us doing very much running unfortunately today - one with the battery and

another with an engine-related problem.

"It's the nature of testing, and I think Mercedes clearly are the favourites. They have a very good team, and a

great power unit."

Red Bull knows its title hopes rest on a good jump in performance from engine partner Renault - althoughNewey accepts that it will be impossible to expect it to close the 10 per cent power deficit to Mercedes in just

one season.

The reliability issues that his team and fellow Renault outfit Toro Rosso encountered on day one were a sign

of the scale of the challenge the French car manufacturer is still facing.

Daniel Ricciardo certainly seemed a bit cautious when asked about when Renault had made a decent leap

with its 2015 power unit.

"It's still too early to say - but I think it is [a step forward]. We'll see in Melbourne when everyone's even, but

for now, the first day, I think there's some positive signs," he says.



http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/117526


25/60

We must remember of course that this is just pre-season testing - and it's only day one of 12 days of running

before the start of the campaign.

Last year Red Bull and Renault went from crisis on day one to (brief) podium finishers in Australia - so

anything is possible.

But if any of Mercedes' rivals hoped 2015 would deliver us some chinks in the German car manufacturer's

armour, they were pretty much dashed by what the W06 did on Sunday.

Mercedes chief Paddy Lowe was in quite a confident mood as he spoke to the media after the session - and

gave quite a telling answer to a question about what he felt most happy and unhappy about so far.

"Our main objective for today was to achieve mileage," he said. "I think on that basis we can come away very,

very happy indeed. We did 695km [432 miles] during the day, including 17 live pitstops. I think that was more

than we actually had targeted, so I'm very happy with that indeed.

"In terms of things we were unhappy with...um...no, we are not unhappy today."

And neither was Vettel. Sometimes - and perhaps today was a good example - being happy is more important

than being fastest.




26/60

Technical analysis: Mercedes W06Much of the detail on the 2015 Mercedes W06 is familiar from last year's all-conquering car, but CRAIG

SCARBOROUGH is sure that will serve Formula 1's champion team well

Even at the end of its dominant 2014 Formula 1 season, the Mercedes W05 still had a huge margin over its

opposition in race pace - so it's not surprising that the W06 officially revealed at Jerez on Sunday is very much

an evolution of its predecessor.

So subtle are the changes that, aside from the mandatory new nose, the car is hard to differentiate from its

forebear. But modifications have been made both to the chassis and the powertrain.

Last year's W05 featured several unique details on its chassis and aero design, from the car's U-shaped nose

and clever conjoined front lower wishbones, to its tiny sidepods and huge 'monkey seat' winglet. The hybrid

powertrain was equally unique, with its split turbo, compact exhausts and cartridge gearbox.

By mid-season the car was not only the class of the field in powertrain terms, but also on pure chassis

performance, even with FRIC suspension being banned. Poor reliability was the only fly in the ointment, and

brake, gearbox and ERS failures were costly.

With such a clear advantage, Mercedes has not needed to reinvent the wheel for its 2015 challenger, merely

work on the details.

Some of the W06's features are simply reworked versions of the strong points of the old design.

As Paddy Lowe explained: "Every development you make has some risk - you can't move forward without

some risk of potentially not getting it right. So we were very conscious of the point that we had a good car. We

AUTOSPORT+ feature: Technical analysis: Mercedes W06 26



27/60

didn't want to throw any babies out with the bathwater, as we took steps to make developments."

The regulation changes mean differences in the nose and chassis front, as both the nose tip and sloped

chassis of 2014 could not meet the new rules.

Thus a very slim and short nose has been developed, without the fully exposed fingertip of the Williams.

Instead a slight point is the only clue to how the nose adheres to the revised regulations.

Mercedes' old nose used the front wing mounting pylons as part of the minimum cross section. With this not

required, the front wing mounts return to a slender shape.

Atop the nose are the TV camera pods, retaining the pioneering idea from last year of mounting them high on

right angled mounts to keep their obstruction clear of the rest of the car. Below the nose, the front wing

remains in the late 2014 specification.

Now fully optimised for running without FRIC, the front suspension continues the other themes of last year,

with the lower wishbone remaining as two legs partly blended in one profile.

For 2015 this conjoined shape has been taken to a further extreme. The narrow spread legs of the wishbone

form a single profile but for a few inches near their inner mounting with the tub.

Mercedes does this in order to exploit the shape of the wishbone in controlling the front wing's upwash so it

does not upset the rest of the car, in a similar manner to how Ferrari uses its front pullrod.

At the other end of the front suspension, the open inner wheel face is closed off with new brake ducts, their

inner surface devoid of any inlet scoops.

Although this concept is not unique in F1, as other teams collect their brakes' cooling air from small inlets

between the tyre and the front brake duct, this is a departure for Mercedes. This will greatly improve the

airflow around the car.




28/60

Unlike several of its key rivals, Mercedes has not yet employed a duct hollow front axle to use as an

aerodynamic aid. Instead the axle is topped with a pointed end to speed up the engagement of the wheel

guns at pitstops

The other key structural change is the new rollhoop. Last year this was deeply undercut, with the roll structure

supported by struts under the inlet. Now the area is less undercut and has been smoothed over.

Within this structure the inlet is now split, with the side inlets of the W05 removed. The bottom half of the inlet

feeds the engine's airbox and the upper half feeds back towards the gearbox oil cooler.

Cooling improvements were a key area for development. The downsizing of both the rollhoop inlets and the

sidepods show that work has gone into the power unit, lubricants and the coolers themselves.

Last year's car cooled the air from the turbocharger with a water to air intercooler, which sat in the back of the

fuel tank area and its associated water radiator sat within the sidepod. This already made the sidepods

smaller than they would be with a larger air to air intercooler, so this is likely to be one of the key joint

developments between the chassis team in Brackley and the powertrain division in Brixworth.

Also new on the slimmed sidepods are the vanes mounted to the front shoulders. These are refined from

2014 and the horizontal vane gains its own vertical vortex generating vane.

Under the skin the Mercedes AMG power unit has been improved, by "evolution" according Andy Cowell, who

added that it is a totally new engine, the 32 development tokens notwithstanding, given the breadth of what

one token can encompass and due to the fact other alterations were allowed on the grounds of reliability.

Major structural and layout changes can be achieved within what might be thought of as restrictive

regulations.

For the Brixworth powertrain team, the focus has been on cooling and power, although the unreliability of the

ERS last year will also have been attended to.




29/60

Aerodynamics at the rear appear to be more of the late 2014 season specification with the diffuser, rear wing

and Y100 monkey seat winglet all being of familiar design. This is probably the area, along with the front wing,

that will receive the late upgrades before the Australian Grand Prix.

Last year Mercedes was able to bring and race technical updates that performed as it predicted, so its testing

schedule is likely to be centred on improving the powertrain's reliability, with the key developments yet to

come.




30/60

Technical analysis: Red Bull RB11The new Red Bull RB11 made its debut in a striking camouflage disguise livery, but that didn't stop CRAIG

SCARBOROUGH from figuring out its secrets and spotting some big changes for 2015

Look beneath the squiggles of the Red Bull-Renault RB11's monochrome dazzle testing livery, and it's clear

that the four-time champion team's new design is aggressive, especially with its nose treatment, sidepods and

front brake ducts.

While Red Bull was the only team to deny Mercedes wins in 2014, outgoing technical director Adrian Newey

estimated its peak power deficit was around 10 per cent, worth nearly six tenths of a second per lap.

Windtunnel gains of the same magnitude are hard to come by, and Mercedes also gained ground in what is

usually Red Bull's trump card area of aerodynamics last year. A big step is required for 2015.

Since 2009 Red Bull has set the bar for aerodynamic and chassis performance, and its four subsequentchampionships were all won with cars exploiting the Renault engine's exhaust gases to create downforce.

With this advantage negated by 2014's new power unit and aero regulations, Red Bull was left with a huge

loss in downforce, a lack of power, and unreliability.

It could be argued that the chassis was still the class of the 2014 field, although the team's usually svelte

aerodynamics were harmed by a large cooler installation required to keep the Renault powerful and reliable.

This compromised qualifying performance and top speed; and so, without a clear track from the front row, Red

Bull was trapped in an unvirtuous circle of having to run a low-drag set-up for overtaking speed in the race,

which in turn hindered qualifying pace because parc ferme rules meant it was committed to that route from

Saturday afternoon.

Renault's reliability issues often exacerbated these problems. Sebastian Vettel's car was forced to use more

than the allocated number of power unit components, suffering grid-position drops for doing so.

The aim this year is to claw back the lost six to seven tenths per lap to Mercedes by increasing power,

improving aerodynamic efficiency and ensuring reliability.

It's typical Red Bull style to push the car's development to the last weeks, if not days, before the first tests and

races. This year was an extreme example of that methodology: the monocoque was late being completed,

arriving at the race bays last Monday. The car passed the crash tests on Wednesday, and with the trip from

Milton Keynes to Jerez there was little time to complete the car's build and be ready for the start of testing on

AUTOSPORT+ feature: Technical analysis: Red Bull RB11 30



31/60

Sunday.

Of course the team managed this, but in the rush the car's complex paint scheme could not be prepared, so

Red Bull ran with a 'testing livery'.

Imaginatively this was not simply a vinyl wrap of the Infiniti Red Bull colours, but a monochrome dazzle

scheme, designed to frustrate the eyes studying the detail of the car's shape.

This concept works to an extent, but we have been able to decipher details from under the white blocks and

squiggles to reveal some interesting technology.

As with many teams at this stage, the front wing remains a 2014-specification part, there being no rule

changes affecting this area. Above this, the nose takes a much more complex approach to the new rules than

some other teams.

Red Bull's Rob Marshall admitted other concepts were prepared and went through R&D to ensure at least one

solution could successfully pass the crash test. The solution that appeared on the car is quite a short nose,

with the two new mandatory cross-sectional areas created by a thumb-like extension from the nose tip.




32/60

What appears to be quite a bulky nose tip is flanked by the front wing mounting pillars and these are

extremely twisted in shape. The pylons and the flow structures they set up are partly guided back along the

car by this tip as it extends below the nose's under-surface.

In keeping with previous generations of Newey Red Bulls, the nose features an S-duct, which is a system that

catches air from under the nose and guides it back out of the top of the nose. This cleans up the airflows

passing over and under the nose and raised chassis.

Front axles are surprisingly key to F1 cars' aerodynamics, and Red Bull and other teams are experimenting

with the blown front axle concept.

All F1 cars' axles are hollow for strength and low weight. Typically they are closed off near the wheelnut with a

point end fitting to aid the wheelgun engaging with the nut at pitstops. However the RB11, along with the new

Ferrari and McLaren, keeps the axle open, and purposely ducts air through it for aerodynamic effect.

The brake duct scoops inside the wheel are intentionally larger - some of the air they catch is passed directly

through the hollow axle, with no function for internal cooling, but purely for external aerodynamics.




33/60

As the powerful airflow exits the axle through the wheelnut, it works with the front wing endplate to create an

outwash effect. This sends the tyre's dirty wake away from the rear of the car, which in turn improves the car's

aerodynamic efficiency.

Conceptually this is the same sort of effect as the static wheel fairings that were a common sight on front

wheels during 2008-09.

With the dazzle camouflage removed, the car's lines are apparent - and rather than the livery hiding detail

complexity, the shaping turns out to be unusually smooth.

Unusually for a Newey car, the sidepods feature a square-edged cross section, rather than S-shaped curves.

The sidepods are the car's key feature. Last year's Renault power unit appeared to require a lot of cooling,

particularly the charge air compressed by the turbocharger. If too hot, the engine suffered knocking and lost

both power and reliability. So the 2014 car sported two huge intercoolers in each sidepod, as well as the other

coolers for the power unit's oil and water systems.

This oversized cooling package cost aerodynamic efficiency, owing to a combination of the drag of the air

passing through the radiators themselves and by the blockage created by large sidepods costing downforce

from the rear end.

When asked if the RB11's new smaller sidepods were possible because Renault's cooling demands were

reduced, Newey surprised by saying the power unit had the same cooling requirements.

Marshall later confirmed the sidepods' size is as a result of better internal aerodynamic packaging, rather than

Renault or radiator technology changes.




34/60

The dramatic loss in sidepod volume does not come via re-located coolers, since unlike most of its

competitors the RB11 does not draw cooling air from the rollhoop area, merely from the small sidepod inlets.

There is a small inlet below the rollhoop, but this is typically for electronics cooling and not for the heat

exchangers.

Again Red Bull produces its own gearbox, with the same internal cluster used in the Toro Rosso, but

employing carbon-fibre casing as opposed to STR's aluminium one.

In shape the gear case retains Newey's preference for quite a tall, narrow design, this being good for stiffness

and rear structure mounting, in contrast to the trend for low-line gearboxes elsewhere.

Geometrically the suspension is a refinement of the RB10's, sporting pushrods at the front and pullrods at the

rear. Marshall wouldn't be drawn on whether the internals used conventional springing in the absence of

FRIC, or more complex hydraulic springs, adding that he found advantages in both trading the complexity and

reliability of metal springs for pitch and roll stiffness for the ease of packaging and tailoring hydraulic solutions.

The RB11's first day of running did include two technical issues, with a smoky engine and battery problem,

neither of which were caused by cooling issues, suggesting the maladies affecting last year's maiden test

have not been recreated in this year's design process.

How well the team will fare this year is dependent on the difference in power between Mercedes and Renault.

The gap is too large to be closed from aero alone, but the RB11 has taken the right steps to be ready to take

advantage of everything Renault can deliver.




35/60




36/60

Is it a drama or a crisis at McLaren?McLaren insists it never expected an easy start with Honda, and that it's getting through its problems. But

after 12 laps in two days, the team needs a breakthrough, says JONATHAN NOBLE

At what point does a drama become a crisis?

It's a question already swirling around McLaren and Honda after the second day of running at Jerez, when

hopes of its stuttering test programme moving up a gear failed to materialise.

Fresh from the sensor problems that limited its opening day of running with Fernando Alonso to just six laps

on Sunday, Jenson Button could only manage the same distance on day two.

His best lap of 1m54.655s was a distant 33 seconds off the pace. With an average speed of 90mph, it was

probably an effort that Honda's British Touring Car Championship Civic Tourer could target...

McLaren had been bracing itself for a challenging time this week, but perhaps it didn't expect things to be

quite this difficult.

AUTOSPORT+ feature: Is it a drama or a crisis at McLaren? 36



37/60

While it has kept repeating its mantra that what it needs above all else this week is "patience", 12 laps in two

days was much less than had been hoped.

Even on Sunday night, racing director Eric Boullier had talked of a target of 60 laps for the second day of

running.

On current form, McLaren's inauspicious start to testing has gone even worse than Red Bull's and Renault's

first test of the new turbo V6 engine 12 months ago, which rightly felt like a crisis. Rewind to 2014, and

Sebastian Vettel managed eight laps in one day with a best effort of 1m38.3s - still better than McLaren right

now.

But in the Jerez paddock on Monday night, the Woking team said there was finally evidence of light at the end

of the tunnel.

The sensor problems that had dogged day one were gone and an unspecified glitch that was exposed on day

two had finally been cured to allow one trouble-free lap right at the end of the day.

In theory that should at least allow the team to finally push on with its testing programme properly on Tuesday.

That was certainly Button's belief.

"We always knew the first test was going to be difficult, it always is," he said. "It's not as straightforward as it

used to be with sticking an engine straight into the car and trying to pound round. It's a very complex system

now.

"We've had a few things that we've been able to solve now. And tomorrow we'll see where we stand."

Let's not forget though that more mileage was exactly what McLaren had predicted 24 hours ago...

Yet beyond the immediate struggles of the week, there remains a conviction that this is not the precursor to a

year of frustration.




38/60

Instead the mood inside the team is more about this week being an inevitable growing pain of having

produced a "size zero" car - so named because of the skin-tight packaging at the rear.

Boullier said: "We have been quite extreme with packaging our car, and every technical solution that we've

brought to the car is something we believe will help us to close the gap to Mercedes quickly.

"Being brave and ambitious means we're not reliable, and we're struggling with electrical issues, which are

quite difficult to fix. They are fixable... but I want to be cautious on this because every time we try to fix one[problem], we open up something else further."

The scope of this week's delays, the complications in finding out where trouble is starting, are all a legacy of

this aggressive approach to the Honda packaging - and fixing relatively simple things is not easy because of

the way everything is packed so well inside the car.

But that is the price that the team feels it must pay if it is to close the gap to Mercedes, which not only has the

pace but also has a year's more knowledge of the new turbo hybrids.

Reflecting on Mercedes' strong start to Jerez, McLaren chief Ron Dennis said: "Are we surprised that

Mercedes can do 100+ laps? No, not at all because that is where we would expect them to be coming out of a

season where they were dominant and were effectively developing a given package.

"If you are behind in any sport - catching requires you to accelerate faster than they are running. Otherwise

you will not catch them up. Have we taken some calculated technical risks? Yes. These relate to technologies

that we are the first to deploy and we will work hard to get performance advantages.

"And it probably will not even be Australia before we know how we are doing. I expect two or three races

before we really get the lie of the land. And we will try through the remaining tests, especially the next two, to

take away the consequences of this densely packaged concept."

We must not forget either that this is testing and testing is about discovering problems before the racing

starts. Some things are just not exposed until a hot car is being pushed to the limit with all the vibrations and

G-forces that entails in the real world.

Boullier added: "You can use simulations and dynos all you want but you need to be on track to put the whole

package together.

"We have the 2015 car here, and we have to go through some pain and some glitches to allow us to run, and

obviously we don't want to take any risks either. If you blow up the engine, you could face something

damaging the car, and you'll lose more time. We have to take things step-by-step.

"We just want to win, so we have to be better than the best, which last year was Mercedes. It was the aim of

McLaren-Honda to be as brave as possible so we can close the gap as soon as possible.




39/60

"[Honda] came up with some good technical solutions that maybe bring some reliability issues, but they know

where to go; they have the people, the resources, and the technology. So they can match [Mercedes]."

The talk remains positive but it is pretty obvious that such optimism is pointless unless there is genuine

progress on track.

History has a strange way of repeating itself, especially in sport, and McLaren has been burned in the past by

going aggressive with a car design and it not quite working.

One McLaren team member famously said at the launch of one such bold car: "Our long-term strategy is to

re-establish the team as a consistent winner, through increasing overall competitiveness and reliability. To

achieve this demands significant, rather than incremental, steps."

Does that sound familiar? Indeed, it's a quote that would fit quite well today for what is going on with the

MP4-30. But it actually came ahead of the launch of McLaren's ultimately doomed MP4-18 back in 2003. That

car never raced.

There is nothing to suggest that McLaren-Honda is heading for the kind of new-car crisis it faced back then,

but equally there is no guarantee yet that what has happened this week is just a bit of early drama that will be

quickly forgotten when the season starts.

The answers will come within the next 48 hours.




40/60




41/60

Can back-to-front work for Nissan?Nissan is turning motorsport wisdom on its head by trying to win Le Mans with a front-engined,

front-wheel-drive LMP1. GARY WATKINS examines the bold thinking behind the GT-R LM

We were always expecting something different from Nissan. It has, after all, been building a reputation as

something of an off-beat, even zany, manufacturer and it does employ arguably the most imaginative mind in

motorsport in Ben Bowlby. But how different!

Nissan's GT-R LM NISMO turns conventional motorsport thinking on its head. Or rather back to front. The

rumours had quietly gained momentum that the car was indeed front-engined and front-wheel-drive, but

seeing - and reading - was truly believing.

That a manufacturer has decided to do something completely different in a bid to meet the challenge of the

LMP1 rulebook is refreshing in the extreme in an era when racing cars are becoming increasingly

homogonised.

AUTOSPORT+ feature: Can back-to-front work for Nissan? 41



42/60

Nissan's rivals in the 2015 World Endurance Championship - Audi, Toyota and Porsche each chose

different powertrain concepts with only front-axle kinetic-energy recovery in common, but their respective

contenders were hardly miles apart in terms of chassis design.

The diversity of machinery in sportscar racing is what attracts me to this branch of our sport. I remember

reading about wild Le Mans 24 Hours racers of the past the likes of the side-engined Ardex Group 6 car, the

Rover-BRM gas turbine racer and, going back even further, Briggs Cunningham's Le Monstre and was lucky

enough to be able to report on the tail-end of the rotary-engined Mazda Group C programme. I saw a car run

around the Circuit de la Sarthe on liquid petroleum gas and even wrote about an admittedly stillborn project to

race a car at Le Mans made of wood or at least vegetable-fibre composites.

I also got to see a front-engined prototype win races against Audi in the American Le Mans Series in the 21st

century. If you'd asked me when I visited my first international sportscar race as a 14-year old in 1981 if I

would one day see a prototype with the engine up front triumph in a major event, I would would have giggled

in your face. But it happened.

The original open-top Panoz prototype variously called the LMP1 Roadster-S and the LMP01 Evo beat

the mighty Audi R8 five times in 2000-'02. There were some unusual circumstances along the way, but Iwould say all but one of them was on merit. And Jan Magnussen's and David Brabham's triumph in

Washington on a decent city track even if it was laid out in a car park in the last of those years stands as

one of the best sportscar races on which I've ever had the good fortune to report.

But there's front-engined and then there's front-engined with front-wheel drive. Wow, that's an entirely

different proposition.

If you'd asked me prior to the launch of the GT-R LM in the small hours of Monday morning and a quick chat

with Nissan's head of global motorsport, Darren Cox, in the afternoon, I wouldn't have had a clue how it

works.




43/60

I sort of do now, and here goes trying to explain it.

The LMP1 rulebook is as restrictive as most single-seater formulae in terms of the rear venturis and diffuser.

But there is more scope for using the air from the front of the car to one's advantage.

So package the powertrain and its cooling up front, and you free up the sidepods for airflow, which on the

Nissan exits out the back above the diffuser.

This has allowed Bowlby and his design team to move the centre of pressure forward and reduce drag, the

twin holy grails for the designers of LMP prototypes.

That doesn't explain why Nissan has opted for front-wheel drive. Cox says that the major reason was the

weight penalty of a giant propshaft and a differential slung out the back in a formula where achieving the

weight limit now up 10kg from last year's 870 with a powerful hybrid system is already the big challenge.

It's all starting to make a bit of sense to my untrained mind, but then if it seems obvious to me why hasn't it

been obvious to any number of manufacturers and constructors down the years?

Either it's because Nissan has pushed or rather pulled itself up a blind technical alley or because other

manufacturers didn't have Bowlby working for them and/or have the same spirit of innovation that exists within

Nissan. The motor racing industry remains a conservative one, even in a form of racing where new ideas are

encouraged and even nurtured.

My enthusiasm for the new Nissan hasn't convinced me that it is going to work out on the race track. On the

other hand, I'm not convinced it isn't going to work. I really don't know, and why would I?

But there are so many questions to be answered about this complex beast that breaks the mould. Can it get to

the point where it is competitive and can it get there soon enough? Does Nissan have the time and resources

to make it work?

And there are more specific questions, such as what's going to happen to the tyres with all that power

550bhp from the petrol engine and some or maybe all of the retrieved power from the car's hybrid system or

systems being put through the front wheels?

With upwards of 1000bhp, at least for a few seconds on the exit of corners, the GT-R LM will surely be the

most powerful front-wheel-drive racing car in history. And we are talking about a form of racing when multiple

stints on the tyres are demanded.

Nissan, it should be pointed out, is asking us to be patient.

The hyperbole of former company vice-president Andy Palmer on the launch of the programme last May has

disappeared, to be replaced with a more measured tone.




44/60

Cox is now talking about "being respectful of the experience and quality of our competition". And Nissan, he

says, needs "to be credible and get to the finish of Le Mans" in its first year back in the top flight of

international sportscar racing.

Cynics might suggest that the Nissan GT-R LM NISMO is already succeeding and will continue doing each

time it visits a new country. It is gaining column inches around the world for its unusual appearance and

off-the-wall technology.

That poses an obvious question. Has a brand that got a massive marketing return for its buck with the

DeltaWing and ZEOD RC experimental machines at the 24 Hours made its technical decisions based on

empirical data and windtunnel figures or has it chosen to be different to grab the headlines?

Nissan insists it's the former. "We are not being different for different's sake," suggests Cox, without

prompting. "We were in the fortunate position to have an open mindset and the support of the company to go

and do something different."

I'm happy to take him at his word and banish thoughts that the radical concept of the P1 racer is the ultimate

get-out-of-jail card, to be played with the words, "yes, but we dared to be different".

That's partly because I really want the Nissan to succeed. As I've already said, it is variety that makessportscar racing so interesting to me, and I have always loved the weird and wonderful, probably more than

the next man.

It would also be good for the WEC if a strange-looking thing is running up front and in contention for podiums

and even victories. It could help raise the profile of a series that, although on the up, needs a helping hand in

the promotional stakes.

The other reason why I won't doubt Cox is that there does appear to be logic to the concept of this wacky

racer.

My problem is that more than 50 years of conventional motor racing wisdom says that Bowlby and Nissan are

wrong.




45/60




46/60

The other F1 engine in troubleWhile Honda's woes have grabbed all of the headlines at Jerez so far, JONATHAN NOBLE reveals that one

of its rivals has been able to keep its troubles out of the spotlight - until now

When Fernando Alonso guided the new McLaren-Honda out of the garage shortly after the track opened at

Jerez on Tuesday morning, it was not just the excited Spanish fans who were delighted that their man was in

action.

The relief on the faces of everyone inside the McLaren garage was clear to see. After two days of deep

frustrations, as engineers from the team and engine partner Honda chased glitch after glitch on the new turbo

engine, finally its testing programme could start properly.

As Alonso returned to the garage after the installation lap and reported zero problems with car and engine, the

confidence grew. Longer and longer runs followed, lifting spirits further.

AUTOSPORT+ feature: The other F1 engine in trouble 46



47/60

There was even a brief reason to smile when Alonso, out on intermediate tyres at the same time as Nico

Rosberg's Mercedes, set a purple fastest time overall in sector one - offering a glimpse of some real potential

in the MP4-30.

Any joy did of course turn to frustration a few hours later when running was curtailed by a parts failure that

caused a water-pump leak. But still this was an important step for the new McLaren-Honda era.

Honda's progress this week has been the dominant story of the Jerez test. Interest in the fortunes of one ofF1's most iconic team-engine partnerships is immense. That its early efforts stalled so much, leaving it at the

bottom of the timesheets on each of the three days so far, has only served to ramp up the attention.

But just because Honda has faced the brunt of the media spotlight does not mean the opposition have

escaped their own problems.

Day three at Jerez threw up the first public evidence that Renault's pre-season testing programme has

perhaps not had as good a start as it had originally hoped for.

Twelve months on from its famously disastrous debut test for the new V6 turbo, Renault was having a better

time, but it still was not trouble free.

With the excitement surrounding Red Bull's camouflage livery on day one, and Daniil Kvyat's wing-less laps

on Monday, having died down, a proper day of running for its main team on Tuesday confirmed growing

paddock whispers that Renault is still playing catch up in 2015.

Daniel Ricciardo not only lost track time through the need for an engine change, he and fellow

Renault-powered Carlos Sainz were adrift of the Mercedes and Ferrari on the timesheets.

Their longest stints also seemed quite short compared with what rivals were doing.

It all fitted in with a pattern that team members have hinted at: the two Renault teams being limited in how

long they could eke out their long runs amid concerns about a reliability Achilles Heel.

Renault's managing director Cyril Abiteboul confessed as much on Tuesday night, as he revealed the French

car manufacturer had been braced for a troubled time this week after uncovering a problem in dyno testing

last week.

"To cut a long story short, we have a couple of reliability issues and the next few days will tell us if they are big

issues or small issues," he told AUTOSPORT.

"They are known issues, so we were coming here with some risk associated to the engine that we knew.




48/60

"And so far, some of that risk has materialised. There is one particular issue on something that is even

cheaper than your [voice recorder] there! It is crazy that such a cheap part is causing so many issues for a car

so expensive like a Renault/Red Bull package."

"It is something that is not critical to performance but can be critical to reliability, so we know what we have to

do."

The impact of this part - linked to a metallic shaft that is related to the ERS water pump was that long runshad to be limited in length, just so regular observations could be made to ensure things did not become critical

and lead to an engine failure.

"Let's put it this way: the servicing of the engine has to be pretty frequent," said Abiteboul. "We know what the

issue is, we know what we have to do.

"It is a metallic shaft that we have to change, and we have to optimise and review the design.

"It is something that was working very well last year, but we decided to change and improve it a bit further with

the overall packaging of the engine to also support Red Bull in their attempt also to have very good

packaging. That is why we did not really care for that part.

"Usually you have very specific simulations, designs tests, and validation protocol. But honestly we did not do

it for this part because it is such a stupid part..."

The fault with the 'stupid part' was discovered too late for a fix to be in place this week. But a replacement is

coming for the next test in Barcelona, which it is hoped will give Red Bull and Toro Rosso a decent step

forward.

Ricciardo certainly believed that what is planned for Barcelona cannot come soon enough.

"I think we're where we thought we would be," explained the Australian. "We know there are still some steps

for the Barcelona tests. We know there's stuff still to come.

"We didn't expect to have everything on the track this week. Come the next two tests, we want to be racking

up more laps, and I think we will.

"We came into this test knowing it was a pretty big evolution from last year, and we knew it would be tight.

Obviously we'd love to do 150 laps here, but we knew it would be compromised one way or another.

"I think if Dany [Kvyat] can rack up 50 laps tomorrow, that's not a bad test for us...."

Even with another day to run at Jerez, thoughts are already shifting towards what needs to be done back at

base over the next few weeks.




49/60




50/60

Can Haas succeed where others failed?The last few attempts to start new Formula 1 teams haven't ended well. Can Gene Haas buck that trend?

DIETER RENCKEN examines his chances and gets the latest on the project

It's become a cliche - but no less true for being oft-repeated - to say that the only way to make a small fortune

out of Formula 1 is to start off with a big one.

While F1 tsar Bernie Ecclestone has spectacularly gone the other way, F1 history is littered with examples of

businessmen who, having made it in life, proceeded to not only lose their shirts to sport, but their kids' clothes

as well.

There is, though, absolutely no reason why an extremely wealthy man with a deep passion for motorsport and

in-depth understanding of its intricacies should not be able to make a successful entry into Formula 1, and all

the more so if an appropriate commercial platform is linked to a long-term programme. That man is Gene

Haas.

This encapsulates the difference between the Haas F1 Team that will join F1 in 2016 and the quartet of

wannabes who arrived (or not, in the case of USF1) in 2010 on the back of former FIA president Max Mosley's

ill-fated budget concept. USF1 was still-born; the other three rapidly exited the sport via the back door - HRT

at the end of 2012, while Marussia and Caterham filed for administration after last year's Russian Grand Prix

AUTOSPORT+ feature: Can Haas succeed where others failed? 50



51/60

and have slim hopes of survival.

With just nine teams expected (at time of writing - though Caterham and Marussia show sporadic signs of life)

to take to Melbourne's grid, the future health of the sport is under intense scrutiny. Indeed, many in the

paddock wish fervently that the all-US team backed by machine tool magnate Gene Haas - he of

Stewart-Haas NASCAR and Windshear windtunnel fame - had been able to appear in 2015 as originally

mooted.

However, the FIA entry process necessarily dragged on so long - to prevent repeats of the USF1/HRT fiascos

- that any expectation Haas could be up and running in less than a year (the entry was only confirmed in April

2014) would have been utterly unreasonable.

Haas simply does not work that way.

Sceptics point out that Marussia et al had but six months to prepare - and the realistic retort is: "yes, and look

where it got them..."

Thus, by requesting a 12-month extension Haas clearly learned valuable lessons before committing pen to

paper or bucks to budget, namely not to rush things. That said, with exactly 12 months remaining before the

cars are unveiled ahead of the 2016 season, what progress has been made in the interim, particularly given

that talks with Ecclestone first be

Autosport Plus O5 2015

Documents