[ 2020 ] Scuderia Ferrari - Ferrari

[Scorpaguy]

In this era, racing on Sundays is mostly data confirmation (with some driver skill, team management, and luck thrown in). Given comparable resources, if your engineers do a better job in the off season and mid week, such efforts will equate to race wins. MB's engineers have had the measure of Big Red (and everyone else) for some time...and such does not appear to be changing anytime soon. This lop-sided equation is further exacerbated by MB having very good drivers and superior team strategists/managers. The TV coverage this weekend was interesting, aside from the start and finish line, Hamilton was almost never featured, with mid-field battles occupying the screen...and doing thusly proved entertaining. Ferrari being lapped was a tragic comedy and quite telling of their engineering efforts of late. Unfortunately, I do not see them undoing/reversing this anytime soon. WEC may be getting a new works team in the top tier to alleviate this humiliation.

[Jolle]

Push rod suspension does not explain the 1s or so Merc was pulling on Ferrari. There is evidence that shows Merc started their engine development year before anyone else. It was Toto and Ross Brawn who strong armed FIA into moving to the hybrid formula. Ferrari does have issues with mis-management, but the topic in question is how to fix that. Even if you have ideas to fix it, it takes time and time is one thing that is not on Ferrari's side. Every year they dont win, the pressure builds. They need to beat Merc at their own game (politically) before they beat them technically, and this is not going to happen with the way things are.
I dont understand why people forget Ross Brawn is the reason why Merc is where they are. He built the team you see today, when Honda up and left. Why do people not question his intentions when they talk about FIA favouring a particular team. Any question about FIA & Ferrari, people come barreling down on Jean Todt, but conveniently forget Brawn.
The intention of my discussion is empower Ferrari, not drag them deeper through slush they are already in.
If wearing a Ferrari shirt is all you need to win, Ferrari would be lapping Merc day in and out.
Nobody will stand by Ferrari and say they are the best. They clearly are not. As a fan of the scuderia, i can only suggest ideas to problems i see and what i see is weakening power at the top. Binotto needs a smart ally who can fight battles along side him, while he can focus mostly on reorganizing the technical structure. This is what has happened at Mclaren, bringing in Zak & Seidl. One handles the political side, the other technical.

That Toto and Brawn pushed on behalf of Mercedes for the Hybrid rules is very strange... they were published in 2011, when Toto was just a shareholder of Williams Renault and Brawn in the startup of Mercedes GP. The timeframe suggests that the rules were lobbied at the time he was at Honda.

So don’t make stuff up to suit your narrative.

In fact, Renault pushed for a hybrid car, an inline four and Ferrari wanted a V6. Mercedes, then still McLaren, wanted also an inline four. Renault stated to leave if the V8 wasn’t replaced.

[GPR-A]

Ferrari reminds me of some firms I have worked for. They are old and lethargic, and are resting on their laurels. Without cleaning house and starting over, they are going to be on the back foot relative to their competition. As such, they have high turnover and low morale. Firms that are managed well and made the hard choices to clean house / rebuild are much happier places to work and they get better performance out of their employees.

What exactly is starting over? Since 2008, they have fired Montezemolo, Domenicali, Aldo Costa, Mormorini, James Allison, Tombazis and Arrivabene. In each of their firings, there have been internal realignments. Aldo and Allison have been important part of Mercedes domination. This fire at the drop of a hat is the problem Ferrari hasn't done well.

When Jean todt took over Ferrari reigns, there wasn't a single firing of known quantity. He simply structured the team well, protected them and allowed them all the freedom, which lead to results. Since then, they haven't had anyone who could create that sense of security amongst the empoyees, belongingness and a long term vision with achievable planning.

Since 2008, Ferrari's team bosses are headline hungry Italian media and it's fan base. They call for heads as soon as results dry and heads roll.

[dans79]

This fire at the drop of a hat is the problem Ferrari hasn't done well.

Since 2008, Ferrari's team bosses are headline hungry Italian media and it's fan base. They call for heads as soon as results dry and heads roll.

This is the real problem, it's basically created a "produce or else" work environment. People generally don't speak up or take risks if they are constantly in fear of losing their jobs.

[Xwang]

In my opinion they should do five things:
1) they should move politically to delete all the rules which pretend to limit what a team can do outside an official event (IMHO FIA cannot guarantee that they are respected). So free testing, free CFD, free Wind tunnel testing, no shutdowns, no budget cap and so on. The cars must comply with the sporting and technical rules during the events. Any teams which does not have enough resources to compete can go and compete anywhere else. *
2) they should open a technical center in the UK to develop a parallel F1 project which will run as the official one only if it is faster (and in this case the Italian based one will run with the parallel team name). So that they can try to take people and knowledge from other teams and their Italian based team will have to work better.
3) they should start a parallel project in WEC (only if balance of performance is not in use) to start dominating both with works and client teams.
4) they should start investing more and better and take a proper president and CEO.
5) they should stop firing people (in case of necessity they should just relocate them in the parallel F1 project and/or in the WEC).

*To avoid a team to over spend for a short period and go away after having won, a rule can be added which says that victories and world championship are kept only if the winning team continue to compete with the same brand name and identity for some years after the last championship victory.

[Jolle]

In my opinion they should do five things:
1) they should move politically to delete all the rules which pretend to limit what a team can do outside an official event (IMHO FIA cannot guarantee that they are respected). So free testing, free CFD, free Wind tunnel testing, no shutdowns, no budget cap and so on. The cars must comply with the sporting and technical rules during the events. Any teams which does not have enough resources to compete can go and compete anywhere else. *
2) they should open a technical center in the UK to develop a parallel F1 project which will run as the official one only if it is faster (and in this case the Italian based one will run with the parallel team name). So that they can try to take people and knowledge from other teams and their Italian based team will have to work better.
3) they should start a parallel project in WEC (only if balance of performance is not in use) to start dominating both with works and client teams.
4) they should start investing more and better and take a proper president and CEO.
5) they should stop firing people (in case of necessity they should just relocate them in the parallel F1 project and/or in the WEC).

*To avoid a team to over spend for a short period and go away after having won, a rule can be added which says that victories and world championship are kept only if the winning team continue to compete with the same brand name and identity for some years after the last championship victory.

isn't that blaming everything outside Ferrari again?

[El Scorchio]

In my opinion they should do five things:
1) they should move politically to delete all the rules which pretend to limit what a team can do outside an official event (IMHO FIA cannot guarantee that they are respected). So free testing, free CFD, free Wind tunnel testing, no shutdowns, no budget cap and so on. The cars must comply with the sporting and technical rules during the events. Any teams which does not have enough resources to compete can go and compete anywhere else. *
2) they should open a technical center in the UK to develop a parallel F1 project which will run as the official one only if it is faster (and in this case the Italian based one will run with the parallel team name). So that they can try to take people and knowledge from other teams and their Italian based team will have to work better.
3) they should start a parallel project in WEC (only if balance of performance is not in use) to start dominating both with works and client teams.
4) they should start investing more and better and take a proper president and CEO.
5) they should stop firing people (in case of necessity they should just relocate them in the parallel F1 project and/or in the WEC).

*To avoid a team to over spend for a short period and go away after having won, a rule can be added which says that victories and world championship are kept only if the winning team continue to compete with the same brand name and identity for some years after the last championship victory.

I suspect your point 1 would end with about three teams competing in the sport.

[Xwang]

In my opinion they should do five things:
1) they should move politically to delete all the rules which pretend to limit what a team can do outside an official event (IMHO FIA cannot guarantee that they are respected). So free testing, free CFD, free Wind tunnel testing, no shutdowns, no budget cap and so on. The cars must comply with the sporting and technical rules during the events. Any teams which does not have enough resources to compete can go and compete anywhere else. *
2) they should open a technical center in the UK to develop a parallel F1 project which will run as the official one only if it is faster (and in this case the Italian based one will run with the parallel team name). So that they can try to take people and knowledge from other teams and their Italian based team will have to work better.
3) they should start a parallel project in WEC (only if balance of performance is not in use) to start dominating both with works and client teams.
4) they should start investing more and better and take a proper president and CEO.
5) they should stop firing people (in case of necessity they should just relocate them in the parallel F1 project and/or in the WEC).

*To avoid a team to over spend for a short period and go away after having won, a rule can be added which says that victories and world championship are kept only if the winning team continue to compete with the same brand name and identity for some years after the last championship victory.

I suspect your point 1 would end with about three teams competing in the sport.

Maybe, but, after all, are the other really competing? And moreover are we sure that those limitations to "reduce costs" have effectively reduced costs? It seems that now every team spends a lot more to get very small gains because tightly constrained by those rules.

[Jolle]

In my opinion they should do five things:
1) they should move politically to delete all the rules which pretend to limit what a team can do outside an official event (IMHO FIA cannot guarantee that they are respected). So free testing, free CFD, free Wind tunnel testing, no shutdowns, no budget cap and so on. The cars must comply with the sporting and technical rules during the events. Any teams which does not have enough resources to compete can go and compete anywhere else. *
2) they should open a technical center in the UK to develop a parallel F1 project which will run as the official one only if it is faster (and in this case the Italian based one will run with the parallel team name). So that they can try to take people and knowledge from other teams and their Italian based team will have to work better.
3) they should start a parallel project in WEC (only if balance of performance is not in use) to start dominating both with works and client teams.
4) they should start investing more and better and take a proper president and CEO.
5) they should stop firing people (in case of necessity they should just relocate them in the parallel F1 project and/or in the WEC).

*To avoid a team to over spend for a short period and go away after having won, a rule can be added which says that victories and world championship are kept only if the winning team continue to compete with the same brand name and identity for some years after the last championship victory.

I suspect your point 1 would end with about three teams competing in the sport.

Maybe, but, after all, are the other really competing? And moreover are we sure that those limitations to "reduce costs" have effectively reduced costs? It seems that now every team spends a lot more to get very small gains because tightly constrained by those rules.

I don’t think Ferrari was good in the early 2000’s because of those rules but because the structure Todt put in place over years of investment. Toyota (among others) showed us that simply throwing money and miles at a project doesn’t work as long as you don’t work as a team. Multiple designs at once at different places also been fruitless in the past, Hondas dream car as one of the victims.

A good team will succeed whatever the challenge.

[hape]

Originally posted by jumpingfish in the Hungarian GP thread but relevant here as well:

https://twitter.com/Vetteleclerc/status ... 9585297409

Any idea who will replace Vettel as lead strategist?

Maybe they offered him the job of lead strategist but this time out of the car?
On a serious note: It shows the mess they are in.

[hape]

Ferrari lost the political game for quite some time. I am not convinced that their PU advantage was solely on fuel flow cheating. I think theyn found a loophole in the deployment department that FIA could not prove it was illegal immediately and for sure did not like. So Ferrari decided to accept in a way liability and made a deal. FIA would need a long court procedure that could take time in order to prove that Ferrari cheated and maybe both parties did not want that. The problem is that the result of such arrangement in the end is not bad for Ferrari only. it's bad for F1. 2020 championship is over. All the things FIA cannot understand should not penalise them...just because of the benefit of the doubt. In the end fuel flow cheating leads to having to use more fuel so carry a weight penalty or having to lift and coast. So maybe for qualifying it could be useful but during the race not so much. In the end Ferrari by going on a deal with FIA accepted that it was guilty of something. The Team needs a leader in the managing and political aspect of the sport. Not sure Binotto can be successful on that end. By not giving Vettel even a paycut contract and getting a driver like Sainz proves that he does not want to have too many headaches. he could not manage the situatio between Leclerc and Vettel. Ferrari would have way more success if they had given to Ross Brawn the position of Jean Todt...They seem lost not only in terms of engineering and building a fast car but in many other aspects of the sport.

I guess you are right. With being nice and gentle you don’t win F1 championships.
First of all, the FiA, after 4 months of studying, was unable to proof what trickery was going on so the secret agreement came. Why did Ferrari have to stop immediately what was going on, being left with a castrated engine? Mercedes trickery on “oil” burning was slowly reduced over years at a time when Ferrari started the same. And let’s not say it was so difficult to redesign the engine for that.

Knowing the engine was a pussy back in 2020 winter testing, the aero was a mess.... how on earth could Binotto commit to this token system and the budget cap?

[Jolle]

Ferrari lost the political game for quite some time. I am not convinced that their PU advantage was solely on fuel flow cheating. I think theyn found a loophole in the deployment department that FIA could not prove it was illegal immediately and for sure did not like. So Ferrari decided to accept in a way liability and made a deal. FIA would need a long court procedure that could take time in order to prove that Ferrari cheated and maybe both parties did not want that. The problem is that the result of such arrangement in the end is not bad for Ferrari only. it's bad for F1. 2020 championship is over. All the things FIA cannot understand should not penalise them...just because of the benefit of the doubt. In the end fuel flow cheating leads to having to use more fuel so carry a weight penalty or having to lift and coast. So maybe for qualifying it could be useful but during the race not so much. In the end Ferrari by going on a deal with FIA accepted that it was guilty of something. The Team needs a leader in the managing and political aspect of the sport. Not sure Binotto can be successful on that end. By not giving Vettel even a paycut contract and getting a driver like Sainz proves that he does not want to have too many headaches. he could not manage the situatio between Leclerc and Vettel. Ferrari would have way more success if they had given to Ross Brawn the position of Jean Todt...They seem lost not only in terms of engineering and building a fast car but in many other aspects of the sport.

I guess you are right. With being nice and gentle you don’t win F1 championships.
First of all, the FiA, after 4 months of studying, was unable to proof what trickery was going on so the secret agreement came. Why did Ferrari have to stop immediately what was going on, being left with a castrated engine? Mercedes trickery on “oil” burning was slowly reduced over years at a time when Ferrari started the same. And let’s not say it was so difficult to redesign the engine for that.

Knowing the engine was a pussy back in 2020 winter testing, the aero was a mess.... how on earth could Binotto commit to this token system and the budget cap?

That the FIA couldn't find any proof is one theory. Another one is that they did find proof but didn't want to exclude one of Liberies main assets to the F1 brand; Ferrari. That Ferrari didn't use their veto right to block the sudden freeze of development points to the FIA holding Ferrari's balls at the moment, they are on very thin ice. The agrement between FIA and Ferrari, the timing, the drop in pace and the secrecy around it looks more like a coverup then a "we couldn't prove anything'.

Looking back what Todt did from 1993 onwards, building Ferrari: Getting the best assets from every successful team on the grid. PMI from McLaren, with their whole marketing power, Shell resurrected from Honda/PMI, Brawn, Byrne from Benneton and the best driver on the grid, Senna and after his death Schumacher. And still it took six years before the first WCC came.

As all new era champions (after Chapman, Dennis, Williams and Brawn) Wolff set new standards in F1. The way he and his team structured Mercedes is next level, just like every great driver champion added something extra to the pallet of a champion. Wolff made a organization that is not dependable of a single person or big names, but where those talents do feel at home and are able to deliver their best work. Just imagine what would happen to RedBull if Newey really left (well, look at where McLaren and Williams are now) or Benneton and Ferrari after Brawn or Mercedes after Brawn.

[Harvester]

Ferrari needs someone like Toto or Horner as their TP. Someone who is willing to bitch and moan 24*7 till they get what they want. As we all know, squeaky wheel gets the grease.

I guess, if this is the mentality, it's pretty obvious that Ferrari is failing. While having not only a veto right on rules and a direct line to the FIA and Liberty, they get paid more then any other team for just showing up.

Ferrari needs a good look in the mirror and nog bitch and moan about why other are doing a better job. This is a downfall of their own making. again.

Not taking anything away from Toto, but he is a master manipulator, the best on the grid today. The advantage that they got from 2014-2017 was due to his planning. Mercedes had such a strong head start going into the hybrid formula, that everyone has been playing catch up since day one. And while the competition was looking to fix the engine and build cars around their weak engines, Mercedes went full force into developing arguably the best windtunnel-CFD system, all the while relying on their strong engine to keep them ahead.
Now that they have the strongest simulation tools out there, they will master any new regulation changes between now and forever. To their credit, they don't seem to be resting on their laurels as Ferrari often do.
Anytime they sense weakness in their team, Toto and Co orchestrate a BS problem that the FIA is forced to look into, all the while fixing the above said weakness.
This is what Ferrari needs. They need a smart conman. Someone who can get Ferrari's technical team time to catch up or push the competition behind. Ferrari seems to have lost this opportunity for this regulation change.
I believe they will need to go through a tough transformation period, similar to Mclaren, while the team catches up.
They need to steady during this time. Binotto needs support from Camelleri and Elkann. They need better PR people, who can handle the media. All this pressure inevitably trickles down to the team.

First I have to say that Mercedes success hasn't started since hybrid era. They probably had the fastest car even before. It just ate tires. Then working from that they worked hard to fix that and keep their speed, including political games in pushing tire development in direction it suited them. Also all rule changes since then suited their car. And then they also had the best engine and it was all over for other teams. Ferrari after Marchione took over recovered and had decent seasons but Mercedes was simply too good

[e30ernest]

Also all rule changes since then suited their car.

Were the rules suited to the car or were they just better at suiting their car to the rules? I seem to remember that a lot of Merc innovations were banned too. They were among the first to pioneer the outwash front wing concept and that was hurt by the last set of rule changes too.

IMO, it's Ferrari and Red Bull who haven't been able to cope with the rules rather than the rules being suited to the Mercs.

[basti313]

Also all rule changes since then suited their car.

Were the rules suited to the car or were they just better at suiting their car to the rules? I seem to remember that a lot of Merc innovations were banned too. They were among the first to pioneer the outwash front wing concept and that was hurt by the last set of rule changes too.

IMO, it's Ferrari and Red Bull who haven't been able to cope with the rules rather than the rules being suited to the Mercs.

Well...there is a lot of luck in the game and always the engine. There is not only a "good management" reason for the long wheelbase, I think the engine stands above everything:
A long wheelbase and refined aero with guiding structures produces more drag. Remember the start of the hybrid time when Newey removed all wings/edges from the car.
If you have enough engine power you can have more drag...this is why Merc could easily go this direction. On the other hand especially RedBull and to some degree Ferrari had to stay on a short wheelbase concept with rake where the floor produces downforce with a good drag ratio.
This is also the reason why Ferrari had such a fast straight line car last season: Suddenly they were on par or above Merc with the engine power, but the drag was clearly lower.
It had its reason why they were talking about putting more drag and downforce on the car all season. This was the clear development target.

Then FIA castrated the engine. This was the point where suddenly the "new" aero concept they developed at least for the last year collapsed.

In my point of view the error of Ferrari was to expose themselves too much. With the new engine power they saw some low hanging fruits to catch. So they combined low drag with engine power. Merc reduced its engine power and the politics killed Ferrari...
If they would have been smart they would have put dirty drag on the car once they could release some extra power from the engine. Like this no one would have seen this extra power, no one would have protested and on the long run they could have switched to a aero concept that works without overdoing it on the straights.