When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
There are rumours that Mattia Binotto will be dismissed from his position as team principal before the start of the season in Bahrain. The Maranello based team would like to wait and see how the car performs during the winter tests at the Bahrain International Circuit and then dismiss the Italian.
That is the rumour that The Judge 13 came up with on Saturday morning. According to the website, which has been right more often than not about matters in Formula 1, Czech Ferrari GT driver Josef Kral is said to have spoken out a little via his Youtubechannel. The video has since been set to private.
Kral supposedly said that it has been decided internally that Binotto will be fired. Ferrari are reportedly just waiting for the three days of testing next week to see how the SF21 performs. If expectations are met, Binotto will be given a dignified farewell and 'thanked for building a good car for the team'. He himself says that the rumours have been taken out of context.
Ferrari already has Laurent Mekies as its successor to the 51-year-old Italian. Last week it was announced that Binotto would no longer be present at every Grand Prix in 2021. Laurent Mekies would then take over Binotto's duties and manage everything on the circuit during the weekend. If the rumour is true, Mekies is the ideal candidate to take over.
According to Formula 1 journalist Serhan Acar (almost 100,000 followers), Binotto will work as a member of the FIA World Motorsport Council, representing Ferrari. This is to prevent Binotto, who is still considered one of the best engineers in the premier class of motor sport, from moving on to Red Bull Racing, Mercedes or any other team.
Wasn't too big on F1 until I just binged through both S1 and S2 of this series this weekend with the wife... now we're hooked and trying to catch an F1 race sometime in the near future... Perhaps even making it a bucket list item of seeing race in each country
If he is such a good engineer why are they not using his knowledge? Seems interesting if true.
Italian politics, which dooms Ferrari every so often. Two of the top technical people at Mercedes Benz (James Allison former Ferrari CTO, Aldo Costa former Ferrari Technical Director) came from Ferrari when their positions were reassigned or demoted by Ferrari internal strife.
Mattia Binotto was in charge of Ferrari power units throughout the 2010's before he got the promotion to technical director, then team prinicple. What I'm guessing happened is those promotions were due in part to the Ferrari sudden peak power increase which allows Vettel to place #2 WDC in 2017, 2018, and 2019. Binotto's team came up with a novel cheating way to allow more fuel and subsequent power for brief periods for passing, which other teams (Andy Cowell at MB Power Division) correctly guessed that Ferrari were cheating with fuel metering. When this was discovered in mid 2019, Ferrari had to revert back and their power fell back and shown in 2020. So Binotto went from hero to zero in 2020, Ferrari is giving him a chance to see how good the new power unit is.
So all the "new" cars are now revealed. Here's my ranking for the liveries.
10 - Ferrari - Lime green puke on red. No.
9 - Williams - Looks like three different cars crashed into one.
8 - Haas - Clean look, but kind of boring,
7 - AlphaTauri - A step down from last year's design. New pattern is boring.
6 - Mercedes - Lack of imagination. The blending of the silver on the engine cover doesn't really work.
5 -McLaren - Nothing wrong with it, but nothing new as well.
4 - Alfa Romeo - Basically inverted the colors on the rear of the car from last year, but it really works.
3 - Red Bull - Nothing wrong with it, but nothing new as well.
2 - Aston Martin - Great reinterpretation of racing green with a silverish sheen.
1 - Alpine - Spectacular
Mostly agree with that list, but would probably put the SF21 ahead of the Williams & Haas, and would move MB up a few spots though I still wish the car were back to silver & they'd kept the 'constellation' stars over the AMGs.
I've never liked the flat finish paint scheme for RB or Ferrari
You may have a point. Matte finishes may be on the way out. If you recall, Red Bull used to have a very shiny finish, but they changed matte a few years ago and everyone was like "wow!" But maybe it's played out. Aston Martin went the shiny route.
Mostly agree with that list, but would probably put the SF21 ahead of the Williams & Haas, and would move MB up a few spots though I still wish the car were back to silver & they'd kept the 'constellation' stars over the AMGs.
When the Mercedes press photos came out it, looked pretty good and I liked it. But the press photos were with a black backdrop. When real-life photos came out (see below), it actually looks kind of weird. We have silver, black, and red intersecting together at the back and it doesn't really work. Kind of like the rear of the Ferrari, you have a mesh of lime green, bright red, and burgundy red all crashing together.
Ferrari, hoping to rebound from its worst Formula 1 season in 40 years, took the wraps off its 2021 car on Wednesday. The SF21, which is the franchise's 67th built in Maranello, Italy, for Formula 1, features a conservative, no-nonsense livery.
The car uses the same carbon-fiber chassis as in 2020. Engine, aerodynamics, and the rear end is where the team made modifications for 2021, as F1 teams brace for new specs this year.
"When we began the SF21 project, our first task was to identify which area of the car we should focus on in order to achieve a radical change," said Enrico Cardile, Ferrari's head of chassis. "We opted for the rear end, designing a new gearbox and new suspension system. This, in addition to the efforts of our power unit colleagues has led to a much tighter rear end.
"We also looked at the cooling system, increasing the effectiveness of the central radiator and designed the body with more 'downwashing.' Aerodynamics was one of the areas affected by the regulation changes aimed at reducing the ability to generate vertical load, in order not to put too great a strain on the tires. That’s why, as we began developing the car’s aerodynamics, we set ourselves two goals: recovering more aerodynamic downforce than was lost through the regulations and reducing drag.
"Because of the regulations, less drastic changes were possible at the front end of the car. So, we developed a new front wing, which works in conjunction with a new concept nose, but the chassis itself and the suspension is off last year’s SF1000.”
The team will have a new driver lineup this year, as former McLaren driver Carlos Sainz Jr. joins holdover Charles Leclerc. Veteran Sebastian Vettel is now at Aston Martin (formerly Racing Point).
Ferrari finished sixth in the F1 Constructors' Championship in 2020, its worst finish since a 10th-place finish in 1980.
"There’s plenty of positive energy coming from our two drivers," said Ferrari racing director Laurent Mekies. "Carlos has spent a lot of time in the factory and has integrated with the team very quickly.
"As for Charles, he is already perfectly at home with the team: He knows what he wants and is also very aware of the role he has in the team, both in and out of the car. Over the winter, we have witnessed the two guys getting on very well together and this can only be a good thing for the whole team.”
Silverstone has been chosen to host one of the first sprint races before this year’s British Grand Prix, it was reported on Thursday.
The Formula One chief executive, Stefano Domenicali, said the Northamptonshire circuit is among the three venues that will trial the new format this season. Friday’s second practice session is expected to be replaced by qualifying to make up the grid for Saturday’s shortened race, which will be approximately a third of the length of Sunday’s grand prix.
“We are finalising the intricacies of it,” Domenicali told the Daily Mail, with those details due to be discussed further at a meeting in Bahrain on Thursday. “For sure we do not want to take away the prestige of the grand prix itself. That will remain the climax of the weekend.
“We will have the qualifying on Friday and then ‘sprint qualifying’ on Saturday. It will provide some meaningful action the day before the race. It will give fans, media and broadcasters more content. It will last about half an hour. There will be no podium celebration. That will wait until Sunday.
“But points will be awarded – how many is yet to be decided – towards the world championship and determine the grid for the race itself. What I can say is that Silverstone will hold a sprint race.”
The Italian, Brazilian and Canadian Grands Prix are reportedly the contenders to host the other two sprint race trials.
As a sandstorm engulfed the Bahrain International Circuit on the afternoon of day one of pre-season testing, Max Verstappen went fastest for Red Bull – but Mercedes struggled with a gearbox issue and then a lack of pace, finishing the day with just 48 laps, the fewest of all the teams.
Verstappen enjoyed the whole day in the Red Bull RB16B – with team mate Sergio Perez set to drive on Saturday – and finished the morning third, before improving under the floodlights to take first with a fastest time of 1m30.626s on mediums. Bar a spin in the first session, Verstappen's Friday was incident-free.
When afternoon running began the wind was whipping up sand all over the track, robbing the drivers of grip. But later in the day, as the floodlights punched through the darkening sky, conditions cooled and grip increased leading to a late flurry of fast laps. That left Lando Norris second overall for McLaren on mediums, Esteban Ocon third for Alpine on soft tyres and Aston Martin's Lance Stroll fourth with a late effort on prototype Pirelli mediums. Morning leader Daniel Ricciardo finished seventh overall for McLaren.
As for Mercedes, a gearbox issue in the morning meant 17th-place Valtteri Bottas could only complete six laps overall – much to the chagrin of Team Principal Toto Wolff. Lewis Hamilton (10th fastest) took over in the afternoon but added just 42 laps to Mercedes' total, as he failed to make use of the favourable evening conditions and seemed to be struggling for grip and pace. Verstappen, on the other hand, managed 139 laps in all.
Ferrari's Carlos Sainz also improved under the lights and finished fifth, having taken over from 11th-place finisher Charles Leclerc in the afternoon. Behind Sainz was sixth-place Alfa Romeo driver Antonio Giovinazzi, who ran in the afternoon after 12th-place Kimi Raikkonen took the morning session.
AlphaTauri's productive day continued with rookie Yuki Tsunoda making his pre-season testing debut in the Honda-powered AT02. He took ninth overall, half a second off eighth-place team mate Pierre Gasly who ran in the morning.
Sebastian Vettel kicked off testing for Aston Martin in the morning and finished 13th overall, ahead of Williams' sole day one runner, test driver Roy Nissany.
Haas revealed their VF-21 in the morning and Mick Schumacher then set his first times, albeit with a gearbox issue hampering his running. He managed just 15 laps to finish 16th, with new team mate Nikita Mazepin taking over in the afternoon to complete 70 laps and finish 15th fastest.
Bottas, who only managed to turn six laps with aero rakes on his car, rounded out the standings in P17. The Finn returns on Saturday afternoon as Hamilton takes the wheel in the morning.
Soon, Bahrain's floodlights will switch off and give way to a bright Saturday morning, in which Fernando Alonso will make his Alpine debut, Sergio Perez will take the wheel of Red Bull's RB16B and Nicholas Latifi will drive for Williams – while reigning champions Mercedes have it all to do.
ELIAS: Mercedes' secret weapon for the F1 preseason
IMO, the performance group at MB F1 has been one of the main reasons for their success using their push method of requirements to the various car's engineering team versus a pull method.
as well as incredible reliability.
Design engineer Gabriel Elias recently returned to his native Florida after spending the past six years employed at Mercedes F1, where he helped to design the cars that have carried the team to the past seven Formula 1 constructors’ championships.
When I first began working in Formula 1, my perception of pre-season testing was probably the same as a lot of people’s. You imagine these teams having worked all winter on their new car, and then going to the track for this day of reckoning where they find out whether all that work has paid off with the performance they were expecting. That, and some trepidation about what the opposition has been up to during the off-season.
But the truth of the matter is that in my time at Mercedes, when we got to the first test, it was really just about mileage accumulation. We were trying to break the car. We already knew that there was performance, so the first test was essentially for validation.
As time has gone on the teams have become much more prepared for the first test, because they’ve seen the necessity of getting your mileage in the hybrid era of Formula 1. Mileage is basically gold to race teams — if you’re not able to go out in testing and get laps, you’ve screwed yourself. And we’ve seen that over the past few years, when teams have had problems during the first test, or missed days of it altogether because their car wasn’t ready. When that happens, you’re losing hundreds of kilometers per day that you need in order to be able to try different setups, different ride heights, different engine modes, different aero packages, all that kind of stuff. You can’t do any of that work if you’re not running, and recent history shows how big a setback missing that track time can be.
But while you usually arrive at the first test with a good sense of your own car’s performance, you never really know where you are in comparison to the other cars until you get there. All top teams have some form of performance tracker that basically follows and projects the performance of their closest competitors, normalized based on, say, engine mode. So in the case of Mercedes, if we were testing at the start of 2018, the team might say, “OK, Ferrari’s chasing us,” and we could take all the data points of their upgrades from 2017 as relatives to our car over the entire season. Then we would essentially project out that, OK, we think they’re going to bring four tenths – that’s just an example – to the car, because of the ruleset for that year, combined with historical data from past years and other inputs.
RELATED
OPINION: I was an American designer at Mercedes. F1 needs to create a path for others
So we’d have an idea where the competitors are, but no one really knows until they show up. But as far as what Mercedes or any other good team will bring to the circuit, they’re going to be projecting out that, hey, we need to find, let’s say, one second in performance from the end of one season until the start of the next, assuming that the regulations stay fairly stable. OK, well we can gain two-tenths from the engine – we’ll call Brixworth (ED: home of Mercedes HPP) and say, “Can you give us 10 horsepower,” or whatever that ends up being. We need to find this many tenths in the wind tunnel, and the aeros will be making weekly gains as soon as the model switches over from the previous year to the next one, barring any setbacks. And then let’s say we can find a few tenths in mass optimization, vehicle dynamics-related updates, like that. So all of that is set as directives, and then developed in simulation. And that drives our design.
Then once we bring the car to the track, it’s almost like, “OK, we’re pretty sure we’re going to be here or hereabouts, now we just need to make sure that our competitors have followed the track that we projected for them as well.” So that’s what points the ship at the start of winter.
By the time the leading teams show up to F1 testing, they already have a pretty good idea where they – and their rivals – stand. The focus is largely on validating what simulations showed during the winter. Sutton/Motorsport Images
During my time with the team it was rare that one of our rivals came out with something that really surprised us, but there were certainly a couple of occasions when we all started looking at something another car was doing, like, “Whoa, that was gnarly.” A couple of years ago at Melbourne, we had an onboard of the Ferrari rear wing and we saw the thing diving — we could see flexing at speed on the straight. And we’re all sitting there like, “How the hell are they doing it?” We were looking at the hinge points at the main plane, as it attaches to the endplates, we’re looking at the rear flap…. It all seemed to be on a slider of some sort. And moveable aerodynamic devices are a no-no, but under speed you could probably get away with it, as some teams have done in the past.
That was one where I remember we looked at it really closely, like, “How can we do this?” We tried to scheme up some options that would maybe get us a similar result. But one thing about Mercedes in my time there is the team never brought questionable things to the car. They were always very, very afraid — and Daimler was always very afraid — of the optics of going too far into the gray area. I’m not sure that all of our rivals felt the same way, but Mercedes was very keen to avoid what would come with the kind of publicity you’d attract for doing something against the rules. If we brought something to the car that was novel, the technical management was certain they could prove its legality in the event of a protest before it ever went onto the track.
Ferrari gave us a scare another year when they were up by about a second a lap during pre-season testing. And internally, within the team, we were just like, “We are so screwed here.” I think that was when they were doing something with their engines, and they were showing it in different places on the track. Remembering the engineering notes, we ended up finding a ton of performance almost inadvertently, and it had to do with ride height. So we made a ride height change, and basically the car just lit on fire — figuratively — and we found massive chunks of time. And as I remember, that might’ve been the afternoon of the last day of the last test before Melbourne, and we found about half a second, just in ride height changes.
That year we also brought a ton of aero development during the season to try to make up for Ferrari having this engine mode that we couldn’t figure out. It was almost through sheer luck that we found something, plus the fact that we had superior reliability, which was always the calling card of our car, that we were able to get it done that year. That was a really tough slog of a year, because we just kept bringing parts to the car, trying to get more and more performance. I know that took a lot out of everyone.
I’ve been asked about what makes Mercedes better than other teams, and the thing that always stood out in my time was the chassis dyno. A lot of people don’t know that there’s this massive chassis dyno at Mercedes, and they are now commonplace at other top teams as well. It was purchased and constructed by Honda in 2008, and then Honda subsequently left — they essentially left the keys in the door and walked out — but in doing such, they left a multi-million dollar chassis dyno cell that was purpose-built for the F1 team. So the team has this dyno cell that you can put the full chassis on, complete with bodywork.
You run the air through the radiators at speed – it can run all the way up to, let’s say, 320 km/h (200mph) or something like that in terms of airspeed. You can replicate all the air densities and air temperatures, and correct for altitude. And it doesn’t run to the track time schedule you’d have at the track. It doesn’t run from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. It runs 24/7. There’ll be three shifts, and if the car goes down — let’s say you got an oil leak, you have to take off the engine, all that kind of stuff — there are people working 24/7 to get the thing back and running, and complete as many kilometers as possible. Everything you can think of, this thing can do. When Mercedes arrives at the first test, it’s not really the “first” test. They’ve been running in the chassis dyno for weeks.
That’s what will have been happening at Mercedes over the past few weeks: the engine, gearbox, cooling system, hydraulics, everything including the suspension and brakes have been put through the wringer on the chassis dyno, brake and gearbox dyno, and off-car kinematics rigs. I’ve had things break on the dyno, and it gave me enough opportunity to make a countermeasure almost immediately, before we even got to the circuit. So by the time you get to the track, there’s a fix in place, and now we’re getting track time to make sure that the replacement part is OK. And by the time that’s all done, you’ve got a solution in place and then you usually can go on the rest of the season with no issues. Most smaller teams don’t have that opportunity. When they break something, they’re breaking it at the circuit, and then they start the mad scramble to fix it a week before they have to fly to the first race. There’s the difference between the top three teams and the rest of the grid.
If Formula 1 wants to make things interesting in the future, they should ban chassis dynos. Just ban them altogether. Teams shouldn’t have them: you should get to the first test, and everything should blow up and break. The grid will just change as the season goes on, and then you’ll really see who’s better at adapting on the fly.
For us, being a well-resourced team, we still had problems, but it seemed like we were able to manage them. We’d have tons of mechanical problems pre-season. In my case, I had one of my radiator designs crack and leak one year, and I was freaking out. The first thing I had to do was come up with an emergency patch to get through the first test, and then I had to redesign the tank so that it didn’t leak in the future. Those kinds of things are very stressful. Myself and a couple of other engineers had to figure out the root cause of this little bit, and do the redesign and manufacturer the redesign all within, let’s say, a four- or five-day span in order to get the change to the circuit. We’d overnight it, or stick it on a plane and it would be in Barcelona within two hours, just to get us back running on the track. Mercedes, being so risk averse, always wanted to make sure that we were testing a representative car.
Williams was late getting its FW42 onto the track in 2019, and spent the rest of the year trying to catch up. Jerry Andre/Motorsport Images
By the time the first race comes around, the modified parts have already done… we’d probably do between 400km (250 miles) and 600km (370 miles) a day in testing, multiplied by however many test days you had to work with. There was a kilometer limit that all parts need to pass before they’d go onto the race car, so it was on us to rush all of these fixes to the test as soon as possible, because that’s the only way we could race with them. So, nerve-wracking times, for sure.
There were years that went really smoothly, and then we’ve had years… I can remember in 2017, we broke so many floors. We were cracking the diffuser off the rearward portion of the floor. That’s ridiculously scary, because that’s a cat1 fault, or a DNF fault. If the floor breaks, your car is done. Those breaks were happening at the first test, and the reason why they were happening was because we were making 40% more downforce, and we didn’t match the strength of the floor correctly for the new downforce level that we were experiencing.
Another year, we broke tons of brake discs. So over time you’d see failures all over the car. But the percentage of failures that Mercedes has at the track is much lower because of all the testing done at the factory prior to the car ever leaving a garage. And that’s invaluable, because you’re working on problems two weeks earlier, and you’re doing it from the comfort of your own home, so to speak. Let’s say a brake disc fails on the brake dyno; you’re in a controlled environment, and you can take time to really understand what happened — you can do a full analysis on it, you can bring your colleagues into it. But when you’re at the circuit, it’s just a skeleton crew. You’re using the race team’s eyes and ears to relay back to the factory, “Hey, this, this is what broke, you guys look into it.” And that distance makes failure analysis even more strenuous.
I’d argue that’s the secret weapon for Mercedes. It’s not purely about superior on-track performance, it’s reliability because of the things like the dyno and all the other different isolated test cells that were at R&D that allowed the team to prove out the car before we ever had to put it onto a track. And that’s what my former colleagues will have been focusing their energy on before shipping the new car out to Bahrain this week.
Used to love the blood red ("Rosso Mugello") paint on the older Ferrari F1 cars.
, whenever I saw the blood red Ferrari F1 cars (Lauda 312T and 312T2, and Prost 641/642) in person they look so right.
I saw a Ferrari F1-2000 (just a display model) at a Ferrari dealership and it just didn't look right with the Marlboro orange/red paint.
I tried saying hello to him once at a McLaren party in Indy while speaking with Ron Dennis (me, not him). I said "Hello Mr. Walker, very nice to see you here." He didn't even look over at me and I was less than 3 feet away. A legend yes, but when Dennis can speak to you at his peak, you'd think Murray could at least say hello.
03-05-2021, 12:26 PM
though I still wish the car were back to silver & they'd kept the 'constellation' stars over the AMGs.
, whenever I saw the blood red Ferrari F1 cars (Lauda 312T and 312T2, and Prost 641/642) in person they look so right.
