Ferrari F2012 (pre-launch speculation)

[gridwalker]

I thought that this was supposed to be a technical thread about the 2012 Ferrari? Why has it turned into a dispute about degrees?

Because tempers always get a bit frayed in the off-season : even this brief hiatus (compared to the old 16 race season) is enough to trigger withdrawal symptoms

[munudeges]

Probably trying to work who is doing what with the car, and who is ultimately responsible.

I must admit I'm confused. You've got someone with a strong background in aerodynamics who isn't head of aerodynamics and hasn't really been responsible for aerodynamics there at all from what we can tell, the team has been through several heads of aerodynamics, a former engineer has come back on a purely part-time consultant basis who appears to be calling the shots, all with a technical director who isn't called a technical director. Of course it might all work, but who takes responsibility if it doesn't?

[italian]

but who takes responsibility if it doesn't?

I think Stefano Domenicali will probably take responsability, he's the DS.

[Gerhard Berger]

Probably trying to work who is doing what with the car, and who is ultimately responsible.

I must admit I'm confused. You've got someone with a strong background in aerodynamics who isn't head of aerodynamics and hasn't really been responsible for aerodynamics there at all from what we can tell, the team has been through several heads of aerodynamics, a former engineer has come back on a purely part-time consultant basis who appears to be calling the shots, all with a technical director who isn't called a technical director. Of course it might all work, but who takes responsibility if it doesn't?

I assume the someone with a strong background in aero that you're talking about is a reference to Tombazis. AFAIK, he was the deputy to Willem Toet when he first joined Ferrari in 97. Toet left at the end of 98 and Tombazis took over his role of chief aerodynamicist. I think moving from chief aero, to chief designer (and then technical) is the natural progression one would want to take.

In terms of who's calling the shots - Domenicalli, Fry and Tombazis. If Ferrari fail to produce a championship challenging car, then these guys will be in the firing line (IMO).

[italian]

I think that if they try lots of innovative solutions but not working fine, these men will risk nothing.

[CHT]

I think that if they try lots of innovative solutions but not working fine, these men will risk nothing.

When a team have to take big risks it usually mean they have a lot to catch up. so it will be a case of either make or break for Ferrari in 2012

regardless if they succeed or not.I think it will be all good for F1 as long as it doesnt bring politics in to it.

[italian]

it doesnt bring politics in to it.

Are you referring to The President of Ferarri, don't you?
I'm a fan of Ferrari but I think that sport and policy are two different thinghs and they must be separated.

[CHT]

it doesnt bring politics in to it.

Are you referring to The President of Ferarri, don't you?
I'm a fan of Ferrari but I think that sport and policy are two different thinghs and they must be separated.

Ferrari will always be Ferrari. Ferrari can only exist as long as they have a flamboyant president that appeal to their fans.

However when you are running an organization where you need to attract talents from across the globe to deliver the results, you will need someone with good management skill rather than passion.

[italian]

I agree with you only in part, we've to have passion for doing right everythingh. I don't want an economic manager as president, like in FIAT.

[Crucial_Xtreme]

Transcript of interview with Rory Byrne regarding the Scuderia Ferrari 2012 car. As some sources have been saying for months, Byrne has been heavily involved with the development of the new car although "Officially" they claim he's basically just working with GT & road cars. Let's hope he's right. Sounds like Fry might have a winning car on his hands!!

http://twextra.com/aq8djd

[wesley123]

Can I remind you something guys?

The last time they spoke about their car like this and went with radical concepts their car became a failure(F92A).

[Holm86]

Can I remind you something guys?

The last time they spoke about their car like this and went with radical concepts their car became a failure(F92A).

So?

They last time they took a very conservative way of design their cars became failures. F60, F10 150° Italia was failures ...

So what other way would you take?? No mater what route you take you take a chance.

[Hemsy]

There is a difference between going radical and aggressive. Radical means coming up with something that no other team has thought of. I'm sure Ferrari mean aggressive which means that they'll be pushing the envelope in every area of car design.

[hardingfv32]

1) "Radical and aggressive" are meaningless without an understanding of EACH person's baseline who is using these words. You guys are just generating meaningless chatter, which I guess is all you can do until the new cars hit the track. If you must, why don't you set standards for "radical and aggressive".

2) The fact is we have very little understanding of the designs of last years cars. We only know what we can see, mostly aero, and then we are far from aero experts to even access that. All we know is the relative performance with other cars.

Brian

[PlatinumZealot]

Radical means far apart from the usual.

Aggressive in a engineering sense means repeatedly done till you get results, trying different things at a rapid pace or pushed to the limits of some rule or regulation.

The two words Could be very well applied to our imaginations...