[Team] McLaren - can they compete?

[gert]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

they found nothing wrong other then the obvious and recurring multi season problems i assume.

question though about penalties for the next race...if you stop with an engine/gearbox problem does that result in a reduced penalty for the next race or does it make no difference given they are already over their season allotment?

anyways mixed feeling about if he intentionally parked it or not.

for sure there is an issue if a professional driver just gives up in a race like this but given whats going on with Honda im not sure i find 'intentionally parking' an unsurprising turn of events.

on the other hand, i am more surprised that Honda were so quick to rule out an engine issue and failed to cover for Alonso and Mclaren...seems like ruling out an engine issue will only create more controversy, conspiracy and negative headlines for Honda.

Maybe there was nothing wrong with the engine itself, but that doesn't mean there can't have been something else on the Honda side.

The engine in Q2 wasn't broken either, but still it didn't perform as could have been expected.

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/13...d-alonso-honda

Who knows what else can 'confuse' an engine?

[gert]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

question though about penalties for the next race...if you stop with an engine/gearbox problem does that result in a reduced penalty for the next race or does it make no difference given they are already over their season allotment?

I am not sure what the rules say, but AFAIK Alonso was due to have his own set of penalties for Monza anyway - to avoid having to take penalties in Singapore.
Parking it to avoid penalties would thus have made no sense.

The plan was for Alonso to provide a tow to Vandoorne in Italy, i.e. same as in Spa but the other way around.

[Akrapovic]

I don't think we should be blaming Fernando for FOM focusing on his radios. It's done for entertainment value.

There's an argument to be had that drivers having 65 place grid penalties and absolutely no forward development in 3 years is way more unprofessional than anything Fernando can even dream of. I'm no Fernando fan, but he's put up with a LOT from Honda (and he couldn't even escape when he went over the Atlantic), so I'm not sure I agree with the unprofessional label. If this was something that had happened as a one off, then sure, but it isn't.

He has a car that has so little power that he can take pohuon flat, and the result is the engine doesn't know how to cope with someone driving fast and gets confused. That's another level of incompetence.

[RWill2073]

Originally Posted by gert

I have never heard him say anything bad about the car or the team.
It's always related to the Honda-part, never the McLaren-part.


I am not convinced he 'just parked it'. The team knew he was coming in to park it, they were waiting for him in the pitlane.
If there was nothing wrong, wouldn't they have asked him why? They have lots of telemetry, so I assume they too must have noticed something.

Honda said they didn't find any issue in the engine.
That may be true, but that doesn't exclude
* that they may have failed to find the problem (even it that possibility is slim)
* that there may have been another issue that wasn't engine-related (gearbox?, ....) but caused the engine to not perform like it should

See, this could bring other factors or possibilities into play. Maybe the team appreciates Alonso publicly pointing out Honda's failure. It keeps the team from doing it, and between McLaren complaining publicly or Alonso, Alonso will he given more sympathy or respect by the public, as well as not completely tainting a business partnership. I think Alonso has made it clear he likes the McLaren chassis and has complimented the team plenty. If this embarrasses honda more, then it was a good move to park it. Interesting if it was honda themselves and not McLaren stating that the engine was fine. Could be telling....

[Akrapovic]

Can I point out that according to Honda, Alonso didn't park the car through his own choice.

Honda F1 project chief Yusuke Hasegawa said: "He radioed in with what he thought was a problem with the car, and although there was nothing showing in the data, we decided to stop the car as a precaution".

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/13...-alonso-engine

He reported a problem and was apparently told to stop the car. When you spend every session with the car having some sort of engine problem, you're bound to eventually report something that wasn't actually a problem - it was just the engine being diabolically bad.

Although I wonder what the stopping as a precaution was. If it blows up he might get a 75 place penalty, rather than a 65 place penalty? I don't see what they save by stopping the car in this situation, as it's already a lost cause so you might as well run it till it blows up and see if you can get any data. Stopping early just means you know for a fact you'll get less data.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by gert

Doesn't that count for most drivers, when circumstances don't go their way?

While his radio comments irritate me, it is the parking the car part that really bothers me. So far the evidence is that he parked the car out of aggravation.

Originally Posted by gert

That said, I'm not so sure I like the way these radio messages are transmitted.

It's unfortunate that the transmissions are now part of the media circus, but that is the current situation and drivers have to understand that.

Grosjean for example has commented that he felt he was being targeted by FOM as they broadcast his negative comments. I "think" we have recently heard less from him about brake issues. Did the brake issues get resolved, or did Grosjean wise up change what he is saying or how he says it? Alonso is smart enough to understand this. What I don't know is if he really is just loosing it and doesn't care when he says what he says, or if it is a calculated thing. I tend to think he just loses it because he doesn't act the same way in post race interviews.

If I was to be cynical...

Alonso is just smart enough to know that he has to act correct when directly in front of the media (post race interviews, etc.) but with that the "in the moment" comments, he can be overtly negative. All with the goal of being released from his contract. Which is not a good theory, because I suspect he can just walk away? If he doesn't like the situation just walk away.

Originally Posted by chillibowl

question though about penalties for the next race...if you stop with an engine/gearbox problem does that result in a reduced penalty for the next race or does it make no difference given they are already over their season allotment?

As Gert says... I believe parking it does nothing with respect to penalties. It just reduces the mileage. I doubt saving the engine was Alonso's intent!

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

There's an argument to be had that drivers having 65 place grid penalties and absolutely no forward development in 3 years is way more unprofessional than anything Fernando can even dream of.

Being competent and acting in a professional manner are two different things. Honda has failed, but do continue act professionally. So Honda's technical failure is a green light for unprofessional behaviour by Alonso?

I will say... I think the "cost saving" aspects of using a set number of engines per season is not working well. At the moment, I am all for ditching it because the huge number of grid penalties does nothing positive for anyone. It is supposed to prevent teams from making short lived engines, but in this case, I am sure Honda wants the engine to last. Plus... OMG, lets harp upon how many grid penalties a car has even if the worst that can happen is it starts last on the grid. The race media makes a bigger deal about it than anyone.

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

I'm no Fernando fan, but he's put up with a LOT from Honda (and he couldn't even escape when he went over the Atlantic), so I'm not sure I agree with the unprofessional label. If this was something that had happened as a one off, then sure, but it isn't.

Akra, we agree on a lot. But Alonso can cry me a river with all he has had to "put up with"! His life is so bad!

And regarding Indy... I am repeating what others have said here (can't remember who) about the Indy engine (and its propensity for not lasting). d I believe Honda had asked the teams that they can have good reliability or the best power. Pick one. The teams told Honda power. And what engine won Indy this year? Oh, yeah, a Honda.

Richard

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Can I point out that according to Honda, Alonso didn't park the car through his own choice.



https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/13...-alonso-engine

He reported a problem and was apparently told to stop the car. When you spend every session with the car having some sort of engine problem, you're bound to eventually report something that wasn't actually a problem - it was just the engine being diabolically bad.

It would be interesting to hear the radio calls and timing, but I do believe typically teams will try to diagnose and talk to the driver vs. agreeing to a straight up retirement. Especially if they don't see data showing issues and it is not a driver complaining about a safety issue (i.e. loose belt or something). A good example is Kimi talking about rear vibrations this weekend.

For Alonso...

1. I think he was out of the points at that point. So nothing is lost by agreeing with him.
2. Honda/McLaren very much want to retain Alonso. So why argue with him on the radio if he has done nothing but complain during the race? What was to be gained by telling him the car is fine and asking him stay out. It wouldn't gain points and would likely just result in Alonso providing a new stream of comments about lack of power and how much of a joke the engine is!

I have posted a number of times about this today. I probably sound like I am more upset than I am. I actually am not upset. Just slightly irritated. Mostly because I "want" to be a fan of Alonso right now, but I am having a hard time. He is letting me down.

Richard

[P38 in workshop]

If its true that he collects 40 million euros a year for parking a McLaren once every couple of weeks,I would park one every day for the same money.Should I call Woking?

[Akrapovic]

I'd argue that at this sort of high level, competency and professionalism are heavily linked. If you are not competent then it's very hard to act professional. With drivers it's quite easy to find an exactly of this - Yuji Ide was not competent. As a result he was completely unprofessional on the track, in that he fell well below the standards expect of a professional driver.

I personally don't see the difference with engines. The results that Honda have produced as an engineering team, suggest that as a team, they are not competent. The individuals certainly will be, but the engineering team are not, as you can only judge competence on the results. The results they have fall well below what you'd expect of professionals.

I know not everybody will agree, but I believe professionalism extends far beyond the sense of "acting" professional and you must perform professionally too. I realise I might be the odd one out in thinking that, but it is just my opinion.

I don't see who has anything to gain in this relationship anymore. Honda shouldn't want to keep Alonso, as he's clearly unhappy with them. Alonso obviously doesn't want to stay and Zak Brown is pulling all sorts of weird deals out of his buttocks, including an Indy 500 run, to keep him in the car. The only person winning from this (whilst still losing) is Zak Brown, as he's managing to turn even the worlds worst results into some good PR. That's pretty impressive!

It is an amusing anecdote about IndyCar Honda having to choose power or reliability. For Honda (although maybe not the individual teams), it does make sense to choose power as they win on a pure numbers game. They do enter much more cars than the Chevy teams. Meanwhile, Chevy sit 1-3-4-5 in the championship, with a lot more wins. Honda may have won the big race, but they did blow up more motors to do it, and the championship suggests the Chevy is a better engine all round.

I assume Honda are doing ok in SuperGT, but the last HPD AXR was a bit of a dog too. Will be interesting to see how the AXR-05 does.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

I'd argue that at this sort of high level, competency and professionalism are heavily linked.

I would argue the opposite. These (and the similar WEC hybrids engines by Audi, Toyota and Porsche) push the envelope with respect to piston engine and hybrid efficiency. Producing these engines is not easy for some of the largest engine manufactures on the planet. People here tend to act as if it is. Honda has absolutely screwed up and generally their issues are self inflicted. But are not "incompetent" (I am sure many will disagree with me). What they are IMHO is... "unsuccessful". Particularly in a spectacular way! It is unlikely that everyone involved is going to produce an equally good power unit. If Honda was to overall Renault from a performance and reliability perspective (not out of the question), does Renault suddenly become incompetent and then by extension unprofessional? No.

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

If you are not competent then it's very hard to act professional. With drivers it's quite easy to find an exactly of this - Yuji Ide was not competent. As a result he was completely unprofessional on the track, in that he fell well below the standards expect of a professional driver.

I get your point, but if you look at a few definitions of "unprofessional" it also easily matches Alonso's behaviour.

* Below or contrary to the standards expected in a particular profession.
* Not exhibiting a courteous, conscientious, or generally businesslike manner in the workplace
* Not showing the standard of behavior or skills that are expected of a person in a skilled job

Beyond having technical skill (your Ide example), Alonso is a paid driver who has sponsorship responsibilities. You can't argue he is executing on that part of his job!

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

I personally don't see the difference with engines. The results that Honda have produced as an engineering team, suggest that as a team, they are not competent. The individuals certainly will be, but the engineering team are not, as you can only judge competence on the results. The results they have fall well below what you'd expect of professionals.

See my comments above.

Richard

[Akrapovic]

Oh you make some very good points (a really brought a smile to my face reading that one! ) now I'm not sure where I stand. Where do you draw the line between unsuccessful and unprofessional. Alonso certainly fits that definition at times.

Does unsuccessful become unprofessional when it reaches a certain degree? And who gets to decide that degree? I suppose (controversially) Fernando would as he's the one using the product so one of only two people who can actually judge it through using it. But then if Alonso is being unprofessional then is he fairly judging it?

It'd be easier if we just went back to V12s. Everyone can build those.

[chillibowl]

in fairness, Honda have missed publicly stated targets for upgrades, including a 'Spec 4' engine for this race...certainly, in addition to being unsuccessful, missing a deadline is unprofessional as well no?

missing all of their target dates could even be described as incompetent.

[greentrumpet]

Do Honda still pick up the tab for the drivers' wages?

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Does unsuccessful become unprofessional when it reaches a certain degree? And who gets to decide that degree?

It is a spectator sport. With us armchair team owners who get to decide!

I don't think there is an objective way to solve this type of puzzle. But you hit upon what I think is a good point below...

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

It'd be easier if we just went back to V12s. Everyone can build those.

I think lack of success can be labeled unprofessional when the desired goal is clearly achievable (technical expertise, budget and realistic timeline is in place), and the final result under delivers. Let's say the engine formula was relaxed and we were back to something like the prior non-hybrid V8, V10 or even V12 engines you mention. In the grand scheme, those engines are not complex and a known quantity when it comes to what is needed to succeed (1 + 1 = 2 type of stuff. Not much if any "secret sauce").

Someone like Honda should be able to produce a competitive, maybe not top of the heap, but competitive engine right away in the first season. Matched with a good chassis and driver, it would win races. Would failing to do so be unprofessional? Maybe? It would be unexpected that is for sure!

If you look back at recent history to find an example of this in F1, the first thing that comes to mind is the Footworks Porsche engine. It was a failure and by my definition above should fit into the "unprofessional" category. That engine was designed by Hans Mezger who was a long time engine guy at Porsche and who also did the famous and successful Porsche TAG F1 engine. He was good at what he did.

I read his autobiography a few years ago and he talked about that project. I can't remember what the deal was (will need to pull that book when I get home tonight and look over that chapter again), but he obviously had painful memories of that project and listed various reasons why it worked out badly plus that they had a revised solution, but it was not accepted (I can't remember if it was lack of funding, lack of trust in Porsche at that time, or both). My point is that he knew what he was doing and it all went south anyhow. What is unprofessional of Porsche? I can't say. It was a surprising outcome.

Richard

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

in fairness, Honda have missed publicly stated targets for upgrades, including a 'Spec 4' engine for this race...certainly, in addition to being unsuccessful, missing a deadline is unprofessional as well no?

missing all of their target dates could even be described as incompetent.

I could be wrong, but did Honda say they would have Spec 4 at Spa, or was that media speculation? I think they said they would have Spec 4 if reliability proved to be correct and that what was provided was a spec 3.5 and/or 3.6 (I visit another F1 forum and people very obsess on the meaning and accuracy of spec numbering!)

But your point about missing targets stands. I am sure Honda didn't think they would be where they are now when they started this project and I am sure McLaren has been promised more than has been delivered.

Richard

[ASCII Man]

Honda didn't manage to get the spec 4 engines to Spa.

[GTRMagic]

Doesn't a DNF get MrAlonso a free gearbox change?
And given the Honda lump's liking of blowing up, maybe keeping the miles off it for the next GP has some merit.

[F1Guy]

Is there an essay competition in here or something?? Who can type the most words wins??


I tend to skip any posts that have more than a few lines. CBF'd reading it all.

[Greem]

It's not Twitter, you know.

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by F1Guy

Is there an essay competition in here or something?? Who can type the most words wins??


I tend to skip any posts that have more than a few lines. CBF'd reading it all.

Long posts that make sense are most welcome..

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by F1Guy

Is there an essay competition in here or something?? Who can type the most words wins??


I tend to skip any posts that have more than a few lines. CBF'd reading it all.

That's ok, I will still read your posts.

Richard

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

But If you look back at recent history to find an example of this in F1, the first thing that comes to mind is the Footworks Porsche engine. It was a failure and by my definition above should fit into the "unprofessional" category. That engine was designed by Hans Mezger who was a long time engine guy at Porsche and who also did the famous and successful Porsche TAG F1 engine. He was good at what he did.

I read his autobiography a few years ago and he talked about that project. I can't remember what the deal was (will need to pull that book when I get home tonight and look over that chapter again), but he obviously had painful memories of that project and listed various reasons why it worked out badly plus that they had a revised solution, but it was not accepted (I can't remember if it was lack of funding, lack of trust in Porsche at that time, or both). My point is that he knew what he was doing and it all went south anyhow. What is unprofessional of Porsche? I can't say. It was a surprising outcome.

Just to close this slight off topic post, I looked in his autobiography for his comments on the Arrows engine. In short, it lacked development. They went from a paper design to physical engine quick. Also the prior F1 team had been broken up so they had lost experienced resources. With more development it would have produced the needed power. Regarding the oft mentioned issues with overweight engine, he said that is exaggerated. That the target was the cosworth v8 with ancillaries installed. And they were within a handful of Kg of that target. That the initial block casting was heavier than expected/predicted (walls thicker than design spec) and a recast would have met the target.

Overall, the quick design, lack of development and prior F1 experience having been dissipated with the organization seems very similar to Honda.

Richard

[S griffin]

So it's been exaggerated that he parked a healthy car, they parked a healthy car as a precaution to his concerns about a problem with his car

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Greem

It's not Twitter, you know.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by F1Guy

Is there an essay competition in here or something?? Who can type the most words wins??


I tend to skip any posts that have more than a few lines. CBF'd reading it all.

I personally think the long posts are the best! There's some people here I wish would make longer posts as I'd like to hear more of their opinions!

Still not sure how I feel about Fernando vs Honda with the professionalism after Richards post either. I think I've become too entertained by Alonso to criticise him, which isn't a good stance to have.