Magazines Autosnort 21st December

woodyracing · 21 Dec 2006, 23:28 (Ref:1797223)

was it out today (thursday) ? i cant find it anywhere

tried 3 places already that usually have it. is there any reason its sold out so quick ?
i never saw the Schumacher issue either, just after he announced his retirement. maybe i should subscribe and get an alonso car

MikeHoyer · 22 Dec 2006, 00:50 (Ref:1797267)

I subscribe and I haven't had it yet. It wasn't in Asda either. I guess it's just a distribution delay.

rdjones · 22 Dec 2006, 08:46 (Ref:1797420)

It was double issue last week, so no Autosport this week, but it is back next week with another double issue.

redshoes · 22 Dec 2006, 08:46 (Ref:1797421)

The answer was on the cover last week's 'Double Christmas' issue, dated Dec 14/21 2006.

woodyracing · 22 Dec 2006, 10:26 (Ref:1797481)

ah right thanks, I didnt buy that one

***Chris Y*** · 22 Dec 2006, 16:21 (Ref:1797789)

Just got an Autosport delivered today. Dated December 28th

MikeHoyer · 22 Dec 2006, 17:06 (Ref:1797810)

I thought that they did that actually... Did a Christmas issue, then one more normal sized one just before Christmas. Not much going on between Christmas and New Year after all!

Looks like I'll have to wait for mine though, as there's nothing in Asda again, or in my letterbox!

redshoes · 22 Dec 2006, 17:34 (Ref:1797820)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Y

Just got an Autosport delivered today. Dated December 28th

Has it got the results of the Boxing Day meeting at Mallory. I want to know if it's worth going.

**touringlegend** · 22 Dec 2006, 20:47 (Ref:1797937)

I usually get the post Christmas issue this week, but not yet.

I didn't get last weeks till Monday. Strangely, I never missed it...

redshoes · 23 Dec 2006, 10:05 (Ref:1798186)

Got my 28th Dec issue this morning. It seems that after the double issue last week there must be a paper shortage. At least I this time I didn't have to skip past pages of F1 news.

zac510 · 23 Dec 2006, 10:21 (Ref:1798198)

I heard a rumour that a few weeks ago there was actually a cover without an F1 personality on it? I was out of the country and must have missed this rare event!

**Adam43** · 23 Dec 2006, 11:20 (Ref:1798238)

You are right it was a rare issue. Even rarer as nobody bought it!

My 28th December copy has just landed on the mat.

**touringlegend** · 23 Dec 2006, 12:08 (Ref:1798264)

Sorry to be picky, again! but they still had to get schumacher's name on the cover....

Mine has dropped in this morning, quick flick through and there seems to be quite a few good reads in there.

Knowlesy · 25 Dec 2006, 23:00 (Ref:1799184)

Quite enjoyed the last two Autosports actually. The double issue is usually decent (lot's of Roebuck and Hughes!) and this weeks had some good articles about Clay and Brock. The 905 feature was hideously dull, sadly.

**Adam43** · 26 Dec 2006, 19:55 (Ref:1799507)

Quote:

Originally Posted by touringlegend

Sorry to be picky, again! but they still had to get schumacher's name on the cover....

Yeah Andy thought that was great to be compared to him.

**Adam43** · 26 Dec 2006, 19:58 (Ref:1799508)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

...and Hughes!

I thought we'd get an appendix where he clarified the source of the "fuel corrected lap" with confidence levels and if and how the coefficients changed for car/track/temperature.

Quote:

The 905 feature was hideously dull, sadly.

I liked it, but can't work out why Blundell was so surprised the 905 started on the button after the race; it restarted fine after every pitstop.

woodyracing · 26 Dec 2006, 22:06 (Ref:1799566)

ok we didnt get a 21st Issue, people have been getting 28th issue on the 22/23, wonder what issue will be out on the 28th

Knowlesy · 26 Dec 2006, 23:30 (Ref:1799614)

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdamAshmore

I thought we'd get an appendix where he clarified the source of the "fuel corrected lap" with confidence levels and if and how the coefficients changed for car/track/temperature.

A big fan then?

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdamAshmore

I liked it, but can't work out why Blundell was so surprised the 905 started on the button after the race; it restarted fine after every pitstop.

It was a good laugh apparently.

No, I couldn't believe the stupidity of that comment either.

**John Turner** · 27 Dec 2006, 10:17 (Ref:1799805)

Quote:

Originally Posted by woodyracing

ok we didnt get a 21st Issue, people have been getting 28th issue on the 22/23, wonder what issue will be out on the 28th

Yes, we did; please see 'redshoes' post of 22 December! The 14th December issue was the Christmas double issue as the front cover tells you and therefore includes the 21st December issue. Those of you who received (I didn't) your 28 December early, are the lucky ones, as I suspect that they shouldn't have been sent out by the printers until today, for delivery tomorrow.

woodyracing · 27 Dec 2006, 10:24 (Ref:1799806)

yes that is what i meant, there wasn't a seperate 21st issue

**Adam43** · 27 Dec 2006, 14:20 (Ref:1799924)

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Turner

...they shouldn't have been sent out by the printers until today, for delivery tomorrow.

They don't seem to mind as each year it comes early. The post is not as predictable over Christmas so they send them out as early as they are printed. It is only the shops that don't receive them until the 28th.

Although that doesn't explain why I haven't got my 21st December issue

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

A big fan then?

No he is alright, but I find it a little worrying that these adjustments are treated as pure fact. He should write papers on global warming. Autosport and global warming aside any claims like that which haven't been clarified would lead to a journal immediately rejecting the article.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

It was a good laugh apparently.

Ha!

Knowlesy · 27 Dec 2006, 20:19 (Ref:1800048)

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdamAshmore

No he is alright, but I find it a little worrying that these adjustments are treated as pure fact. He should write papers on global warming. Autosport and global warming aside any claims like that which haven't been clarified would lead to a journal immediately rejecting the article.

It is true, these are annoying indeed. Things like "Montoya would have been on pole at Bahrain with fuel adjustment" simply cannot be stated as straightforward obvious fact. It takes nothing into account at all.

Ignore those things though, and I think he's pretty good. I still hanker for Roebuck to do GP reports and suchlike though!

**John Turner** · 28 Dec 2006, 10:11 (Ref:1800324)

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdamAshmore

It is only the shops that don't receive them until the 28th.

Well, I'm not a shop and mine came this morning!

**Adam43** · 28 Dec 2006, 11:10 (Ref:1800378)

At least your postman has read up on the latest in motorsport!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

It is true, these are annoying indeed. Things like "Montoya would have been on pole at Bahrain with fuel adjustment" simply cannot be stated as straightforward obvious fact. It takes nothing into account at all.

If he did what is required when doing any calculation (i.e. assess and quote the errors) then he might be able to write such things and justify it. Except he doesn't and each instance is given the same weight. In practice the reader just accepts it, however what they should do is dismiss it as a unreliable.

An article on the assumptions he makes, the source of his data and the analysis he does would help give his articles weight. If he does this just once, or perhaps makes the raw data available on autosport.com then that would be fine. I do not expect each article to go into great depth everytime.

Does the analysis of the the data just looking at practice laps? Is it from previous testing? Does he have a source at the teams that fill in some of this for him? Does he use the same coefficient for each driver/team, or does he do analysis for each competitor? Does weather, overall wieght, set-up, car, tyres effect the coeffiecent. Does each car use the same fuel on each lap, is it significantly more on a Q lap? Possibly these things can be assumed to have a minimal effect, but how much work has he done to justify this? All of these things may mean that when they calculate a gain in lap time per lap worth of fuel there should be a significant error on it.

Quote:

Ignore those things though, and I think he's pretty good. I still hanker for Roebuck to do GP reports and suchlike though!

Yeah ignoring that and I am finding him good. I have just about got over the first and last paragraph thing he does too (he has got over it a little himself)!

Still Roebuck for GP reports would be spot on. Especially if it allows Hughes to put more effort into these coefficients.

woodyracing · 28 Dec 2006, 15:05 (Ref:1800588)

finally got the 28th December issue before it sold out

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Brands on 21st	Dan Friel	Marshals Forum	4	14 Nov 2004 20:43
Who Will be the 21st Driver?	SurfaceUnits	ChampCar World Series	4	1 Apr 2004 08:29
Westies December get together	Les	Trackside	12	6 Sep 2002 19:04