Norbert Haug has the ‘F-duct’ debate around by admitting he questions the exhaust solution featured on this year’s McLaren car.

Some teams – notably Red Bull, Lotus and Ferrari – have complained loudly about the W03′s aerodynamic configuration, arguing the F-duct ban completely ruled out similar systems that are triggered by a driver’s movement.

Mercedes argues that its new F-duct is entirely passive and is triggered not by the driver but by the activation of the ‘DRS’ rear wing system.

So far, the FIA agrees, but it has led to suggestions Mercedes is only performing in qualifying because of its questionable F-duct, before struggling in the race when DRS use is much more limited.

“We have to live with that,” Mercedes’ motor racing chief Haug is quoted by Sport Bild, “until we are faster in the race, but it’s not true that we do not have a good car.

“We are a serious team that has to pretend nothing; we have prepared well in winter testing.”

Team boss Ross Brawn said recently he suspects all the fuss about Mercedes’ F-duct is a diversion when it comes to the exhaust solutions taken by some of his rivals in the wake of the blown diffuser clampdown.

Haug agrees that championship leader McLaren’s solution, for example, is “probably not what they (the FIA) had in mind when the blown diffuser was banned”.

But he also said Mercedes is not threatening to protest the “clever” British team.

“It is quite legitimate that we ask the FIA for a clarification, otherwise we could be missing a trick.

“It’s part of the game,” he explains.

Lotus has overcome a serious chassis flaw to lead the field as the final pre-season test began at Barcelona.
The former Renault team had to sit out last week’s running at the Circuit de Catalunya as designers grappled to fix a problem with the front suspension mounting.

“The mounting of the suspension is now the strongest part of the car,” an unnamed team member is quoted by SID news agency.

At the end of his return to action on Thursday, Romain Grosjean was quoted by France’s Auto Plus: “It (the E20) feels the same, there’s not much difference really.”

Indeed, the revised car is 1 kilogram heavier, but the biggest issue is the four lost days of testing, which after an FIA clarification cannot now be made up.

“To miss four days is not ideal as suddenly we have to try to work twice as hard to catch up,” continued Grosjean.

“It’s true that it’s not great, but it’s not as problematic as it might have been.”

He is referring to the fact that, so far, the Lotus appears intrinsically fast.

Asked if the E20 felt as good around Barcelona’s demanding layout as it had at Jerez last month, the reigning GP champion enthused: “Yes, exactly the same.

“You can trust the car, push it, play with it.

“You can attack, and if you attack too much, you know what will happen — if you have understeer, you know that by attacking less, you’ll have less understeer.

“On this aspect, the car is very good.”

1982 world champion Keke Rosberg told the Finnish broadcaster MTV3 that while the Lotus looks as good in Barcelona as it had at Jerez, it is still not clear if it will be able to compete against F1′s regular top teams.

Auto Motor und Sport quotes Grosjean as saying: “I think there are a couple of teams ahead of us — Red Bull and McLaren look very strong.

“Behind them, it’s a lot closer than it was before.”

However, amid F1′s now extremely limited track testing regime, there is no ignoring the four lost days of running.

Asked if he is ready for 2012, Grosjean said according to Finland’s Turun Sanomat: “I have to be.

“Of course, the more time you have with your car, the better you feel. However, it is what it is.

“We have this four days prior to Melbourne and that’s better than nothing,” he added.

* Caterham had to replace Heikki Kovalainen with his teammate Vitaly Petrov on Thursday, as the Finn recovered at his nearby hotel with food poisoning.

An audit by a company called Capgemini has found “discrepancies” in relation to Red Bull’s budget in the context of last year’s resource restriction agreement.
That is the claim of Italian magazine Autosprint, as Red Bull’s Sebastian Vettel travels to Singapore where he can wrap up his second consecutive championship this weekend.

Earlier this year, boss Christian Horner denied claims the team flouted the FOTA-governed cost savings agreement by as much as EUR 60 million in 2010.

Autosprint said the suspicion is that Red Bull broke the agreement by filing contentious information about its structure and workforce.

The magazine cited “sources” in claiming Red Bull figures have attempted to stop the Capgemini audit because it is an “invasion of privacy” requiring the release of “sensitive data”.

The report said the teams association FOTA, headed by McLaren’s Martin Whitmarsh, wants a “clarification” at a meeting this week even though “at the moment there is no mention of any penalties”.

Autosprint also questioned the timing of the emergence of the Capgemini story, given that Red Bull is on the cusp of securing both the drivers’ and constructors’ world championships for the second season running.

A vague regulation was cleared up at Silverstone after Lewis Hamilton and Mark Webber were summoned by the stewards.
The pair were seen using their ‘DRS’ adjustable rear wings during rainy Friday practice, even though the innovation cannot be used on a wet track.

But McLaren, testing a new rear wing configuration ahead of the British grand prix, exploited a loophole in the rules that makes no mention of DRS being banned when the car is fitted with slick tyres.

“The stewards just wanted to understand so that they could tighten the wording of the regulations for the next race,” Hamilton confirmed.

The stewards, including 1992 world champion Nigel Mansell, took no action against the 2008 world champion or Red Bull’s Webber.

Toyota has called off a technical collaboration with the struggling Spanish F1 team HRT.

We reported at the weekend that an announcement about HRT and Cologne based Toyota Motorsport GmbH (TMG) would be made on Monday.

The news that was expected was a technical and support tie-up for the 2011 season, including use of the car that was designed and built by Toyota late in 2009 but never raced.

But in fact, Toyota confirmed that the collaboration “has been terminated and will not resume”.

“TMG regrets that HRT has not met its contractual payment obligations and will pursue all available options to reach a satisfactory conclusion to this matter,” read a statement.

HRT, having recently concluded a deal with Williams to use the British team’s gearbox next year, responded: “Hispania Racing is very surprised about Toyota’s press statement … and this matter will be a subject of further clarification.”

The team’s technical boss Geoff Willis told the BBC: “There will be no comment until (there are) explanations from (boss) Dr (Colin) Kolles and the (team owners) Carabantes.”

McLaren team figures believe the recent flexible bodywork saga will have taken the shine off Red Bull’s earlier dominance.

At F1′s last outings in Spa and Monza, where new FIA compliance tests came into effect, the RB6 was no longer the stand-out dominant package it had been at earlier events.

But Red Bull already expected to struggle at those high speed circuits, due to its less powerful Renault engines.

In light of the team’s dominance on twisty tracks like Monaco and Hungary, therefore, this weekend’s racing on the Singapore street circuit might be seen as a litmus test of the true effects of the FIA’s flexibility clampdown.

“I think a lot has changed since that race in Budapest — not least, some quite hefty revisions to the rulebook regarding bodywork flexibility,” said Jenson Button.

Team boss Martin Whitmarsh agreed: “Singapore is likely to give us a much clearer idea of the respective pace of the leading teams after two less-representative events in Belgium and Italy.”

Chief race engineer Phil Prew is also hoping Red Bull will be closer to the rest of the field in Singapore this weekend.

“The legality clarification and changes that we’ve all made in response to that could well influence it (the pecking order),” he said during Wednesday’s Vodafone phone media conference.

“We’re optimistic that the gap, which was massive by formula one standards, should well have reduced,” added Prew.

He said he now feels all the teams are racing on a level playing field.

“The advantage that was felt to be gained by Red Bull and Ferrari in Hungary will be harder to exploit,” confirmed Prew.

Interviewed today for “Corriere della Sera,” Niki Lauda denied having made the comments published on formula1.com that had woken the Horse Whisperer in its silent lair.

Informed of the clarification, the Whisperer had this to say: “I am very pleased Niki has denied making these statements: it shows that fresh air is really good for you!”

Source: Ferrari

Italy’s motor racing sanctioning body has backed Ferrari’s raging complaint about the outcome of the European grand prix.

Maranello based Ferrari has argued loudly that the credibility of the sport is at risk after Lewis Hamilton overtook the safety car in Valencia but still managed to finish the race on the podium.

The Italian team is also critical that penalties against 9 drivers for speeding during the safety car period did not promote Fernando Alonso higher than just eighth place.

“The success of a sport is measured by its ability to be credible and above all understandable to the general public,” said CSAI (Commissione Sportiva Automobilistica Italiana) president Angelo Sticchi Damiani in an Italian-language statement.

“What happened on Sunday … damages the credibility of the category; I don’t think anyone, whether in the grandstands or in front of televisions around the world understand what has happened,” he added.

“Drivers who pass the safety car came to the podium.  Others, taking advantage of the same situation, also had an advantage over their rivals.

“But others – those who respected the rules – were the victims.

“Perhaps some of the regulations about behaviour in formula one must be investigated and evolved so that they do not create more uncertainty and confusion.”

Italian reports also quoted Sticchi Damiani as saying CSAI’s support of Ferrari is not “to be controversial, but (to be) constructive”.

“We would like clarification about the penalties … and on what criteria they were given,” he added, suspecting that a “degree of subjectivity” was applied.

(GMM)

Meetings have been arranged to address the issues that arose after Sunday’s European grand prix.

Fernando Alonso and Ferrari were furious when a mere and late drive-through penalty for Lewis Hamilton’s safety car overtaking in Valencia still allowed the McLaren driver to finish second.

But also unhappy were several of the nine drivers given 5 second time penalties for driving too quickly during the same safety car period.

“Vitaly (Petrov) came in too quickly and we accept the penalty for him, but it’s hard to understand Robert (Kubica)’s penalty,” said Renault’s chief engineer Alan Permane.

Also seeking clarification is Mercedes, after Michael Schumacher found a red light at the end of the pitlane despite the fact a line of traffic was not yet formed up behind the safety car.

“There was a green light for a moment and then suddenly it went red again.  We believe that this was not correct,” said Michael Schumacher.

Alonso wrote on his Ferrari blog: “I was pleased to hear that the FIA has reacted promptly, calling an extraordinary meeting of the Sporting Working Group and I am confident, certain even, that all the points up for discussion will be cleared up in a comprehensive fashion.”

It is understood the meeting will be held next week.

Moreover, Mercedes’ Ross Brawn told Germany’s Auto Motor und Sport that the issues will be discussed by the team bosses at Silverstone next Wednesday.

“There are too many unanswered questions that can be interpreted either way,” he said.

(GMM)

Red Bull’s Christian Horner this weekend accused a “naughty” Ferrari of breaching the “spirit” of the agreement by testing its new exhaust layout at Fiorano last week.

Ferrari argues that the run was allowed because “filming and promotional” activities were taking place, and FOTA chairman Martin Whitmarsh on Saturday said the teams association will react.

“I didn’t think they (the rules) needed clarification, but for some they clearly do,” he said.

“It isn’t ambiguous in my English interpretation of it, but others obviously thought it was.

“That’s why we have to remove that ambiguity, and I think we are going to do the correct and honourable thing.”

Whitmarsh made clear that, like Ferrari, teams including Mercedes and Renault have also made “some arguable decisions” with regards to the rules about in-season testing.

“Once one does it then everybody feels ‘well, if that’s how you are going to interpret something, then I’ll push it to the limit’,” said the Briton.

He made clear that when McLaren tries its Red Bull-like exhaust layout next week, it will do so with one of its allocation of straightline test days.

Whitmarsh also thinks it is time F1 relaxed its approach to in-season testing.

“We had to take significant measures given the crisis involving the economy and formula one,” he said.

“I think now, as we can see signs of the economy improving, we can go back to testing.”

Jun.13 (GMM)  F1′s governing body has issued a rule clarification after Lewis Hamilton was penalised and reprimanded for an incident at the end of qualifying in Montreal.

The McLaren pole sitter was fined $10,000 after driving too slowly on his Q3 in-lap and then stopping on the circuit, so that enough fuel was left in the tank for a sample to be tested by the FIA.

Not everyone was happy with the British team’s actions.

“I don’t know all the details so it’s hard to comment,” Mercedes team boss and FOTA technical chairman Ross Brawn is quoted as saying in Canada.

“But we must not come to a situation where cars run out of fuel after their last lap because they want to be running as light as possible.”

According to Germany’s Auto Motor und Sport, the situation was discussed on Sunday during a meeting of team bosses and the race director Charlie Whiting.

Whiting reportedly clarified that, in future, any car that runs out of fuel at the end of qualifying will be summoned to the stewards, risking penalties if the reason for the stoppage is not ‘force majeure’.

Jun.8 (GMM)  Franz Tost believes F1 teams should still be able to run a ‘customer car’ acquired from active competitors.

Since the Faenza based team was sold by Minardi in 2005, and until last year, Toro Rosso raced a chassis based on the car fielded by sister team Red Bull Racing.

But in 2010, due to a rule clarification, the team had to build up its Italian base and staff in order to design and construct its own car, the current Ferrari-powered STR5.

“Nevertheless, I am of the opinion that this rule is wrong,” team boss Tost is quoted in the latest edition of Auto Bild Motorsport.

“With an intensive collaboration between two teams, you could cut the budget in half,” adding that the lower half of the grid would also be more competitive.

However, Tost is also happy with the current situation, with Red Bull owning and operating two separate teams.

“It works perfectly: Red Bull going for the world championship, and Toro Rosso working with the next generation.

“Our current drivers Sebastien Buemi and Jamie Alguersuari are on the right track and have great futures,” added the Austrian.

Tost also thinks team owner Dietrich Mateschitz is happy.

“At the moment I don’t see any signs of a sale.  In the (finance company) Money Service Group from Liechtenstein we also have our first own sponsor,” he said.

The FIA’s rule clarification about adjustable ride-height mechanisms has no impact on Red Bull, boss Christian Horner and designer Adrian Newey insist.
Race winner Sebastian Vettel (GER) Red Bull Racing RB6 Formula One World Championship, Rd 3, Malaysian Grand Prix, Race, Sepang,

Race winner Sebastian Vettel drives into parc ferme after winning the Malaysian GP

Following speculation that the ride-height of the RB6 car is somehow being altered between qualifying and the race, the governing body said last week that such a system would theoretically be a breach of the regulations.

But Horner says the FIA is “completely happy” with the car after detailed inspections, adding that it will be transported to China in an identical mechanical specification to the one raced to first and second places in Malaysia.

And Newey told Germany’s Auto Motor und Sport: “We have neither an illegal, automatic system, nor a legal one like Ferrari’s which allows an adjustment at the pitstops.”
Adrian Newey (GBR) Red Bull Racing Chief Technical Officer with with Sebastian Vettel (GER) Red Bull Racing RB6. Formula One World Championship, Rd 2, Australian Grand Prix, Preparations, Albert Park, Melbourne,

Adrian Newey examines the RB6 cockpit with Sebastian Vettel

However, it also emerges that while Horner said recently he would welcome an FIA rule-tweak to legalise a ride-height change between qualifying and the race, Red Bull actually voted against the proposal.

Auto Motor und Sport said a second team also vetoed the rule change.

But the reason for Red Bull’s veto reportedly has nothing to do with a secret system aboard the RB6, but instead the fact that its design is more efficient than its rivals with both high and low ride-heights.

The team’s German driver Sebastian Vettel told Sport Bild magazine: “It is always the case in formula one that the fastest cars are observed closely by the competition.

“There is always speculation and it’s actually a compliment, because it shows that we are feared,” the 22-year-old added.

There are hundreds of brands of infants formula in the market today. Many of them promise more nutritional additives, while some of them often claim that they are the best substitute for breast milk. Many consumers, especially new mothers, were enticed by the advertisement of these baby milk products that they forgot there is more to know before purchasing a can of a baby formula powder. To help consumers to gain more insights regarding these infants formula, here is a run down of some of the myths and truths about it:IT IS INDEED THE BEST SUBSTITUTE FOR BREAST MILK: False – No milk formula can take the place of the natural recipe of breast milk. That means, no matter how much more chemicals manufacturers of these milk formulas add to their product, it cannot be the same as what breast milk can offer. Moreover, there are many more benefits listed under breastfeeding than feeding a baby with these artificially prepared baby milk products.IT IS MORE POPULAR THAN BREAST MILK: True – There have been surveys around the globe that shows a lot of mothers who are now using milk formulas to feed their children rather than breast feeding them. There are even surveys that show mothers getting more satisfied using infants formula, which booms the industry that deals with it to generate billions and billions of income annually. Bottle-feeding with a baby formula is common especially among mothers who belong under the classification of young professionals, such as those who are working in the offices or having a job that requires them to be away from their babies at least eight to ten hours daily.IT CONTAINS ESSENTIAL NUTRIENTS: True and False – It contains similar nutrients as with breast milk, such as iron and calcium. There are some manufacturers who add more elements, such as ARA and DHA, which are essential for brain growth and function. Although these milk formulas were enriched with these nutrients, these also lack other vital elements that will support more the mental and physical health of the baby.IT IS CHEAP: False – Breast milk is cheaper because it is free. But if one wants to spend on these products, there are infants formulas over the web that are being sold at a lower price. One could even avail of a discounted price and free shipping if she orders online.IT CAN BE GIVEN AFTER BIRTH: Partly True – Although there are hospitals and health care institutions that prohibit milk formula to be given on the newborn immediately after birth, this policy is sometimes neglected because there are mothers who do not lactate or produce breast milk until the third day after they have given birth. That is why; some nurses inside the nursery in other countries secretly give milk formula to answer the hunger cry of the newborn.These are only some of the myths and truths about infants formula, and hope these will give some clarifications on the misconceptions on these products. The decision whether to buy these products or not is still up to the consumer. Again, one should remember that there is a disadvantage that goes with every advantage and vice versa. For more information about feeding your baby, infant formulas and great discounts on buying formula please visit us at DiscountInfantFormula