Bienvenido ALONSO N1 !!! seguro que te sentiras como en tu casa rodeado de tanta gente cojonhuda que para por aqui habitualmente.

Que bueno el aire fresco !!! Compas nuevos, escuderia nueva.
Vaaaaaaammmooooooosssss

(25-11-2014, 22:21)Josemurcia7 escribió: Chavales, os recuerdo el primer día de test del 28 de enero de este año, día en el que se estrenaban las PU. Las PU que un mes después serían homologadas. A Honda le quedan 3 meses. Recordad que difícil fue... Y que nada significaba nada:

Echa un vistazo al Tweet de @piusgasso: https://twitter.com/piusgasso/status/537...78112?s=09

Enviado desde mi One Plus One

Coño pero si Raikkonen fue el que más rapido se adaptó !!

(25-11-2014, 23:16)CarreraConLluviaPlease escribió:

(25-11-2014, 22:21)Josemurcia7 escribió: Chavales, os recuerdo el primer día de test del 28 de enero de este año, día en el que se estrenaban las PU. Las PU que un mes después serían homologadas. A Honda le quedan 3 meses. Recordad que difícil fue... Y que nada significaba nada:

Echa un vistazo al Tweet de @piusgasso: https://twitter.com/piusgasso/status/537...78112?s=09

Enviado desde mi One Plus One

Coño pero si Raikkonen fue el que más rapido se adaptó !!

Jajaja

Enviado desde mi One Plus One

http://www.f1plus.com/en/news/item/7117-...Yt.twitter

Why Fernando Alonso’s Ferrari spell was no waste of time
While the Spaniard’s Ferrari stint did not feature championships, this was more than made up for in the benefit to his

November 25, 2014 (F1plus/Graham Keilloh).- The F1 season-closing round whatever else it is always is a time to say goodbye. In many cases merely for the winter. In a few cases for good. Sometimes somewhere in between, in that they’ll be around next time but in different colours. Some departures even are yet to be revealed.

And it just so happens that 2014’s campaign-concluding Abu Dhabi Grand Prix meet was thick full of them, of all varieties. So many that I won’t bore you by listing them all, but the one that got most of the attention was that Sebastian Vettel was indeed in at Ferrari next year, and as a result Fernando Alonso was out. Hardly revelatory of course, indeed the words of the Lotus Twitter feed regarding its own driver announcement made seem apt: “you heard it here last”.

But still, the Alonso part of the news after taking a step back came with some sadness. That this driver-team relationship rather petered out, and did so unfulfilled. The magical and complete Alonso and the lavish Ferrari squad in tandem never quite scaling the sport’s ultimate peak of a world championship, that both so clearly anticipated as a base expectation when they were first brought together in 2010. They came close, more than once indeed. But not close enough.

Alonso didn’t grow up dreaming of Ferrari (instead it was McLaren, ironically enough), but still when he pitched up camp at the Scuderia rather like Clay Regazzoni, Gilles Villeneuve or Jean Alesi he seemed to fit hand in glove at Maranello. A man as if put on the planet to drive for the evocative Italian squad.

The team and its tifosi foot soldiers definitely have a type – distinguished by passion, unquenchable hunger and willingness to tough it out on track. The sort possessed with the ‘Tiger’ – an unteachable, instinctive characteristic – outlined by Denis Jenkinson in his seminal work The Racing Driver. It helps being very fast too. And they took to Alonso obviously. As Martin Whitmarsh, ex of McLaren, noted: “for all the success he’s had – the hungriest driver out there today is Alonso. You could triple his net worth, and he’d still have that hunger. It’s in his makeup. What you always look for is the car that’s scoring points it shouldn’t be – and who’s driving it. For a long time that, overwhelmingly, has been Fernando.”

Long before his first season there was out it was said in Italy that not since Villeneuve had a Ferrari pilot been so loved.

It may be exaggeration – but not too much – to state that Ferrari with its resources and allure should win the championships every season. That it doesn’t owe to the team’s many peculiarities and flaws. It was summed up perhaps best by Villeneuve himself: “When you first go there and you see the racing department, Fiorano, and everything else, you wonder how they ever manage to lose a race. But the longer you are with them, the more you understand…”

And for all that the days of rich success under Schumi, Todt et al are still fresh in the memory it remains all-in for the red team atypical. There have been peaks, such as the mid-1970s, but mainly Ferrari’s F1 past is one of frustration, rancour and underachievement. Alonso’s time there rather than being the outlier in fact is more in keeping with the general theme; he in large part had the misfortune of joining exactly at the wrong moment. And is far from the first to walk away from the Maranello gates bewildered and sore.

So what changed in the relatively short time since its time of plenty? Well, rather a lot. Between Schumi’s Ferrari days and Alonso’s F1 moved into a very different world, and one that could have been designed to be difficult for the Scuderia. Historically engines and gearboxes were Ferrari’s strengths, aerodynamics much less so (hence the, possibly apocryphal, Enzo Ferrari quote about aero only being for those who don’t know how to build engines), but the sport for most of the more recent spell effectively became a spec series on the first two, and aero grew into the vacated space to become the chief, almost only, discriminator.

Track testing was restricted severely too. And Ferrari had right to rue this, being the only F1 team with its own private test track and one almost literally on its doorstep. Indeed it was a double whammy, as having Fiorano at its disposal for years meant it did not have the same onus to develop its simulation tools that its rivals did, and thus it suddenly found itself way behind in this new race. Even today Ferrari is playing catch-up on that one.

There were differences in how it did things too. The feeling grew that President-until-lately Luca Montezemolo had become a hindrance. That he was sticking his oar in too much, constantly hauling people in for crisis meetings with all of the distraction and disruption that entails. And it all was in sharp contrast to Todt’s time. As German F1 journalist Michael Schmidt outlined: “The biggest achievement of Jean Todt (at Ferrari) is that he protected the team from Luca, Luca let him do. (Todt’s successor) Domenicali didn't have that luxury, he (Montezemolo) was always interfering.”

And a negative spiral was set in motion; Ferrari responded to its difficulties just like in the old days by scapegoating and offering the Gods periodic sacrifices – see Chris Dyer, Aldo Costa and others. This hastened the negative spiral by aiding a rather craven culture, that an observing Gary Anderson at Silverstone this year reckoned was visible: “everyone is frightened of sticking their head above the parapet and making a call because if they do, and for any reason they're wrong, it will be chopped off” he mused.

We can add peculiar impediments to all of this. There is Ferrari’s dodgy wind tunnel, which didn’t correlate with what was happening on track and sent the team down many a blind alley, as well as gripped it with the fear that what it was producing could well be dud. The problem reared its head in 2011 and only really by this season did it seem solved.

But while the chassis was much improved this year Ferrari somehow, and in a way not yet fully explained, got it seriously wrong on the power unit front, and in a new formula that was supposed to suit the squad.

For what it’s worth too, while the Scuderia was as thick as thieves with both the FIA and Bernie in its glory years of the noughties (and just ask Ron Dennis and Adrian Newey as to its manifestations…) more lately both relationships have been strained, in part due to Montezemolo’s dalliance with FOTA and all that in 2009. F1’s invisible hands are not to be underestimated.

I’ve heard it muttered on occasion that Ferrari’s struggles reflect badly on Alonso. But with all of these factors listed it would take a rather fertile imagination to conclude that any of these can be laid at Fernando’s door. As Martin Brundle noted shortly after the announcement that Nando was away: “at the end of the day he can’t design the chassis, the engine and do the aerodynamics himself.”

And then we have to remember that as in any sport all things are relative, and another crucial difference between Ferrari winning and Ferrari now is in the standard of its opponents. While Ferrari then was formidable certainly no foe of anything like the standard of latter day Red Bull, nor indeed the Mercedes squad that learned a lot of its lessons, existed then.



Alono's classic helmet won't be seen on board of a Ferrari anymore.
Indeed when at the start of 2014 Mark Hughes was asked why the red team wasn’t dominating as it once did his immediate reply was “Adrian Newey and Red Bull is the problem, they’re (Ferrari) not doing anything particularly badly, they’re not performing at less a level when they were winning championships. It’s just the game has moved on since Adrian got the thing going at Red Bull.”

But with this, and all the associated frustration, we should not consider Alonso’s five-year Ferrari stint a failure. Not for him anyway. As what he has missed out on in trinkets he has gained and then some when it comes to his reputation and legacy.

Ask yourself this. In Alonso’s five years at Ferrari how often could it be said that the Ferrari in normal circumstances was the pace-setter? I make it no more than three solitary rounds, all in 2010 – Bahrain, Hockenheim and Monza – when the F10’s strong braking and traction vaulted it to the front. Since then, nothing. Indeed not since the race following the final of that trio, in Singapore that year, has Fernando, or Ferrari for that matter, won a pole position in the dry. Often it’s never been close.

Yet with this consider that Alonso oh-so nearly won two titles there – in either case merely requiring the tilting of an additional card in his direction to prevail – as well as triumphed in 11 races. And despite apparently always pushing at the car’s very outer limits citing errors from him in that time is a largely unrewarding task. Citing an off day from him is absolutely so.

It totalled up to 1190 points, 44 podiums and 11 wins. And the equivalent figures for his respective Ferrari team mates across the same period are 551, eight and a big fat zero. This year against someone who was supposed to really test him, he has been further away than ever.

Rob Smedley, recently late of Ferrari, for one concluded that “Fernando is an incredible competitor; really one of the very best drivers of all time…We all know that Kimi is an incredible driver. But Fernando just delivers and it's not just weekend in, weekend out; it's session in, session out.”

Towards the end of last season Felipe Massa – in a unique position to judge – even described Alonso even as “even more perfect” than the lauded Michael Schumacher. Of course, one could harness Mandy Rice-Davies and claim that Massa would say that, given the general competitive order of things in his time paired with the Spaniard. But from watching the interview wherein he gave the tribute I didn't get the impression that he was indulging in desperate self-justification. His tone instead was sober, reflective (and apparently a good few within Ferrari agree with him too).

Some thought though that the words of Ferrari boss Marco Mattiacci that Alonso’s replacement Vettel “brings with him that sense of team spirit which will prove invaluable” were rather loaded.

“It’s a plain dig” Brundle reckoned. Indeed a few races ago the idea emerged – and you would be terribly cynical to assume that it came from the top of Ferrari – that Alonso was a disruptive influence internally; that he was aggrandising himself too much at the team’s expense in public.

Brundle noted further however that it’s not at all clear from the outside what the idea is based on: “Over the years Alonso’s been Mr Positive” he said, “we’ve always talked about it; his head’s down in the race but also out of the car it’s like ‘well all of your four wheels have fallen off today Fernando, what’s the story?’ (and he says) ‘I’m confident, we’ll get this together’. He’s always been the man to say ‘it’s going to be OK, we’re going to make this work’”.

Plenty internally at Ferrari too deny that Alonso has been disruptive. Smedley for one has refuted the concept, saying that he instead is determined and resolute. It gives rise to the possibility that Alonso was a persona non grata as far as Mattiacci was concerned as he noted Alonso’s status within the team, and was keen to show who is boss, as it were – and indeed reportedly a few Maranello insiders have suggested as much. Or else was determined to make Alonso’s departure look noble on his own part. While Alonso at the same moment that the ‘disruptive’ point started to swirl complained that he reckoned factions within the team were seeking to undermine him.

Of course, if we are to judge solely against the original objectives Alonso’s five-year Ferrari stay is a failure – he in the end did not add to his collection of titles as noted. But to be so reductive would be to miss rather a lot; as in all things it must be appreciated in its context. Numbers after all are mere statistics. And quality must be appreciated as well as quantity.

One of F1's underpinnings is that teams design and build their own cars, and as a consequence one of the best things about the sport is witnessing a great driver in a not-so-great car, relying on their own ability to make up the difference. It is in these circumstances that a driver's greatness can be most obviously appreciated. And this has emphatically been so for Alonso in his time at Ferrari.

This was spelled out recently by Sean Kelly, reflecting on the Spaniard’s latest season: “I really feel like we’re watching an Ayrton Senna, Gilles Villeneuve-like genius in Alonso this year. When he won the titles in ’05 and ‘06 I felt like he was an extremely good driver, he was clearly worthy of his titles. What I feel like we’re seeing now is we’re seeing the Senna of ’92 and ’93; the Senna that made the folklore.

“When you think about it we don’t think necessarily of Senna winning easily in Monza in 1990 or in Monaco of 1990, we think of the Senna in Donington in ‘93 clearly in an inadequate car fighting a rear-guard battle.

“You think of Gilles Villeneuve you don’t think of him easily winning in 1979 in South Africa or Watkins Glen or Long Beach, we think of him trying to manhandle a car that clearly didn’t want to be there.

“I feel like these are the seasons that will cement Alonso’s legacy…what Alonso’s been able to do with that car I think is phenomenal. We probably should be looking at Raikkonen as a more accurate barometer of what that car’s really capable of doing.”

Think of the F1 discourse in recent years. As we’ve looked ahead to weekends, who is likely to be fighting near or at the front. Usually a team or two – Red Bull, Mercedes more lately – come to mind. McLaren and Lotus in years past too. And Alonso. Almost alone he on a consistent basis has been discussed almost as distinct from his machinery. “Without Fernando Alonso Ferrari would be nowhere…” said Niki Lauda recently. “Fernando Alonso is the most talented driver out there…he drives the car to the end of the world to make it win” Derek Bell added.

And surely his performances over his five-year Ferrari spell will go a long way to ensuring his transition to an all-time F1 great. Disruptive or not, he underlined in thick lines there that if you want an F1 driver to scale sheer cliff edges then he is the one to turn to.

Fernando Alonso is modern F1’s alchemist, and it’s just that unlike Paulo Coelho’s version however much Nando really wanted it to happen, the whole Ferrari universe did not conspire so that his wish came true

La barba de fernando es otra pista mas que corrobora lo de Mclaren... y alguna cosa mas.

Que es lo primero que le pidió Dennis a Fernnando cuando llegó. Que se cortara el pelo. Es bien sabido el gusto de Dennis por el aseo y 'orden' capilar.

La barba de fernando (y su corte de pelo, poco arreglado) es un mensaje multidireccional. El primero para el mismo, pero tambien para Dennis y su manías y para los que lo observamos desde fuera. Ahora manda él.

(26-11-2014, 00:58)NachoBcn escribió: La barba de fernando es otra pista mas que corrobora lo de Mclaren... y alguna cosa mas.

Que es lo primero que le pidió Dennis a Fernnando cuando llegó. Que se cortara el pelo. Es bien sabido el gusto de Dennis por el aseo y 'orden' capilar.

La barba de fernando (y su corte de pelo, poco arreglado) es un mensaje multidireccional. El primero para el mismo, pero tambien para Dennis y su manías y para los que lo observamos desde fuera. Ahora manda él.

El hecho de que Honda haya probado en el filming day en Silverstone y que ahora estén probando estos dos días, teniendo varios meses hasta los tests de pretemporada es un verdadero punto a favor.

Se ha tenido un año para ver las soluciones de los demás y adaptarlas, y ahora se tiene 100% de libertad hasta la homologación para modificar cosas y depurar errores. Honda ha tomado un camino muy inteligente.

Por otro lado mencionar una cosa que no he visto a nadie comentar. Mclaren-Honda ha hecho un filming day (PE según el reglamento deportivo), pero todos los equipos tienen derecho a 2:

"Each competitor will also be permitted to carry out two Promotional Events (PE) with the
above cars which will not be considered TCC. A PE shall be defined as an event in which a
competitor participates purely for marketing or promotional purposes. No such test may
exceed 100km in length and only tyres manufactured specifically for this purpose by the
appointed supplier may be used."

Así que hasta los tests de Febrero, Mclaren-Honda dispone de otros 100 km para poner a punto los sistemas básicos del motor (software y demás). Unas 18 vueltas. Más de lo que hicieron muchos en los primeros 3 días de tests de 2014.

(26-11-2014, 01:44)ethernet escribió: El hecho de que Honda haya probado en el filming day en Silverstone y que ahora estén probando estos dos días, teniendo varios meses hasta los tests de pretemporada es un verdadero punto a favor.

Se ha tenido un año para ver las soluciones de los demás y adaptarlas, y ahora se tiene 100% de libertad hasta la homologación para modificar cosas y depurar errores. Honda ha tomado un camino muy inteligente.

Por otro lado mencionar una cosa que no he visto a nadie comentar. Mclaren-Honda ha hecho un filming day (PE según el reglamento deportivo), pero todos los equipos tienen derecho a 2:

"Each competitor will also be permitted to carry out two Promotional Events (PE) with the
above cars which will not be considered TCC. A PE shall be defined as an event in which a
competitor participates purely for marketing or promotional purposes. No such test may
exceed 100km in length and only tyres manufactured specifically for this purpose by the
appointed supplier may be used."

Así que hasta los tests de Febrero, Mclaren-Honda dispone de otros 100 km para poner a punto los sistemas básicos del motor (software y demás). Unas 18 vueltas. Más de lo que hicieron muchos en los primeros 3 días de tests de 2014.

Buen apunte ethernet. Aunque, esos filming days, son del año en curso o del que entra? Porque imagino que McLaren haría el suyo con el motor Mercedes antes de comenzar esta temporada, no sé... Ya lo veremos.

Pensando y pensando, acabo de llegar a otro ejemplo simplificado para ayudarnos a entender la ventaja de Honda por entrar un año más tarde:

Imaginad que existiesen 5 motoristas en 2014:

-Mercedes
-Williams (con el 2° mejor motor)
-McLaren (con el 3° mejor motor, y estoy siendo generoso porque dudo que hayan dispuesto de mejor motor que Force India, Mercedes no es tonta).
-Ferrari
-Renault

Ahora suponed que McLaren, con ese motor, hubiera estado todo el 2014 desarrollando esa PU con el 100% de libertad, mientras que los demás sólo al 60 y poco % que permite la normativa actual. Esos resultados se verían en 2015, en los test de pretemporada (aunque los test poco dicen).

Imaginad también, que el chasis de McLaren de ese año, no se diseñó en función de las especificaciones de la PU, porque fabricaban cada cosa en una sede y no había coordinación (ejemplo absurdo pero me sirve) y que para 2015, sí existiría esa cooperación y la PU habría tenido en cuenta este hecho.

Tendría en ese caso McLaren ventaja? Efectivamente, una posibilidad de mejorar de cara a la próxima temporada mayor que la de nadie...

Esa es la jugada.

Enviado desde mi One Plus One

(26-11-2014, 02:35)Sandra escribió: Chic@s,yo la verdad,es que veo muchas mejoras...

Si va a McLaren,el coche ya no es rojo y no nos dara el bajon...
Si vamos a Mercedes,el coche ya no es rojo y no nos dara el bajon...

Si ponen algo mejor que el papel albal,no nos dara el bajon...
Si no vemos al hombre avivando el fuego de los frenos....no nos dara el bajon...

La pretemporada...ufffffff...este año el motor Ferrari era el que menos pesaba,el que menos consumia....
Y en plena temporada,era el que mas consumia,y lo de poco peso,de poco a valido....

Eso si.Menos caballos que los demas

Asi que como dice Fernando
Lo mejor esta por llegar

ejejejej pues si la memoria no me falla el motor Ferrari era de los que mas pesaba