What’s vexing Fernando Alonso about rival F1 teams’…

What’s vexing Fernando Alonso about rival F1 teams’ “unlimited upgrades”

So far this season, Aston Martin has finished in the points just once – and even that was due to Fernando Alonso gaining two positions because of penalties applied to Formula 1 drivers who had finished ahead.

This trajectory is locked in for the next few rounds given the team’s policy of waiting to introduce a major new upgrade package this summer in one hit, rather than applying development components on a piecemeal basis when they are ready. Indeed, the gap is only likely to widen in the short term as other teams find performance while Aston remains static.

It’s understood that there have been differences of opinion over the team’s upgrade strategy, but that it was decided by managing technical partner Adrian Newey, whose track record in F1 means his opinion carries more weight. But in addition to this, there are those within the paddock who question how, given Formula 1’s budget cap, some teams are bringing developments regularly while others feel they have to hold back.

“I didn't agree [with delaying the development step until summer],” Alonso told media including Motorsport.com in Austria.

“But apparently there is no money to bring upgrades, unlimited upgrades like the other teams do. Which is surprising to see the FIA document on Friday every race [in which teams must list and explain the purpose of all externally visible changes].

“Maybe they [the other teams] have the money machine in the minus one [basement] in the factory…”

The Aston Martin team is not short of money, given that it is owned by a billionaire and sponsored by Aramco, one of the biggest net contributors to F1’s coffers. But like all the other teams, it is limited by the budget cap in terms of how much can be spent, and on what.

There are also constraints on how much aerodynamic development can be done, though this is applied on a sliding scale relative to historic constructors’ championship positions. Top teams face more restrictions than those who have been underperforming.

Fernando Alonso: "Apparently there is no money to bring upgrades" at Aston Martin (Photo by: Andy Hone/ LAT Images via Getty Images)

From this season, logistics have been swept into the areas covered by the cap, which has implications for when teams might choose to introduce new components. There would have to be a big performance case to justify air-freighting a large item such as a new floor to a far-flung grand prix, for instance.

Upgrade schedules have diverged as this season has progressed, with some teams – notably McLaren, Ferrari and Red Bull – saying they will introduce new steps as soon as they are ready, while others hold back for various reasons. Williams, for instance, has said that for many components it will wait until the end of their service ‘life’ to replace them with upgrades.

With Aston Martin, it quickly became apparent that the AMR26 is fundamentally flawed in a way that cannot be fixed through intermediate steps.

“There are always different opinions and they go around what steps can you make, how much budget you have at your disposal, and then there is a decision that is taken,” said chief trackside officer Mike Krack in Austria.

“In a team environment, it's often that you have diverging opinions. But when you decide to commit, you have to commit 100%. Not 80% and then go to the coffee machine and complain about it.

“So, I think we have taken that decision and we just have to work to that, even if it's hard.”

"When you decide to commit, you have to commit 100%," says Mike Krack (Photo by: EYE4images / NurPhoto via Getty Images)

There may be parallels between this situation and the McLaren MP4-18 whose design Newey oversaw for the 2003 season. Its introduction was repeatedly delayed and the team ultimately completed the year with a development of the previous season’s MP4-17.

The MP4-18 was overly ambitious in many areas but Newey believed the fundamental problem to be an aerodynamic instability caused by an unforeseen interaction between some of the aero furniture and the chassis itself. Curing it, though, would require the front end of the monocoque to be remodelled, along with the sidepods.

Again, there were differences of opinion behind the scenes, resulting in a decision to focus on tweaking the car to make it more reliable, and running it the following season as the MP4-19. When that car also underperformed, Newey eventually got his way, but the scale of the change required meant it wasn’t introduced until the Belgian GP in 2004.

With this in mind, it’s easy to see why Newey, now not just Aston Martin’s most senior engineer but also a shareholder in the business, would use all that influence to focus on large-scale changes more likely to achieve the required course-correction. The AMR26 is three seconds a lap off the pace, and a new front wing isn’t going to meaningfully slash that gap.

“Obviously it takes time,” said Alonso. “After missing Barcelona [the pre-season ‘shakedown’, where the AMR26 barely ran] and being in Bahrain with a bad first test – and knowing our situation in Australia, which back then we didn't know if we could complete the race. That was the uncomfortable truth that we found in Australia.

“I think the decision was made and I think it's the right decision. For us it doesn't change to bring three or four tenths in a couple of grand prix and still fighting at the back. We need something bigger than that.”