Brawn: Mercedes too conservative http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/87548 Mercedes GP team boss Ross Brawn believes the root of his squad's 2010 disappointments is that it took too conservative an approach to its car design - but thinks that was the only choice it had given the pressure of the 2009 title fight. After dominating much of last season in its Brawn GP guise and winning both championships, the now-Mercedes-owned outfit has failed to win at all this year, and abandoned development on its 2010 car some time ago to focus on 2011. Although the 2009 machine had been developed with the full resources of former owner Honda, the team had to dramatically cut costs and staff numbers following the Japanese company's exit, and Brawn reckons there is no way the slimmed-down squad could have coped with sustaining a 2009 title challenge while producing a cutting-edge 2010 car. "At the beginning of 2009 we had to reduce staff, and this obviously had an impact on many sectors," Brawn told Italian newspaper Gazzetta dello Sport. "When the time came to design the 2010 car, our design office wasn't well organised. What came out of it is a scarcely ambitious car, in fact too conservative. "But we couldn't do otherwise, because resources were not sufficient. For 2011 we have a group of young engineers who want to show their worth, so we are ambitious again." He is confident that Mercedes will not be similarly hampered in future years, as the ongoing cost-cutting process under the Resource Restriction Agreement will see other teams forced to cut back as well. "With the restrictions we had, in late 2009 we couldn't chase the title and build a competitive car for this year at the same time," said Brawn. "But from 2011, because of the cost reduction process, this will become the norm for everyone - even though I don't believe that teams like Ferrari and McLaren will have to compromise too much." Brawn also reiterated that he has no intention of leaving Mercedes despite this year's struggles, and intends to stay with the project until he retires. When asked if he was definitely on board for 2011, he replied: "Yes, and I think Mercedes will be my last team."
This substantiates what many had conjectured was the case. Corporate reorgs are like this and time will tell if the batch of new young engineers are worth their salt. Who knows, perhaps one of them is the next Christian Horner.
MS had to know this coming into this year. That is why I give him a pass for this year. If he doesn't podium next year, than it should be over for him.
I think Brawn will up sticks sooner, sounds to me as if he is butting heads with the management. MS forget it.
Hey, I think the thread title is *very* misleading - You're implying (to me anyway) the Ross is "blaming" Mercedes for their conservative approach this season. I'm sorry, but I don't read it that way at all - My 02c: - Ross got the deal done with Honda very late - He knew (or suspected) he had a winner, and they put *all* their now limited resources into winning it once his suspicions were confirmed. [I don't think even he could have dreamt what happened early last year.] - "Oh ****, what are we gonna do about 2010!?" then became the question..... - Merc stepped in, I guess figuring they were on a winner - The current WC's plus Michael must have had the suits doing what I once suggested Moretti wanted to do to Mark. - Problem was, the car was "conservative" and is mid-fielder at best. I don't read any criticism by Ross of Merc or Norbert in the article. Cheers, Ian
I see this more as posturing and explaining away the desaster this season has been. Brawn is trying to save his head in front of the board. He'll probably succeed in that but not for long.
The title isn't mine: it appeared that way in AUTOSPORT. It looks to me that Ross Brawn is asking from Mercedes-Benz more money to succeed . The irony is that Norbert Haug explained the divorce from McLaren and the acquisition of Brawn F1 at the end of 2009 as a budget exercise, having watched how Ross Brawn could win a title in 2009 with a very such a low budget!
Ian, I have read that at the moment there continue to be rumours that there is discontent between the UK and German parts of the team, with the suggestion being that team principal Ross Brawn and Norbert Haug are at odds. However these have been denied.
But his explanation makes sense - does it not? Seems pretty factual to me. Any organization that loses 40% of it's workforce is going to experience major problems. I'm sure he doesn't want to be fired; but he isn't worried about it. ANY team in F1 would love to have him onboard. (Including Ferrari) And he's not worried about money considering he made $30M on the sale of Brawn F1 to MB. (ands was a multi-millionaire before the sale) What I find most interesting are his comments about the Resource Restiction Agreement - and why he doesn't think mcLaren and Ferrari will suffer too much....what are the restrictions again? Kevin
Honda money!!, and a good interpretation of the rules in which caused the other teams to cry to the FIA, it went Brawns way..the rest is history.
Yes it makes sense, but I don't buy that those are all the reasons. I still believe a current German company is incapable of building a WDC winning F1 car. Whether they are Benz, BMW, Porsche, VW or Toyota. He is right that the reductions will affect McLaren and Ferrari less because they have road car productions closely tied in with their F1 operations: So basically they can continue to operate at present staff levels by hiding the additional staff in the road projects. Unless the FIA posts watch dogs into the factories they will never be able to spot the hidden resources. Same goes for Renault btw.
Interesting. As a German I would love to prove you wrong! (BTW - why doesn't M-B have a Warsteiner sponsorship?) But is it really a Germany company? In essence it's about as German as the McLaren is. Cars, & engine built in England. (MBHPE is in Brixworth). Yes I know they are German owned, though. Anyhow..... Kevin
My bad - Apologies. I should have said "the headline". Sorry. +1 on the second part, but I'm not sure about the first - Sure, they'd all like a bigger budget but you've gotta know how to spend it - It seems to me Ross does, Toyota and many others don't/didn't.... [Sir Frank does and probably VJ has joined that club IMO] Mateschitz has kind of "blitzed" it to me..... [*Two* teams! WTF? ] As always, my 02c, Cheers, Ian
The budget for the Brawn car was anything but conservative. During development it was in multiple wind-tunnels simultaneously. Haug's excuse was just the public excuse for the obvious divorce between McLaren and Mercedes.
Exactly right. The litany of excuses for lack of performance coming from Mercedes-Benz on a daily basis is starting to ring rather hollow. There is a board of directors to answer to back in Stuttgart, the very same board which laid off 20,000 workers at the same time Schumacher was hired. With all the finger-pointing and excuse-making going on, it seems certain some heads will roll at the end of the season. BHW
Spot on. Several weeks ago Haug said exactly that: Heads will roll if the results don't improve. Only question remaining is whose head(s) will it be?
It Blows my mind that people and mostly the press think a team which has had 3 separate owners in in span of 20 months. One of the owners being an underfunded individual as opposed to a Multi Billion dollar car company should be title contenders through out the ownership transition period.
Well, here is Rosberg toning down the "heads will roll" language in favour of some "staff reshuffling". Should we expect to hear about Rosberg being called on the carpet for this statement? http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/87601 BHW
My point was that men like Ross Brawn don't make excuses not that your reasons lacked validity. The lack of team ownership stability may have been a factor but I'd say that this year's car's development was compromised due to the season end championship push draining design resources. With today's testing restrictions this is a phenomena that effects even established teams.
