Considering the F60 did all its pre-season testing with the KERS in the 'wrong' place (according to FIA), the car was bound to be useless. It was superb with the KERS in pre-season, but when it had to be placed somewhere else it completely messed the balance up. We're talking almost 30KG of weight here...which is a lot. Another 30 KG for ballast plates and the car is well back in the field.
Whether putting the batteries in the wing would have been a good idea or not is debatable, but it is my understanding that the F60 was designed for that. Surely, Ferrari believed that to be an advantage - which was taken away by the FIA. Regarding the diffuser, I am sure that contributed. However, my understanding is that Red Bull had the most difficult engineering problem designing around their pull-rod suspension and they seemed to have pulled it off, at least in part. Either way, Alonso hasn't done much with the Renault despite his acclaimed car-developing skills. Still, I bet he is going to claim that he brought "6 tenths" to whatever team he goes to next.
I'm a big believer in Alonso's car development skills. However this year he couldn't really use them as there was no testing. So all he did was develop the wrong car (not his fault) to perfection over the last winter. At Ferrari however he could be very valuable in the development of a new car. Which raises a question I don't know the answer to: What testing/development is allowed after the last race? If the teams are allowed to test/develop the new cars freely, Alonso will be a huge asset to whatever team he is working for.
As best as I remember there are limitations but a driver with Alonso's skills will still be an asset.
What supports the argument that Alonso developed the car to perfection? There is no evidence that Kimi or Massa wouldn't do just as well, or better, if the F60 had been designed without the weight distribution problem and perhaps with the diffuser. Perhaps it can even be argued that Kimi has done a much better job than Alonso (although my understanding is that both Ferrari and Renault have switched development to the 2010 cars) in developing the car despite problems similar to the Renault with respect to the diffuser (made worse by the KERS problem), given Kimi's recent four podiums in a row. Conversely, Alonso has no podiums this year. He is however leading all drivers in summons to the WSMC.
I also don't know the limitations on pre-season testing. My recollection is that it was around 20,000 kms this year, significantly less than the year before, but I may remember wrong. It sounds like we agree that the in-season testing ban is asinine.
Alonso's reputation as a great car developer stems from his past in F1: Before he joined Renault as test/development driver, that car wasn't going anywhere. Then he developed it to two WDCs. Then he switched to McLaren who haven't had any success for a long time and with his help the car developed to a WDC challenger. Meanwhile the Renaults were going backwards. But you don't have to believe me. Just listen around and you'll hear this comment everywhere. Or just ask your dog. Neither driver is a great development driver. That's an open secret at Ferrari and also evidenced by the decline in the Ferrari's performance ever since MS left.
I have heard lots of people say that Alonso is great car developer. Just because lots of people say something doesn't make it true. Perhaps the old addage applies - "you are only as good a car developer as your last car development." And Alonso hasn't proven much lately. The McLaren was not good in 2006, it was great in 2005. But, given that the rules change ever year, and the development of the cars (at least in the past) was extremely fast, there is little, if any, carry-over from one year to another. So whether the McLaren was bad the year before or not is not very dispositive. My recollection is that the "six tenths" Alonso claimed he took to McLaren coincided with some Ferrari information making its way to McLaren. Whether Alonso or Hamilton contributed in some part to the development we will never know. In 2008, Hamilton did pretty well with a car that Alonso had next to nothing to do with. So perhaps it was Hamilton who brought the six tenths. Based on what we have seen this year, would you say that Fisichella or Sutil are fantastic car developers, certainly much better than Alonso? You have to wonder about a guy who claims he is surprised he is summoned to the WMSC when his team has essentially admitted (by not contesting) they staged a crash to give him a strategy to win. My dog says that sounds dumb - but she is not that into F1.
The car did quite well in 2007 and 2008. I do not dispute that MS was a great team player and car developer. Whether the recent decline in Ferrari's performance is due to Kimi and Massa not being great developers (some would say Kimi "developed" the McLaren to contend for at least two WDC's), or more due to the KERS/ballast issue and the diffuser, is something reasonable minds can speculate differently on.
Evidently Felipe was able to help somewhat develop last years car. It did contend well for the title(s) and Kimi's new contract stipulates he DO more testing. Felipe did a majority of it and well, the results were all Felipe and a deflated ice-man full of excuses. Who here knows who can do what for car development and say so with authority. Fisi was always rumored to be the reason Renault improved its cars. Again at Force India, he is there and a car improves. When someone has concrete proof please post it. For now I dont see Alonso as the godsend for development or anything else. Seems JB and Rubens are doing well. I guess they are good at development too?
A very good question, I await Andreas's response with interest. Engineers, not drivers, develop cars.
I'd say it's got to be a team effort, MS at Ferrari was the prime example, get everyone singing the same tune, bringing everything together. Driver feedback is important MS must be good at it, FA he likes to blow his own trumpet I'm sure he is ok at it. Lets assume some drivers will be better than others at it, feedback that is..
I would disagree in years past. but with so many restrictions on testing this year, I would agree that data engineers have had mroe influence this year.
