Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Well it makes sense for Red Bull to swap Alonso for Webber.

McLaren gets a no bullshit driver who can actually drive.

Red Bull gets a shed load of publicity & an excellent driver who may stop whinging because

1. Perhaps, possibly, maybe, potentially he may have learnt to shut his pie hole.

2. He will have a slower team mate than him.

It makes more sense than much of what else has been speculated as:

1. Would McLaren really allow Alonso to return to Renault & potentially get them back in the main game?

2. They already have had one newb throw away a championship, do they risk two?

3. Who the fk would want to drive for Toyota, shedloads of cash aside?

Lastly is Gary Parfitt any relation to Rick of Status Quo fame?

  • Replies 2.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Only problem is that it looks like Red Bull are heading in the right direction... and knowing Webbos luck i bet you he will go to McLaren and they will go to shit and RedBull will get towards the pointy end of the field.

true true. but I would still love to see webber hitch his ride to the maclaren wagon. shame kimi is not still there though. I reckon webber and kimi would have been a cool team.

As i said before. RBR would be far better to use the money to secure Brawn and other egineering staff and infrastructure to be a stronger team 2008/2009. I dont think they need to be spending the moeny on Alonso...i can see it if its part of a package with Brawn though.

But again, McLaren have never wanted Webber, and RBR are more likely to retire DC then ship off Webber. There is Vettel and Bourdais in the wings...i just cant see RBR needign to chase Alonso.

What i do see is BMW in discussions with Heidfled release him to take a seat at McLaren and Alonso to BMW. Kubica has too much raw speed and future potential to be getting rid of him, so i think parting with Heidfeld now is the perfect move.

The fact that noone seems to be really talking about it tells me that im wrong...lol or possibly its on the cars and F1 wheels are turning

As i said before. RBR would be far better to use the money to secure Brawn and other egineering staff and infrastructure to be a stronger team 2008/2009. I dont think they need to be spending the moeny on Alonso...i can see it if its part of a package with Brawn though.

But again, McLaren have never wanted Webber, and RBR are more likely to retire DC then ship off Webber. There is Vettel and Bourdais in the wings...i just cant see RBR needign to chase Alonso.

What i do see is BMW in discussions with Heidfled release him to take a seat at McLaren and Alonso to BMW. Kubica has too much raw speed and future potential to be getting rid of him, so i think parting with Heidfeld now is the perfect move.

The fact that noone seems to be really talking about it tells me that im wrong...lol or possibly its on the cars and F1 wheels are turning

Remember Red Bull are only in it for the publicity, something that signing Alonso is sure to generate.

Dunno why MB went cold on Webber. It is only speculation but I would guess he may have told them what he thought of their Le Mans prototype....

I can't see BMW releasing either of their two drivers, least of all to go to Mercedes Benz!

yeah well the mercedes/webber relationship has been pretty frosty I imagine since his le mans escapade(s). I think copping the first flip as possible driver error only to have it happen to more times (once more to webber) made it even worse. I mean sure if they had just looked into it properly the first time it happend, instead of blaming webber after which he promptly copped it sweet and got back in the car, things may be different. but I hear that webber and his old man were pretty pissed off and pretty vocal about it afterwards.

I can't see BMW releasing either of their two drivers, least of all to go to Mercedes Benz!

But they are getting a two time WDC and i dont think anyone can say that Heidfeld is near the driver that Alonso is, he never wiil be. So i just see it suiting both teams. If for instance Heidfeld had won the WDC and become synonymous with BMW and wins. Neither driver is purely BMW, though i do see Nick less welcome to the long term plans of BMW with Vettel / Glock etc all in the wings.

And RBR are for sure in it for the exposure, but Mateschitz is spending the money to buold a winning team, and winning races will get him exposure. He has put in place the right ppl and woudl be silly to go against their best advice of how to move the team forward.

best way to slow down the mclarens and bring them to mediocraty would be for webber to join. he has an amazing ability to turn teams to shit

lol, that would have to qualify as one of the silliest comments ive heard in years...sorry Duncan. Its true.

remember jaguar? MW put himself and that beast of a car on the map ver 2 years. An utter pig to drive, he qualifies the thing on the front row in malaysia.

remember that one?

Edited by m3gtr

wow! :rolleyes:

Schumi is getting back into the cockpit!

let the rumour mill spin, spin, spin!

http://www.planetf1.com/story/0,18954,3213_2864232,00.html

Edited by m3gtr

I can't imagine why Kimi hasn't yet gone ballistic at the Ferrari management. I mean, he has just won them the drivers championship & they return the favour by dragging out some retired old hack to test their car. Wouldn't he just tell them to keep Schumacher the fk out of everyones way?

I reckon schuey should come back. half the field have not driven an F1 car without TC. he has won titles without TC and I've no doubt TC is one of those things that brought the mediocre drivers up into touch with the good ones.

anyway, after all this Kubica will be WDC next year. First polish F1 champ. go you good thing.

you dont mess with the scuderia's prodigal son, old boy

drunk as he may be... even kimi knows that

Well I reckon the past is just that, the past. As high a regard as some people may hold Schumacher in it is no different to having someone like Prost or Mansell or Berger or Alesi or any of the other former drivers attend a test.

I was looking at it from the current drivers point of view. It would be giving them conniptions - on the assumption either of them are presently sober enough to care. The team should be focussed on building a car for next years that can win without the help of the FIA, not on nostalgia. They have the thoroughbred GP series for that.

I was looking at it from the current drivers point of view. It would be giving them conniptions - on the assumption either of them are presently sober enough to care. The team should be focussed on building a car for next years that can win without the help of the FIA, not on nostalgia. They have the thoroughbred GP series for that.

Look at from the red teams point of view... with kimi on an extended break who are you going to get to test the 08 charger, minus traction contol?

Massa?? Don’t make me LOL… it just shows you how low his own team even rank his ability and his chances for next years WDC. They've come up with the best solution possible. Get a guy in there that knows what he's talking about and can actually put in a session without putting the '08 prototype into the wall at the curve grande the first time round Monza

Edited by ctjet

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I have engineer in my job title One of or motto's though is "we make and we break"
    • This is actually 2 whole different trains of thought that need to be addressed separately. No, as Matt says above, "Engineer" is not a directly protected title. A lot of guys who just do mechanical design via CAD, with or without even some sort of associate diploma in engineering, often have the job title of "Design Engineer". A train driver can probably still describe themselves as an engineer. But, to usefully get employment with anyone as a proper engineer, you're going to have to have at least the necessary and relevant degree qualification. You're not going to get a job as an electrical engineer if you have a chem eng degree, unless you can demonstrate x number of years of working in that capacity, sufficient knowledge, etc. Having the degree is at least in indication that you've seen the relevant text books, even if you haven't read them (like pretty much the last 10 years of graduates!). To be a self employed engineer.....you could get away with quite a lot pretending that you're suitably qualified, without actually being a proper engineer. But, you will find yourself unable to work for a large section of the client space because a lot demand CVs and capability statements when considering contracting for any engineering work these days. Insurances too. If you're not a proper engineer, it will be much harder to obtain proper PI insurance. Insurance companies have gotten hip to that. The "Professional Engineer" thing is a thing in Australia. If you have the right qualifications and experience you can apply to the relevant engineering top level body (mostly Engineers Australia, the less said about whom, the better), to be assessed and approved as a Chartered Professional Engineer, CPE. There are high bars to get over and a requirement for CPD to maintain it. The RPEQ thing is similar-ish, in that you have to demonstrate and maintain, but the bars are a little lower. It is required to be RPEQ in order to sign off as an engineer on any engineering design in Queensland. The other states haven't fully followed suit yet. There's "engineering" and there's "engineering". Being an engineer that signs off on timber (or even steel) frames for housing projects, council creek crossing bridges, etc, is a flavour of civil engineering that barely warrants the name, description and degree. That would be soul crushing work anyway. Being an automotive engineer working in the space where you have to sign off on modifications to cars and trucks would also be similarly soul crushing. At least partly because of the level of clientelle, their expecations, depths of bank balance, etc. And that brings us to your second question. No, we do not have professional engineers "do vehicle inspections". Well, not the regular roadworthies, etc etc. That's done by mechanics. There might be some vehicle standards engineers at the various state govco inspection stations where cars go to get defects cleared and so on, but that's because they (the cars) are there specifically for defect inspection and clearance and so the stakes are a little higher than on an annual lights and brakes working check. But, if you modify a vehicle in Australia, you have to get it engineered. A suitably qualified (and effectively licensed, which I will get back to) automotive engineer will have to go over the application, advise on what would be required to make the mods legal, supervise some parts of the work, inspect and test the results, and sign off. The "licensed" aspect comes from there being a list of approved engineers to do these things in each state. They have to jump through hoops set up by the govco vehicle standards divisions that mean only the suitably qualified can offer to and approve such mods.
    • It's got a problem Prank... It looks like both washer spray caps have fallen off this car... 😛
    • Meh, it's only got to last another 10 years or so until you'll be forbidden to drive it. Keep it dry and forget about it.
    • The title of Engineer is not protected. However different states have different rules about what an Engineer requires to operate. Engineering for a motor vehicle modification is very different to engineering for a bridge, electronics, etc, including what that engineer needs as certifications.   In Canberra, "Engineer" is the loosest category with basically nothing stopping you calling yourself and engineer and designing a bridge or building. From what I've reviewed, QLD has the strictest requirements through RPEIQ.
×
×
  • Create New...