The Man from Sao Paulo - Senna to Williams in 1992

[FickleCrossroad]

(Re: Bridgestone/Ferrari bias) With more than one tire company in the game?

Especially when the FIA gets in on the collusion. Point of the matter is that when a supplier has a few teams, they're naturally going to favor the fastest one.


http://www.slideshare.net/GHHLLC/how-ferrari-and-bridgestone-stole-the-2003-f1-world-championship-presentation

I'm not suggesting a lowest price contract, but more a "best deal in exchange for exclusive", or something. Besides, if you're Michelin or Avon or Dunlop (or Richmond or Kelly, for all that), & your tires are in F1, do you really want the world, & especially the world's racing fans, seeing you making junk?

Oh! Well, we already know Michelin makes junk.

Yeah, when you phrase it like that, I'm in.

Fair enough. I'd take away the choice entirely, myself, but I see the value. I'd sooner get excitement with passing courtesty of design changes rather than pit stops.

I had been addressing the "theatre" aspect of the tyre selection. If some research could be done by someone in the FIA and/or FOM, to determine if viewership is boosted on the mandated use of two compounds, I'd love to see the findings. If it DID work, then I'd be for it, but yeah, it seems a bit silly. I'd rather let the teams figure it out during practice, which compounds they want to use in the race. Hell, I'd be down if they mixed and matched compounds if they noticed a significant difference in wear rates between corners of the car. I just don't see the FIA going for that last bit, though.

(Re: Issues w/ flying in to certain locations): Oh, why not?

Demand drives up travel costs, I was priced out of the 2012 USGP, and I was going to be driving from the Oklahoma City area. If I had to fly, I wouldn't even consider it. Driving, the only thing that kept me away was I had told my father that if I could swing it, I'd buy him a ticket for his birthday. By the time I had an answer from him, there wasn't a hotel for less that $500/night within 3+ hours of the track. My favorite memories of my life is a race with my father, so I wasn't going to tell him I couldn't take him and than go myself.

Indy, OTOH, is freaking AWESOME for driving in, and would have been cheaper for me to drive the extra 10hrs round-trip.

On that basis, Elkhart Lake is best. (I have a weakness for Watkins, myself, but that's the history buff in me: keep it where it started.)

Well, from ingress/egress, Indy is a no-brainer. I still haven't decided yet, but it's looking like Elkhart Lake will eventually get the gig, unless I can have a German-style setup where Indy and Elkhart alternate. I had a few good memories at Indy, and am only leaning away from it because a flat road course just makes me sad when I think about Spa and Interlagos. Even the Hungaroring, come to think of it... The terrain is the only redeeming quality, otherwise it's too narrow and too twisty.

Then again, my idea of a "perfect track design" involves several medium to long straights, followed by either fast sweepers or 90+ degree hard turns, with about 1 to 1.5km of esses and chicanes. Something where teams have to balance their setup, overtaking is possible, but driver skill in managing difficult turn complexes is also needed.

(I begin to think I should just shut up.)

Don't do that! Please, anything can help.

I don't recall that in Senna. It was more, "Give way, hell!" I always had a sense he needed to get a bit of maturity so he didn't break as much when he didn't absolutely have to. And I got the sense he was moving that way by '94--still a ways to go, but headed the right direction.

I just looked at it and thought, "Where can I give Mansell a highlight-reel pass to win a race on Senna, where Senna won't do something stupid."

Silverstone, being the team's and Mansell's home track, and far less animosity than w/ Prost, seemed like the only way to do it.

ITTL, the Senna-Mansell relationship is cordial, with a feeling of a coworker you want to do better than, and you think that coworker is pretty cool even though he gets on your nerves from time-to-time, but is someone you'd never hang out with off the clock.

With Elkhart Lake getting a date, we will see the US Grand Prix making a reboot, next year.

Wait, what? OTL or a question about TTL?

 

[AdA]

Mansell couldn't deal with Piquet. Senna would jedi mind **** him into insignificance. I never liked the man, with his intense "God holds my driving wheel" atitude, but he could outdrive anyone racing in his era. The strongest chalange he faced was Prost, who outdrove Mansell whem they were both at Ferrari.
Senna vs Mansell on identical cars is no contest. Senna would win four times as many races.

 

[FickleCrossroad]

Mansell couldn't deal with Piquet. Senna would jedi mind **** him into insignificance. I never liked the man, with his intense "God holds my driving wheel" atitude, but he could outdrive anyone racing in his era. The strongest chalange he faced was Prost, who outdrove Mansell whem they were both at Ferrari.
Senna vs Mansell on identical cars is no contest. Senna would win four times as many races.

Mansell wasn't Senna's equal, but he was pretty close. It was just crap luck for him that his prime years were spent dealing with legends and those who could mess with his head.

I'd personally rank Senna alongside Fangio for greatest-ever, but I'm fairly biased, and a lot of my writing is trying to account for my biases.

The FW-14 & 15 were designed around Mansell, that's an equalizer. Add to that, Mansell's got a deeper network within the team, so 1992 realistically would be fairly level. TBH, I know I'm pushing the envelope trying to construct TTL to start off fairly even, but I'm trying not to make it implausible.

Otherwise, if the MP4/7A was the equal to the FW-14B, I'd expect a final haul of something like 110-85 in favor of Senna, OTL. If the FW-14B was designed as a compromise between the two, ITTL, I'd give Mansell an early win to account for familiarity with the Williams designs, but yeah, Senna would only be outraced 2-3 times a season by Mansell, and a final win total of 10-5 (accounting for mechanical failures,) would be easy to expect.

 

[AdA]

Mansell wasn't Senna's equal, but he was pretty close. It was just crap luck for him that his prime years were spent dealing with legends and those who could mess with his head.

I'd personally rank Senna alongside Fangio for greatest-ever, but I'm fairly biased, and a lot of my writing is trying to account for my biases.

The FW-14 & 15 were designed around Mansell, that's an equalizer. Add to that, Mansell's got a deeper network within the team, so 1992 realistically would be fairly level. TBH, I know I'm pushing the envelope trying to construct TTL to start off fairly even, but I'm trying not to make it implausible.

Otherwise, if the MP4/7A was the equal to the FW-14B, I'd expect a final haul of something like 110-85 in favor of Senna, OTL. If the FW-14B was designed as a compromise between the two, ITTL, I'd give Mansell an early win to account for familiarity with the Williams designs, but yeah, Senna would only be outraced 2-3 times a season by Mansell, and a final win total of 10-5 (accounting for mechanical failures,) would be easy to expect.

About fair, except for the pretty close bit. Mansell couldn't deal with a teammate that out drove him, and would break down. He wasn't like Prost, who was strong enough to deal with being slower and come up with ways to win, as he did in 89, nor like Berger, who was happy to be number two. He would try to out drive Senna, fail, and make lots of mistakes.
As for who was the best ever, my personal choice would be Jackie Stewart. He out drove a team mate who was a world champ (and would be again) in his first season, and totally outclassed anyone who had a similar car. His win in Germany in 68 by four minutes was something not even Senna could have pulled. Given a time machine, on their best shape, I'd say Stewart Fangio Clark and Moss could beat Senna on pure speed. If we go back to the dark ages, Nuvolari and Rosemeyer.

 

[AdA]

Frank

Frank Williams would have to spend some major money to get Senna. He would know the Brazilian was "the one" and he would go out of his way to make Senna happy. He wouldn't issue team orders, but he wouldn't have to.
Even if they hesitated, Senna would do his trick of suggesting something, then taking the car to the track and go so fast the team would listen to his every wish from then on.

 

[FickleCrossroad]

Frank Williams would have to spend some major money to get Senna. He would know the Brazilian was "the one" and he would go out of his way to make Senna happy. He wouldn't issue team orders, but he wouldn't have to.
Even if they hesitated, Senna would do his trick of suggesting something, then taking the car to the track and go so fast the team would listen to his every wish from then on.

Senna was offering to drive for free by that time, (or the '93 season, I'm not sure when his offer started.) ITTL, finding out earlier that Honda was going to bail made him desperate to get to Williams before Prost put pen to paper. The money won't be outrageous, but he'll be paid nicely.

Why do you think I'm including Adrian Newey and not Patrick Head in the Grove scenes. Senna's already getting his fingers in the pie.

Trying to Senna-ize the -14B will be tricky, but the funny thing about the FW-14 & -15 is they were ready FAR in advance, so there's some spare time in Grove to tweak designs. Early on, they know they're a winner, so the -14 honestly wouldn't get much effort for a drivers' vanity project. The -15 will be even better than OTL, though, because of Senna's input.

 

[phx1138]

Don't do that! Please, anything can help.

"Should", but not much chance of "will".

Especially when the FIA gets in on the collusion. Point of the matter is that when a supplier has a few teams, they're naturally going to favor the fastest one.

Huh. That sounds all too probable. I'm wondering, tho, if more suppliers doesn't help that: if I were a tyre maker, & there were 10 teams on my rubber, I'd be saying, give 'em all the best & see which one can be quickest. Every team with mine is exposure...even if they're not winning. (Yes, better if they are--but only one make is likely to be on the podium.)

Also, I'd say, a more cost-equal tire deal means teams can spend the money elsewhere, so more will be nearer the front (or the spread will be less, same thing), so it's good for all the tire suppliers.

Oh! Well, we already know Michelin makes junk.

Yeah, when you phrase it like that, I'm in.

Glad to have you aboard.

I had been addressing the "theatre" aspect of the tyre selection. If some research could be done by someone in the FIA and/or FOM, to determine if viewership is boosted on the mandated use of two compounds, I'd love to see the findings. If it DID work, then I'd be for it, but yeah, it seems a bit silly. I'd rather let the teams figure it out during practice, which compounds they want to use in the race. Hell, I'd be down if they mixed and matched compounds if they noticed a significant difference in wear rates between corners of the car. I just don't see the FIA going for that last bit, though.

We're agreed, generally. I'm understanding FIA's reasons, just thinking the reasons are crap. That being so, I'd far rather you do almost anything else.

The terrain is the only redeeming quality, otherwise it's too narrow and too twisty.

I've a preference for twistys, myself, so... That does mitigate against passing, however.

I just looked at it and thought, "Where can I give Mansell a highlight-reel pass to win a race on Senna, where Senna won't do something stupid."

Silverstone, being the team's and Mansell's home track, and far less animosity than w/ Prost, seemed like the only way to do it.

I don't count it impossible, & you've already changed Senna slightly, so no beef.

Mansell wasn't Senna's equal, but he was pretty close. It was just crap luck for him that his prime years were spent dealing with legends and those who could mess with his head.

I'd personally rank Senna alongside Fangio for greatest-ever, but I'm fairly biased, and a lot of my writing is trying to account for my biases.

Mansell, IDK. I never liked him, nor was very impressed with him. Senna, I completely agree. With some seasoning & maturity, IMO he could have been the best F1 has ever seen.

I also think Alesi never got into a team suitable for him, & I think he was much better than his results. Berger, too.

final win total of 10-5 (accounting for mechanical failures,) would be easy to expect.

Presuming no breakages, I'd agree. OTOH, I'd expect Senna to break more often, because he would never go easy; he seemed not to know how. Mansell would. (Then there's my perfect model for how to win a title, Prost, who'd accept 3d or 4th, finish, & be World Champion.)

 

[CultBoy]

Only just found this thread, please keep it going for as long as possible!

 

[FickleCrossroad]

f I were a tyre maker, & there were 10 teams on my rubber, I'd be saying, give 'em all the best & see which one can be quickest. Every team with mine is exposure...even if they're not winning. (Yes, better if they are--but only one make is likely to be on the podium.)

Personally, I'd agree with you, but given the corporate mind... Competition would only work if you pushed tyre standards to the level that current OTL engine/gearbox standards are, (you will perform X distance or whoever's running you is SCREWED.) I damn near went to the 2005 USGP as a college graduation present to myself, (my work hours got cut massively the week I was going to buy tickets,) and have a utter loathing of Michelin after that.

Also, I'd say, a more cost-equal tire deal means teams can spend the money elsewhere, so more will be nearer the front (or the spread will be less, same thing), so it's good for all the tire suppliers.

True, but there's that bit about quality I'm not yet willing to sacrifice. I'm still trying to untie the knots over aero and engine, plus juggle where I want the diverging cast of drivers to go, plus figuring out the major rift I threw in for myself (IndyCar side that hasn't debuted yet.) Tyres aren't on the back of my mind, but they're effectively lowest-priority that I'm actually ranking. Any help here is appreciated. Gimme a few good links, and if I see it's justified, I'll work it in.

We're agreed, generally. I'm understanding FIA's reasons, just thinking the reasons are crap. That being so, I'd far rather you do almost anything else.

Anyone else cool with an eventual (Doubtful it'd be before 1996, ITTL,) shift towards letting teams run their own tyre picks?

I've a preference for twistys, myself, so... That does mitigate against passing, however.

Mind you, I love large tight and twisty SECTIONS. My ideal track adds an increase in race length. Instead of 190-ish miles/300km-ish distance, we're at 450-500km total race distance, or 4hrs total time. Let the fans at the track see more laps for the same price. If the track average distance reaches 6.5km, then let's work in a sector that's an utter pain in the ass, wide, but so technically demanding that the racing line doesn't offer much passing. The other 3/4 of the track? Overtake! Put the engineers on their heels, make them pick balanced setups and leave it to driver skill.

I don't count it impossible, & you've already changed Senna slightly, so no beef.

Senna hasn't got done screwing up. I just look at it this way, he's in the hole, and he's confident enough to think he can pull of a win without a block at a really crappy turn to put a block. I'm not trying to change him too much. I just read the flipside of someone's comment (forget who offhand,) on Sergeant Heretic's "ISOT'd House..." TL, where she loathes Nixon and wanted to make him out to be not so much of a bogeyman. Senna's a man I still mourn, who still watches the opening lap of Donington Park '93 a couple dozen times a year, and I don't want to write a TL that's nothing but a shrine.

Mansell, IDK. I never liked him, nor was very impressed with him. Senna, I completely agree. With some seasoning & maturity, IMO he could have been the best F1 has ever seen.

Yup. Mansell wasn't the fuzziest Teddy/Paddington bear in the toy chest, but the man did have speed.

I also think Alesi never got into a team suitable for him, & I think he was much better than his results. Berger, too.

F1 understatement of the 1990's. The man had horrible luck and total inability to determine team inertia. He'd have been a WDC otherwise.

Presuming no breakages, I'd agree. OTOH, I'd expect Senna to break more often, because he would never go easy; he seemed not to know how. Mansell would. (Then there's my perfect model for how to win a title, Prost, who'd accept 3d or 4th, finish, & be World Champion.)

16-race season, I gave Senna 10 wins, when a win was 10pts. Yeah, I concur. Add Prost, he'd be fighting Schumacher every race if he wasn't in the Williams, and the young eagle would beat him more often than not. Add Prost to '92 ITTL, and he'd rarely make the podium.

Only just found this thread, please keep it going for as long as possible!

Thanks! I've had to dial back a bit due to work, but I'd love to keep it going as long as I can. After a few TL-years, I may shrink down the story sections a bit and speed the pace up, but I'm expecting to have it this involved through at least 1996.

At this rate expect 1, maybe two updates a week unless I get a bunch of ideas and time, which isn't likely considering I'm working 12-hr shifts, and severe season kicks off soon. (I'm the USAF equivalent of a weatherman stationed in Oklahoma. I guaranfuckingtee everyone there won't be an update next Monday if the data holds. I'll be shit-faced less than an hour after I leave the desk, as current data is saying a tornado outbreak is possible.)

Anyway... I'm expecting to post the next update Friday sometime.

 

[phx1138]

Personally, I'd agree with you, but given the corporate mind... Competition would only work if you pushed tyre standards to the level that current OTL engine/gearbox standards are, (you will perform X distance or whoever's running you is SCREWED.)

I'd agree on the first. Not sure I'm clear of your meaning on the second, tho: FIA-mandated durability standards? (I had in mind more a "quality minimum", like crash testing has, but minimum durability for any/every compound sounds really good.)

I damn near went to the 2005 USGP as a college graduation present to myself, (my work hours got cut massively the week I was going to buy tickets,) and have a utter loathing of Michelin after that.

I tend to blame Bernie, myself. Sh*t happens, even when you're more/less hand-building tires. Did Michelin intend the tires to blow up? I doubt it. (Yes, I have nothing good to say about them, either, but that has as much to do with them being a French company, & French officials screwing over the Mini team in '59, & Senna in '84. {I don't say that's an entirely rational response...})

True, but there's that bit about quality I'm not yet willing to sacrifice.

Me neither. F1's dangerous enough.

I'm still trying to untie the knots over aero and engine, plus juggle where I want the diverging cast of drivers to go, plus figuring out the major rift I threw in for myself (IndyCar side that hasn't debuted yet.) Tyres aren't on the back of my mind, but they're effectively lowest-priority that I'm actually ranking. Any help here is appreciated. Gimme a few good links, and if I see it's justified, I'll work it in.

Fair 'nuf. ATM, I'm really at the point of being out of ammo & throwing the gun at you. (I really, really do want to see that actually work. Just once.)

Anyone else cool with an eventual (Doubtful it'd be before 1996, ITTL,) shift towards letting teams run their own tyre picks?

To be clear: if that's the route you go, I won't scream. I'd just far rather any other option be the one.

The pit stops, plus the safety car, plus the TV guys adding pit interviews, keep making me think they're trying to turn F1 into ChampCar...& they're losing the uniqueness in the process.

Mind you, I love large tight and twisty SECTIONS. My ideal track adds an increase in race length. Instead of 190-ish miles/300km-ish distance, we're at 450-500km total race distance, or 4hrs total time. Let the fans at the track see more laps for the same price. If the track average distance reaches 6.5km, then let's work in a sector that's an utter pain in the ass, wide, but so technically demanding that the racing line doesn't offer much passing. The other 3/4 of the track? Overtake! Put the engineers on their heels, make them pick balanced setups and leave it to driver skill.

I'd agree with most of that, except the added race length/duration. IMO, that's pushing driver endurance pretty hard, to the point you're just asking for a wreck by the last 10 laps or so.

Senna hasn't got done screwing up. I just look at it this way, he's in the hole, and he's confident enough to think he can pull of a win without a block at a really crappy turn to put a block. I'm not trying to change him too much. I just read the flipside of someone's comment (forget who offhand,) on Sergeant Heretic's "ISOT'd House..." TL, where she loathes Nixon and wanted to make him out to be not so much of a bogeyman. Senna's a man I still mourn, who still watches the opening lap of Donington Park '93 a couple dozen times a year, and I don't want to write a TL that's nothing but a shrine.

I wasn't meaning to say it's looking like a wank, by any means. It's not. I say it as a particular fan of Senna's: I thought he pushed when he didn't have to, & he wanted some seasoning. He didn't last long enough to get it. Had he gotten it, he'd have been about as unstoppable as Fangio in his prime, or Clark either, or as Michael at Ferrari.

Yup. Mansell wasn't the fuzziest Teddy/Paddington bear in the toy chest, but the man did have speed.

I'd agree on the first. On the second, I have to reserve comment. I'm by no means objective. (I do recall him chasing down Senna, once, making up more than a sec a lap, tho {damned if I can say where/when}, so...)

F1 understatement of the 1990's. The man had horrible luck and total inability to determine team inertia. He'd have been a WDC otherwise.

Yeah. Same bug seems to've bitten Gilles.

Any TL of mine, they'd both be champion. (Just get Gilles out of the 312, first.)

16-race season, I gave Senna 10 wins, when a win was 10pts. Yeah, I concur. Add Prost, he'd be fighting Schumacher every race if he wasn't in the Williams, and the young eagle would beat him more often than not. Add Prost to '92 ITTL, and he'd rarely make the podium.

That would be absolutely epic. (And I say that as somebody who thinks Michael should have gotten serious sanctions for wrecking Jacques, at a minimum, more than he got--& way more than he got for doing it again afterward.)

I'd love to keep it going as long as I can.

IDK about anybody else, but I'll hang in so long as you're updating more than about once every 6mo.

 

[AdA]

I'd agree on the first. On the second, I have to reserve comment. I'm by no means objective. (I do recall him chasing down Senna, once, making up more than a sec a lap, tho {damned if I can say where/when}, so...)


Monaco 1992. Mansell was driving the Williams "smartcar" and had won the first 4 races of the season. Senna was drivind the much slower McLaren. With a few laps to go Mansell had to pit, Senna jumped to the lead. Mansell was back on fresh tires, rushed up to catch Senna, but just couldn't pass him.

 

[athleticsfan2kx]

I'd agree on the first. On the second, I have to reserve comment. I'm by no means objective. (I do recall him chasing down Senna, once, making up more than a sec a lap, tho {damned if I can say where/when}, so...)


Monaco 1992. Mansell was driving the Williams "smartcar" and had won the first 4 races of the season. Senna was drivind the much slower McLaren. With a few laps to go Mansell had to pit, Senna jumped to the lead. Mansell was back on fresh tires, rushed up to catch Senna, but just couldn't pass him.

Great Work Maybe Nigel Mansell can win more later in the 1992 season, can't wait to continue on with that.

 

[phx1138]

Monaco 1992. Mansell was driving the Williams "smartcar" and had won the first 4 races of the season. Senna was drivind the much slower McLaren. With a few laps to go Mansell had to pit, Senna jumped to the lead. Mansell was back on fresh tires, rushed up to catch Senna, but just couldn't pass him.

That was it. Thx.

 

[Geordie]

Looking good SPDoyle. Keep it up! I shall post a more detailed response later.

 

[FickleCrossroad]

Round Eleven – VIII Marlboro Magyar Nagydἣ – 16 August 1992 – Hungaroring

Late summer in Hungary was its normal, dusty and dry, but to Mika Hakkinen, it was still a bit surreal. In the first race behind the now-dead Iron Curtain, the first year after the fall of the USSR, he found it odd, the mood was more relaxed, and confused, particularly amongst the few Slovaks and Czechs arriving from their newly-separate countries. He hoped that with all the loosening, more money would be directed to this track, it was nearly as hard to pass as Monaco, with nearly insufficient length to the straightaways, and all of the tight corners, he was surprised as many fans showed up as they did. What did they say in that American movie? If you build it, they will come? This place gave off the air that a farmer plowed up his field and layed down the asphalt himself. One day, perhaps, it would be better here, and he would be driving for a car that could win on this track.

With Williams on the verge of clinching the Constructors’ Championship, a track like the Hungaroring couldn’t come at a better time for the number one team. With all of the medium speed corners followed by short straights, the Williams was destined to reign. Qualifying was a breeze for the blue and yellow machines, with a second ahead of Patrese and Schumacher on the second row, and their teammates on the third. The Ferraris were poised to make a fight of it this weekend, with less demand on the top end of the engines, but being three seconds off-pace in qualifying, they knew the amount of luck it would take would be too much to hope for. Further back, Hill made his first start for the Larrouse team, back in fourteenth place, with Hakkinen to the inside and Katayama in front. He wanted to keep his momentum up, but on a track like this, if attrition didn’t fell him, he’d be struggling for a top-ten.

Senna led from pole early on, and the characteristics of the track combined with his defensive tenacity made it impossible for Mansell to press the attack home early on, and Senna slowly faded into the distance. Patrese fought his teammate and Schumacher hard through the middle portion of the race, and eventually pulled enough of a gap through traffic that the German and Austrian were fighting amongst themselves to the checkered, with Berger getting the better. Alesi’s in the Ferrari passed Brundle’s Benetton in the closing stages to earn Ferrari a single point. With yet another one-two Williams finish, the Constructors’ Championship was clinched with five races to spare, and only Mansell, Senna, and Schumacher were left for the Drivers’.

Round Twelve – L Grand Prix de Belgique – 30 August 1992 – Spa Franchorchamps

The 1992 season had finally come to one of the scenic favorite of drivers and fans alike, Spa Franchorchamps. Between the geopolitical and racing histories of the area, and the beauty of the Ardennes, it was already an unofficial crown jewel of the Formula One calendar, after Monaco, Silverstone, and Monza. As the intrateam battle at Williams was set to continue in the valley, attention came to the meteorologists, as a summer weekend at Spa inevitably meant answering the question of when it would rain, not merely if. With a reputation stretching back to his rookie season, the Senna fans were hoping for a chance for him to shine where the sun wouldn’t, and the Mansell fans were hoping for a dry race, and rain everywhere else.

Friday brought a scare to the fans present in practice, when Erik Comas went off hard and crashed at the high-speed Blanchimont corner. file:///C:/Users/Sean/Documents/The Man from Sao Paulo - Ayrton Senna to Williams in 1992.docx Senna had only been a few corners behind, and saw the Ligier in a precarious position, with Comas motionless in the cockpit. Senna halted his Williams off the racing line and rushed over, killing the engine to prevent a fire and supporting Comas’ head until Dr. Watkins and his crew came to the scene. Comas survived intact, however the incident was enough for him to sit out the rest of the weekend as he recovered from a concussion. This tipped the scales for the Belgian fans, as Comas was the teammate of favorite son Thierry Boutsen, Senna’s actions during practice were enough to convince Alain Prost to not take the temptation of filling in for Comas, as he had been in ongoing negotiations with the team to purchase it, and had been considering using the race as a field test to see what improvements would be made.

With the moment still in Ayrton’s mind when qualifying came around, Mansell sealed pole over his distracted teammate, with a shocking second place of Schumacher breaking the tedium of the grid led by the blue, yellow, and white of the Williams’ cars with a time just hundredths faster than Senna. Beside him on the second row was his old teammate Berger, followed by Patrese’s McLaren, Boutsen’s Ligier, and the Lotuses. The start of the race brought another surprise to the fans, as Mansell hesitated with his line going into La Source, allowing Schumacher to pass and Senna to set him up on the way to Les Combes. By the end of the first lap, the order was Schumacher, Senna, Mansell, Berger, Boutsen, and Patrese in the tentative final points spot, the Lotuses and Ferraris close behind. The German’s lead was not to last, though, with Senna pouncing through the downhill esses on the second lap, slowly increasing his lead as Mansell began to duel for second.

During the first stint, the skies began their familiar mid-race darkening, and Senna knew this race could be his if he weren’t to take any unnecessary chances. Pitting for wets after the rain started to fall proved to save his race, despite a rare Williams error in the pits slowing his return to the fray and allowing Schumacher past again for second, as Mansell led from his in-lap. After the stops cycled, the order was the same as the grid, but with Senna passing both with the ease of the opening laps. Further down the order, Capelli’s Ferrari had another spectacular failure on the end of the backstretch, and Patrese’s transmission couldn’t handle the strain of the circuit. Several spun off in the rain, producing rolling chicanes in the mist as the shower tapered off.

Late in the race, Schumacher showed a skill which reminded many of Senna, handling a drying track with a tenacity which matched the aids of Mansell’s Williams, who was pressed into another error, overshooting the entry into Les Combes and having to let Schumacher by as he idled through the escape lane. The final order was Senna, followed by Schumacher and Mansell, with Berger, Hakkinen, and Boutsen rounding out the points to a cheering Belgian crowd. The podium celebration had a bemused Senna, still taking in the elation of his fourtieth victory, second all-time to Prost and only four wins behind overall. He looked to the young German as another rain warrior, and was beginning to wonder how close the race would be between them in equal cars. One day soon, he would stand atop the podium, and Senna began to realize that he likely would be that very moment had he remained at McLaren.

Points after twelve races:

Drivers’:
Mansell – 86
Senna - 82
Schumacher – 46
Berger - 23
Patrese – 19
Hakinnen – 13
Brundle – 11
Alboreto– 8
Capelli - 7
Comas & Alesi – 4
Herbert – 3
Groulliard - 2
Wendlinger, Morbidelli, Lehto, & Boutsen – 1

Constructors’:
Williams – 168
Benetton - 57
McLaren - 42
Lotus - 16
Ferrari - 10
Footwork - 8
Ligier - 5
Tyrrell - 2
Minardi, March, Tyrrell, Dallara - 1


file:///C:/Users/Sean/Documents/The...yrton Senna to Williams in 1992.docx#_ednref1 Yes, outside of changing the moment from Friday qualifying to practice, I kept this as OTL. Blanchimont is an easy corner to have an error on, and as OTL proved, it was in Senna’s nature to do such a thing. I thought the story was awesome as a 9-year old fan at the time, and decided I’d keep it, butterflies be damned.

 

[athleticsfan2kx]

Wow I Can't Believe Nigel Mansell is still racing for a shot and the 1992 F1 Title because he has the lead!

 

[FickleCrossroad]

Wow I Can't Believe Nigel Mansell is still racing for a shot and the 1992 F1 Title because he has the lead!

Fairly hard to change, considering he had a decent lead going out of France, and hasn't DNF'd yet, whereas Senna had three at this point. Without DNF's by either Williams driver, the standings at this point would be 108-78, with Senna a win away from clinching the WDC in Belgium. If anything, more like 108-74, because in that scenario, I'd see Mansell beaching it in the rain trying to stay alive by finishing ahead of Schumacher, knowing that a single mechanical DNF for him at that point would effectively eliminate him from contention.

Mansell hasn't let that truth sink in yet.

 

[Geordie]

In the long term, I'm lead to believe it's all about the aerodynamics as to where F1 is going. One of my best friends is F1 mad, and an engineer. Two yeas ago, he got to a third round of interviews at Mclaren. He, and an acquaintance working at another F1 team in a similar capacity, both tell me that the trick is to limit the aerodynamic properties of the car. You get so much foul air running behind, that overtaking becomes really difficult. Because the cars are aerodynamically faster, power is then limited to balance things out. My mate insists that this is putting the cart before the horse.

Any thoughts by those with enough knowledge to analyse and comment on this assertion?

 

[FickleCrossroad]

In the long term, I'm lead to believe it's all about the aerodynamics as to where F1 is going. One of my best friends is F1 mad, and an engineer. Two yeas ago, he got to a third round of interviews at Mclaren. He, and an acquaintance working at another F1 team in a similar capacity, both tell me that the trick is to limit the aerodynamic properties of the car. You get so much foul air running behind, that overtaking becomes really difficult. Because the cars are aerodynamically faster, power is then limited to balance things out. My mate insists that this is putting the cart before the horse.

Any thoughts by those with enough knowledge to analyse and comment on this assertion?

From what I understand, the aero wash of F1 cars over the last 30-odd years is the reason. Too many elements are scattered on top of the car, that the turbulence screws everything up. Ironically, the cure was banned early on: Ground effects with a double-chassis designed to keep the physical demands on the drivers low enough they wouldn't risk fatigue-related DNF's. The Lotus 88 and Brabham BT49 are your cures. Nearly zero aero wash, because all the downforce is from the ground effects.

 

[Geordie]

From what I understand, the aero wash of F1 cars over the last 30-odd years is the reason. Too many elements are scattered on top of the car, that the turbulence screws everything up. Ironically, the cure was banned early on: Ground effects with a double-chassis designed to keep the physical demands on the drivers low enough they wouldn't risk fatigue-related DNF's. The Lotus 88 and Brabham BT49 are your cures. Nearly zero aero wash, because all the downforce is from the ground effects.

Interesting. I'm not an engineer, and don't even pretend to understand all the ins and outs of said debate, but the fact that a solution could be available is interesting. I'd always wondered how one could limit the affect of the car in front...

EDIT: I've had a look at the cars mentioned (just the Wiki articles, but they should be good enough). The Lotus 88 especially sounds like an interesting idea. Any chance of the FIA changing regulations in TTL to allow double chassis designs for the '94 season...?