Latest news:

2019 Mexican Grand Prix Countdown

Days
Hours
Minutes
Seconds

Goto Page: Previous123456
Current Page: 6 of 6
Re: Future of Paddy Lowe thread
juras 21 February, 2019 21:17
The car does not look bad. Paddy Lowe needs time. Last year we had a bad car and two inexperienced pilots. Now we have a much better car and two exceptional racers.
Let's wait for next week, there will be a rehearsal.

The team keeps them together, that's good. He blames himself publicly for no good.

Williams forward!

Re: Future of Paddy Lowe thread
Gunk 21 February, 2019 21:56
Thing is, though, RBR had a guinea pig B team to try out Honda. Without that, would they have committed? I don't think so.

Re: Future of Paddy Lowe thread
Ozzy Osbone 21 February, 2019 22:32
Quote:
Gunk
Thing is, though, RBR had a guinea pig B team to try out Honda. Without that, would they have committed? I don't think so.

But they are a race winning team with a huge budget and much to lose so no. We on the other hand are always looking around for a budget and had little to lose to be honest. The money alone and the chance that we may have ended up with the best engine in time.

Maybe it's moot as they might not have looked twice at us anyway. Or maybe we did try and fail. Who knows.

Honda would have known the TR deal was a rehearsal for the main event.

Re: Future of Paddy Lowe thread
phatjack 21 February, 2019 23:03
Quote:
Gunk
Thing is, though, RBR had a guinea pig B team to try out Honda. Without that, would they have committed? I don't think so.

Fair point though the B Team seems to be looking good in preseason testing.

Re: Future of Paddy Lowe thread
andy si 21 February, 2019 23:09
Quote:
phatjack
Quote:
Gunk
Thing is, though, RBR had a guinea pig B team to try out Honda. Without that, would they have committed? I don't think so.

Fair point though the B Team seems to be looking good in preseason testing.

Well, after a few seasons of continuous development some tech must run down to the B team.
Make it stronger to eat up competitors points away.

Re: Future of Paddy Lowe thread
George Orwell 22 February, 2019 00:51
[thejudge13.com]

TJ13 exclusive: A source from Grove has approached us: why are Williams F1 so bad?

Late on Monday, TJ13 received an anonymous email from an internal source within Grove. To quote:

“At the end of last year, all the managers in all manufacturing departments got sacked after an internal survey.

“They all obviously appealed, and have now all been paid off with no employment restrictions.

“Upper management are now trying to implement new working hours and staff are refusing to work more than the standard shift hours in protest of any change. So not a surprise the car is late and is not at the test”

Williams has managed to get their car to Barcelona this morning, but say that they’ll not be running until the afternoon at the earliest. The car arrived at 4am and Williams has been working since then to get it ready.

Both Lowe and deputy team principal Claire Williams have media sessions scheduled today.

Re: Future of Paddy Lowe thread
AlanJones 22 February, 2019 07:33
Hmm, such a large let go would have triggered some sources or people in the press. Why is this coming out some two months after?




http://oi60.tinypic.com/24eyh6f.jpg

Re: Future of Paddy Lowe thread
Stuart L 22 February, 2019 07:40
[www.racefans.net]

DieterRenken article

Re: Future of Paddy Lowe thread
Gunk 22 February, 2019 10:12
Quote:
AlanJones
Hmm, such a large let go would have triggered some sources or people in the press. Why is this coming out some two months after?

Non-disclosure agreements.

However,it would appear that the source is now leaking like a sieve.

As Rencken writes, the problems appear to revolve around management and the drawing office.

Re: Future of Paddy Lowe thread
AlanJones 22 February, 2019 10:18
Well where the problems are addressed now, are the fields of which we all were quite sceptical about for a while now. So the change itself bears logic to me and I would even go as far as saying I applaud it. But that doesnt mean that it is still quite strange of this story not coming out sooner.




http://oi60.tinypic.com/24eyh6f.jpg

Re: Future of Paddy Lowe thread
Gunk 22 February, 2019 10:52
Quote:
AlanJones
But that doesnt mean that it is still quite strange of this story not coming out sooner.

Probably because the problems did not physically manifest themselves until the last minute during the build, resulting in the spectacular no show on Monday. The late release of engineering drawings was known, but that some were inaccurate and some parts just did not fit was another twist.

Seems to me that whoever stepped into Ed Woods' shoes does not quite have the same competence.

Re: Future of Paddy Lowe thread
Stuart L 22 February, 2019 11:02
I agree with that. I think Ed Wood was more an engineering manager, the one responsible for process management and the link between manufacturing, car build and design. Maybe he wasn’t a designer in the Adrian newey Moulden, but he managed process well relative to what we have today.

However Iaddy comes in and says that lead times are quicker at Mercedes, and the team has been jumping to try to close up to those lead times with half the staff of Mercedes. It’s that attempt to continuously improve that has stressed the system.

I think Ross Brawn achieved these changes by talking and carrying existing staff with him, not wholesale change. Maybe Oaddy doesn’t have those people skills.

Re: Future of Paddy Lowe thread
Gunk 04 March, 2019 05:58
Quote:
Stuart L
I agree with that. I think Ed Wood was more an engineering manager, the one responsible for process management and the link between manufacturing, car build and design. Maybe he wasn’t a designer in the Adrian newey Moulden, but he managed process well relative to what we have today.
However Iaddy comes in and says that lead times are quicker at Mercedes, and the team has been jumping to try to close up to those lead times with half the staff of Mercedes. It’s that attempt to continuously improve that has stressed the system.

I think Ross Brawn achieved these changes by talking and carrying existing staff with him, not wholesale change. Maybe Oaddy doesn’t have those people skills.

I meant to reply to this earlier, Stuart.

I agree about Ed Wood. Pat left 'with immediate effect' at the end of 2016. Paddy was not on board until March 2017. So the whole manufacturing and build process was handled in-house, on-time and drama-free, without any TD whatsover, 'underperforming' or otherwise.

This lends credence to your argument in the following paragraph. I can see the argument for shrinking build times because you will gain design and innovation time. But perhaps the structure isn't there.

Mehryar posted recently that, along with losing some quite high-profile people, you inevitably lose some functionality. I have no idea whether DeBeer genuinely screwed up or was scapegoated, but it remains that the functionality is still needed. Like Wood, he hasn't been replaced. Incidentally, neither has Smedley.

Re: Future of Paddy Lowe thread
shriekback 04 March, 2019 10:30
I have to say that this whole discussion proceeds upon the entirely dubious assumption that all the problems that have befallen Williams the last few years have originated out of some objective dysfunction within the team itself and that the ever evolving nature of the sport is not a particularly relevant factor.

It is, of course, the case that the team, in order to successfully compete, has to successfully adapt to changes in the sport, like very other team must, but their problems may just as well have occurred had their been no changes within the team. That is to say, the various individuals and departments within the team could have done just as good a job in a sense as those who preceded them did, but that job may have sufficiently changed--grown more complicated or made more rapid in pace--such that that same level of team performance yielded, under those changed circumstances, different results.

Consider the repeated claims by Claire that the traditional way of doing things at Williams simply no longer worked and some pretty basic changes needed to be made. It is not that those methods were inherently flawed. Far from it--they are the third winningest team in F1 history following those methods. Rather, they just no longer work very well under present conditions. They have presumably updated (many times probably) the tools they used to build the FW42 from those they used to develop the FW07--the car with which they first won the championship almost 40 years ago. Would you have them still using those tools now on a carbon fiber chassis because they worked so well before? Obviously not, so why expect that the same organizational methods, work structure, etc. will work in a sport now dominated by massive corporate teams like Mercedes and Ferrari?

The Rencken article notes that the time for developing and producing the car was squeezed at both ends (a factor that Claire has clearly and repeatedly cited as decisive in the team's late arrival to testing) but then dismisses that fact as unimportant with no very good basis for doing so. Ok, Racing Point showed up with a complete car on time. Their own head of design, however, has labeled the car "vanilla" and the team has promised a major upgrade before the first race that will hopefully alter their very disappointing performance (ie. only ahead of Williams and not by very much) so far. Rencken labels their car "competitive," but it is nowhere near where it actually placed last year if one ignores the way the re-branding of the team changed their standing in the points. Williams has clearly taken a step forward in performance whereas Racing Point has, so far, taken a large step backward. So how are they the example that makes the reality of incompetent personnel at Williams undeniable?

Nevertheless, Rencken still stupidly asserts "This smacks of denial," in response to Claire's admission that what led up to the late finishing of the car requires further inquiry and is not a matter they will likely discuss in detail in public even when that inquiry has been completed. Claire's response is, after all, entirely reasonable and honest if what needs to be undertaken at Williams is the implementation of changes in order to meet the novel requirements of a constantly evolving sport. That would be a potentially very complicated matter and how the team resolves to deal with it would not be something you would want to share with your competitors. Let them grapple with that challenge--which they surely face as well--without help from Williams. It is arguably in fact the essence of the struggle between all the teams, from top to bottom. Whoever adapts not just their car, but their larger methods, organizational structure, etc. that produces a good car, effective race strategy, keeps up morale, and so on, is in the end the team that wins.

So Williams obviously needs to do better, but blaming individuals as incompetent is likely a hugely counterproductive approach and I see no real grounds for accusing Claire or the team of some denial, or of falsely shielding those responsible and thereby placing a morale-crushing and unfair blame on the innocent. That again presumes (wrongly) that some individuals must be blamed, precisely what Claire denies.

I don't mean to just be rude about it, but this basic error in reasoning does not speak well of Rencken's general intelligence. This is just a really poorly reasoned argument and can, I think, be pretty much dismissed.

The one in TJ13 barely makes any argument at all and simply strings together a series of claims as though they obviously amount to something. They don't.

Goto Page: Previous123456
Current Page: 6 of 6

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net