05/31/2012
62 Custom Vette......It's Finished.............5/30
Going to build a custom Vette..........................................................
More coming soon..........................
Source: http://cs.scaleautomag.com/SCACS/forums/thread/1014489.aspx
05/30/2012
Fresh questions over struggling Schumacher
Michael Schumacher's collision with Williams driver Bruno Senna in Sunday's Spanish Grand Prix has once again focused awkward attention on the German legend's lacklustre performances for Mercedes.
A senior member of the Mercedes team used the word "mediocre" last weekend when discussing the 43-year-old's driving, and that was before Schumacher clumsily ran into the back of Senna's car in the race.
It was the sort of error you might expect from a beginner, not a man with 91 grand prix victories and seven world titles under his belt.
Coming at Senna from a long way back, Schumacher seemed simply to misjudge the closing speed of the two cars and, caught in two minds about which direction to go, he ran into the back of the Williams.
Schumacher called Senna an "idiot" on the radio as he sat in the gravel trap in the immediate aftermath, and, even after watching replays, he still seemed convinced it was his rival's fault. The stewards disagreed and gave him a five-place grid penalty for the next race in Monaco.
Schumacher's reaction will have surprised no-one in F1 - he has always seemed to lack the ability to accept he can ever be wrong.
In an aspiring young driver, this is a characteristic one might expect. But age is supposed to bring wisdom and, in this aspect at least, it appears not to be the case with Schumacher.
With the passing years comes an inevitable waning of physical abilities, and it is surely now beyond dispute that this has come even to him.
Michael Schumacher collides with Bruno Senna during the Spanish Grand Prix. Photo: Reuters
How long can he go on raging against the dying of the light? More to the point, perhaps, how long can Mercedes accept it?
There is no shame in Schumacher not being the driver he was - one can argue there is honour in him being able to achieve even what he has as he heads into the middle of his fifth decade.
The facts, though, are that he is now no more than a decent F1 driver - and some may argue not even that.
Statistically, this is the worst start to a season in Schumacher's career. But statistics can be misleading - Schumacher actually started the season well. He was the stronger of the two Mercedes drivers in the first two races.
But then came China and Nico Rosberg's qualifying lap, half a second quicker than his team-mate, who was second on the grid.
The gap was explained almost entirely by a stunning middle sector of the lap from Rosberg, which Schumacher, I'm told, justified to himself by Rosberg managing to turn his tyres on better.
That may well have been the reason, but the gap was there nonetheless. As it was again in the race, when that excuse was less justifiable. Schumacher was simply outclassed by his team-mate.
They have been more evenly matched since, but still Schumacher is almost certainly getting no more from the car than a number of other drivers could manage.
The contrast, with what Fernando Alonso is doing in the Ferrari - which is not dissimilar to the sort of thing Schumacher used to achieve in his early years with the team - is stark.
The tragedy of Schumacher's current situation is that it is leading some people to question his earlier achievements of seven world titles; two with Benetton and five with Ferrari between 1994 and 2004.
His criticisms of the Pirelli tyres after Bahrain drew uncomfortable parallels with the bespoke tyres from Bridgestone which Schumacher enjoyed for much of his Ferrari career, a subject that was largely unexplored during his pomp.
Some are beginning to wonder if seven titles really was such an amazing achievement, given the advantages he had at his disposal?
This would be wrong, though. There is no doubt that the Schumacher of the 1990s and early 2000s was an outstanding racing driver, one of the greatest there has ever been.
But that Schumacher belongs to the past.
The current one is out of contract at the end of this season. This, in fact, was the context in which the "mediocre" remark came up.
So what reasons do Mercedes have to keep him on, rather than try for someone else?
Lewis Hamilton, also looking for a new deal in 2013, may well not be available, or interested. Alonso, Sebastian Vettel and Jenson Button are committed to their current teams. Those left are all unproven.
Schumacher may continue to embarrass himself in wheel-to-wheel racing occasionally, but he's close to Rosberg's pace these days - and Mercedes' top management rate their younger driver very highly indeed.
The other reason is less palatable for those who like to consider F1 as the arena in which the very best drivers in the world do battle. It's commercial.
Schumacher's marketing value to Mercedes is huge. After Rosberg's victory in China, vice-president of Mercedes motorsport Norbert Haug delighted in how "fantastic" Schumacher had been in front of 800 guests at the launch of a new road car model in Shanghai the previous night. It had been, Haug said, "the perfect weekend".
Schumacher may no longer be one of the best F1 drivers, but around the world he remains arguably the most famous - and therefore the most valuable to Mercedes off the track. And in Germany, Mercedes' home, he is largely untouchable, voted recently the greatest national sportsman in history.
Ultimately, though, Mercedes are in F1 to win - and it is no secret that, after two disappointing seasons, the pressure on the team at the start of this season was enormous.
It will have been alleviated somewhat by their win in China, but the team have faded after a promising start and currently look no better than they did through much of last year.
In a season as topsy-turvy as this, that could easily change - and, who knows, if everything comes together perhaps Schumacher can win again. After all, who before the weekend would have predicted Pastor Maldonado's victory in Spain?
But, all things being equal, that looks unlikely. For a team with an average car who need to win, is a "mediocre" driver, however famous, good enough?
Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/andrewbenson/2012/05/fresh_questions_over_mediocre.html
Ferrari Launch Their 2011 Car The F150
Source: http://f1fanatics.wordpress.com/2011/01/31/ferrari-launch-their-2011-car-the-f150/
05/29/2012
05/28/2012
05/27/2012
05/26/2012
Drivers' meeting 'promises to be very interesting'
Oh to be a fly on the wall at the drivers' briefing ahead of the Spanish Grand Prix next month.
The controversial decision not to penalise either Nico Rosberg for his aggressive defence against Lewis Hamilton and Fernando Alonso at the Bahrain Grand Prix or Hamilton for overtaking by going off the track has led to considerable debate within Formula 1.
So much so, that Alonso, a man who weighs his words carefully, has decided to speak out about it. After learning of the ruling, the Ferrari driver said to his 400,000-plus Twitter followers: "I think you are going to have fun in future races! You can defend position as you want and you can overtake outside the track! Enjoy!"
Nico Rosberg (left) and Lewis Hamilton may have differing views at the drivers' meeting. Photo: Getty
On the face of it, and at first glance, the stewards' decision does appear difficult to understand.
With both Hamilton on lap 10 and Alonso on lap 24, Rosberg veered dramatically to the inside - and, unusually, right across to the white line that demarcates the edge of the circuit.
Both Hamilton and Alonso went off the track in avoidance, to varying degrees. Whereas Hamilton kept going and succeeded in passing the Mercedes, Alonso backed off and tried for the outside line, but had lost too much momentum to pull a move off.
Article 20.4 of the sporting regulations says: "Manoeuvres liable to hinder other drivers, such as deliberate crowding of a car beyond the edge of the track or any other abnormal change of direction, are not permitted."
So why was Rosberg not penalised?
The stewards said his defence was legitimate because although it was Rosberg who started to deviate from his line first, he did so in a "constant and continuous straight-line manner" and neither Hamilton nor Alonso had "a significant portion of their car... alongside" Rosberg's.
In other words, because Rosberg moved first, he was always clearly in front and it was therefore effectively the other driver's decision to keep moving to the inside to the point that he was off the track.
In Hamilton's case, if you watch the TV footage back, you can clearly see this is the case.
It is less obviously so with Alonso - and the stewards had to use the footage from the Ferrari's onboard camera before they came to a conclusion.
I have not seen the footage, but I'm told it showed again that a) Rosberg moved first; and b) at no point was "a significant portion" of Alonso's car alongside the Mercedes.
During the race, viewers heard Alonso say over his team radio: "He pushed me off the track. You have to leave a space. All the time you have to leave a space."
This, though, is not actually what the regulations say.
A new rule, article 20.3, was introduced this year to formally enshrine that "any driver moving back towards the racing line, having earlier defended his position off line, should leave at least one car width between his own car and the edge of the track on the approach to a corner".
But this only applies when he is making a second move - there is nothing in the rules to stop drivers going right to the edge of the track in their first defensive move.
In other words, you might think - as Alonso did - that Rosberg's driving was unfair, overly aggressive, even dangerous, but the rules contain nothing the stewards could use to penalise him.
There is no obligation, I'm told by a senior figure, to leave room for a rival, unless he is partially alongside. The question then becomes, how far alongside does a driver have to be before the man he is overtaking has to leave him room with his first move?
That's where it starts to get awkward.
"It's no different," a senior insider says, "to a conventional overtaking manoeuvre when one driver dives down the inside, gets halfway alongside and they collide. One guy says: 'You should have given me room.' The other says: 'You weren't far enough alongside.' Often drivers' perception of a situation differs from the reality."
The stewards have to use their judgement, including factors such as speed differential between the cars, when a driver moved, how many moves he made, and so on.
Back, though, to what the rules do say. Article 20.2 says drivers "must use the track at all times". This is why Rosberg said over his team radio: "Hamilton passed me off the track."
Which Hamilton clearly did. So why was he not penalised?
The stewards, I'm told, asked: "What advantage did Hamilton gain by going off the track?" And they concluded that if he had gone to the outside, he was carrying so much momentum he would have passed anyway.
The most obvious of several counter-points to that is: "Yes, but Hamilton did go off the track when you have established he didn't need to, and he did pass him by doing so, so he should be penalised."
At least two leading drivers share this view, I'm told. But you have to bear in mind that Hamilton is not the most popular driver on the grid and his rivals are "always looking for ways to nail him", as one source put it on Monday.
The problem arose in the first place because concrete run-offs surround the circuit in Bahrain. Drivers can use these with impunity, safe in the knowledge that if they are forced off the track they are not going to spin on wet grass or hit a wall.
Had there been grass there, Hamilton would not have been able to pull off the same move (another argument for a penalty being applied) and Alonso might have backed off sooner.
Equally, had there been grass there - or even a wall - Rosberg might well have given them both a bit more room.
The stewards weighed it all up and felt that, in this instance, penalising Hamilton would have been overly harsh.
The result is some drivers believe Hamilton should have been penalised, some believe Rosberg should have been, and Alonso is saying the stewards' ruling gives drivers carte blanche to overtake off the track or crowd their rivals as much as they like.
Which is why that drivers' meeting in Barcelona promises to be so interesting.
Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/andrewbenson/2012/04/unanswered_questions_for_rosbe.html
Drivers' meeting 'promises to be very interesting'
Oh to be a fly on the wall at the drivers' briefing ahead of the Spanish Grand Prix next month.
The controversial decision not to penalise either Nico Rosberg for his aggressive defence against Lewis Hamilton and Fernando Alonso at the Bahrain Grand Prix or Hamilton for overtaking by going off the track has led to considerable debate within Formula 1.
So much so, that Alonso, a man who weighs his words carefully, has decided to speak out about it. After learning of the ruling, the Ferrari driver said to his 400,000-plus Twitter followers: "I think you are going to have fun in future races! You can defend position as you want and you can overtake outside the track! Enjoy!"
Nico Rosberg (left) and Lewis Hamilton may have differing views at the drivers' meeting. Photo: Getty
On the face of it, and at first glance, the stewards' decision does appear difficult to understand.
With both Hamilton on lap 10 and Alonso on lap 24, Rosberg veered dramatically to the inside - and, unusually, right across to the white line that demarcates the edge of the circuit.
Both Hamilton and Alonso went off the track in avoidance, to varying degrees. Whereas Hamilton kept going and succeeded in passing the Mercedes, Alonso backed off and tried for the outside line, but had lost too much momentum to pull a move off.
Article 20.4 of the sporting regulations says: "Manoeuvres liable to hinder other drivers, such as deliberate crowding of a car beyond the edge of the track or any other abnormal change of direction, are not permitted."
So why was Rosberg not penalised?
The stewards said his defence was legitimate because although it was Rosberg who started to deviate from his line first, he did so in a "constant and continuous straight-line manner" and neither Hamilton nor Alonso had "a significant portion of their car... alongside" Rosberg's.
In other words, because Rosberg moved first, he was always clearly in front and it was therefore effectively the other driver's decision to keep moving to the inside to the point that he was off the track.
In Hamilton's case, if you watch the TV footage back, you can clearly see this is the case.
It is less obviously so with Alonso - and the stewards had to use the footage from the Ferrari's onboard camera before they came to a conclusion.
I have not seen the footage, but I'm told it showed again that a) Rosberg moved first; and b) at no point was "a significant portion" of Alonso's car alongside the Mercedes.
During the race, viewers heard Alonso say over his team radio: "He pushed me off the track. You have to leave a space. All the time you have to leave a space."
This, though, is not actually what the regulations say.
A new rule, article 20.3, was introduced this year to formally enshrine that "any driver moving back towards the racing line, having earlier defended his position off line, should leave at least one car width between his own car and the edge of the track on the approach to a corner".
But this only applies when he is making a second move - there is nothing in the rules to stop drivers going right to the edge of the track in their first defensive move.
In other words, you might think - as Alonso did - that Rosberg's driving was unfair, overly aggressive, even dangerous, but the rules contain nothing the stewards could use to penalise him.
There is no obligation, I'm told by a senior figure, to leave room for a rival, unless he is partially alongside. The question then becomes, how far alongside does a driver have to be before the man he is overtaking has to leave him room with his first move?
That's where it starts to get awkward.
"It's no different," a senior insider says, "to a conventional overtaking manoeuvre when one driver dives down the inside, gets halfway alongside and they collide. One guy says: 'You should have given me room.' The other says: 'You weren't far enough alongside.' Often drivers' perception of a situation differs from the reality."
The stewards have to use their judgement, including factors such as speed differential between the cars, when a driver moved, how many moves he made, and so on.
Back, though, to what the rules do say. Article 20.2 says drivers "must use the track at all times". This is why Rosberg said over his team radio: "Hamilton passed me off the track."
Which Hamilton clearly did. So why was he not penalised?
The stewards, I'm told, asked: "What advantage did Hamilton gain by going off the track?" And they concluded that if he had gone to the outside, he was carrying so much momentum he would have passed anyway.
The most obvious of several counter-points to that is: "Yes, but Hamilton did go off the track when you have established he didn't need to, and he did pass him by doing so, so he should be penalised."
At least two leading drivers share this view, I'm told. But you have to bear in mind that Hamilton is not the most popular driver on the grid and his rivals are "always looking for ways to nail him", as one source put it on Monday.
The problem arose in the first place because concrete run-offs surround the circuit in Bahrain. Drivers can use these with impunity, safe in the knowledge that if they are forced off the track they are not going to spin on wet grass or hit a wall.
Had there been grass there, Hamilton would not have been able to pull off the same move (another argument for a penalty being applied) and Alonso might have backed off sooner.
Equally, had there been grass there - or even a wall - Rosberg might well have given them both a bit more room.
The stewards weighed it all up and felt that, in this instance, penalising Hamilton would have been overly harsh.
The result is some drivers believe Hamilton should have been penalised, some believe Rosberg should have been, and Alonso is saying the stewards' ruling gives drivers carte blanche to overtake off the track or crowd their rivals as much as they like.
Which is why that drivers' meeting in Barcelona promises to be so interesting.
Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/andrewbenson/2012/04/unanswered_questions_for_rosbe.html
Gerhard Berger Eric Bernard Enrique Bernoldi Enrico Bertaggia
05/25/2012
Fresh questions over struggling Schumacher
Michael Schumacher's collision with Williams driver Bruno Senna in Sunday's Spanish Grand Prix has once again focused awkward attention on the German legend's lacklustre performances for Mercedes.
A senior member of the Mercedes team used the word "mediocre" last weekend when discussing the 43-year-old's driving, and that was before Schumacher clumsily ran into the back of Senna's car in the race.
It was the sort of error you might expect from a beginner, not a man with 91 grand prix victories and seven world titles under his belt.
Coming at Senna from a long way back, Schumacher seemed simply to misjudge the closing speed of the two cars and, caught in two minds about which direction to go, he ran into the back of the Williams.
Schumacher called Senna an "idiot" on the radio as he sat in the gravel trap in the immediate aftermath, and, even after watching replays, he still seemed convinced it was his rival's fault. The stewards disagreed and gave him a five-place grid penalty for the next race in Monaco.
Schumacher's reaction will have surprised no-one in F1 - he has always seemed to lack the ability to accept he can ever be wrong.
In an aspiring young driver, this is a characteristic one might expect. But age is supposed to bring wisdom and, in this aspect at least, it appears not to be the case with Schumacher.
With the passing years comes an inevitable waning of physical abilities, and it is surely now beyond dispute that this has come even to him.
Michael Schumacher collides with Bruno Senna during the Spanish Grand Prix. Photo: Reuters
How long can he go on raging against the dying of the light? More to the point, perhaps, how long can Mercedes accept it?
There is no shame in Schumacher not being the driver he was - one can argue there is honour in him being able to achieve even what he has as he heads into the middle of his fifth decade.
The facts, though, are that he is now no more than a decent F1 driver - and some may argue not even that.
Statistically, this is the worst start to a season in Schumacher's career. But statistics can be misleading - Schumacher actually started the season well. He was the stronger of the two Mercedes drivers in the first two races.
But then came China and Nico Rosberg's qualifying lap, half a second quicker than his team-mate, who was second on the grid.
The gap was explained almost entirely by a stunning middle sector of the lap from Rosberg, which Schumacher, I'm told, justified to himself by Rosberg managing to turn his tyres on better.
That may well have been the reason, but the gap was there nonetheless. As it was again in the race, when that excuse was less justifiable. Schumacher was simply outclassed by his team-mate.
They have been more evenly matched since, but still Schumacher is almost certainly getting no more from the car than a number of other drivers could manage.
The contrast, with what Fernando Alonso is doing in the Ferrari - which is not dissimilar to the sort of thing Schumacher used to achieve in his early years with the team - is stark.
The tragedy of Schumacher's current situation is that it is leading some people to question his earlier achievements of seven world titles; two with Benetton and five with Ferrari between 1994 and 2004.
His criticisms of the Pirelli tyres after Bahrain drew uncomfortable parallels with the bespoke tyres from Bridgestone which Schumacher enjoyed for much of his Ferrari career, a subject that was largely unexplored during his pomp.
Some are beginning to wonder if seven titles really was such an amazing achievement, given the advantages he had at his disposal?
This would be wrong, though. There is no doubt that the Schumacher of the 1990s and early 2000s was an outstanding racing driver, one of the greatest there has ever been.
But that Schumacher belongs to the past.
The current one is out of contract at the end of this season. This, in fact, was the context in which the "mediocre" remark came up.
So what reasons do Mercedes have to keep him on, rather than try for someone else?
Lewis Hamilton, also looking for a new deal in 2013, may well not be available, or interested. Alonso, Sebastian Vettel and Jenson Button are committed to their current teams. Those left are all unproven.
Schumacher may continue to embarrass himself in wheel-to-wheel racing occasionally, but he's close to Rosberg's pace these days - and Mercedes' top management rate their younger driver very highly indeed.
The other reason is less palatable for those who like to consider F1 as the arena in which the very best drivers in the world do battle. It's commercial.
Schumacher's marketing value to Mercedes is huge. After Rosberg's victory in China, vice-president of Mercedes motorsport Norbert Haug delighted in how "fantastic" Schumacher had been in front of 800 guests at the launch of a new road car model in Shanghai the previous night. It had been, Haug said, "the perfect weekend".
Schumacher may no longer be one of the best F1 drivers, but around the world he remains arguably the most famous - and therefore the most valuable to Mercedes off the track. And in Germany, Mercedes' home, he is largely untouchable, voted recently the greatest national sportsman in history.
Ultimately, though, Mercedes are in F1 to win - and it is no secret that, after two disappointing seasons, the pressure on the team at the start of this season was enormous.
It will have been alleviated somewhat by their win in China, but the team have faded after a promising start and currently look no better than they did through much of last year.
In a season as topsy-turvy as this, that could easily change - and, who knows, if everything comes together perhaps Schumacher can win again. After all, who before the weekend would have predicted Pastor Maldonado's victory in Spain?
But, all things being equal, that looks unlikely. For a team with an average car who need to win, is a "mediocre" driver, however famous, good enough?
Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/andrewbenson/2012/05/fresh_questions_over_mediocre.html
Alonso sets the standard
Fernando Alonso's face as he stood on the top step of the podium said it all - a mixture of extreme satisfaction, delight and disbelief.
"Incredible, incredible," he said in Spanish in his television interviews immediately afterwards, and that seemed as good a summing up as any of one of the most remarkable and thrilling grands prix for some time.
Alonso's victory was the 28th of his career and it moved him ahead of Sir Jackie Stewart in the all-time list of winners - he is now behind only Michael Schumacher, Alain Prost, Ayrton Senna and Nigel Mansell, whose 31 wins are his next target.
The Ferrari team leader's presence in such celebrated company is a reminder, as if one was needed, of what a great grand prix driver Alonso is and it was appropriate that his drive on Sunday was one that befitted such a landmark.
Alonso moved up to fifth on the all-time victories list with his win in Malaysia. Photo: Getty
Arguably not the greatest qualifier, Alonso has produced some stunning races in his career, and the one in Malaysia on Sunday ranks up there with the very best.
The Ferrari in its current form has no business whatsoever being able to win a race. In normal, dry conditions, it is way off the pace of the McLaren, Red Bull, Mercedes and Lotus, and almost certainly slower also than the Williams and the Sauber.
And yet there was Alonso, up in fifth place from eighth on the grid by the end of lap one, challenging world champion Sebastian Vettel's Red Bull, which he moved ahead of thanks to stopping one lap earlier for wet tyres in the downpour that led to the race being stopped on lap six.
What won him the race, though, were the laps after the re-start.
He emerged in the lead on lap 16, helped by McLaren having to hold Lewis Hamilton in the pits as Felipe Massa came past.
After everyone had stopped for intermediate tyres, Alonso was 2.4 seconds ahead of Sauber's Sergio Perez - of whose stunning performance more later - and 6.2secs ahead of Lewis Hamilton in the McLaren.
At that point, most would have expected Hamilton - one of the greatest wet-weather drivers in history - to close in on the two cars ahead of him. Instead, Alonso pulled away from Perez, who himself pulled away from Hamilton.
This was, as BBC F1 co-commentator David Coulthard said, "Alonso at his brilliant best", as he built an eight-second lead over Perez in 12 laps.
Alonso is such a benchmark, so peerless, so utterly relentless and unforgiving when he senses a sniff of a win, that it seemed impossible at that stage that he would not win the race.
But then Perez began to come back at him - showing the differing characteristics of the two cars that have been apparent since the start of pre-season testing. The Ferrari is hard on its tyres and the Sauber is the opposite.
Closer and closer Perez got, first by fractions, then by full seconds until by lap 40 he appeared to have Alonso at his mercy.
Stopping a lap earlier than Perez for 'slick' dry-weather tyres put his lead back up to seven seconds, but on these the Sauber was even more superior.
Perez was within a second of Alonso by lap 48 - with eight to go - and what would have been a fully deserved victory by a man who from the beginning of his career last year has looked destined for great things seemed inevitable.
In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions. If you're reading via RSS, you'll need to visit the blog to access this content.
F1 being what it is, a lot may well be made of the radio call that Perez received at about this point. "Checo, be careful, we need this position," he was told by his team, who use Ferrari engines. Was this simply a team that is known to be struggling for finance sensibly warning an excited young driver to make sure he didn't bin it when a valuable podium place was up for grabs? Or was it, as some will surmise, team orders in disguise, an order not to try to deprive the company on whose largesse they have depended in many more seasons than this one of a much-needed win? If it was a team order, Perez didn't seem to pay any attention - he continued to push hard until he made that fateful error. And team principal Monisha Kaltenborn dismissed any thoughts of a conspiracy.
"What we meant was get the car home," she said. "It was important to us to get the result - there was nothing else to it. There was no instruction."
Either of them would have been a deserving winner after two superlative drives - and there were other noteworthy performances down the field, too.
Bruno Senna showed something of his famous uncle's wet-weather skills with his climb up from last place at the restart to finish an impressive sixth.
And Toro Rosso's Jean-Eric Vergne, who narrowly missed out on a point on his debut last weekend in Australia, delivered in spades with a sure-footed drive in the treacherous conditions at Sepang.
The Frenchman was the only driver to stick with intermediate tyres in the early downpour, and he continued to perform impressively on his way to eighth place, just behind last year's rookie of the year Paul di Resta, who also looked good.
Senna, Vergne and most of all Perez clearly have bright futures ahead of them.
But ahead of them all was the man whose consistent excellence over a 10-year career not only they but everyone else in F1 has to aspire to.
"Great race for Alonso, top job, and also Perez," Jenson Button said on Sunday evening in Malaysia. You can say that again.
Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/andrewbenson/2012/03/alonso_sets_the_standard.html
Andrea de Cesaris Francois Cevert Eugene Chaboud Jay Chamberlain
Marussia Virgin Racing Launch Their 2011 Car
Source: http://f1fanatics.wordpress.com/2011/02/07/marussia-virgin-racing-launch-their-2011-car/
