From: b102smi@utarlg.uta.edu (George M. Smiley)
Subject: Re: Williams F1
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: The University of Texas at Arlington
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 22:43:00 GMT

chrisp@regenmeister.Sun.COM (Chris Prael) writes...
> 
>The issue is that it has become clear that it takes a special and
>seemingly different, tallent to excell in a car with active suspension.
>The results of all uses and testing of active suspension F1 cars makes
>it clear that some very fine drivers DO NOT have the required tallent.
>The list to date of the does and don't is DO: Mansell, Hill; DON'T:
>Senna, Patrese, Berger, Piquet.
> 
Your don't list is absurd. To include Senna and Berger is silly. Perhaps
you should ask yourself why none of the three Mclaren active/reactive 
suspension systems under development have ever been used in a race. Could
it be that they are incomplete and possibly dangerous. Mclaren has rarely
been able to get a regular suspension right and now you seem to be implying
that they mastered an active suspension and would of used it except for
the poor driving skills of Senna and Berger. Until either of these fine
drivers test a Williams the point is moot. No comparison can be drawn between
one qualifying session in a car equiped with a prototype system under rather
desperate conditions in the constructors championship to the years
worth of experience the Williams team has enjoyed except for the relative
strengths/weaknesses of each teams engineering staffs and not each teams 
drivers.

>The testing results that have been published, so far show that the
>closest Prost has gotten to Hill's times is 0.6 seconds slower and the
>numbers have more often been in the range of 1.0 to 1.6 seconds slower.
>Those numbers say that today, Damon Hill can walk away from Allain Prost
>the same way that Nigel Mansell walked away from Rico Patrese.
>
I wonder, how many backmarkers did Hill pass ? How many times did he
come in for new tires ? How many times has he tested the same equipment
at the same track ? I should hope that a professional tester who has
been working with the same team/equipment for over a year should be able 
beat a professional driver who sat out the same year by a second a lap
in a testing situation. Prost never has been a particularly blazing
fast driver (something around 20 poles), yet he has managed to win
more races and score more points than any other driver ever. What can
Hill bring to the table that Prost hasn't already gone up against ?

>Allain Prost has great tallant, a powerful intelligence, superb
>experience, and a great will to win.  (He is also a great in whiner as 
>Mansell and Senna.)  But, unless he can close and reverse that gap that 
>now separates him from Hill,  Damon must be the favorite for next years 
>championship.
> 
>Chris Prael

Here is my scenario, Prost outqualifies Hill for most of the season
due to the Prosts experience in that arena (testing and qualifying are
two very different enterprises). If Hill is in fact more of a reactive
suspension ace than Prost, Prost will simply beat him to the first corner
and keep the inexperienced Brit behind him with various blocking techniques
pulled strait out of Prosts book. The frustrated Hill will either crash
his way out of a championship or crash into Prost and have FW fire
him out of a championship, either way Prost is the favorite. When it
comes to running a tactical race, the rookie will be helplessly
outclassed by Prost irregardless of any speed advantage and that is the
reason I will be watching the much more entertaining IndyCar season
unfold.

George

P.S. I am not a Prost fan and never will be, yet respect is due to him.