This week's Grapevine brings you information fresh from the paddock on: Safety Questions Big Cat in Turmoil

Safety Questions

Again, the FIA are coming under criticism for a safety issue, when Sunday's race was not stopped after the first corner incident. Though, it must be said, those doing the criticising appear to be the drivers and teams who would have had the most to benefit from any restart.

There are two points being used. The first, "the spectacle," is an important issue: fans have paid good money to see a race, not to see half the grid (including the pole sitter) go out at the start (cynics may read that as "the sponsors are not getting good value for money if the cars are in the garage"). However, whilst the spectacle might have been improved by restarting the event, the argument is not relevant to whether, under the current rules, a restart should have taken place. As David Coulthard pointed out, this is a primarily a sporting event, not a show, so the sporting rules that govern a consistent approach must be adhered to.

That said, the second point is far more relevant, and certainly is causing questions to be asked: in avoiding a restart, the FIA was taking a calculated gamble that the debris that could not be cleared up would not have a significant effect on the race.

Had the race been stopped, it would have been possible to make a far more thorough job of clearing up the mess; furthermore, all the cars would have had their tyres replaced, ensuring that even if someone had already picked up carbon fibre shards, they would not be in a position to puncture a tyre. By making the stewards work under safety car conditions, inevitably, the cleanup was not as thorough - indeed, a casual post race walk around the track revealed shards of carbon fibre bodywork sat on the ground. This posed the risk of cut tyres, or even, potentially, pieces of carbon fibre being thrown by the wheels of cars passing over the debris - not to mention other issues, such as oil on the track.

That is the argument being used by those who advocated a restart, and as a safety complaint, it is pretty strong.

But it is only half the story. When considering whether to stop the race, Charlie Whiting takes into account the fact that stopping the race means another start. Which, of course, means the chance for another first corner type incident. It must come as little surprise to discover that starting a Grand Prix is statistically the most dangerous time in the race, where the unpredictable, close order manoeuvering brings cars into contact in almost every race, almost always at high speed, and generally in a position to pick up several innocent bystanders.

It's no surprise, then, to learn that Charlie Whiting was one step ahead of the game, and had warned the drivers in advance that in the event of an incident, he would not be stopping the race, unless he had no other choice on safety grounds. And, whilst it may be tough on those drivers who were blameless, or the spectators' diminished viewing pleasure, he believes that, sooner or later, these drivers will learn that in order to finish, they all have to get past the first corner.

And that, clearly, would make the sport even safer.

Big Cat in Turmoil

With the ignominious performance in Australia's qualifying session behind them, the big question at the Jaguar factory is about what comes next - scoring points was all very well, but qualifying behind Minardi on the grid is going to be hard to justify for any length of time.

From the data available to them, there is a question about what, precisely, is the correct way forward. As Irvine said in practice, the car felt better than expected, and is actually quite well balanced. It just doesn't go fast enough. And the cold weather is not a good enough reason for being so comprehensively outclassed by most of the grid, including newcomers Toyota, and the Cosworth powered Arrows.

Pretty much as soon as the team's key figures were on their way home - and so, no longer in a position to quash gossip - the rumour mill started turning out some interesting claims concerning both the root of Jaguar's problems, and the short term solution they will be shooting for. The word is, the Jaguar chassis is not stiff enough, and their aerodynamics are inadequate. The solution - move the new power steering into last year's car, and race that, whilst fixing the new car.

An interesting plan. It's not impossible that the team might revert to a development of the 2001 car whilst sorting out the new one, but then again, there would have to be some serious questions asked as to the wisdom of pursuing that route.

Firstly, it would clearly be seen for what it is - a panic reaction. Not exactly the sort of message you would want your parent company to read, and the sponsors would be none too happy either. Consider, last year's car, whilst not quite an unmitigated disaster, was certainly not a winning design; even putting on those developments that are directly pertinent and beneficial from the new car would not make it especially fast now.

Then again, the time taken to put together the hybrid, and work on setting it up, would be directly at the cost of effort needed to develop this year's car. Which, undoubtedly, would be time just wasted.

Consider the alternatives. Taking the new car to Malaysia is going to be interesting. It's a warmer climate, which is widely expected to suit the Michelin tyres better - probably bringing the Arrows and Minardis back within reach. The track offers plenty to cars with good balance and power - something this car has plenty of, at least - without putting an exceptional premium on the aerodynamics. The performance might not improve very much, and Jaguar might still be 4 seconds off the pole time, but it should be better that the Australian performance, and without wasting time and money getting the old car out.

However, while it is little wonder that this rumour only took root whilst the decision makers were on their way home, it does highlight the fact that Jaguar are struggling with their new car. The engine, apparently, is solid, which leaves the chassis and aerodynamics as the main culprits. The chassis flex problem, apparently, is true: in making a good weight saving through the off season, the new monocoque has lost some of the rigidity of its predecessor. That said, the movement in the chassis was originally believed acceptable, if undesirable, in pre-season testing: the focus was on improving the aerodynamics.

The bottom line, for Jaguar, is not the best of news. Aerodynamics have improved, enough to find a good balance at least, but far more is needed to be competitive on medium or high downforce circuits. Then, fixing the flexible chassis is going to require a whole new tub - which may, or may not, be ready for the first European race. And then, may, or may not, provide a solid base from which to develop the car. All in all, it is looking like this could be a very long season for Jaguar.