Has Williams been smart by realising it was short of options for 2018 and picking a driver that has a good junior record and lots of cash - or is that too generous?Mitchell Steven
What Williams is doing by signing Sirotkin is not stupid. He has pedigree in the junior classes and he has been around for a few years getting a bit of testing and Friday running. So he has reasonable current experience and he also knows how an F1 weekend unfolds.
Running a two-car team in F1 just to build the cars and go racing will cost in the region of £70 million minimum. Williams is committed to that and the prize money and team sponsorship income probably covers that, but that's it. So any extra income that a driver can bring should all be able to go into the development pot, which if spent correctly will make the car faster for both of its drivers.
I have never looked at drivers coming with money as paying drivers. They have investors or companies behind them and very few are dipping into their own pockets. It's a bit like starting a business - to get it all up and running you need investment, then you need to make it all work and if you are any good at it you will make some money and the investors will get their funds back.
For a racing driver, it's no different. They have to find investment to allow them to get to the level where they can prove their talent. If they haven't got any talent, then they will be found out very quickly. Sirotkin has shown in the junior formulas that he has ability, now he needs to show it at a higher level.
All of the greats brought something with them to the table. It might not have come out of their or their family's pockets, but it came from hard work in finding sponsorship.
What are the chances of having a new team enter F1 since the departure of Manor?
snowandbeach, via Instagram
I don't see any new teams until at least 2021, when the agreements with the current teams are renewed - and the regulations are again up for revision.
To come into Formula 1 at the moment with any chance of survival you need a minimum yearly budget of £100million and a commitment to spend that for at least five years to allow you to put all the pieces of the jigsaw in place and start to reap the benefit.
That is a huge commitment for anyone, and given the fact that new owner Liberty Media and the current teams appear to be at loggerheads on what is the best way forward, no one with any sense would get involved until this all settles down and a clear direction gets defined. That is if that ever happens. Personally I wouldn't hold my breath...
Do you see a realistic possibility to revisit the issue of the tyre sidewall dimensions and tyre rim diameter in future regulations? I recall it was Bernie Ecclestone's wish to keep the archaic 13-inch rim and large sidewalls in place. Considering the immense increase in size of modern F1 cars, the wheels look disproportionately small...
Sasha Salipanov, via Facebook
Never mind the fact that the 13-inch diameter rims and high-sidewall tyres look out of place, they are actually well and truly out of date. You are correct the time is right for a move into the 21st century.
No other high-performance vehicle either on the road or racetrack runs with these tall sidewalls, and if F1 sees itself as cliff-face engineering, then as part of the package for the 2021 regulation changes something like 18-inch diameter rims needs to be introduced.
This could also be a good opportunity to introduce a common upright, wheel bearing, axle and brake disc drive system assembly. Teams individually spend a huge amount of money in this area and no one ever sees it. It makes very little, if any, difference to a team's performance.
A common assembly allowing the teams to bolt on their own individual suspension pick-up points would be a good start to help reduce budgets.
Do you think a driver could come up through Formula E into Formula 1? Why not one of the 'juniors' in Ferrari or Red Bull? It is pretty cool and requires a cerebral approach to racing it would seem.
Josh Giese, via Facebook
Formula E is a very individual motorsport discipline. At the moment, to get its credibility it is using drivers that have made their names in other formulas but for some reason not quite made it to the top level.
If FE was to start using young up-and-coming drivers, and even junior Mercedes, Ferrari or Red Bull drivers, and they were able to show they could beat the older brigade that are currently driving the cars then there is no reason that it couldn't be used as a stepping stone.
But I wouldn't see anyone taking on an FE driver and putting them straight into F1 as we see with Formula 2, Formula 3 and GP3.
I think FE needs at least a couple more seasons at least to see how it unfolds. It is still in its infancy and needs time to stabilise before we can see where it stands in the ranks of existing championships.
Apart from the tyres, which component is the most susceptible to fail, and why (McLaren-Hondas of the past aside)? Are there particular races (eg Singapore) where particular components are more likely to fail than during other races? These days mechanical failures appear to be things of the past, but there are surely drivers who know that they made it across the finish line on a wing and a prayer.
Mark Williams, via email
If you have designed a car correctly, everything should be working at something like 90% of its maximum workload. If it is not, then everything is either too heavy or not giving you the performance you require to be competitive.
From the engine, gearbox, upright assemblies, suspension components, radiators to even bodywork and wings everything will have a duty cycle and a mileage life at that duty cycle and every circuit will be slightly different in how the components get used.
Now that the teams collect much more data than in the past and simulation and test rigs are much more complex, teams can put everything through rigorous tests before a component actually arrives at the track.
Taking the engine as a good example, the current power units are more complicated than ever before. But the reliability has been incredible. Other than Honda and, on occasions, Renault I think the engineers responsible for producing these engines need a pat on the back.
It only comes from hard work and knowledge from the many engines that will run through their duty cycles on the transient dynos. The same is also true of the gearboxes; the teams will run them on their own gearbox dynos and in doing that will really understand and rectify any critical areas.
The days of sticking your finger up in the air and hoping all was well are long gone. If a driver feels something is not quite correct, they will report it to the team and it will trawl through the data to see if it can find a reason that will put the driver's mind at rest.
We hear about how tyres deteriorate during a race, but how much rubber is actually lost from a tyre? I assume that the rubber that is lost is the tread compound and without treads we cannot see how worn the tyres are after a pitstop.
Chris Curtis, via email
With the current tyres, there are quite a few ways that they can deteriorate and each circuit will throw up different problems.
1) If the tyre is sliding too much or you have too much wheelspin, then the surface tread will overheat and the grip will reduce. To address this you need to basically slow down and allow the tyre surface temperature to reduce.
2) You can get graining, which is when the top surface of the tyre shears off and you end up with little rolled up pieces of rubber rolling across the surface of the tyre reducing the grip. It's a bit like driving on sand. To rectify this, you need to slow down and allow the tyre time for the tread to clean up.
3) You get what your original question was all about - the tyre tread wears away. When this happens, the tyre actually loses grip because there is not enough rubber left on it to retain the heat. This is what the drivers call hitting the cliff face, there is nothing you can do about this other than a pitstop. The current tyres will have something like 3mm of tread depth, of which 2.5mm can be worn off. When this happens, the tyre will cool down on the straights and then offer a dramatic reduction in grip in the corners.
It is very difficult to put more rubber on the tyre to begin with because too much rubber can lead to blistering when the tyre is new. So the tyre companies have to come up with a compromise.
I find Ferrari's constant threats of leaving F1 annoying. What would F1 be like without them and could Ferrari get the same amount of exposure as they do in F1 in another racing series?
Richard Bell, via email
I'm pretty sure both F1 and Ferrari would survive without each other, but they do complement each other well. So hopefully it will kiss and make up with Liberty Media and be part of the show for many years to come.
The big guys need to be listened to, but the smaller teams are the ones that make up the show. In reality, 20 cars is the minimum we want to see on the grid and even that is too few. It is the smaller teams that make up the numbers so they need to be listened to as well and the best compromise found.
Manufacturers will come and go, as they have done for many years, but for the smaller teams F1 is their main business. As we have seen on many occasions, it is the smaller teams that offer the best excitement over a race weekend.
Why can't there be a planned reset of Formula 1 regulations from the ground up with a clean sheet of paper rather than iterative changes? What are the practical barriers to that actually happening.
Richard Benson, via email
There are no barriers that couldn't be overcome to allow that to happen, it is just the people involved with making those decisions that won't allow it to.
Everyone wants to look after their own best interests and no one wants to address the bigger picture of the overall problems that everyone keeps fighting about.
Ferrari is a good example of that. When Ross Brawn put forward Liberty Media's initial proposals for the regulation changes for 2021, Ferrari - instead of sitting down with everyone else and trying to find the best solution for F1 and everyone involved in it - immediately declared that if it couldn't have it its own way it was off.
I think this was all a bit childish and short-sighted on Ferrari's behalf. But the other big teams are not far behind them in not wanting anyone other than themselves to get the whip hand.
They all need to be listened to but then someone needs to go off and make a decision. Where's Bernie when you need him?
I noticed the FIA and your former team, Jordan, experimented with a rear-wing mounted laser in 1995 as a possible solution to enhance visibility in the rain. What was your opinion on that device and why was it not worth further tests?
Jozsef Gerse, via email
We did test a laser system on behalf of the FIA a couple of times. The first one was a pod mounted on the centre of the rear wing flap trailing edge. The second was two small pods mounted on the upper rear corner of the wing end plates both focused a laser beam down towards the ground at a certain distance behind the car.
When the following car came within a certain distance then the laser beam would become more prominent allowing the following car to take avoiding action.
It did work, but needed more development. From memory, it was felt that there was nothing there and suddenly the laser beam would appear.
You would then have to decide what action to take, and I think the current strobe system took development priority and would be more practical to pass down through to other formulas.
Do you have a question for Gary Anderson? Send it to askgary@autosport.com, use #askgaryF1 on Twitter or look out for our posts on Facebook giving you the chance to have your question answered
Has Williams been smart by realising it was short of options for 2018 and picking a driver that has a good junior record and lots of cash - or is that too generous?Mitchell Steven
What Williams is doing by signing Sirotkin is not stupid. He has pedigree in the junior classes and he has been around for a few years getting a bit of testing and Friday running. So he has reasonable current experience and he also knows how an F1 weekend unfolds.
Running a two-car team in F1 just to build the cars and go racing will cost in the region of £70 million minimum. Williams is committed to that and the prize money and team sponsorship income probably covers that, but that's it. So any extra income that a driver can bring should all be able to go into the development pot, which if spent correctly will make the car faster for both of its drivers.
I have never looked at drivers coming with money as paying drivers. They have investors or companies behind them and very few are dipping into their own pockets. It's a bit like starting a business - to get it all up and running you need investment, then you need to make it all work and if you are any good at it you will make some money and the investors will get their funds back.
For a racing driver, it's no different. They have to find investment to allow them to get to the level where they can prove their talent. If they haven't got any talent, then they will be found out very quickly. Sirotkin has shown in the junior formulas that he has ability, now he needs to show it at a higher level.
All of the greats brought something with them to the table. It might not have come out of their or their family's pockets, but it came from hard work in finding sponsorship.
What are the chances of having a new team enter F1 since the departure of Manor?
snowandbeach, via Instagram
I don't see any new teams until at least 2021, when the agreements with the current teams are renewed - and the regulations are again up for revision.
To come into Formula 1 at the moment with any chance of survival you need a minimum yearly budget of £100million and a commitment to spend that for at least five years to allow you to put all the pieces of the jigsaw in place and start to reap the benefit.
That is a huge commitment for anyone, and given the fact that new owner Liberty Media and the current teams appear to be at loggerheads on what is the best way forward, no one with any sense would get involved until this all settles down and a clear direction gets defined. That is if that ever happens. Personally I wouldn't hold my breath...
Do you see a realistic possibility to revisit the issue of the tyre sidewall dimensions and tyre rim diameter in future regulations? I recall it was Bernie Ecclestone's wish to keep the archaic 13-inch rim and large sidewalls in place. Considering the immense increase in size of modern F1 cars, the wheels look disproportionately small...
Sasha Salipanov, via Facebook
Never mind the fact that the 13-inch diameter rims and high-sidewall tyres look out of place, they are actually well and truly out of date. You are correct the time is right for a move into the 21st century.
No other high-performance vehicle either on the road or racetrack runs with these tall sidewalls, and if F1 sees itself as cliff-face engineering, then as part of the package for the 2021 regulation changes something like 18-inch diameter rims needs to be introduced.
This could also be a good opportunity to introduce a common upright, wheel bearing, axle and brake disc drive system assembly. Teams individually spend a huge amount of money in this area and no one ever sees it. It makes very little, if any, difference to a team's performance.
A common assembly allowing the teams to bolt on their own individual suspension pick-up points would be a good start to help reduce budgets.
Do you think a driver could come up through Formula E into Formula 1? Why not one of the 'juniors' in Ferrari or Red Bull? It is pretty cool and requires a cerebral approach to racing it would seem.
Josh Giese, via Facebook
Formula E is a very individual motorsport discipline. At the moment, to get its credibility it is using drivers that have made their names in other formulas but for some reason not quite made it to the top level.
If FE was to start using young up-and-coming drivers, and even junior Mercedes, Ferrari or Red Bull drivers, and they were able to show they could beat the older brigade that are currently driving the cars then there is no reason that it couldn't be used as a stepping stone.
But I wouldn't see anyone taking on an FE driver and putting them straight into F1 as we see with Formula 2, Formula 3 and GP3.
I think FE needs at least a couple more seasons at least to see how it unfolds. It is still in its infancy and needs time to stabilise before we can see where it stands in the ranks of existing championships.
Apart from the tyres, which component is the most susceptible to fail, and why (McLaren-Hondas of the past aside)? Are there particular races (eg Singapore) where particular components are more likely to fail than during other races? These days mechanical failures appear to be things of the past, but there are surely drivers who know that they made it across the finish line on a wing and a prayer.
Mark Williams, via email
If you have designed a car correctly, everything should be working at something like 90% of its maximum workload. If it is not, then everything is either too heavy or not giving you the performance you require to be competitive.
From the engine, gearbox, upright assemblies, suspension components, radiators to even bodywork and wings everything will have a duty cycle and a mileage life at that duty cycle and every circuit will be slightly different in how the components get used.
Now that the teams collect much more data than in the past and simulation and test rigs are much more complex, teams can put everything through rigorous tests before a component actually arrives at the track.
Taking the engine as a good example, the current power units are more complicated than ever before. But the reliability has been incredible. Other than Honda and, on occasions, Renault I think the engineers responsible for producing these engines need a pat on the back.
It only comes from hard work and knowledge from the many engines that will run through their duty cycles on the transient dynos. The same is also true of the gearboxes; the teams will run them on their own gearbox dynos and in doing that will really understand and rectify any critical areas.
The days of sticking your finger up in the air and hoping all was well are long gone. If a driver feels something is not quite correct, they will report it to the team and it will trawl through the data to see if it can find a reason that will put the driver's mind at rest.
We hear about how tyres deteriorate during a race, but how much rubber is actually lost from a tyre? I assume that the rubber that is lost is the tread compound and without treads we cannot see how worn the tyres are after a pitstop.
Chris Curtis, via email
With the current tyres, there are quite a few ways that they can deteriorate and each circuit will throw up different problems.
1) If the tyre is sliding too much or you have too much wheelspin, then the surface tread will overheat and the grip will reduce. To address this you need to basically slow down and allow the tyre surface temperature to reduce.
2) You can get graining, which is when the top surface of the tyre shears off and you end up with little rolled up pieces of rubber rolling across the surface of the tyre reducing the grip. It's a bit like driving on sand. To rectify this, you need to slow down and allow the tyre time for the tread to clean up.
3) You get what your original question was all about - the tyre tread wears away. When this happens, the tyre actually loses grip because there is not enough rubber left on it to retain the heat. This is what the drivers call hitting the cliff face, there is nothing you can do about this other than a pitstop. The current tyres will have something like 3mm of tread depth, of which 2.5mm can be worn off. When this happens, the tyre will cool down on the straights and then offer a dramatic reduction in grip in the corners.
It is very difficult to put more rubber on the tyre to begin with because too much rubber can lead to blistering when the tyre is new. So the tyre companies have to come up with a compromise.
I find Ferrari's constant threats of leaving F1 annoying. What would F1 be like without them and could Ferrari get the same amount of exposure as they do in F1 in another racing series?
Richard Bell, via email
I'm pretty sure both F1 and Ferrari would survive without each other, but they do complement each other well. So hopefully it will kiss and make up with Liberty Media and be part of the show for many years to come.
The big guys need to be listened to, but the smaller teams are the ones that make up the show. In reality, 20 cars is the minimum we want to see on the grid and even that is too few. It is the smaller teams that make up the numbers so they need to be listened to as well and the best compromise found.
Manufacturers will come and go, as they have done for many years, but for the smaller teams F1 is their main business. As we have seen on many occasions, it is the smaller teams that offer the best excitement over a race weekend.
Why can't there be a planned reset of Formula 1 regulations from the ground up with a clean sheet of paper rather than iterative changes? What are the practical barriers to that actually happening.
Richard Benson, via email
There are no barriers that couldn't be overcome to allow that to happen, it is just the people involved with making those decisions that won't allow it to.
Everyone wants to look after their own best interests and no one wants to address the bigger picture of the overall problems that everyone keeps fighting about.
Ferrari is a good example of that. When Ross Brawn put forward Liberty Media's initial proposals for the regulation changes for 2021, Ferrari - instead of sitting down with everyone else and trying to find the best solution for F1 and everyone involved in it - immediately declared that if it couldn't have it its own way it was off.
I think this was all a bit childish and short-sighted on Ferrari's behalf. But the other big teams are not far behind them in not wanting anyone other than themselves to get the whip hand.
They all need to be listened to but then someone needs to go off and make a decision. Where's Bernie when you need him?
I noticed the FIA and your former team, Jordan, experimented with a rear-wing mounted laser in 1995 as a possible solution to enhance visibility in the rain. What was your opinion on that device and why was it not worth further tests?
Jozsef Gerse, via email
We did test a laser system on behalf of the FIA a couple of times. The first one was a pod mounted on the centre of the rear wing flap trailing edge. The second was two small pods mounted on the upper rear corner of the wing end plates both focused a laser beam down towards the ground at a certain distance behind the car.
When the following car came within a certain distance then the laser beam would become more prominent allowing the following car to take avoiding action.
It did work, but needed more development. From memory, it was felt that there was nothing there and suddenly the laser beam would appear.
You would then have to decide what action to take, and I think the current strobe system took development priority and would be more practical to pass down through to other formulas.
Do you have a question for Gary Anderson? Send it to askgary@autosport.com, use #askgaryF1 on Twitter or look out for our posts on Facebook giving you the chance to have your question answered
