Brawn's F1 journey: 'Schumacher and I were in the trenches together'

Perhaps inevitably post-Benetton, insinuations followed the team about traction control and at times there was audible evidence that the Ferrari had some electronic help in getting its power down. But what Ferrari had during this time was not traction control in the strictest sense of the term, but rather a clever interpretation of the regulations that forbade any torque reduction reaction from the ECU to a spinning wheel. What the Ferrari system was doing was anticipating wheelspin rather than reacting to it and was thereby technically legal. Other engine manufacturers came to realise this in time and at least one was using a similar system before the technology was re-admitted in 2002.

These are the murky waters of F1, pushing the rules and politicking. Everyone plays them, but Brawn perhaps most adeptly of all. But there was one area of advantage he claims not to have known. Many years later it emerged that Ferrari had enjoyed a rules veto since 1998, something Todt had negotiated with Max Mosley. “I was quite shocked when I discovered that existed,” says Ross. “It was never used to my knowledge and I couldn’t see how you could use it. Perhaps the threat of a veto had more impact [on the FIA] than ever using it.”

In 1999 – Brawn’s third year at Maranello – a constructors’ title finally came Ferrari’s way, the first in 16 years. Prior to that, the obstacles were always the designs of Adrian Newey, firstly at Williams and later at McLaren. Michael took a few against-the-odds wins during this time, when it was difficult to see the join between his own extraordinary skills and Brawn’s strategic nous. “It was a golden era for race strategy,” he recalls. “I’d had the good fortune of getting involved in strategy through sports car racing for a couple of years before F1. So I had a better insight. It was a small group and we were quick, nimble on our feet. We probably missed a few opportunities because we didn’t have the capacity to look at everything, but our hit rate was better than 50/50. It worked for a number of years – and at crucial times. The impression I got of the McLaren system was that it was broader-based and less dictatorial and sometimes that let them down, though occasionally it was to their advantage because they would have scanned and understood the broader situation. In later years, with the speed of communication with the factory and the enormous modelling, there was less scope for an innovative decision to swing it.”

❖

Schumacher narrowly defeated McLaren’s Mika Häkkinen in 2000 to become the first Ferrari-mounted world champion for 21 years – and from there the team bestrode the sport for several seasons. The energy eventually began to wane as first Rory went into retirement, then di Montezemelo, in trying to plan for a post-Schumacher future by signing Kimi Räikkönen, triggered Schumacher’s reluctant retirement at the end of 2006. Months earlier, Brawn had already decided he was going to take a sabbatical in 2007.

Negotiations regarding his Ferrari return broke down and Brawn opted instead for the altogether more difficult challenge of trying to make something from under-achieving Honda. He would be in the team principal role this time – and without Schumacher or Byrne. It was quite a test. The 2008 car was woeful and he spent much of his time trying to keep the input from Japan from compounding the difficulties faced at the Brackley factory. The course of events there would directly impact upon the fortunes of Mercedes to this day.

“It takes three years in my view to build a team,” he says. “When I joined Honda I tried to accelerate that process by not wasting time in the first year, just accepting what was there, bringing people in, getting to build a team up. That got abbreviated because they withdrew [at the end of 2008 following the world financial crisis], but that impetus and inertia just carried us through into the Brawn GP year.” Incredibly, Brawn GP won both world championships in its only year of existence.

“Honda had made a huge investment and a massive effort had gone in to that car. That became Brawn GP for a year but it wasn’t sustainable – we couldn’t continue that momentum because there weren’t the resources any more. We only had two cars for half the year, the spare didn’t appear until mid-season. We were actually OK financially but concerned we might have to do a second year without a major sponsor. It was a finely judged year and we didn’t spend anything more than we had to. Which meant there wasn’t a lot in the coffers in terms of technical innovation, development for the following season.”

Technically, there were two crucial components to Jenson Button’s championship that year in the Brawn BGP 001. The Honda engine for which the car was designed was replaced by a customer Mercedes unit that proved rather better. Secondly, the car had a double diffuser – getting around the intention of new regulations that limited diffuser size and steepness of ramp. This cunning interpretation had left designs from such rivals as Ferrari, Red Bull and McLaren essentially obsolete before they raced. Adrian Newey was furious and remains adamant that the only reason the sequence of Red Bull titles didn’t begin in 2009 is that the Brawn was not legal. In looking at the long-running struggle between these two giants, there’s a sense that Newey finds it frustrating to have his creative design genius constantly thwarted by Brawn’s interpretive skills, rather like the gifted striker who’s forever being taken down by the burly defender.

Adrian sometimes finds it difficult to hide that frustration, Ross seems to enjoy being magnanimous – which surely only winds up Adrian even more. “My nemesis!” says Ross, smile a mile wide, eyes sparkling with mischief. “I don’t know why he gets so caught up on the double diffuser. What is legal? Legal is what the FIA defines. A lot was made of the double diffuser, but two other teams [Williams and Toyota] also had it and we beat them comfortably. A lot was made of the fact that we were able to optimise our car, but we didn’t hit upon it until quite late – around August, so our car wasn’t fundamentally designed around it and was still a compromise.

“I have huge respect for Adrian Newey”

“Although we’ve been in competition with each other, Adrian and I have been in slightly different spheres. He has operated within the creative side and I’ve been in the operative element. But he is extremely competitive, very innovative, very good at interpreting regulations, a poor loser – like I am, I think that goes with the territory – and we’ve been at each others’ throats for 20-odd years.

“I have huge respect for him. He’s very talented but just has a different cross-section of talents to those I might have. You build a team around the people you have and a team built around Adrian would have a different profile to a team built around me.”