When Newey got it wrong

Formula 1 design legend Adrian Newey's 2014 campaign got off to a troubled start when his Red Bull team struggled in last week's Jerez test.

As part of a package of special features on the challenge facing Red Bull and Newey, AUTOSPORT looks back at other times when his designs have not worked out as planned.

MARCH-JUDD 891/LEYTON HOUSE-JUDD CG901

Adrian Newey's first technical directorship was with the Leyton House-owned March team. In 1988, the March 881 had set the template for the modern era of aerodynamics and was one of the few cars to occasionally trouble the McLaren-Hondas.

But the team struggled in 1989 with the March 891 and the following year with what was dubbed the Leyton House CG901, but what was to all intents and purposes the same as the previous year's car.

In the first six races of 1990, Ivan Capelli and Mauricio Gugelmin failed to qualify as often as not and, amid management turmoil (team principal Ian Phillips was laid up with meningitis), Newey saw the writing on the wall and accepted an offer to join Williams as chief designer. Effectively, he jumped before he was pushed.

"The 891 was troublesome to start with and that was mainly aerodynamically," said Newey of the car. "We had some gearbox problems at first but, once we had sorted those, the car wasn't as stable as the 881 had been.

"It wasn't until the first part of 1990 that we looked at the windtunnel itself and realised that the floor had bowed over a period of time and was giving completely false readings, sending us in the wrong direction."

Ironically, Capelli came within an ace of winning the race after Newey left, the French Grand Prix at Paul Ricard.

In Mexico, a new floor/diffuser package had been introduced but the combination of bumpy track and poor readings from the windtunnel meant it didn't work. At ultra-smooth Paul Ricard it was another matter, and only a late fuel-pressure warning led to Capelli lifting, allowing Alain Prost's Ferrari to pass him for victory.

WILLIAMS-RENAULT FW16

It seems harsh to describe a car that took the constructors' championship as anything other than a success. But the ban on driver aids, specifically active ride, made life very difficult for Newey, then Williams chief designer, in 1994.

"The rule change banning active ride was a big problem," said Newey of the car, which in the first half of the season was capable of being rapid but was all too often on a knife-edge.

The dominant FW14B and FW15C of 1992 and '93 relied upon fine-tuning of ride heights for the aero platform to work and the '94 car proved too critical and prone to stalling.

Significant upgrades at Imola and Magny-Cours made the car more consistent and laid the foundation for Damon Hill's run at the world title.

MCLAREN-MERCEDES MP4-18

The unraced MP4-18 of 2003 lives in infamy on Newey's record. A series of delays while the MP4-17D - a highly evolved version of the '02 McLaren - raced on eventually turned into the permanent mothballing of the troublesome car.

When it first tested, at Paul Ricard, the short-sidepodded MP4-18 was instantly faster than its predecessor but managed only 28 laps. Hydraulic problems were a particular difficulty, and things turned from bad to worse in testing in June when Kimi Raikkonen and Alex Wurz suffered big accidents in Spain.

There were positives about the car, which was tightly packaged with a Mercedes engine that was planned to be lighter and more potent. But it struggled to pass its crash tests. "I wouldn't say it's radical," said Newey, but with innovations such as its exhaust chimneys it was distinctive.

Ron Dennis described the MP4-18 as the "mother" of the following year's MP4-19, with many design features carried over, although that machine only won once in 2004.

MCLAREN MP4-21

The 2006 McLaren failed to win a GP and, while Newey had left the team for Red Bull by the time it finally raced, he did contribute to the design.

The MP4-21 lacked downforce and aero efficiency and did not develop as well as needed throughout the season, but it would be harsh to hold Newey responsible for the overall failure of the car.

RED BULL-RENAULT RB3

The 2007 Red Bull was the first pukka Newey-designed car produced by the team, and did allow it to get to the front of the midfield fight. But with the Red Bull team still immature and Newey only having joined early in 2006, it was still raw.

The fundamental concept was good aerodynamically, but what Newey described as the "hurried" commissioning of the Bicester windtunnel by Jaguar (which became Red Bull ahead of the 2005 season) held it back.

"We had significant differences between how the windtunnel suggested the car should behave and how it actually did behave," said Newey.

"And given the very short time we had, we just looked at the parts that might be misbehaving and redesigned them based on my previous experience."

That went some way to solving the aerodynamic problems. But, and this will sound very familiar, the tight packaging of the seamless-shift gearbox caused major problems.

The result was overheating bearings as a result of too much compromise for aerodynamic advantage, and the majority of Red Bull's technical problems during 2007 were caused by the gearbox.

This feature also appears in the February 6 issue of AUTOSPORT magazine - available in shops and online now - as part of an in-depth package on Red Bull and its troubled start to the 2014 Formula 1 season.