Ask Gary: Is Ferrari catching up for 2016?

How do you see Ferrari's in-season development of aero and engine in terms of 2016 preparation?
Metin Mete, via Twitter

Metin, I don't think Ferrari has closed the gap to Mercedes since the beginning of this season.

If you take away the scatter that different circuit characteristics require as far as pure speed in concerned, it is still around 0.7 seconds slower.

At the beginning of the season, Ferrari was better than this in the race but lately seems to have lost a little in that department.

For 2016, Ferrari will need to 'do something different' - a car's development, like the power unit, can only be developed around its initial concept.

Ferrari needs to have overall a better initial concept and then it will get better response from developments.

The Haas team seems to have been very smart by using as much as it is allowed to from Ferrari. Why have other teams, like Caterham, not done the same?
Liam O'Rourke, via Facebook

Liam, teams have always been able to do this to a certain level but most come into Formula 1 from another European single-seater formula. They are a bit naive and believe they are going to be on the front row of the grid at the first race.

Haas is slightly different in that it is coming in with a vast amount of racing experience, albeit in a completely different style of racing, and has recognised that it will need all the help it can to survive that first few years.

During that period, it can then structure the company to suit how it sees its priorities.

How can Red Bull hope to attract an engine partner while being openly ungrateful and hostile to Renault?
Erico Calixto, via Twitter

Enrico, that is a question that Red Bull really does need to sit down and ask itself.

When Red Bull was dominating, it was as if the team was the reason and Renault got no recognition. Now Red Bull isn't winning, it's Renault's fault.

A team consists of all its partners and, as such, a team wins and loses together. What happens or is said behind closed doors is a different matter.

Yes, Renault didn't do as good a job with the new engine regulations as Mercedes or Ferrari. But because of how the regulations limit the recovery from a situation like this, its hands are tied.

As we have seen from the years of domination, Red Bull is a team that knows how to win. But it sure doesn't know how to lose.

Red Bull needs to remember the old saying, 'there is no 'I' in team'.

Could we ever see an independent engine manufacturer like Cosworth return to F1 in its current form? Would it be conceivable that a company like Red Bull would finance the development of a Cosworth engine for the current formula? Considering their current plight with the lack of engine options, surely this was something that was considered?
Jay Menon, via email

Jay, yes it is possible but it would have to be with a very long-term commitment.

The power unit consists of so many elements that are very wide ranging. To get on top of what makes all of this work would be at least a five-year commitment - and this would be before the engine would hit the track publicly.

The problem is that by the time that had happened the regulations would have changed.

Because of this, someone would need to have a big enough bank balance to invest in whatever is necessary to set up a power unit manufacturing company.

They would need to staff it as required to be able to research and develop every avenue that any motorsport formula can throw at it.

Only then would it be in a position to design and develop whatever the powers to be have decided on regulations.

Is Bernie Ecclestone brave enough to drop Monza from the F1 calendar?
@f1lover75, via Twitter

Never underestimate how brave Bernie is.

He has run F1 for a long time and he has personally made many people very rich. If another circuit comes along and puts together a proposal that means he and the teams will make more money out of it, Monza will be a goner.

About half of the grid are pushing for some sort of budget cuts. No matter how big your budget is, it will get spent so in reality all of the teams could do with a bit of a budget boost.

F1 is simply a business. No one, especially the teams, is in it for the sport - they all need to make money out of it. If there's a better deal with a circuit in Timbuktu then they will all be shouting about how fantastic it is to be challenged by new tracks.

What would the aerodynamic gains be with a jet-style canopy to protect drivers, and would/could teams alter aero designs to get the most from that redirected airflow?
Mitch Scott, via email

Mitch, the cockpit opening has a strange affect on the aerodynamics of a car. The airflow passing over the top of it creates a low-pressure area inside the opening and sucks out airflow from it.

When you hear the drivers complaining about their seat getting hot or their backside being burned, that is because where wiring and or piping passes through from the outside to the inside of the cockpit it has to pass through a hole.

Most teams will actually have a moulded rubber plug, a bit like a sink stopper, that goes around the outside of this wiring or piping to block off any unnecessary openings.

If these are not fitted correctly then hot air will be sucked through. When I am talking hot air, I am talking around 100°C.

Without a little bit of aero research, it is always difficult to predict aerodynamic changes. But I think it should reduce the drag that little bit and help the efficiency of the rear wing.

Could F1 ever go down the diesel route to become even more efficient?
Nick Hipkin, via Twitter

Nick, as I said above in answer to the Cosworth question, the regulations for the power unit could go in any direction.

To be honest, I don't see why F1 needs to prioritise efficiency. I think this should be left to the long-distance sportscars.

Looking back at your decades in F1, is there a particular period or set of regulations that you most enjoyed and what can be learned from it?
Marcus Smith, via email

Marcus, I think you are asking two questions and I suppose the 1990s was the decade that took us from what was good racing to what we have today.

It was also the decade that I was most involved in the design of the cars, so because of this I suppose it was my favourite.

But look at the cars from the early '90s, with wide tracks, nice wide tyres and simple aerodynamics in comparison to the late '90s when the cars got narrower, we had those stupid grooved tyres and aerodynamics began being so complicated that the teams' aero departments became the dominant part of the team.

So to sum it up, think a lot could be learned from my previous paragraph.

Got 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