Alexander Albon, Williams, Suzuka, 2023

Albon blames Williams’ wind sensitivity for racking up most track limits breaches

RaceFans Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Alexander Albon expects to rack up fewer track limits infringements in 2024

Show which drivers and teams you are supporting

Which F1 drivers and teams are you supporting this season? Here's how you can show your support for your favourite on the grid on RaceFans:

  • Log in with your RaceFans account (sign up here if you don't have one)
  • Select Edit My Profile from the top-right menu
  • Select F1 Teams and Drivers
  • Make your selections then click Save Changes

In brief

Albon expects fewer track limits penalties in ’24

Alexander Albon says he expects that Williams’ new FW46 will be less wind sensitive than last year, which will help reduce his track limits infringements.

Albon had 60 track limits offences in competitive sessions throughout the 2024 season – at least ten more than any other driver. Asked by RaceFans how he will reduce that figure this upcoming season, Albon feels it should be easier with the team’s new car.

“I mean, none of the track limits cost us positions – if you want to put it like that,” Albon said. “So as much as track limits might be seen as a bad thing and a ‘bad boy’ kind of behaviour, it’s just part of the game – pushing it to the limit.

“I think the tracks themselves aren’t obviously forgiving for this. Our car was very wind sensitive. That was one of the bigger ones, you would say, that kind of triggered it. Gusts of winds and little snaps here and there just made it difficult, especially on tracks like Austin, for example. Truthfully, it’s not really something that’s on the top of my agenda to focus on for this year. But at the same time, of course, I’m hoping we’re going to be in more races where track limits will matter because we’re going to be in the points in those races.”

Ferrari junior Taponen wins FRMEC title

Ferrari academy driver Tuukka Taponen clinched the Formula Regional Middle East Championship title in commanding style with two races to spare in the first of three races in Dubai.

After heading into the final round of three races with a fifty point lead, Taponen dominated the first race of the weekend, winning from pole in commanding style to lead home Zachary David by two seconds with McLaren junior Ugo Ugochukwu completing the podium.

There will be two further races to finish the championship today.

Sceats forces FROC title showdown

The Formula Regional Oceania Championship title will be decided today on the last day of the final weekend of racing.

Roman Bilinksi, who has dominated most of the championship, held a 56 point lead over Liam Sceats heading into the final weekend of three races at the Highlands circuit. Sceats dominated the opening race of the weekend on Saturday, winning with Bilinksi third behind Callum Hedge in second.

With the final two races of the season today, Sceats will likely need to win again with Bilinksi failing to score a point to force a title decider in the third and final race.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Social media

Notable posts from X (formerly Twitter), TikTok and more:

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Comment of the day

Kevin Magnussen may not have had a great season last year, but Brell-9W believes the Haas driver is underrated…

I hope Kevin Magnussen has a great season.

Every man and his dog wants him gone from F1, saying that he had a bad year last year and is past it.

I don’t know how many prospective drivers were going to get three tenth places in grands prix in that car last year. I don’t know why so many people want a driver whose never been in a top team but always fought hard and has been to hell and back with the Haas team, are so keen to see him gone.
Brell-9W

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to _Ben_ and Mike!

Author information

Will Wood
Will has been a RaceFans contributor since 2012 during which time he has covered F1 test sessions, launch events and interviewed drivers. He mainly...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

20 comments on “Albon blames Williams’ wind sensitivity for racking up most track limits breaches”

  1. Albon blames Williams’ wind sensitivity for racking up most track limits breaches

    Spoken like a true racing driver… “No, I can’t slow down to make sure I stay within track limits – it’s the car’s fault.”

    So as much as track limits might be seen as a bad thing and a ‘bad boy’ kind of behaviour, it’s just part of the game – pushing it to the limit.

    The modern ‘spirit’ of sportsmanship… Play the rules even harder than the other competitors.

    And the Ford Vs GM thing – Apart from the minor detail that Ford purchased and funded Cosworth to build race engines for them rather than actually doing it themselves in-house – GM was only contracted for, and enticed for the purpose of, bringing Andretti to F1. They had no other reason to want to join, and had otherwise expressed little if any real interest in doing so.
    Further to that, I think it’s quite fair to say that if Red Bull weren’t interested in partnering with Ford, Ford wouldn’t have gone any further with their relatively sudden F1 plans either. They only wanted to partner with a front-running team – and had it worked out differently with Porsche, they wouldn’t have even had the opportunity to do so.

    Reply moderated
    1. Be noted that they aren’t even using the Chevy or GMC brand.

      Specifically Cadillac, which was always seen as a unique brand for sportscars and where GM would gather resources and people to compete in racing events without the risk of damaging the most important brands (Chevy and GMC) image.
      They even find NASCAR (Indy comes second) more rewarding when it comes to their purposes.

  2. Well, if a car is wind-sensitive, he should take fewer risks with track limit excursions at corner exits by giving a bit more margin.

    Nice to see & hear the RB1 in action after a while.

  3. A change of diet perhaps may help.

  4. Little known fact– GM has been working with hybrids, fuel cells, and battery tech for a very, very long time. Most of this has been in development chassis that don’t see production, but the technology is there. GM has multiple R&D and production facilities for EV batteries– Ford just broke ground on their first.

    And of course, GM developed Magne Ride, a suspension technology common on their upper end vehicles (and many European marques) that’s too sophisticated for F1. /rolleyes

    1. Most F1 hardware is quite unique and very esoteric that does not translate very well economically for most road cars; meaning GM would still have to spend big money and years channeling their existing knowledge and IP to catch up and come up with race winning F1 parts. I seriously doubt GM has yet invested any significant tooling, facilities, money or time into making any F1 hardware.
      They’ve probably only been spitballing so far until they get the green light from FOM.

      However, I do look forward to seeing them in a F1 race.

  5. I disagree with the author, the “GM entry” does have a fair bit going for it, but he misses the point. He almost gets the point when he says:

    they might reconsider GM’s bid if it comes in with the full force and budget that manufacturers like Mercedes and Ferrari devote to the program — and waits until 2028

    The thing is that the Andretti proposal didn’t involve anything from GM except the name until 2028 and until that point the car would be a chassis with no historical knowledge behind it, powered by the lowest performing PU on the grid. That proposal has back marker written all over it.

    Think back a little, and you will see that Ferrari proved just a few years ago that if the PU performs well enough the failings of the chassis can be overcome, the McLaren sudden fall to the back with an under-developed Honda PU was attributed to the Mercedes PU having enough power to mask the failings of the chassis. Under power PU and underdeveloped (or badly developed) chassis = back marker.

    1. What’s wrong with a back marker?

      Especially when they are new to the sport, and didn’t have a chance yet to show how serious they are trying to improve based on experience.

      1. What’s wrong with a back marker?

        Bernie let Haas in, knowing that unless they were allowed to pretty much clone the previous year’s Ferrari using mostly Ferrari manufactured parts, they would be tagging along behind.
        Nobody here seems to support that idea of Haas being there other than a place marker for something else.

        I think they should focus on lining up a decent PU and enter with that.
        Given the GM engine-power-is-everything, I’d guess they would produce a 2028 PU that would put an average chassis into the mid-field.

        1. Please read my second sentence, and let me know what you think!

      2. What’s wrong with a back marker?

        Nothing is wrong with a backmarker – someone always has to be last anyway.
        Any negative consequences of them being a backmarker are worn solely by themselves.

        Reply moderated
    2. Think back a little, and you will see that Ferrari proved just a few years ago that if the PU performs well enough the failings of the chassis can be overcome, the McLaren sudden fall to the back with an under-developed Honda PU was attributed to the Mercedes PU having enough power to mask the failings of the chassis.

      When was that? The 2019 Ferrari was the dodgy one, and despite that they weren’t all that competitive, winning two or three races and not really being a factor in the championship.

      McLaren was also pretty mediocre, as was Force India, back in 2014 with that world-beating Mercedes V6. The third customer Williams was much better than both, and even they were a long ways behind Mercedes proper. A great engine might be able to power through some problems, but if the car itself is unstable, sensitive, and doesn’t do well with the tyres (or any of the other problems drivers have talked about recently as it relates to 2023) the car as a whole is still going to struggle.

  6. I think wind is a hopeless excuse for track limits. The Alfa Romeo was a really poor car this year. Maybe not sensitive in exactly the same way as the Williams, but it clearly was worse overall. I don’t think it is just going to be related to the wind that Bottas got 5 times less track limit warnings.

    Also, if it is to do with the wind, then every single street circuit with no run off where it was windy and he got track limits – he would have crashed. He managed to not to go off the circuit here as he was more careful which was all he needed to do at the other circuits. His team mate having nearly a third less than him is also an indication that Albon is the problem more than the car.

    1. Perhaps he was obliged to overdrive the car ie push the limits of traction, in order to be competitive in a tight midfield. Also remember that he scored way more points than Sargeant who probably was unable to keep the car as close to the limit as consistently.

      But yeah, you make a reasonable point.

  7. Seeing as track limits are (once again) a big talking point today, I thought I’d bring up this from yesterday (Friday maybe?). The Formula Winter Series qualifying session saw every driver get disqualified from the session for track limits. The footnote at the bottom tells you which laps (i.e. all) were disallowed for each driver. In the end, they set the grid using the combined results from the practice sessions.

    I’ve seen a lot of debate online about this, but in my opinion this is a fantastic decision. Obviously, it is far from ideal, but it makes a clear statement that the white line is to be respected and that infringements will be penalised. I’m sure those drivers will likely be more careful in the future. More of this kind of enforcement elsewhere please.

    1. Now that is hilarious.
      If only F1 was allowed to have the integrity to do this, rather than being so consumed by appearances and myth.

      However – what matters most in this particular case is that they mustn’t follow F1’s example of changing the rules (and even the circuits) as a result of everyone breaking them.

      Reply moderated
  8. Albon knows exactly how other cars behave aerodynamically and is the only one driving on the limit of the car at every corner. Ok.
    Anyway I would expect some adjustments after offs in free practice or penalties in previous race. Unless the penalties are not stiff enough to make a driver want to stay inside the track.

  9. With regards to the pistonheads.com article; the XJ220 being disqualified at Le Mans was always a bit dodgy. Not the best bit of officiating in any case.

    The Group C cars were always going to be a tough act to follow, but as fun as some of those mid 1990s entries like the XJ220 were, I’m glad Le Mans went back to the more extreme prototypes later on in the decade.

  10. And here come the armchair experts telling Alex Albon how to drive his car because clearly you all know far better right.

    Excuse me for just trusting what the actual drivers who drive these cars say rather than just listening to a bunch of internet people who have zero idea what they are talking about!

    1. And here come the armchair experts telling Alex Albon how to drive his car because clearly you all know far better right.

      Albon is experienced enough to know how to drive the car.
      The ‘armchair experts’ are merely reminding him of the rulebook.
      But maybe the dog ate the rulebook ;)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.
If the person you're replying to is a registered user you can notify them of your reply using '@username'.