The Spa 24 Hour Casino

Trying to follow a race when you're not actually there is never easy. But even if you are there, you really need to be able to see the track to stay on top of things. For the Spa 24 hours, John Hindhaugh, Martin Haven and I were following the race from afar, with invaluable information
being provided by Graham Goodwin, who was talking to us from media centre at Spa-Francorchamps. Although we managed to stay on top of things, (I think), there is nothing like trawling through the numbers afterwards, to make sure that the contemporary impressions are matched by the data.

Thanks to the kind folks from 'Blancpain Timing', a few days after the race, I managed to get hold of the data file which provided such analysis.

The first thing that I wanted to confirm was the impression that for the HTP Motorsports Mercedes SLS AMG and the Manthey Racing Porsche 911 GT3-R, Bernd Schneider and Patrick Pilet, respectively, were the outstanding drivers. Looking at single laps is often misleading, so in the table below, I show the average of the best 50 laps of each driver.
No. 84 HTP Mercedes

Driver	Average of best 50 laps
Schneider	2m 23.314s
Buhk	2m 23.621s
Götz	2m 23.848s

No. 150 Manthey Porsche

Driver	Average of best 50 laps
Pilet	2m 23.792s
Lietz	2m 23.963s
Lieb	2m 23.994s

This shows quite clearly, the contribution that each of the respective team's drivers made to their result. Looking at the time spent by each driver behind the wheel is also interesting:

No. 84 HTP Mercedes

Driver	Driving Time	No of Laps
Buhk	8h 17m 26s	205
Götz	6h 38m 05s	161
Schneider	8h 07m 27s	198

No. 150 Manthey Porsche 911

Driver	Driving Time	No of Laps
Lieb	8h 03m 49s	196
Lietz	7h 57m 02s	195
Pilet	7h 06m 09s	172

Note that the driving time does not include the time spent in the pits, which explains why the total does not add up to 24 hours (in case you were wondering)!

Another way of looking at average lap times is to take the time of a driver's stint and divide it by the number of laps completed. On this basis, let's look at the best full stint for each of the drivers of the no. 84 Mercedes and of the no. 150 Porsche.

No. 84 HTP Mercedes

Driver	Best Stint	Average lap time
Buhk	8:09am - 9:11am	2m 23.4s
Götz	5:10am - 6:12am	2m 23.8s
Schneider	1:54am - 2:57am	2m 24.2s

No. 150 Manthey Porsche 911

Driver	Best Stint	Average lap time
Lieb	9:27am - 10:32am	2m 23.8s
Lietz	10:34am - 11:39am	2m 23.8s
Pilet	8:23am - 9:25am	2m 23.9s

Somewhat surprisingly, both Schneider and Pilet are the slowest! Undoubtedly, Schneider's ability to set a quick time for a stint was compromised by the safety car periods during the fastest part of the race on Sunday morning. But perhaps also, although he and Pilet are quick when the track conditions allow, they are a little more cautious in the traffic? It's a theory, at least.

Another thing that was noticeable during the race was that the HTP Motorsport team was far more eager to have its drivers do double stints than Olaf Manthey's team was. Here are the longest stints done by each driver:

No. 84 HTP Mercedes

Driver	Driving Time	Driving Laps	Stint Time
Buhk	2h 07m 15s	52	3:00am - 5:07am
Götz	1h 51m 17s	44	5:10am -7:01am
Schneider	2h 08m 19s	52	6:56pm - 9:05pm

No. 150 Manthey Porsche 911

Driver	Driving Time	Driving Laps	Stint Time
Lieb	1h 04m 41s	27	9:27am - 10:32am
Lietz	1h 42m 36s	40	0:06am -1:48am
Pilet	1h 04m 14s	22	11:42am - 12:46am
Pilet	1h 03m 03s	26	6:40pm - 7:43pm

I have shown Pilet twice in the table because the 22-lap stint was partly behind the safety car, and although his 26-lap stint took less time, it is perhaps more relevant as a 'long stint'.

The other key to the Mercedes win was the speed with which the HTP mechanics changed the brakes at half distance. The Mercedes brake change was 1m 51s quicker than on the Porsche.

However, the amount of time spent in the pits for each car was as follows:

No	Car	Time Spent in pits	No of stops
84	HTP Mercedes SLS AMG	57m 11.467s	24
150	Manthey Porsche 911 GT3	53m 15.354s	23
2	Team WRT Audi R8 LMS	56m 08.677s	23

(Note that, for the purpose of this table, I have excluded Manthey's drive-through penalty.)

Arguments can no doubt be put forward from both Renaud Dufour (from HTP) and Olaf Manthey that they lost out due to safety car interventions, and it would be naïve to suggest that none of the five safety car periods had an impact on the race. Dufour had a strategy though and pitted on four of the five occasions that the safety car came out. The Porsche pitted only once when the safety car was out, but try as I might, I could not find conclusive evidence that either strategy was the correct (or the wrong) one.

It seemed to me a bit like betting on 'red' or 'black' at roulette - it is the best way of ensuring that you win something, but neither of them is better than the other: whether you win or not ultimately comes down to chance.

But it does seem to be clear that the key to the Mercedes win was its pace on the track. And also, that Schneider (who, don't forget, set the fastest lap of the race), was very ably supported by his two co-drivers. Oh yes, and the Manthey car had a misfire.

The Goodwood Festival of Speed

What on earth to make of the Goodwood Festival of Speed? Thanks to a work colleague who had a spare ticket that he was willing to part with, and to Goodwood’s policy that 12-year-olds could get in for free, I went along for my first-ever proper Festival of Speed on Saturday. I use the word ‘proper’ as I had visited the “Moving Motor Show” in 2012, but this was my first time at the Festival of Speed itself. I had been to the Revival Meeting in 2003, and had really enjoyed it – it is a race meeting, after all – but the Festival had never quite held the same appeal for me.

My son Robin was in his element though. From the moment we parked up in the car park, and a McLaren MP4 12-C drew up alongside us, until we spotted an Austin Healey 3000 in the same car park on our way back to the car some nine hours later, Robin delighted himself, getting up close to some true motoring icons.

For a young, impressionable Top Gear Magazine reader like Robin, there was something to see at every corner, but for me, somehow the event failed to hold me in the same thrall. The Festival of Speed is, as someone said to me, a big garden party. It unquestionably attracts some extremely well-heeled folk, for whom perhaps the British Grand Prix has fallen out of favour, but for whom the social ‘see and be seen’ events at Wimbledon, Henley and Glyndebourne are opportunities to parade the latest addition to their wardrobe, jewellery box, garage or (dare I say it?) bedroom. And like all good garden parties, you invite some ‘ordinary people’ as well, in order to gain credibility in the eyes of the public.

But this is too cynical a view. Especially as the over-riding feeling at Goodwood is one of naïve enthusiasm, where the commercial and political realities of modern motorsport are far from evident. Gathering together winners from F1, WEC, WRC, BTCC, Moto GP and other disciplines beyond my ken, means that there is indeed something for everyone; and the wealth of manufacturer stands presenting their message, gives even more breadth to the appeal of the event. A Festival indeed.

It may be that the very breadth is what makes me feel uncomfortable at Goodwood. At Le Mans, there is a certain security in the knowledge that my fellow-spectator knows about the WM-Peugeot, about Jean Rondeau and about Jaguar’s and Bentley’s heritage. But at Goodwood, there is the Sin R1 and the Peugeot Onyx, about which I know nothing, and there is a song and a dance about Peter Fonda and Captain America. And the fact that Spana and Tauro make road cars has somehow passed me by. I know about the 250 GTO’s racing heritage, but what is a 599 GTO? Am I alone here in feeling somehow overwhelmed by it all? I did take some recompense at Robin’s joy at seeing a real Ferrari F40, though.

I found the whole affair somewhat unstructured: we never quite knew what was happening or where we were supposed to be. It was unfortunate that the Vulcan bomber display coincided with the action on the track before us, although there had been nothing going on for the previous hour. Maybe I should have been listening to the commentary more closely on the radio – quite how that could be described as “free”, when the event programme cost £15, was something of a mystery. The raceday programme at Le Mans was a mere five euros. At least the queues for hamburgers and ice cream were pleasantly manageable.

The ‘festival’ mentality was carried over into the lack of structure of the event. The fact that one would suddenly ‘happen upon’ something or someone of note – for example Lord March himself strolling through the crowd trying (and failing) to look inconspicuous, or Andy Wallace on his way from A to B, or Derek Bell on his way back, was kind of nice, but if there was something you particularly wanted to see, then it was rather random whether you would succeed or not. You always had the impression that by doing this, here, now, you were missing something else happening somewhere else.

The activity on the hill was similarly haphazard. Some runs were competitive, being against the clock; but most were merely demonstration runs. With the track being so narrow, and run-off areas non-existent, you couldn’t doubt the wisdom of this approach, but it meant that watching the action on the track was as much of a lottery as the goings-on in the paddock. And again, this may be as much a reflection on my approach as on the event, but I found the “blink and you’ve missed it” nature of the runs up the hill annoying as well. Driver interviews, when they were out of the car at the top of the hill, were sometimes live, and sometimes delayed; the pictures on the screen, similarly were sometimes of live action and sometimes repeats. If you’re only looking occasionally at the big screen, you’re not in a position to follow a narrative flow of pictures.

This sounds far too negative; you’d think I hadn’t enjoyed my day. Wrong; I had a really good time, and I am so glad I went. Many of my gripes are because I didn’t have a proper strategy for the event: I just turned up and followed my nose (or Robin’s). Maybe I needed to be a VIP or have a proper guide, telling me where to go and what to do next.

Or maybe it’s because the pleasure is in just being there. History is not made at the Goodwood Festival, but it is celebrated. And for that, you need to approach the event in a different frame of mind. I’ll know next time!

(All photos: Robin Truswell)

Le Mans 2013

I have been somewhat slow in posting anything about Le Mans 2013 on this blog. There are a number of reasons for this; among them: firstly, that I was busy in the immediate aftermath of the race writing up a long analysis for Racecar Engineering, which should appear in the next issue of that magazine. Secondly, I have been busy at the routine tasks of my day job. Thirdly, that I seem to have had lots of jobs to do at home that needed my attention. But fourthly, and perhaps most relevantly, I’ve spent a good deal of time mulling over the death of Allan Simonsen.

I’ve commented on death in motorsport before in these pages, (here, if you missed it) and it is not my intention to repeat my thoughts on the matter. However, when one considers the scale of some of the accidents that have occurred at Le Mans in the past twenty years or so, I was somewhat taken aback that the accident that looked relatively innocuous at first viewing could have such terrible consequences.

Emotions run fairly high as a matter of course in the Radio Le Mans commentary box, particularly at Le Mans, and I found myself on more than one occasion having to re-focus attention on the on-going race, rather than dwelling on sentimentalities. It was the first time that I had been hooked into the team Skype channel, which enables John, Eve, our London studio and some others, to have off-air ‘conversations’ during the broadcast, and thus it was that I learned the news before the official press releases were issued. And due to the nature of the news and how it broke, we at Radio Le Mans had to confront it, head-on and for real.

Although I wouldn’t count Simonsen as a friend (I have few enough of those), I had met him on a number of occasions. I was impressed watching him at first hand in British GT races, and had interviewed him for circuit PA in the pit lane. There was also the inaugural Dailysportscar Cricket Match in 2008, which Allan attended,  and which provided a memorable opportunity to chat on a range of subjects, including the pronunciation of his surname, about which he was relaxed.

But I think it was the very fact that we have dodged the bullet so often at Le Mans that was the reason this year, that its impact, when it hit home, was so shocking. It was a hard race, in every way.

But, to use a well-worn phrase, back to the race. What a well-deserved, well-executed and thorough victory it was for Tom Kristensen, Allan McNish and Loïc Duval! A slow puncture aside, it was a fault-free run, as it had to be, given that there was always at least one Toyota close behind.

After the race, though, there was a press release from Audi that got me thinking. “Audi most efficient in the field”, it read, and there’s nothing quite like an extravagant claim to get me rushing for calculator and spreadsheet. The Michelin Green X Challenge is something of a dark niche, but having failed to get to the bottom of the calculation used, (despite email requests to Michelin, answers have not been forthcoming) I have developed my own “Index of Efficiency” for the 21st century.

Just as in the 1950’s and 1960’s my “Index” is based on the simple ratio of average speed divided by fuel consumption. The average speed is the speed of the car when it is on the track, so it is a matter of subtracting the time spent in the pits from the aggregate time of the car for the race, and dividing by the number of kilometres completed. It being France, fuel consumption is calculated in litres per 100kms.

However, since diesel has a higher calorific value than petrol, (measured in megajoules per litre), I apply a factor of 13% to the diesel-powered cars to come up with the following:

No.	Car	Average Speed (km/h)	Fuel Consumption (l/100km)	Index of Efficiency
3	Audi e-tron quattro	203.129	33.264	5.404
2	Audi e-tron quattro	204.138	34.044	5.306
1	Audi e-tron quattro	204.485	34.882	5.188
8	Toyota TS030 Hybrid	203.568	40.585	5.016
7	Toyota TS030 Hybrid	202.998	40.500	5.012

No argument, then, that Audi had the most efficient car at Le Mans. But more interesting, perhaps, is a comparison with last year’s race, in which Audi achieved an Index of Efficiency with the winning car of Lotter, Tréluyer and Fässler, of 5.870, compared to Toyota’s 5.017, which admittedly only completed around seven hours of the race. Audi's second-placed R18 e-tron quattro, in the hands of Kristensen, McNish and Capello, achieved an even more impressive 6.127.

In case it is not already clear, the way this calculation works, a higher Index of Efficiency means a more efficient car. So although Toyota would appear to be much the same as last year, it seems that this year’s Audi is up to 10% less efficient than last year’s car.

The Michelin Green X Challenge works the other way round - i.e. a lower index indicates more efficiency. But the same pattern is evident in that calculation too: last year Audi won with an Index of 5.26, this year it was 6.10, an even more significant change.

Unfortunately, in order to qualify for the Michelin Challenge, you need to finish the race, so figures for Toyota are not available for 2012; however, it is possible to make a comparison between Audi and Rebellion. Last year, Rebellion’s most efficient Michelin Green X Index was 83% of the best Audi, this year it was 91%; further evidence that Audi sacrificed efficiency for speed this year.

Now normally, I do not spend a lot of time fretting about the Michelin Green X Challenge, or on matters of fuel efficiency – after all, racing is more about speed than efficiency. But in 2014, the regulations are going down the route of allocating fuel based on the efficiency of the engine, and so understanding the nature of these calculations is going to be critical.

At the beginning of this year’s WEC season, Ralf Jüttner admitted that the reduced size of the engine air restrictor had forced Audi to take the less efficient route in order to stave off the challenge from Toyota. In defining fuel allocations for 2014, the FIA / ACO will be looking at the evidence from 2013, and could well find themselves in the role of kingmaker.

For sure, there will be plenty of to-ing and fro-ing before regulations are issued, and even after they're published, don’t be surprised to see some adjustments as we go through the early season races of next year as well.

Of over-riding importance, though, is that measures taken in response to Simonsen’s accident are well-considered and well-judged. It is essential that lessons are learnt, but the response must be appropriate. The FIA and ACO have a lot of difficult decisions ahead. I do not envy them the task.

Postscript: Following further analysis, I also picked up on Audi's assertion that the winning car completed the race using 16 sets of tyres. This means that each set lasted, on average, 21.75 laps. Last year's winning car though, completed 378 laps on just 13 sets, an average of 29 laps per stint. I leave it to the reader to decide whether 2012 or 2013 was the more 'efficient' victory!

Benoit Froger

I was saddened to hear recently of the death of Benoit Froger, following a long illness.

Benoit was, in a sense, one of the founding fathers of Radio Le Mans, and certainly helped establish the radio station in the late 1980's and into the 1990's.

At that time he was the marketing manager for the ACO, and was extremely supportive of Radio Le Mans in the early days. In effect, if we wanted to do anything, it was Benoit that sorted it out, whether it was arranging for telephone lines from France Telecom, radio frequencies from the French Government, car passes from the ACO, or the allocation of commentary booths amongst a variety of radio broadcasters.

He was usually ready to help, although he could at times be stubborn and intransigent: this was due as much as anything to his having to make compromises to keep as many people as possible as happy as possible for as much of the time as possible.

He left the ACO in 1995 and spent the rest of his career working for GM, providing a valuable link for the Corvette Racing and Cadillac teams with his many friends at the ACO.

His legacy was much broader than that though. During the 1970's it was Froger that encouraged many of the American teams to cross the Atlantic and come to Le Mans. Closely allied with Bill France of NASCAR, one wonders what would become of USCR if Benoit were still involved in the process.

It was also Froger that developed the marketing potential of the TV coverage of the race. Don't forget that during the 1970's the Le Mans 24 hours was seen as a something of a drudge. Contemporary sports-prototypes were not reliable, there were fuel shortages and the race was generally at a low ebb. With the arrival of Group C came increased interest from manufacturers, and Froger saw the potential of a world-wide TV audience for the race.

A man whose vision and enthusiasm is already missed.

Three more litres

It's now been more than a week since the ACO announced that the petrol-engined LMP1 cars are to be allowed a larger fuel tank at Le Mans. At least the organiser of the most important endurance race of the year has come clean and admitted that the additional three litres of fuel that the works Toyotas, the Rebellion Lolas and the Strakka HPD will be allowed to carry is in order to better balance the performance between petrol and diesel-fuelled engines.

So, this year, the hybrid Toyota TS030 cars will be allowed to carry 76 litres, an increase of 4.1% per tank. The non-hybrid privateer entries from Rebellion and Strakka will be able to carry 83 litres, an increase of 3.75%.

In 2012, both Toyotas were only able to manage 11 laps in a stint, which means that they were using about 6 litres per lap. Audi sometimes did 12 laps on its 58 litres of diesel, although some stints were 11 as well.

Just as an aside, before diving into the arithmetic too heavily, and before anyone starts pulling the wool over your eyes about how efficient these engines are, consider this. The diesel Audi, if it used all its fuel to do 12 laps last year, would be achieving 7.8mpg and the Toyota a miserable 5.8mpg (of super-unleaded). That means if you were to drive from Calais to Le Mans, you would need to stop twice en route to refuel, even if it you topped it up to the brim before you boarded the ferry at Dover!

So while we applaud the increased emphasis on more efficient engines, we must never forget these are racing cars, designed first and foremost to optimise performance. Using the same analogy of driving your road-going Toyota TS030 Hybrid from Calais to Le Mans, you could expect to arrive in around two hours - depending on how long the queue for toll booths was!

Anyway, to return from my tangent to the matter at hand, three litres is not even enough for a lap. But it might make the difference between 11 and 12 laps for Toyota. And you get the feeling somehow, that it must make the difference. Such rule changes are not made in isolation, they are made in consultation with the entrants concerned, and we know that Toyota has been lobbying for a performance break.

So it is reasonable to expect the Toyota TS030 Hybrids to be able to manage 12 laps in a stint this year. It will mean that at the start of each stint, the cars will be 2¼kg heavier, and the pit-stops will take around a second longer.

But what I find interesting is that the ACO chose to increase the tank size of the petrol-engined cars and not decrease the size for the diesel-engined Audis. It seems pretty obvious that Toyota needed the increase to get an extra lap and it wouldn't have the same negative impact on Audi - or at least that's what Toyota must think.

From what we have seen so far this year, Audi has a much thirstier car than last year - indeed, by my reckoning, they might only be able to get 10 laps out of a tank.

The other big issue is going to be tyre usage. We have seen the Michelin tyres lasting for three stints at Le Mans in the past - indeed, Audi has been known to run a quadruple strategy in the past. And if Audi can only manage 10 laps on a tank, then a triple stint for the tyres would only be 30 laps.

Of course, there are many scenarios, but let's take just two: first, that Toyota can indeed manage two laps more than Audi on a tank of fuel, but that Audi triple stints the tyres, where Toyota only double stint them.

In this case, assuming that there are no safety car periods, then the Audis will need to make seven additional stops (each) during the race. However, if they can lap, on average, three-quarters of a second faster than the Toyota, then they should (according to my projection software) be ahead at the end of twenty-four hours.

Second, let's suppose that Toyota's fuel advantage is only one lap, but that both teams can triple stint the tyres. This will enable Toyota to complete an extra lap over 24 hours, but it will have to maintain an average lap time within half a second of Audi in order to win the race.

In a nutshell, it is all finely balanced. The underlying theme is that Audi has the quicker car, but it will have to stop for fuel more often. The projections above both assume the ‘perfect race’ though - i.e. no fumbles on track or in the pits, no safety cars and no rain.

These days, that is not such a wild assumption, but bear in mind that each of the works hybrids will need to make more than thirty pit stops and over a thousand overtaking manoeuvres during the race, so achieving perfection is a very tall order indeed.

Continental Notes - May

A feature of my youth was growing up with Motor Sport magazine, and readers may recall the columns written by the irreplaceable and incomparable (and perhaps irascible) Denis Jenkinson under the same title. I do not for a moment pretend to be in Jenks' league as a journalist, nor as a writer, but wish to preserve his memory by using - I hope he'll forgive me - one of his headings for this post.

It was at Spa, at the beginning of May, that Nick Daman mentioned to me that he had noticed that I was at more races this year. And I explained to him the conscious decision I had taken at the beginning of the year to devote more time to racing, at the expense of my day job. Inevitably, it has been, to an extent, at the expense of my family life as well, but I have an understanding family (I think...) and May was a good month, featuring a trip to Spa-Francorchamps for the Six Hours WEC race, and to the Nürburgring for the 24 hours.

I first went to Spa in 1986, for the 1000kms sports-prototype championship race, and had a most memorable time, including being driven round the old circuit by Howden Ganley. In those days, even though the new circuit was in use, parts were still public road, including the run up to La Source and then back down to Eau Rouge, although Raidillon itself was coned off, you could then drive up the Kemmel straight towards Malmedy.

My last visit had been in 2001, and although in the interim I had visited various events, including some GPs, I must admit I had forgotten some of the charms of the place. I was able, during the Saturday morning warm-up session to wander off and watch the cars.

And I have to say that Spa is (in my opinion) one of those very special places to watch racing cars. It's not just the proximity - at some points you can get very close - and it is more than just the legendary status of places like Eau Rouge. It is to do with the age, the venerability of the place. If race circuits were in the Queen's honours list, Spa would have a knighthood.

You almost want to talk to the trees and ask them what they think of the current breed of WEC car, compared to the D-Types, Aston Martins, Ferrari Testarossas and Porsche 956s.

Time moves on of course, and now there is a nice new media centre in the paddock, but the old start finish line is still overlooked by the main grandstand. And the old commentary box, at the top of the hospitality suites in the centre of the picture below, brought back memories of times that aren't really that long ago.

The old 'bus stop' has gone too, but from the top of the pits is a marvellous viewing area (and a bar!), not just of the start finish, but of the run down towards Pouhon in the distance. Simply magnificent.

Audi UK had provided me with an A5 in which to make the trip, and as the race was held on Saturday, finishing at 8:30 in the evening, it was possible to drive home on Sunday morning on some delightfully empty Belgian autoroutes.

To make the weekend practically perfect, the weather was fine throughout, most unlike some very dreary weather that I've experienced in the past in the Ardennes.

A mere fortnight later, and it was off again, this time to the Nürburgring, for the 24-hours, with transport this time from Toyota GB, and a rather spiffing Lexus RX450h. It wasn't the first hybrid that I had driven, but it was certainly the best, the car easily returning 35mpg, despite being driven with some gusto at various points by John Hindhaugh and Jim Roller, who both drove it on occasions.

It's not really fair to compare Spa-Francorchamps with the Nürburgring, for although they are only 50 miles apart, they are quite different animals. The Nürburgring is itself something of a 'Jekyll and Hyde', with the rather bland Grand Prix circuit attempting, but failing, on 24-hour weekend, to cast a shadow over the mighty Nordschleife.

Although Spa was modernised before the Nürburgring (in 1979, rather than 1984), somehow the Germans managed to get everything wrong that the Belgians got right. The beauty of the 24-hour race at the Nürburgring is that you get to see both sides of the place: and in some ways the German character is similarly dichotomous. Never did we see an Autobahn as empty as in Belgium, and yet we were allowed to drive as fast as the poor little Lexus would go, once the de-restricted signs were shown.

Drivers in Germany are a lot more aware and disciplined than in Belgium, for good reason.

At the end of the long weekend though, driving home provided the opportunity to reflect on two rather different races and two rather different tracks. And yet, both stir the soul of motor racing aficionados.

When I was deciding on my 'Classic Tracks' recently, I didn't include either Spa or the Nürburgring - you'll have to wait for the final part of my trilogy to see what I added to Indianopolis and Monza - but having visited both in the last month, they are undoubtedly worthy of inclusion, and certainly both are well worth a visit. Even if you've been before, Spa Francorchamps and the Nürburgring are tracks that get under your skin and suck you back for repeat visits.