Who gives a shit about their airbox when you are crashing losing the front end? The Duc's weren't slow so did they really need a bigger airbox? Staying up on two wheels and not falling off due to front end feel (or the lack of it) seems a lot more important than airbox volume. Did anyone actually hear the riders complain that they were crashing or two seconds off the pace due to an airbox that was too small? Rhetorical question. Of course they didn't. But they can't complain about their team or the Bridgestones either. No win situation.

Hopefully the out-sourced metal frame will help them out. They could use a break. This time next year Vale will be racing rally cars if they don't get their shit together.

Don't forget, Ducati was building the "perfect bike" at that time, and it was the rider's fault if they couldn't win on it.

A well-designed airbox is as important to making HP as a well-designed chassis is to quickly getting around corners.

Kevin Cameron wrote about this years ago.  There seems to have been a similar progression in the late 70s/80s when tire development yielded much-better grip (and they also let-go without warning) and chassis design had to follow to keep riders from wearing out their 'leathers'.  Seems that Ducati's attempts with the stressed-member/CF chassis were just in the wrong direction for this era in MotoGP - who knows, but it might be the correct technology in some future scenario.