Yes, let's not forget the topic is the MP4/24, and how dreadful it is.

Except in the real-world (as of late 2004, anyway), that's not what's happening. Large corporations still use the language for their core business applications. http://www.expresscomputeronline.com/20040...opinion03.shtml

Yes, this is going to be a very interesting start to he F1 season.

On topic now: Any new statement from Whitmarsh?

I hate to say to you guys but I told you so,I've been a McLaren fan long enough to knows when theres trouble ahead,I f**kin hope a B version comes out ASAP. :\

interesting how lacking in grace the other fans on here are, this thread is to talk about the MP4-24, please be polite and not pollute this one with digs.

That over, I think with the sandbagging and being at the back, people are again getting carried away, they are slower then expected, thats different then what some people are thinking, but with the 4 days next week especially next week I am expecting them to be competitive, maybe not up with the top 2 or 3 but not far off (unless Brawn is for real, but then no one is going to live with them if true, the only problem with the next tests its going to be hard to know who to measuring the times against, I am also hoping for some new parts to make an appearance and futher make a boost.

As for Lewis, I think he has proved himself to his fans and McLaren and the world, he is the worlds youngest WDC ever, he has nothing to prove to know one anymore.

and oh femi? swish....

Indeed!

So what is everyone's thinking - season a write-off, or salvageable?

Clearly things don't look great right now, and McLaren actually coming out and saying it was a bit of a shock. I like that they did, but at the time it was a bit of a downer. Any positives out of it at all?

Well, I think, reading into what Whitmarsh and Haug have had to say (as far as you can in a McLaren press release, anyway), there at least seems a hint of positivity, paired with no small amount of determination to get back to the front. Haug says there is no problem with drivability, so would this imply that the "lack of traction" reports could be off the mark? It seems balanced at the least. They also both cite the problem as being downforce, and something like traction would be more of a mechanical issue, right?

If the whole aero concept of the car is wrong, then I guess the season is pretty much over. The most we could hope for would be a B version, setting up for next year (ensuring they know what works, so the 25 can be an evolution of that rather than risking the same thing happening again), and perhaps getting the odd race win. That said, I think they'd know by now if the whole concept was the wrong one, right? Maybe I'm reading far too much into something issued by the McLaren public relations department, but they don't sound as if they're giving up hope on the car yet.

Fingers crossed Jerez will be positive, that we can lead the midfield pack at Melbourne and turn the car into a winner by Barcelona

What is "rear wing stalling " ??

all the talk concerning the Mc's superior simulation-abilities is bullshit ... how the hell can they fall behind Force-india
Well, thanks god Brawns cars are running well, it keeps HSJ and his theories about the Merc-crapengine out of this thread ...

No Newey, No Dossier. No chance.

Stalling is when you lose all the downforce (upforce if on an aircraft) in one of the wings.

So what's going on at Mclaren is that their rearwing is losing downforce which cuases a lack of rear grip and therefore means the car is lateon the gas.

As I said, please pollute another thread, this is for the MP4-24, not for airing your own personal bash views on another team, you wouldn't like it in a thread about your team, so please return the favour and not do it here.

The stories about McLaren and their car now are reminiscent of 2004. This time though, it's not the engine that got the blame, it's the aerodynamics of the car. However, we all know that, even though '04 started out as an unmitigated disaster for McLaren, they managed to turn it around mid-season, getting a pole and a win.

Let's see what happens. I don't rate McLaren's chances highly for the first 2-3 races, but I can see them winning races towards the end of the season, considering their massive development resources, even in spite of the testing ban. I don't think, though, that Hamilton will be able to defend his title.

Or maybe I'm wrong. We'll know what's what when those five red lights go out.

They better turn it around alright. They should be ashamed that with all those resources they have again produced a lemon.
Ferrari should be given credit for fighting for championships each and every year whereas McLaren regularly seem to drop the ball.

I hoped (and expected) my favourite team and driver to have a chance to defend their crown.
It however looks to be a transition year where we only catch up when it's too late.
With the increased competition, coming back will be even harder.

When reading the press release this afternoon, us McLaren fans are not going to be having a lot to cheer for.

I don't think its good but I don't think its as bad as some people are making out, I think Lewis will be challenging for points in Austrialia and I think McLaren will progress in leaps and bounds through the season.

Not in 2005 and then FIA changed the rules back

...looks like I'm the only one whose mood has improved about our chances after the press release then

Traction is simply the available grip. Its dependent both on aero and mechanical components, not just one or the other. So a lack of downforce could definitely be a cause of poor traction.

This is a thread about the MP4/24. It isn't a thread about McLaren fanboys getting together. As long as you give your opinion on the MP4/24, it is fine, whether it is positive or negative. He is expressing the opinion that the MP4/24 is no good because of a lack of Newey and the Ferrari documents. You may not like his opinion, but it is more on topic than saying "If you aren't a McLaren fanboy, feck off"

I was thinking more in terms of the whole poor off the start thing that was bandied about. I realise that at high speeds the two are related.



How about, "your opinion is the kind of unreasoned, inflammatory and pointless comment that adds nothing to the thread other than the mindless drivel of someone with nothing constructive to say. Feck off."? Both true and relevant. With regards to tamburello's post, of course.

I don't really see how they can improve considerably over the season as there is a ban on in-season testing. And it's not as if they can rely on their wind tunnel as we've all seen how great that worked out when they designed the car to begin with.

They designed a wheelbarrow of a car at exactly the wrong moment: Where it is very hard to improve it (due to said lack of testing) and in a volatile economy (when they really need to impress the sponsors).

You just don't design a car that's lightyears off the pace and expect the season to go well. I say, devolop the car through the season, but at 60% of the normal "current car" budget. Add the remaining 40% of that budget to the "next car" budget. And get that forsaken wind-tunnel calibrated and cfd correlated.

But what do I know. Perhaps I'm wrong. It's happened before To quote a Nightwish song "End of all hope":

"Wounded is the deer that leaps highest"

-edit: shocking grammer

... maybe they should ask for some 'general help'

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Insane111



I was thinking more in terms of the whole poor off the start thing that was bandied about. I realise that at high speeds the two are related.



How about, "your opinion is the kind of unreasoned, inflammatory and pointless comment that adds nothing to the thread other than the mindless drivel of someone with nothing constructive to say. Feck off."? Both true and relevant. With regards to tamburello's post, of course. [/QUOTE

Well, funnily enough, I haven't seen you admonishing posters who are saying "McLaren are great, so it is all sandbagging", which is clearly even greater mindless drivel. To remind you, the topic is the MP4/24. It isn't "McLaren is great, only post if you agree"

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Josta
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Insane111

[B]

I was thinking more in terms of the whole poor off the start thing that was bandied about. I realise that at high speeds the two are related.



How about, "your opinion is the kind of unreasoned, inflammatory and pointless comment that adds nothing to the thread other than the mindless drivel of someone with nothing constructive to say. Feck off."? Both true and relevant. With regards to tamburello's post, of course. [/QUOTE

Well, funnily enough, I haven't seen you admonishing posters who are saying "McLaren are great, so it is all sandbagging", which is clearly even greater mindless drivel. To remind you, the topic is the MP4/24. It isn't "McLaren is great, only post if you agree" [/B][/QUOTE]

It's for people to enjoy the car. Not a vehicle for nursing a silly FA woz robbed grudge year after year.

I beg to differ. The title of the thread is MP4/24. That indicates that the subject is the MP4/24.

If you want to start a thread entitled "Macca fanboys only", feel free, but this discussion is about the car, and if it is shit, you are entitled to say why you think it is shit.

It's just nastiness.

BTW, could a mod please elaborate on this.

Can negative comments be posted on a team thread?

Personally, I don't think that the Ferrari blueprint has any bearing, but I do think that Newey did.

With new regulations, McLaren had to start from scratch. Without Newey they got lost.

That would be fine as a post, obviously.

Its been bandied about a lot, and much of the discussion is misguided.

Aircraft analogies aren't very helpful because the angle of the wing (the whole aircraft) to the airflow can and does change.
An aircraft "stalling" is different to a wing "stalling".
Lets get the aircraft out of the way first.
As it flies slower, so the pilot has to progressively raise the nose to get enough lift just to keep it in the air.
When its slow enough (nose high enough), the flow detaches, goes turbulent, the lift disappears, and the thing falls out of the sky.

With a car (2009 front wings excepted) the wing has a fixed angle to the direction of travel (and yes with minor changes due to brakes and power).
With an F1 car, there's also lots of cleverness goes on with changing the airflow direction to the wing, so as to get the effect of a change in wing angle.

But for the moment think of the wing as being at a fixed (steep) angle.
As the speed of the air over the wing increases (car going faster), you eventually reach a speed where the flow doesn't stick to the (for a car) underside of the wing.
The flow 'detaches' and gets very turbulent.
That causes a loss of downforce and an increase in drag.
You are accelerating along the straight, and woo, suddenly you hit an aero wall and can't go faster. The back end goes light too.
So you go back to the pits, and they crank some angle off the thing.
Now you are faster down the straight than before... (you've raised the stall speed) BUT you've got less downforce through the corners (making the car less grippy and less stable) and also less downforce means less traction accelerating out of the corners.

Race car wing stalling is NOT a low speed phenomenon. Its a high speed one - it limits the maximum speed, forcing you to use either a lower angle, or a less steeply curved (lower downforce) wing.


Right.
Thing is, stalling is not really the whole story.
Strikes me that the problem is that the underfloor/diffuser/bodyshape isn't generating as much downforce as they had calculated that it would.
Hence they tried to get more from the back wing. (Remember when the "high downforce" wing wasn't available? Make that that the wing they had wasn't delivering as much downforce as the car needed.)
But when you crank on more wing to compensate for the fundamental deficiency, THEN you get the poor old wing stalling.


I think it sounds as though McLaren thought they had a problem, but they first thought it was with the wing not working, maybe that the flow to the wing wasn't as calculated, but now they accept that its actually more fundamental than that.

Hopefully, they are now looking in the right place and will be able to tweak the simulation calculations to agree with the existing real world test data.
Only THEN can they start theoretical (rather than trackside-practical) redesign work.
And this year, as people keep saying, with testing banned, you've got to have good simulation capability.
Right now, the McLaren simulations aren't working properly.

So, there's likely two streams now working somewhat independently.
There's the simulation people trying to workout why their sums don't simulate what is really happening. So they can design and simulate the significant revisions that are needed. This will likely take time.
And then there's the practical racers, no longer so tightly tied to the computer, trying to make the best of what they have - with hacksaws, pop-rivets and fibre-reinforced duct tape. Which could/should make things 'less bad' in the short term.

It'll be interesting to see what happens.

So are you expecting some quick-fix changes in Jerez that will bring some few 10ths and improve the MP424 performance or do you see it longer down the line?

wdh

I think McLaren are hoping for SOME improvement in the short term.
But they seem realistic enough to accept that it'd be wrong to expect the big jump to Brawn-type speed from trackside tweaking alone.

X 2

That's a great down-to-earth aerodynamics explanation

A round of applause

I could be wrong, but I read, we are not where we should be and we are slow, they are meaning they are not in the top 2 or 3, not that they are going to be the back of the grid, its all about expectations and they are expected to be at the front, and anything less then that is deemed failure.

Thanks wdh

If things are as bad as they look, and no significant improvement at the start of the European season is forthcoming (we have heard the tune of "we have identified the problem and are working to fix it" from - ironically - Honda, in the last 2 years, and it never worked), then McLaren has little or nothing to lose by just using the GP weekends as test sessions. It might be better, in the end, to develop an entirely new car (maybe a Brawn copy, at least in aero concept) rather than keep struggling with a car that probably cannot be properly fixed without basically starting from a fresh sheet of paper. Even if you have to put it on track entirely untested, real progress will probably only be made in this way. The MP4/19B was quick pretty much right away when it first hit the (test)track, in mid-2004.

I expect the BGP01 to get Mercedes branding (at least a star on the nose) pretty soon, if it is even half as good as it looks. It may make sense from Mercedes' POV to give Brawn a discount, or even free engines, and also the 'pick of the engines' in return for branding and possibly technical assistance for McLaren (looking at what happened between Benetton and Ligier in 1994 and Ferrari and Sauber in 2004, as well as Red Bull and Torro Rosso now, I assume this is not illegal). That way, they can get 4 cars to near the front and Brawn can obviously use the money spared.

It is probably good for McLaren, and obviously for Mercedes, if Brawn does perform very well. Takes the pressure off from Haug, because if he only had a struggling McLaren to show for all their investment, talk of withdrawal would probably return swiftly. Now at least, it looks like the Mercedes engines will actually look very good. Especially if McLaren manages to (somehow) build a fairly comptetive car by mid-season.

wdh

Well, at least nobody is living in denial. Guess that`s a start ...

I just hope it might help restore the standard of the discussion...

When they say "we know what it is", should we believe them? One big mistake is often the easiest to fix (given time to make new parts).

Wouter
Of course they can borrow an idea or two from other teams, no need to carbon copy. But as I understand it, they have first of all to recalibrate their development instruments - hardware and software - before starting with updates or major changes. It is not possible for a team of McLaren caliber to build the current car if preliminary simulations and wind tunnel data gave bad results.

Yes, it's very important for them to get their Computer Simulations (and windtunnel, possibly) properly calibrated. That may in fact be the most important aim for the test in Jerez (if they didn't already manage to do so at Barcelona). If the simulation matches the reality to a reasonable degree, the lack of testing becomes a much smaller problem.

Starting from the BGP01 might not be bad, though, if it is possible. Taking over the Benetton design didn't hurt Ligier in 1995, and they managed to keep developing it independently from Benetton, leading to a win in 1996 and some spectacular performances from Panis in 1997.

Well, the problem looks like has to be fixed with the combination of the elements of rear part of the car. It is not only the wing (2008 or 2009) but the combination of wing, diffusor and maybe even suspension and camber.
If you add the fact that it will not be available testing time during the season the whole thing stinks.
The simulators, supercomputers, CFD, windtunnels and whatever are great, but still there is no a better experience than putting a car on the track and see what the hell happens

Mercedes played there board hand way to early, they should have let rumours be rife that they was thinking of pulling out and they might have being able to pull a renault and get FIA leeway on certain testing aspects..;)

Even thou they have admitted somethings wrong, and people are suggesting that the computers calibrations are off, hmmm, I dunno, I still don't think something adds up somewhere, they have some of the most advanced simulators, yes it can go wrong, but only to McLaren?

there was a comparison about cockpit position and the mclaren looked rather wierd compared to the ferrari.
really, it's such a difficult thing, we're not talking about one thing wrong...it's a lot harder to make the package work together. maybe just one piece is a little wrong in all this puzzle and you end up changing the wrong stuff
that's why they test with the paint and all
they are a great organization and will get on top of it
you know, when such huge rule changes occur there are a few options
-get it right....
-get it wrong...
-get it very right...
-get it very wrong...

the only one you don't want is the last one..

when you start opening new holes in your sidepods to get more air in to avoid frying your KERS system.....uh, not good

i wonder if it is the restriction on wind tunnel use that is the actual culprit of mclaren's current predicament. they have all this theory and numbers generated by very clever people, but are unable to verify them in the wind tunnel as readily and easily as they have been able to in the past.

still, it is times like this that i am glad i am a mclaren fan. now that in-season testing is banned, and their simulator and cfd resources are second to none, if there's any team in the field that can turn it around then mclaren would be it.

Why would Mercedes need testing leeway? There is nothing wrong with the Mercedes engine. You are suggesting they should use blackmail/cheat to gain an advantage?

It worked for Renault and its worked in the past for Ferrari when they have threatened to leave, you ok with them blackmail/cheat to gain an advantage?

You fanboys need to calm down. This whole forum is a place for positive and negative view points. So if you dont like reading opinions different to your own you should leave instead of trying to shut down opinions you dont like.

My opinion is that Mclaren have chosen the worst season to produce a dog. With no season testing they are most probably finished already as a serious front runner. No Alonso, No Newey, and no Dossier = Back to the dark days.