From the 15th of July:

Q: There have been rumours that McLaren would come up with two cars in 2009: one with KERS and one without. Is there any truth in that ?
Haug: ''No. We're certainly flexible enough to be able to meet with the demands for that. We will have a sound approach to this matter and we will have a good KERS. Mercedes-Benz has an awful lot of knowledge in this area and we're well positioned in comparison to the competiton.''

Q: Can you already definately say whether KERS will be in the car come Melbourne 2009 ?
Haug: ''Yes.''

-----

Whether this is a yes or a no is open to interpretation...

But the effort of making one chassis work well with and without KERS is probably less big (and more efficient) than actually building two different chassis. Which personally I don't think they are doing: there are more than enough difficult things to tackle with working on just one concept, also keep in mind McLaren has been developing the MP4-23 till the very last race, and I don't think they've been working on three chassis' at the same time !

So far McLaren-Mercedes has invested € 30 million on the KERS project.

I read somewhere that Magnetti Marelli were so far behind that Ferrari took KERS into their own hands

Yeah well I think they're willing to push on with what they have for as much as they can but in the end they're still dependent on Magneti Marelli I'm afraid...

Jeeze i have a good memory haha

But they certainly once did (in the not so distant past) work on three cars and we all know how that worked out ...

From the autosport article on KERS, it seems the cars might tend to oversteer. I know lewis loves oversteer but then if it is excessive then this is not very good. Anyone with better ideas than my ten-cent worth opinion?

I'm not sure but from what Sam Michael and Ross Brawn have said I get the impression they can move enough weight forward to suit the tyres, either by lengthening the wheelbase at the gearbox and/or by adjustusting the shape of the wishbones to move the rear uprights back. But they need to tune the weight distribution within a margin of less than 1% for each race, and so they need ballast to do that tuning.

So the lighter drivers should have an advantage, also the teams will be trying extra hard to take weight out of anything on the rear of the car.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/72034

It'll be interesting what McLaren are able to do with the new cars sidepod opening! Will they be able to get it smaller and also make it possible to have on both sides?

Mclaren are 'ahead of the field' with their sidepods and have been for some years now, i think 2004 was the first sculpted mclaren sidepod and since then they have evolutioned year on year, with this year bringing the tiny inlet. I think this could be worth a tenth or two on the other teams if they are capable of producing tiny inlets on the car.

If i reember correctly though, the mp4/19 had tiny inlets and that is why they had so many problems. That and a shotty engine, but even with the shotty engine, the car didnt give it a chance, lack of cool air intake was obvious. The B model opened the pods up a little, but gained the drag back by sculpting them.

Whatever happens, i think mclaren will have a beautiful car and have an amazing shape. Even if the rear wing will make it appear ugly.

PS. Speculation see's McLaren wanting Heikki to lfit his game next year because they are apparently interested in Robert Kubica's services.

source please?

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/72048

"It is understood that Kovalainen will have to improve his performances in 2009 if he to retain his seat beyond the end of the season - with McLaren and Mercedes already believed to be weighing up other options including Robert Kubica."

Given Robert's relationship with a) Hamilton (not brilliant), b) with Alonso (bff) and c) rather outspoken personality I'm not sure he'd be the best fit at McLaren.

Great driver and adding him could put the McLaren lineup in to clear competition with Ferrari's, but I think a Rosberg would be a better choice. Someone who can play the game, and probably not be fast enough to threaten Lewis while fast enough to pick up the ball on the weekends something happens with Hamilton.

One word;

Heidfield

If Hamo has any chance of those three championships then he needs Heikki in the other Mclaren. He also needs the Mclaren to be the clear class of the field as in 2007 and 2008. If not then he seems to be not good enough to win another world title.

Wow. The Mclaren the "clear class of the field". Were the Ferrari's backmarkers in these scenarios?

Obi

Mclaren are quietly dissapointed with what they have acheived over the last two seasons. Whereas Ferarri have made the most out of the 2nd best car, Mclaren have blown the last two championships with clearly the best car on the grid.

Just a shame that they dont have the drivers to show the cars real quality.

If they don't have the drivers to show the real quality of the car... how do you know what the real quality of the car is?

Norbert Haug told me one weekend

Please get the %%ck off this thread. We dont want flame-baiters spoiling a good MP4-24 thead. There are lots of bashing threads around you can hang about on or just start your own

would be nice if the thread-starter would gain some sort of semi-admin-rights for 'his' thread ... would help to keep the garbage out ...

McLaren was the second best car of the year and sometimes they were the third best car. Ferrari were always the bench mark or close to it, silverstone cannot be counted cos of the conditions, and germany was down to tyres.

Mclaren could have had two championships back to back, but they dont, and we dont dwell on what 'might' have been, maybe you ferrari fans do but we dont, we look forward and like to celebrate our achievements. And after 9 years of waiting, i dont really care about what we 'should' have done as you so nicely put it, we still bagged one, now piss off.

HAHA.
.
.
.
.
Not even a ferrari fan. But the Mclaren was the best car of the past two season. That is a fact.
Calm down fanboys.

No way was the McLaren the class car, in normal conditions the Ferrari tended to be far and away the fastest car

Cooling solutions will be quite different next year, the reason only the right side was fitted with the blanking is that the engine oil cooler is installed on that side.

Cooling solutions quite different, is this because of the banning of grill slots and kers, and so the sidepod openings will need to be larger next year?
If so, surly McLaren will still have smaller openings then everyone else even if there own is larger then this year.

But that were eventually consider as abnormal condition this year.

I think McLaren will probably still have the smallest sidepods next year also because they didnt have any "gills" on the car this year anyway and I'm not even sure that kers needs cooling.

KERS will need some form of cooling because when the thing is 'full' you still got something generating energy... its quite complicated but as I understand it you can't just deactivate the thing when it has reached maximum charge... you have to keep it 'boiling' and doing its job, because in any case you have to find a way to keep the braking 'experience' stable... meaning that if you don't need to recuperate kinetic energy for some reason (your KERS charge is full..), you still need to keep a predictable behavior under braking... which means the excess energy is gonna be shifted somewhere else, like to the opposite of a radiator...

Definitely will need serious cooling capacity.

guys, bernie and max want more equal engine. so hp limited engine is easier way for this?

Yes, and chimneys are banned too, so the sidepod outlet with redefine it's overall shape.

Andy, can you say anything about kers cooling? AFAIK the batteries will need quite a lot of cooling - will they be housed in the sidepods?

Behind the crash structure, under the sidepod inlet, it is one of the few places there is space on a F1 car.

Thanks

Why wouldn't you try and replace some ballast with it, up the front? Because the weight balance has moved forward? Can't you connect them with cabling? Wouldn't their dimensions be made up of lots of smaller segments, hence their placement could be around the car? If so, would that produce cooling problems?

Please excuse my ignorance, but if I don't ask, I'll stay this way ...

I can see the Mclaren and Renault being good next year with respect to cooling but Ferrari may struggle as the Type 56 engine isn't renowned for being great with dissipating heat well.

While we wait for an expert reply, my understanding so far is that the power involved - 60 kW - is so high that voltages are in the kilowatt range (to keep cable diameters reasonable: cable dia depends on current and power is volts x current), so there's a safety issue, I think teams have agreed to limit battery positions to protected areas like (as Andy said) behind the side crash structure. And whatever the voltage there's a lot of energy stored and a short-circuit from crash damage could be explosive. Also the cable is quite heavy, costing ballast the longer the cable run, and if that wasn't enough the batteries generate a lot of heat with being charged/discharged so fast and they must need to be in airflow. Possibly the cable might need airflow as well, because if they run it hot it can be thinner.

Interesting isn't it - lots of variables. its no wonder I had thought from the beginning, that flywheel based system which was purely mechanical, would be a much more efficient system for a race car. I hope they introduce a fuel limit and open up the hybrid technology as soon as possible.

I'd have thought the cable for power would not be an issue since it could be run along the bottom of the car - although maybe that would be dangerous in an accident?

Its a shame if the teams have agreed to stop batteries further forward, because it may effect the bigger drivers. That would be tragic IMO if due to KERS and its safety issues with electronics and the change to slick tyres, that the heavier drivers become less competitive.

It'll be interesting to see where Williams put theirs, it seems to me the packaging is even more difficult than the electrical systems, a fat cylinder about 200mm dia or something.

On the driver size it's always surprised me how little difference it seemed make to actual results even in the days when only the car was weighed. But I suppose every generation it's all more highly tuned and small differences matter more. I wonder what % of the kers weight is in the batteries? but I have a feeling the best thing for the bigger drivers will be a light kers with short cables car so they can pack the front wing with ballast.

The Williams system though is not purely mechanical - from what I understand, it just substitutes a flywheel instead of a battery - powering up by electricity an electromagnetic wheel to high speeds.

I have always presumed - perhaps incorrectly - that a flywheel could be energized mechanically, from the cars wheels somehow - and also by reverse, energize the car mechanically, more efficiently than by converting into electrical energy, then storing it, and then using the electrical energy. I guess because if one stores the electrical energy then there is no loss in using it in an electric motor.

When one adds the weight issues, an all mechanical flywheel might have been even more efficient. Although some here earlier said that gas compression could achieve the same efficiency with a more flexible shape that a flywheel.

I think the FIA wanted electrical because the power can be accurately limited. But if the FIA simply limited the fuel, and left the power recovery systems open, then maybe a mechanical system might become worthwhile? I think a gas compression system might be safer than an electrical battery system too - but I don't know how they could efficiently convert compressed gas to power the drive train.

Tungsten has a much higher density and so is more efficient as Ballast.

I was wondering what they used. For others... I looked up some densities - Lead 11.3 gm/cc, Gold 17.2, Tungsten 19.3.

Fortunately tungsten is also a bit denser than depleted uranium

Imagine the FIA not banning that after banning beryllium....

There's only 5 production McLaren F1 LM's in existence. The car that Hamilton will get is the prototype "6th" car that sits in the McLaren building. Pretty unique.

McLaren to work with Freescale on KERS

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/72085

dunno if thats good or bad, this is for 2010
which could be taken as that the one for next year developed with Mercedes isn't quite as good as we'd hope.

Why not have the tech partnership now?

I read it as being both about on-track, but also, on-road applications of McLaren technology.

In many ways this is a positive development and shows that KERS developments made in F1 can trickle down to road car projects, the type McLaren have indicated a desire to get increasingly involved with.

Wander if McMerc will have KERS on it's new P11???

No dude

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXPCckjTMVg

i bet McLarens current ECUs are already based on PowerPC-cores ... so its not that much different ...