Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 5 votes

S.Q.T. (stupid question thread)


  • Please log in to reply
2973 replies to this topic

#2951 Dolph

Dolph
  • Member

  • 4,645 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 02 August 2014 - 07:47

I thought Gerhard Berger winning at Hockenheim in 1997 was interesting. Sure he ran well there, nearly winning there the year before in the Benetton, but I also wondered how much missing the three previous races reset/recharged him.

 

Ha-ha, I remember Berger told how nobody wanted to see him back at Benetton after Wurz replaced him. So everybody acting like "you should have stayed home". So he puts the car on pole, does the fastest lap and wins the race. Suddenly everyone loves him again and they are ecstatic that he is with the team :rotfl: :rotfl:



Advertisement

#2952 HistoryFan

HistoryFan
  • Member

  • 2,553 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 02 August 2014 - 16:41

In times before safetycar the race sometime was interruped and started again after a short break. So at the Mexican Grand Prix 1987 for example. Times of both races were added so that Piquet was ending the Race on first place but Mansell was the winner because of his 30 seconds advantage from race one.

 

My questions now:

1) What other races also were interrupted and started again with the times getting added? I just know about Mexico 1987.

2) Was the restart a standing restart?



#2953 engineblock1

engineblock1
  • Member

  • 76 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 02 August 2014 - 16:58

If the engine stalls on the grid, why do they have to push the car into the pits to start it? Dont the drivers have any kind of ignition key to do it themselves ?



#2954 E.B.

E.B.
  • Member

  • 1,696 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 02 August 2014 - 17:08

2) Was the restart a standing restart?


If it hadn't been I would have remembered it and I don't so it was.

#2955 flatlander48

flatlander48
  • Member

  • 310 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 02 August 2014 - 17:19

If the engine stalls on the grid, why do they have to push the car into the pits to start it? Dont the drivers have any kind of ignition key to do it themselves ?


For one thing, there is no Key. But, I would guess the real issue is making sure that nothing interferes with the start of the race. You can't have the grid forming while trying to remove a car. It doesn't take very long for the engines and electronics to overheat when they are stationary.

#2956 kevins

kevins
  • New Member

  • 29 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 02 August 2014 - 17:30

In times before safetycar the race sometime was interruped and started again after a short break. So at the Mexican Grand Prix 1987 for example. Times of both races were added so that Piquet was ending the Race on first place but Mansell was the winner because of his 30 seconds advantage from race one.

 

My questions now:

1) What other races also were interrupted and started again with the times getting added? I just know about Mexico 1987.

2) Was the restart a standing restart?

The 1994 Jananese GP springs to mind, Hill winning in two parts over Schumacher

 

http://en.wikipedia....nese_Grand_Prix


Edited by kevins, 02 August 2014 - 17:31.


#2957 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 11,324 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 02 August 2014 - 17:36

 

1) What other races also were interrupted and started again with the times getting added? I just know about Mexico 1987.

 

There's one that I can remember right now: Detroit 1982.

 

And of course another one: the 2001 Belgian GP - but that was already in the SC era.


Edited by scheivlak, 02 August 2014 - 17:39.


#2958 HistoryFan

HistoryFan
  • Member

  • 2,553 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 02 August 2014 - 17:39

There were 10 races in which times were added:

 

Austria 1978

South Africa 1979

Dijon 1981

Detroit 1982

Brands Hatch 1984

Mexico 1987

Imola 1989

France 1992

Imola 1994

Japan 1994



#2959 flatlander48

flatlander48
  • Member

  • 310 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 02 August 2014 - 17:58

The original Detroit course had this weird U-shaped outcropping to the north west. At one point the track became completely blocked with maybe a half dozen cars. That part of the course was not included after '82.

Edited by flatlander48, 02 August 2014 - 17:59.


Advertisement

#2960 item3785

item3785
  • Member

  • 58 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 02 August 2014 - 19:21

If the engine stalls on the grid, why do they have to push the car into the pits to start it? Dont the drivers have any kind of ignition key to do it themselves ?


There is no mechanism for a driver to start the engine. Also having mechanics on the grid during a start can lead to situations such as this:
http://en.wikipedia....gian_Grand_Prix

#2961 ollebompa

ollebompa
  • Member

  • 583 posts
  • Joined: November 13

Posted 04 August 2014 - 08:59

Does the added preformance of a hybrid system, such as the ones used in F1, make up for the extra weight they add to the car?

In other words would laptimes benifit from taking them out? Assuming no minimum weight rules apply.

Edited by ollebompa, 04 August 2014 - 09:00.


#2962 August

August
  • Member

  • 2,054 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 18 August 2014 - 20:48

The budget of a top F1 team is over €300M. But how much is the involvement of owners like RB, Merc, and Ferrari when we deduct the income from other sponsors?

 

Also, how much is a typical budget of an engine manufacturer, and how much does a works partnership cost for a manufacturer when we deduct the income from customer engines?

 

Plus, IIRC a LMP1 budget is around €70M, correct me if I'm wrong. How much is a typical sponsorship income for a LMP1 team?



#2963 flatlander48

flatlander48
  • Member

  • 310 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 19 August 2014 - 01:06

Does the added preformance of a hybrid system, such as the ones used in F1, make up for the extra weight they add to the car?

In other words would laptimes benifit from taking them out? Assuming no minimum weight rules apply.


It would have to be pretty heavy to cancel out the benefit of 160hp.

#2964 KirilVarbanov

KirilVarbanov
  • Member

  • 839 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 19 August 2014 - 10:02

Does the added preformance of a hybrid system, such as the ones used in F1, make up for the extra weight they add to the car?

In other words would laptimes benifit from taking them out? Assuming no minimum weight rules apply.

Yes, it does. The whole PU is minimum 145 kg, and the Energy Store is about 20 to 25. Then we have K and H ERS modules, which are unknown at that time, but I'd suspect around 50 kg total, due to the minimum increase of the total car weight for 2014. Mind you, the 160 HP output is limited, but not by design. This could easily increase in future years. Moreover, the instant response you get from the throttle is a whole lot different thing. Finally, due to the efficiency of the 2014 PUs there's about 50 kg less fuel on the start. 
Renault says: 

"The old V8 was 95kg, 100kg if you add the weight of the MGU. This increases to 120kg when you include the ancillary parts, such as the radiators and other cooling devices. With the 2014 Power Unit, the V6 turbocharged engine will be a minimum of 145kg, plus 35kg for the battery. At 180kg, this is a 80% increase over the current units, plus a further 20kg for the ancillaries such as the intercooler and other radiators.’’

 

 

 

 

The budget of a top F1 team is over €300M. But how much is the involvement of owners like RB, Merc, and Ferrari when we deduct the income from other sponsors?

 

Also, how much is a typical budget of an engine manufacturer, and how much does a works partnership cost for a manufacturer when we deduct the income from customer engines?

 

Plus, IIRC a LMP1 budget is around €70M, correct me if I'm wrong. How much is a typical sponsorship income for a LMP1 team?

 

Good questions, but the answer depends on each manufacturer, really, therefore hardly any accurate estimates could be given. 
For example, if Sauber were to build their own engine, imagine the sheer size of the investment they must undertake. Rough numbers and various reports suggest that Mercedes have invested around $500 million to make the 2014 Power Unit. 
Then, if you try to deduct the sponsorship money, I'd say equally proportional rough number could be given that every team subsidize about 40 to 70 percent of the budget. The rest comes from sponsors and various income, such as prize money. 
An excerpt from Forbes: 

Ferrari receives about $160 million from Philip Morris’ Marlboro, McLaren gets $75 million from Vodafone, Mercedes enjoys a $55 million payout from Petronas and even a smaller team like Caterham takes home an estimated $30 million from a deal with General Electric.

 



#2965 ollebompa

ollebompa
  • Member

  • 583 posts
  • Joined: November 13

Posted 19 August 2014 - 11:07

Yes, it does. The whole PU is minimum 145 kg, and the Energy Store is about 20 to 25. Then we have K and H ERS modules, which are unknown at that time, but I'd suspect around 50 kg total, due to the minimum increase of the total car weight for 2014. Mind you, the 160 HP output is limited, but not by design. This could easily increase in future years. Moreover, the instant response you get from the throttle is a whole lot different thing. Finally, due to the efficiency of the 2014 PUs there's about 50 kg less fuel on the start.  


What if they could take it out and was allowed to run underweigth by the amount the hybrid system weighed?

#2966 KirilVarbanov

KirilVarbanov
  • Member

  • 839 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 19 August 2014 - 16:30

What if they could take it out and was allowed to run underweigth by the amount the hybrid system weighed?

Again, it depends. I have a simulation program, and there I have this generic open wheel car, similar to F1 in 2012. Monza chosen as track.

Results for 2012 F1 car, 18K RPM (I don't have time to modify the gear ratios, the torque numbers and the max RPM right now, sorry): 
78.87 seconds - 600 kg, 600 HP

77.83 seconds - 690 kg, 750 HP

Still, this isn't the full picture, as the car without the ERS modules will likely to be harder to drive with large turbo-lag (presumably), will slide a bit more and will be unstable on corner exits, for example. Also, we cannot predict the fuel loads and the tire degradation. 

For the sake of completeness, here's the full config: 
Drag coefficient: 1.2
Frontal area: 1 m^2
Seven gears, drive efficiency 93%, final drive ratio 1
Thermal efficiency 35%

 


Edited by KirilVarbanov, 19 August 2014 - 16:31.


#2967 August

August
  • Member

  • 2,054 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 19 August 2014 - 20:02

Good questions, but the answer depends on each manufacturer, really, therefore hardly any accurate estimates could be given. 

For example, if Sauber were to build their own engine, imagine the sheer size of the investment they must undertake. Rough numbers and various reports suggest that Mercedes have invested around $500 million to make the 2014 Power Unit. 
Then, if you try to deduct the sponsorship money, I'd say equally proportional rough number could be given that every team subsidize about 40 to 70 percent of the budget. The rest comes from sponsors and various income, such as prize money. 
An excerpt from Forbes: 

 

Thanks for the answers. I assume the $500M for the Merc power unit was for this season, they won't spend that much in the next seasons, will they?



#2968 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 11,324 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 19 August 2014 - 20:44

Thanks for the answers. I assume the $500M for the Merc power unit was for this season, they won't spend that much in the next seasons, will they?

Absolutely, and that $500M could well be the amount of money that a program costed that already started a few years ago.



#2969 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 13,642 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 19 August 2014 - 20:46

It's been a factoid bandied around a lot these days that Max Verstappen's mother Sophie Kumpen was a ferociously quick karter in her own right. Even besting the likes of Jarno Trulli.

 

What happened to her racing career?


Edited by Risil, 19 August 2014 - 20:47.


#2970 E.B.

E.B.
  • Member

  • 1,696 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 19 August 2014 - 21:13

I don't know, but aren't factoids by definition completely unreliable?

#2971 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 13,642 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 19 August 2014 - 21:32

I don't know, but aren't factoids by definition completely unreliable?

 

My fifth grade teacher taught it me as a fact without context. That's the definition I'm working on.


Edited by Risil, 19 August 2014 - 21:32.


#2972 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 11,324 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 19 August 2014 - 21:50

I don't know, but aren't factoids by definition completely unreliable?

Being completely unreliable is also a kind of reliability in some strange way  :D



#2973 lars75

lars75
  • Member

  • 135 posts
  • Joined: February 13

Posted 20 August 2014 - 06:37

She married Jos and stopt racing because of his career, she gave birth to Max and Victoria and staid at home. Last year she made her comeback in carracing at a national cup in the Netherlands, but she broke her back in a crash (although she did quit well up to then). After that she had to recover for three months and up untill now she didn't drive again. Although she said it was good to be back at the wheel and it was good fun.

 

But she was like Beitske Visser beating up the pack in karting being a frontrunner all of the time. Beitske found her way in carracing now driving WSR3.5. The step up from Formel ADAC to WSR3.5 was a step to hogh, she did quit well in F3 and FR2.0 testing although. She was always a frontrunner in F3 and FR2.0 testing, her chances would be better there I think.



#2974 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 13,642 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 20 August 2014 - 12:55

Shame. I think there's a story in that, although not a very happy one.