Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 8 votes

McLaren Honda MP4-31 Part V


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
4086 replies to this topic

#101 alpes

alpes
  • Member

  • 303 posts
  • Joined: February 16

Posted 09 August 2016 - 20:52

I think for rotating elements the radius is more critical than mass in creating resistance to rotation movement and this way lag.
The weight of the shaft, apart from the general principle to make everything lighter, is probably more important for the center of gravity of the car since it sits also very high

Advertisement

#102 CPR

CPR
  • Member

  • 5,116 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 09 August 2016 - 21:14

Does anyone know if Honda being allowed to work through the summer break because they are a partner of the team is correct?

 
I'm pretty sure they're allowed to. I believe they put in some heavy hours last year, getting the engine upgrade ready, and I don't think the rules have changed since then.



#103 Alonsofan007

Alonsofan007
  • Member

  • 2,214 posts
  • Joined: April 15

Posted 10 August 2016 - 00:07

 
I generally agree with what you're saying but would suggest you say "reduce lag" rather than "eliminate lag". It won't eliminate the need for an intercooler though - while having hot components around would make a difference the main reason the air gets hot going through the compressor is because it's compressed (google "ideal gas laws" or "air pressure and temperature" if you're interested) - the air temperature would probably increase by somewhere around 200C in these F1 engines, depending on the pressure increase and compressor efficiency.

 

Honda's compressor is in almost the same location as Mercedes's, just a more embedded (not sure if it's still entirely in the V or not this year). I've no idea how much of a difference that makes for overall cooling etc.

reduce lag is right, but i think reason for cooling is opposite, main reason is exhaust temps which are much much higher than temps generated by compression alone. And as per honda their packaging makes it much complicated and any advantage in cooling is negated by being limited in terms how how much they are able to push ICE to keep temps inside V under control.

It's a bit of a give and take to some degree though. The lengthy shaft connecting the compressor and turbine will increase the weight of the rotating assembly, increasing lag and transient response in the process.

I believe Merc spent a ton of time to get the concept right though, as it must be extremely critcal to have a connecting shaft that is as strong and stiff as possible (to prevent vibration & deflection), while remaining lightweight at the same time.

I agree, its about choosing b/w disadvantages you've mentioned vs smaller intercooler means smaller packaging and reduced lag.

excess weight should not be concern IMO esp these days when all cars run ballast to meet weight regulations anyway and their layout gives better weight distribution advantage as well.


Edited by Alonsofan007, 10 August 2016 - 00:15.


#104 Joseki

Joseki
  • Member

  • 3,251 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 10 August 2016 - 14:16

Does anyone know if Honda being allowed to work through the summer break because they are a partner of the team is correct?

 

@HondaRacingF1
To kick off the Summer break we've been having a family day here at Honda HQ with a BBQ and factory tours!
 
CpG8G_cWEAAACxZ.jpg
 
CpG8G_oWcAAadx0.jpg
 
CpG8HBLWYAEnm28.jpg
 
Is this Sakura or Milton Keynes?


#105 CPR

CPR
  • Member

  • 5,116 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 10 August 2016 - 14:24

@HondaRacingF1
To kick off the Summer break we've been having a family day here at Honda HQ with a BBQ and factory tours!
 
Is this Sakura or Milton Keynes?


Probably Milton Keynes... unless there's a lot more foreigners working for Honda in Japan than we had previously thought :)

Edited by CPR, 10 August 2016 - 15:00.


#106 Owen

Owen
  • Member

  • 12,944 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 10 August 2016 - 14:47

Milton Keynes. Think only about 35 people work there just now.

#107 CPR

CPR
  • Member

  • 5,116 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 10 August 2016 - 22:02

Just for fun, distance covered in races so far this year:

   Km     %
 6882 100.0 Williams
 6796  98.8 Red Bull
 6655  96.7 Force India
 6648  96.6 Mercedes
 6570  95.5 Sauber
 6438  93.5 Haas
 6217  90.3 McLaren
 6133  89.1 Renault
 6090  88.5 Manor
 6065  88.1 Toro Rosso
 6032  87.6 Ferrari

 
If we ignore the first 2 races we'd be 4th. On the flip side if we include FP and quali then we'd be 2nd last.
 
Last year looked like this:

   Km     %
11128 100.0 Mercedes
10608  95.3 Ferrari
10593  95.2 Williams
10481  94.2 Red Bull
10287  92.4 Sauber
10051  90.3 Force India
 9969  89.6 Toro Rosso
 9586  86.1 Manor
 8672  77.9 McLaren
 8011  72.0 Lotus



#108 rodlamas

rodlamas
  • Member

  • 10,094 posts
  • Joined: February 04

Posted 11 August 2016 - 11:36

Just for fun, distance covered in races so far this year:

   Km     %
 6882 100.0 Williams
 6796  98.8 Red Bull
 6655  96.7 Force India
 6648  96.6 Mercedes
 6570  95.5 Sauber
 6438  93.5 Haas
 6217  90.3 McLaren
 6133  89.1 Renault
 6090  88.5 Manor
 6065  88.1 Toro Rosso
 6032  87.6 Ferrari

 
If we ignore the first 2 races we'd be 4th. On the flip side if we include FP and quali then we'd be 2nd last.
 
Last year looked like this:

   Km     %
11128 100.0 Mercedes
10608  95.3 Ferrari
10593  95.2 Williams
10481  94.2 Red Bull
10287  92.4 Sauber
10051  90.3 Force India
 9969  89.6 Toro Rosso
 9586  86.1 Manor
 8672  77.9 McLaren
 8011  72.0 Lotus

And if we consider that 1st race we were out due to an accident and 2nd race due to not being able to use the radio, we are not in bad shape at all. Progress has been made, is being made and will still be made for a long time. We will be winning again soon.



#109 muramasa

muramasa
  • Member

  • 8,202 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 11 August 2016 - 13:16

--------------------------------------

 

 Hungary  洪牙利

 

all dotted parts are Hasegawa quote

 

(some quotes look duplicate but these are from different sources/articles. Most likely identical quote transcribed and used bit differently, for those so obvious I merge/aggregate them, but bit difficult or couldnt be bothered this time )

 

 

Friday ---------------------------------------

http://f1sokuho.mopi...359&tt=-1&at=30

 

  • it's only the first day, but this track suits our car i think.
  • (on positive result of Friday - FA P7 & JB P8) Of course it's better than starting from the bottom, but I dont want to evaluate / assess the performance/prospect (for Sat/Sun) by today's lap time.

 

  • It's shame Alonso's PU suffered trouble. Oil has entered into combustion chamber, also it was emitting white smoke a bit.
  • It was the same trouble that happened to JB's PU at Canada, but this time the unit has been turned off immediately, so I think both engine and turbo should be fine.
  • (then they decided to change Alonso's unit to previously used ones) It's the unit last used in Austria (3rd unit that was introduced at Monaco, so had gone through 4 race distance [MON, CAN, BAKU, AUS] )

- current PU is designed for 5 race distance (info in the article, also there was Hasegawa's direct quote on this at Silverstone weekend)  

 

 


Saturday -----------------------------------------

http://f1sokuho.mopi...427&tt=-1&at=15
 

  • It's precious that we were able to not only go through to Q3 but also get 7th and 8th under condition like this.
  • First time we as mclaren honda went to Q3 with both cars. Despite such difficult condition of track drying up rapidly from torrential rain, both team and drivers have made the best job I think. Especially pleased with Q3 result. It was almost dry, so we couldve only dropped position gradually just like we had always been, but our two drivers have extracted 100% from the car and PU performance to produce the best result.
  • (on quali result, reasons for why they were competitive with both cars through to Q3) Chassis advancement and better track condition. Back in Monaco mechanical grip was low and, more than anything, drivers were insisting lack of traction. Since then Mclaren has been making quite an effort in car development, and it's progressing steadily.
  • Besides, Hungaroring track has been resurfaced and got very smooth.
  • Jenson who usually complains a lot was praising the car saying traction is good, grip is good too (laughs).
  • (towards race) We want to defend the current position at least. Also if possible we want to go even further up. I believe it's not impossible wish. Long run pace isnt bad at all as well.

 

 

 

Sunday ----------------------------------------------------------

http://f1sokuho.mopi...498&tt=-1&at=15
https://sportiva.shu.../2016/07/27/f1/

also f1sokuho (print) (same for sat and fri too)

 

 

  • The first trouble (of JB) was brake sensor issue. Most likely hydraulic related sensor trouble. The pace itself has recovered by resetting sensor and so on.
  • (on JB's retirement at lap 60 after white smoke coming out) It's certain that engine oil was leaking. It was not large amount, but we decided to have him retire before engine blow just to be safe. Had we been without these issues we would have got 7th and 8th, so it's shame.  
  • If he had been running within point scoring position, maybe we would've let him continue and take the checkered flag.
  • At the moment we dont see any issue in JB's PU itself, but we will investigate thoroughly before/until the next race.

 

 

  • It's due to track characteristics, but here we could score points on merit nonetheless. we could show competitiveness on dry condition, so we were able to prove car's good progress.
  • All 6 cars of top 3 teams finished the race, and we are right behind them. We were faster than Williams, Force India and STR, which are our immediate midfield rivals so far this season. That itself was nothing but positive.
  • So Mclaren staffs were disappointed more than we (Honda staff) were (about Jenson's retirement). We had good performance, so we think we couldve finished in 7th and 8th, so.

 

  • (context is that Hasegawa is not pleased much, because JB's trouble&retire and big gap to the front pack) We got 7th by showing proper performance under dry condition, so actually it is the result we should be pleased with. The race pace was what we expected, long run was good so it was the race we could feel proper advancement of the car. Of course the track characteristic that it is less affected by power is one contributing factor, but at least on this track we were able to score points by coming to right after the top 3 on merit.

 

  • This track is not power hungry, so it played a good role, but that wasnt everything. A lot of updates on aero have been brought here again, so car as a whole package has progressed, that's what enabled us to achieve good result. Number of recent updates is incredible, so mclaren side of the effort is tremendous too I think.
  • (despite good result, Hasegawa is not pleased much. One reason being that JB's troubles and retire, then) That (absolute gap to the top 3) is one reason I'm not feeling cheerful. Right behind top 3 in terms of finishing position, but we were 40sec behind Raikkonnen who was 6th. So it's not really a pleasant result. The gap is big. It feels like the race was such that we are made to realize clearly the gap to the top 3 is substantial.
  •  Thing is, as Jenson was saying at the post quali conference, we have come to the position where we can aim further up, then we are reminded painfully once again about the considerable gap to the front pack by getting closer to the top.
  • Still, for instance if engine is improved and get power increase, then you can put more downforce for that amount, which then improves tyre life, which then makes strategy easier, so we should be able to go into positive spiral.  Besides we were saving fuel quite a bit this time around too, but if power increases fuel consumption issue will be better as well. There is synergistic improvement cycle about it. So I dont consider that the actual gap is as big as it appears from outside. If one thing goes to positive direction, then the gap should be smaller and smaller, I reckon.

 

 

 

 

 

==========================

 

 

Germany 独逸

 

All dotted parts are Hasegawa quote

Again some quotes look duplicate obviously but they are from different sources/articles

 

 

 

Friday ----------------------------------------------

http://f1sokuho.mopi...665&tt=-1&at=15
also F1 sokuho (print)

 

>>>>

On JB's PU in Hungary

  • (same remark from hungary sunday quoted) It's obvious that engine oil was leaking. But it's not a lot in amount, however we chose to have him retire before engine blow up just to be safe.

- Post-race investigation revealed that part of an engine component was broken/cracked and oil was seeping from that spot. Fortunately exchanging the damaged/failed component was all that had to be done and there is no problem in engine itself, so the same PU continues to be used for Germany. (info in the article)

>>>>


- (regarding JB's eye trouble) In FP2, just as JB started long run on softs, he suddenly came back to the pit saying "i'm coming in, I'm coming in". (info in the article)
 

 

  • It's the first Hockenheim for us Honda. We worked on engine tuning in order to suit PU to this power circuit whose characteristic is quite different from Hungary.
  • At least Mercedes works is turning power down quite a bit on friday. Then turn it up suddenly on Saturday. Force India and Williams are not as obvious, but it's reasonable to assume they are doing/following the same protocol as the works team's.

 

 

Saturday ---------------------------------

http://f1sokuho.mopi...734&tt=-1&at=30

also F1 sokuho (print)

 

  • (asked "compared to hungaroring, hockenheim is power sensitive track for sure, but Red Bull Ring and Silverstone are also power sensitive tracks. Despite so, able to go through to Q3 at those 2 prev tracks while unable at Hockenheim, why is that?") We didnt expect that Hockenheim would be power sensitive this much.
  • It turned out to be that actual full throttle rate/period figure was bigger than what has been calculated/simulated beforehand.
  • When we ran on actual track, we found out that it is possible to press on throttle more than we estimated/expected, and full throttle rate turned out to be even higher.
  • Drivers were able to push the pedal more than expected, therefore engine were using rpm range that's different from the expected/pre-calculated range, which as a result has made driveability bad.

- prepared engine mapping based on simulation result, but rpm range and throttle opening rate/degree that drivers actually used in real condition turned out to be very different from simulation/estimation. Then it took much effort and time to adjust the mapping (nuance is that they couldnt get the mapping right in satisfactory fashion). (info in the article, but format is transcription of Hasegawa's info)

 

- In FP3 JB suffered from the trouble that brake duct caught debris so had to abort the session there.  (info in the article)

 

  • we were surpassed by Merc customer teams brilliantly (from Friday to Sat). To be frank, I think they are running by turning performance down quite a bit on Friday, but I didnt expect effect of power to be this much. 
  • Car setup work didnt go well either, but biggest reason should be power. We couldnt match Merc teams who are superior in power. On the other hand, we were able to press on throttle more than expected, which means fuel consumption has increased for that amount as well, so fuel situation has become more severe than expected too.
  • Having said that, long run pace isnt bad, and regarding power as well, there shouldn't be as much difference on the pu side in race as there was in quali. I think it's highly possible to score points. We should be able to fight against Williams, FI, STR on equal terms.

 

 

Sunday -------------------------------------------

 

http://f1sokuho.mopi...no=100820&tt=-1
https://sportiva.shu...8/03/_split_f1/
http://f1sokuho.mopi...1&tt=1170&at=15
http://f1sokuho.mopi...936&tt=-1&at=15

also F1 sokuho (print)

 

 

  • We were able to show strength of our car in terms of race performance. So in a sense I'm pleased more than I was about Hungary's P7 actually.
  • For instance Russia was very severe on fuel consumption too, but at that time the competitors we were fighting against by saving fuel was Renault and Haas. However now it's Force India, Williams and STR that we are competing against, so we are now one stage up. To put it explicitly, it's impossible to fight against them by saving fuel.

 

  • Regarding PU, 6th race for Alonso's and 5th for JB's, but both lasted til checkered flag. I'm pleased about this too.

- Alonso:   4th ICE that was in its 6th race
- JB:          ICE was in its 5th race, TC was in its 6th

  • This (PU component/count situation) has given us big boost in confidence for future development. During race I was always nervous though.

 

  • On the other hand, we were reminded painfully of severity of fuel consumption and lack of power in quali. We could see advancement in performance, but also the task/issue ahead to be solved has become clearer. Kind of race that's suitable for us / depicted us nicely.
  • From around the start of the final stint, we were in situation where remaining fuel was not enough. Added to that, tyres were shot and only got worse and worse.
  • JB was severe on fuel and tyre , but Alonso who started from lower position and had more battling opportunities was in far more severe situation.

 

  • Jenson was in severe situation on fuel too, but it is thought that Alonso's situation has become more severe because his race was about catching up from behind.
  • For the final stint, they were saving fuel almost all the time. Anyways drivers have done very good job in managing fuel. Fuel remaining in tank after the race was about 0.x%, like 200gram in amount.
  • (on being overtaken by Perez) it was not just because of fuel shortage but also tyres were finished.

 

  • Drivers adjust the driving/pace by themselves by looking at +/- figure (of fuel consumption) on the dashboard indicator, I think they are doing very good job indeed. At the end of the race the margin was within 0.x%, ie fuel remaining in tank being about 200g or so.

 

  • We were discussing on radio, but there were instances where Eric was giving order by saying "dont say that" etc. He was asking like, "if fuel is severe, then perhaps we can tell drivers by target laptime?" etc. I guess maybe he didnt want rivals to know that our fuel situation was severe, I guess that's why he was abstaining from saying sth explicit like "right now you are xx% short of fuel", "lift and coast here" and so on.

 

 

 

 

==============================

 

Random PU topics in general

 

(all dotted parts are hasegawa quote.....in other words non-dotted parts are NOT hasegawa quote so pls b careful)

 

----------------------------------

 

http://f1sokuho.mopi...936&tt=-1&at=15

 

  • We could confirm that we are improving/growing a lot by the development of reliability, turbo and horse power that members of HRD Sakura have been working on since late last year to this year
  • First half of the season was tough more than we imagined. At the stage of winter testing, we were vaguely thinking "we shud be able to score points as long as finish the race", but were surprised particularly by the strengths of FI and Williams. It's impossible to score points if we just race normally. While we are surely able to show our improvement so far this year, we are not yet at the level we can be satisfied with at all. We are facing tough reality that it takes more time to reach high/supreme level in F1. We must make further efforts.
  • The objective is that we continue current evolution/improvement and keep the position of 4th best team in the field firmly with the next step-up. If we are able to be on par or surpass Mercedes, situation would change massively.

 

 

-----------------------------------

 

http://www.as-web.jp...937?cx_cat=news
 

  • [on Friday] (Franz) Tost (of STR) told me off saying "Honda is fast" when I met him at toilet
  • In terms of performance of engine itself, I dont think we are at the level where we can clearly say that we have surpassed last year's Ferrari just yet. In terms of overall competitiveness, we have come to quite good point I think tho.
  • (Regarding Horner's remark at Hungary that Renault PU deficit to Merc PU was 35kW/47ps)  As for the spec that's received token upgrade from Monaco, I dont think their (Renault's) deficit (to Merc PU) is that much.

Then the writer went to ask an engineer of Mercedes regarding the Horner's remark. He said,

"the gap is not like 35kW. I cannot tell you exact figure, but it should be a lot smaller than that. Needless to say, the gap b/w Merc and Ferrari is even smaller. According to our (merc's) analysis, current pecking order of PU is, Merc is on top, Ferrari in 2nd, then 3rd is Renault, followed closely by Honda in 4th. There is no doubt that last year's Ferrari PU that STR is using  is positioned at the bottom."
The engineer also told, "RBR is faster than Merc in velocity at low speed corners."
Why Merc is still confident is that it's impossible to make development tailored to all the 21 circuits, according to the engineer:
"Even if we are inferior to RBR at lower speed circuits, number of tracks where we would lose/struggle is merely 3, ie Monaco, Hungary and Singapore. We won 2 out of those 3 so there is no problem."

 

 

-----------------------------------------

 

https://sportiva.shu...8/03/_split_f1/

 

- There are talks that upgrade will be introduced at Spa, but it's not confirmed yet. It's certain that development has been going on targeting that date (Spa) for a long time, but Hasegawa refused to confirm the exact timing of the introduction (info in the article)

  • It is no secret at all, needless to say we want to introduce as soon as it's completed, actually we'd like to introduce immediately / we wouldve introduced already if possible. We have several "weapons" at hand that have been confirmed on dyno that would defo make it better if introduced. However of course it's impossible to introduce all of them, so we have to decide final spec by assessing/evaluating which ones of these weapons would be most effective, which will make it in time, etc. Right now we are in the middle of verifying its reliability.

 

 

------------

f1 sokuho (print)

  • (regarding prospect for new PU from Spa and onward) Of course my desire/intention is same as drivers and team, that I want to introduce right now if possible to do so.
  • I consider that as long as we are able to confirm/verify the reliability, it's possible to introduce as planned.
  • With the new spec whose combustion efficiency is improved, we can expect not only increased power but also better fuel consumption. As of now, with the comprehensive performance including fuel consumption, we cannot yet match Force India. In that sense too, I'd like to introduce as soon as possible.
     

--------------------------------------------------

http://www.as-web.jp/f1/35630

 

> arranged time for post-race conference is past but Hasegawa doesnt appear

> PR personell searching for Hasegawa

> Eric B appears, asking press people "where is hasegawa?"

> seems Hasegawa was called by Ron Dennis to hold meeting

> Hasegawa was supposed to leave the track immediately after the race

> seems Ron wanted to ask hasegawa about prospect of upgrade

 

- At German GP, drivers asked Hasegawa about the new engine, to which Hasegawa replied with "we'd like to introduce asap".  Then drivers jumped to hasty conclusion by thinking "right. then new engine is coming (at Spa)" and made such remark in public. However Hasegawa denies that he promised the team that Honda would definitely introduce new engine at Spa, by saying:

  • We haven't told the team anything more than what I have been explaining to you (press people).
  • We want to introduce it as soon as the new engine is ready/completed. When/after new engine arrive, then we dont intend to use current spec of engine anymore.

- Alonso's PU at Germany was 4th PU that was in its 6th race. Therefore it's unlikely that this 4th PU will be used at Spa as it would be its 7th race. So if new engine wont be ready by Spa, then Alonso's 5th PU that will be introduced at Spa would be the same spec as current one. Then when new PU is ready to be introduced sometime at Monza or afterward, it will be over 5 component per season rule so they will get grid penalty. Therefore ideally you'd want to introduce the new spec engine/PU at Spa. Both mcl and Honda are aware of this, more than anyone in fact. (...But prospect is not clear at the point of Hockenheim post-race, it depends on the outcome of reliability check, is the nuance)  

  • If it's possible, we want to introduce right away

 

 

 

---------

excerpt of the parts relevant to PU development from "ask Hasegawa vol.07 @Hockenheim (will post full later)"

http://www.as-web.jp...rts/shotshocfri

 

 

------------ During FP1, you were chatting with Alonso, what were you talking about? Looked like you were talking about something using 3 fingers?

  • We were talking like, "current engine, next engine and previous engine, how is it?"

------------ What was Alonso saying?

  • That's related to strategy so I cannot disclose.....

------------ But judging by you two's faces it looked like positive talk?

  • well, it was a talk about what we are going to do with update, so basically positive talk!
  • Also it's Fernando's birthday.....35yo, you're young, i said. He replied "not young" (laughs)

11_J7I7085-660x440.jpg

 

--------- During summer break what are you hasegawa-san going to do? The rest of the staff, how each member will spend break must vary I imagine, but are you going to spend time relaxing with family, or go out to travel etc?

  • no plan at all yet (laughs). I'm thinking I want to go somewhere tho....

 

------------ Can you take proper holiday ?

  • No, I cant take a lot of holidays. For the first half I think I'll be attending company, but basically i'll be able to take a rest

 

------------ Japanese GP is getting closer and I cannot help holding high hopes for Suzuka. To put it straightforward, can you expect further performance gain until Suzuka? Also please let us know your objectives for Suzuka

  • As I've been telling always, we are making development all the time. We'd like to introduce next update before Suzuka. However when it will be hasnt been decided yet. In that sense, we are planning to improve the performance towards Suzuka.

 

----------------- To show recent good performance in graph, it's drawing nice upward curve isnt it. Then I look forward to prospect of joining top 3

  • Well, I cannot say we are aiming that. As we saw in hungary, top 3 is quite formidable, so I think coming to right next to it constantly should be our current objective. Kinda like aiming to be top of the rest of the best 3.
  • We'd like to improve performance in order to be able to score points regularly.


#110 MastaKink

MastaKink
  • Member

  • 4,177 posts
  • Joined: April 14

Posted 11 August 2016 - 13:43

Nice work as always Muramasa.   :up:



#111 Mc_Silver

Mc_Silver
  • Member

  • 4,251 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 11 August 2016 - 14:11

Great post Muramasa thanks. I like those positive mood within the team!  :up:

 

Lots of talk about fuel saving there again. It's clear that Honda is the thirstiest engine in F1 but they are gradually improving things. Hopefully, next upgrade coming for Spa will work as expected and we'll need less fuel saving during races. 

 

As I said before I don't think Renault is 47HP behind. Horner is known to be exaggerating those number to praise their chassis. I believe they are about 30HP behind and Honda is around 60HP behind Mercedes. 

 

If we can find 20HP from the next upgrade, it will be great boost for the second half of the season as there will be Mobil 1's fuel upgrade (around 10HP gain is expected) coming for Spa Gp as well. 



#112 New Britain

New Britain
  • Member

  • 2,297 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 11 August 2016 - 14:24

 
I'm pretty sure they're allowed to. I believe they put in some heavy hours last year, getting the engine upgrade ready, and I don't think the rules have changed since then.

 

Mandatory holiday rule applies only to constructors, not to suppliers (such as suppliers of engines).



#113 chhatra

chhatra
  • Member

  • 2,062 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 11 August 2016 - 14:37

Great post Muramasa thanks. I like those positive mood within the team! :up:

Lots of talk about fuel saving there again. It's clear that Honda is the thirstiest engine in F1 but they are gradually improving things. Hopefully, next upgrade coming for Spa will work as expected and we'll need less fuel saving during races.

As I said before I don't think Renault is 47HP behind. Horner is known to be exaggerating those number to praise their chassis. I believe they are about 30HP behind and Honda is around 60HP behind Mercedes.

If we can find 20HP from the next upgrade, it will be great boost for the second half of the season as there will be Mobil 1's fuel upgrade (around 10HP gain is expected) coming for Spa Gp as well.


That would put us level with RB in terms of power.

If so it would be interesting to see the gap to one of the finest chassis' on the grid.

#114 Rudex

Rudex
  • Member

  • 956 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 11 August 2016 - 14:48

  • It's shame Alonso's PU suffered trouble. Oil has entered into combustion chamber, also it was emitting white smoke a bit.
  • It was the same trouble that happened to JB's PU at Canada, but this time the unit has been turned off immediately, so I think both engine and turbo should be fine.

IT is not clear, but it seems, engine was broken. Since they didnt use in Germany.



#115 Rudex

Rudex
  • Member

  • 956 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 11 August 2016 - 14:55

 

  • In terms of performance of engine itself, I dont think we are at the level where we can clearly say that we have surpassed last year's Ferrari just yet. In terms of overall competitiveness, we have come to quite good point I think tho.
  • (Regarding Horner's remark at Hungary that Renault PU deficit to Merc PU was 35kW/47ps)  As for the spec that's received token upgrade from Monaco, I dont think their (Renault's) deficit (to Merc PU) is that much.

Then the writer went to ask an engineer of Mercedes regarding the Horner's remark. He said,

"the gap is not like 35kW. I cannot tell you exact figure, but it should be a lot smaller than that. Needless to say, the gap b/w Merc and Ferrari is even smaller. According to our (merc's) analysis, current pecking order of PU is, Merc is on top, Ferrari in 2nd, then 3rd is Renault, followed closely by Honda in 4th. There is no doubt that last year's Ferrari PU that STR is using  is positioned at the bottom."

 

Very interesting. I hope the new spec + fuel will bring around 30hp.

So Honda will have a lot of fuel efficiency and get 10-20hp to renault. and 30-40 to Merc. IN this point we should see to  be 4th team giving more from chassis too.

 

btw, very interesting comparative:

https://translate.go....html&sandbox=1

 

CpkKf9mXEAAWuhj.jpg


Edited by Rudex, 11 August 2016 - 15:02.


#116 Marklar

Marklar
  • Member

  • 33,498 posts
  • Joined: May 15

Posted 11 August 2016 - 15:20

Just for fun, distance covered in races so far this year:

Km %
6882 100.0 Williams
6796 98.8 Red Bull
6655 96.7 Force India
6648 96.6 Mercedes
6570 95.5 Sauber
6438 93.5 Haas
6217 90.3 McLaren
6133 89.1 Renault
6090 88.5 Manor
6065 88.1 Toro Rosso
6032 87.6 Ferrari


If we ignore the first 2 races we'd be 4th. On the flip side if we include FP and quali then we'd be 2nd last.

Last year looked like this:

Km %
11128 100.0 Mercedes
10608 95.3 Ferrari
10593 95.2 Williams
10481 94.2 Red Bull
10287 92.4 Sauber
10051 90.3 Force India
9969 89.6 Toro Rosso
9586 86.1 Manor
8672 77.9 McLaren
8011 72.0 Lotus

Then again McLaren had by far the most mechanical retirements (6)

#117 DerekWildstar

DerekWildstar
  • Member

  • 145 posts
  • Joined: May 16

Posted 11 August 2016 - 15:37

Thanks, as always, muramasa.

I can't believe that Alonso got 6 races out of that engine. Honda really did a nice job improving reliability. Now it's time for the next power step (well, as much of a step as the stupid, ridiculous, broken, silly token system will allow).

Also... off-topic... but where are all the people who were posting early this season that Haas was so far ahead of McLaren, and McLaren should be ashamed of themselves? 42 to 28 in the WCC, last time I checked.

Edited by DerekWildstar, 11 August 2016 - 15:37.


#118 Aeonax

Aeonax
  • Member

  • 277 posts
  • Joined: July 15

Posted 11 August 2016 - 16:07

 

 

 

Still, for instance if engine is improved and get power increase, then you can put more downforce for that amount, which then improves tyre life, which then makes strategy easier, so we should be able to go into positive spiral.  Besides we were saving fuel quite a bit this time around too, but if power increases fuel consumption issue will be better as well. There is synergistic improvement cycle about it. So I dont consider that the actual gap is as big as it appears from outside. If one thing goes to positive direction, then the gap should be smaller and smaller, I reckon


Expectations confirmed! :clap:

Yet I´ll still remain #CautiouslyOptimistic :p

As usual, thanks a lot for the hard work Muramasa!



#119 Pro4TLZZ

Pro4TLZZ
  • Member

  • 208 posts
  • Joined: February 16

Posted 11 August 2016 - 17:11

Thanks! Great work!

Advertisement

#120 thez

thez
  • Member

  • 419 posts
  • Joined: August 16

Posted 11 August 2016 - 19:06

Does anyone elese feel that McLaren are putting too much effort into 2016 when they should really be throwing everything into 2017. This talk by EB that they are going to be pushing 2016 development all through the end is rather worrying. Merc in 2013 gave up everything during the summer break. I think RB will be the team to beat as they have been working on 2017 for sometime. (So I am told)



#121 CPR

CPR
  • Member

  • 5,116 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 11 August 2016 - 19:16

Does anyone elese feel that McLaren are putting too much effort into 2016 when they should really be throwing everything into 2017. This talk by EB that they are going to be pushing 2016 development all through the end is rather worrying. Merc in 2013 gave up everything during the summer break. I think RB will be the team to beat as they have been working on 2017 for sometime. (So I am told)

 

If they were putting in heavy effort then it would be worrying, but they were 50% focused on 2017 as far back as Monaco IIRC. It'll probably be way higher after the break.

 

They've also said that the 2016 work they are doing is expected to feed through to next year. So if they get it right it should leave them in better shape for 2017.



#122 Quickshifter

Quickshifter
  • Member

  • 4,330 posts
  • Joined: April 15

Posted 11 August 2016 - 20:27

Looks like Alonso's engine which had oil entering in to the combustion chamber in  Silverstone FP1 is not repairable as it was not used in Germany. Similarly it appears Button's engine from Canada FP1 is also out of commission as he too did not use this engine in Germany.


Edited by Quickshifter, 11 August 2016 - 20:33.


#123 CPR

CPR
  • Member

  • 5,116 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 11 August 2016 - 21:18

Expectations confirmed! :clap:

Yet I´ll still remain #CautiouslyOptimistic :p

As usual, thanks a lot for the hard work Muramasa!

 

It's nice that a lot of what Hasegawa was talking about has been discussed here as well - eg how increased power can reduce fuel use. Gives the feeling that what we're talking about is both relevant and going to be a factor in the upgrades.

 

I get the impression that the "Spa upgrade" is closer to being ready than last year's Spa upgrade was at the equivalent point. Fingers crossed that the reliability testing shows that it's good enough to release the upgrade for Spa.

 

 

 

Looks like Alonso's engine which had oil entering in to the combustion chamber in  Silverstone FP1 is not repairable as it was not used in Germany. Similarly it appears Button's engine from Canada FP1 is also out of commission as he too did not use this engine in Germany.

 

Yeah. Both guys will be taking new PU elements at Spa, whether there's an upgrade or not.

 

 

PS Many thanks to Muramasa! It's a lot of work I'm sure but it's much appreciated! :up:



#124 virtualmark

virtualmark
  • New Member

  • 12 posts
  • Joined: September 15

Posted 11 August 2016 - 21:44

Assuming both Alonso and Button are getting new PUs for Spa, whether there's an upgrade or not ... if there is no upgrade and they get current spec engines I figure they'll only use those current spec PUs for 1-2 races before the "Spa" upgrade does eventually arrive.  In that case it'd be interesting to see what performance you could get out of the PU if you weren't so worried about its longevity.



#125 BillBald

BillBald
  • Member

  • 5,745 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 11 August 2016 - 23:26

Assuming both Alonso and Button are getting new PUs for Spa, whether there's an upgrade or not ... if there is no upgrade and they get current spec engines I figure they'll only use those current spec PUs for 1-2 races before the "Spa" upgrade does eventually arrive.  In that case it'd be interesting to see what performance you could get out of the PU if you weren't so worried about its longevity.

 

Not as much as you'd get from an upgraded PU, I imagine.

 

It will be a bit annoying if they have to 'waste' their 5th PU by taking the old spec.



#126 TakataDomeNSX

TakataDomeNSX
  • Member

  • 1,867 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 12 August 2016 - 04:27


"[on Friday] (Franz) Tost (of STR) told me off saying "Honda is fast" when I met him at toilet"

Hahahahah!

#127 blacky

blacky
  • Member

  • 1,889 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 12 August 2016 - 07:37

Does anyone elese feel that McLaren are putting too much effort into 2016 when they should really be throwing everything into 2017. This talk by EB that they are going to be pushing 2016 development all through the end is rather worrying. Merc in 2013 gave up everything during the summer break. I think RB will be the team to beat as they have been working on 2017 for sometime. (So I am told)

 

Definitely.

Reading Andy Greens comments from FI on AMuS (about 2017 test cars, parts that can be carried over), that's the opposite what EB is saying all the time.



#128 CPR

CPR
  • Member

  • 5,116 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 12 August 2016 - 08:12

Definitely.

Reading Andy Greens comments from FI on AMuS (about 2017 test cars, parts that can be carried over), that's the opposite what EB is saying all the time.

 

Well, FI have generally taken the attitude that any additional costs/changes are bad.

 

The 2017 regulations were specifically designed (compromised) to be fairly cheap/easy to implement. Red Bull came up with a proposal for a big change but after some complaints by teams like FI, McLaren came up with a compromise solution.

 

Going by their statements, McLaren are definitely planning for the MP4-32 to be based on the MP4-31. If FI can't evolve their current design, that's their problem.



#129 Quickshifter

Quickshifter
  • Member

  • 4,330 posts
  • Joined: April 15

Posted 12 August 2016 - 09:53

Mclaren are the pioneers of next years rule changes in  formula. They have devised the aero  regulations so it is they who have been working on the various concepts for a long time.  There is a difference between aero parts and aero philosophy.  For example trying to understand the influence of rake on the rear diffuser is something you can implement on next year's car based on this year's philosophy. The fenestrated rear wing is another philosophy which can be utilized for next year. Mclaren are doing a lot of work on the aero as highlighted  by Hasegawa in his recent quotes posted by Muramasa. 

 

The ideas are developed first and the car is built around those ideas. It is still the design phase for next year's car based on CFD. With wind tunnel restrictions teams have to be really wise as to how they are going to utilize those hours for the best. I am supremely confident that with a settled design team Mclaren chassis will be up close to the front of the grid if not best one.


Edited by Quickshifter, 12 August 2016 - 09:55.


#130 Owen

Owen
  • Member

  • 12,944 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 12 August 2016 - 10:06

Good interview with details on improved correlation.
https://m.youtube.co...h?v=-I_FVL4Axos

#131 f1rules

f1rules
  • Member

  • 6,729 posts
  • Joined: May 03

Posted 12 August 2016 - 10:43

Mclaren are the pioneers of next years rule changes in  formula. They have devised the aero  regulations so it is they who have been working on the various concepts for a long time.  There is a difference between aero parts and aero philosophy.  For example trying to understand the influence of rake on the rear diffuser is something you can implement on next year's car based on this year's philosophy. The fenestrated rear wing is another philosophy which can be utilized for next year. Mclaren are doing a lot of work on the aero as highlighted  by Hasegawa in his recent quotes posted by Muramasa. 

 

The ideas are developed first and the car is built around those ideas. It is still the design phase for next year's car based on CFD. With wind tunnel restrictions teams have to be really wise as to how they are going to utilize those hours for the best. I am supremely confident that with a settled design team Mclaren chassis will be up close to the front of the grid if not best one.

 

yep agree, i think its more to do with verifying concepts and bringing them over to next year. Forexamble doing research in flexing would pay of no matter. If the new rearwing concept works they can for sure adapt it to next year. etc.

Would be interesting if any of the journalists, have the insight to do an article on wheter the rb+mcl route with lots of rake or the merc route is easier to transfer to next years rules.

Regarding next year, i have to say, i expect rb to shine. It seems many of mclarens ideas this year has come from rb, understandably offcourse. Still with a blank sheet of paper, rb and newey normally produce very good results


Edited by f1rules, 12 August 2016 - 10:47.


#132 Aeonax

Aeonax
  • Member

  • 277 posts
  • Joined: July 15

Posted 12 August 2016 - 12:38

Good interview with details on improved correlation.
https://m.youtube.co...h?v=-I_FVL4Axos

 

Speaking about correlation, could anyone confirm here if indeed Mclaren has been using the famous Toyota Wind Tunnel lately? I heard from one of the local F1 broadcasters that they were having correlation issues with the one at Woking.



#133 BillBald

BillBald
  • Member

  • 5,745 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 12 August 2016 - 13:17

yep agree, i think its more to do with verifying concepts and bringing them over to next year. Forexamble doing research in flexing would pay of no matter. If the new rearwing concept works they can for sure adapt it to next year. etc.

Would be interesting if any of the journalists, have the insight to do an article on wheter the rb+mcl route with lots of rake or the merc route is easier to transfer to next years rules.

Regarding next year, i have to say, i expect rb to shine. It seems many of mclarens ideas this year has come from rb, understandably offcourse. Still with a blank sheet of paper, rb and newey normally produce very good results

 

I'm a little bit concerned. The fatter tyres and larger RW are going to need more power to push them through the air, so PU is still going to be very important.

 

If the Honda still doesn't have the grunt, even very good aero might not be enough. A lot of rake might help if it gives relatively efficient downforce, but it's still going to cause some drag, you get owt for nowt.



#134 Alonsofan007

Alonsofan007
  • Member

  • 2,214 posts
  • Joined: April 15

Posted 12 August 2016 - 14:15

i'd be concerned if they continued design and development on this year's car after the break, at this point i'd expect them to be done with design for tracks till suzuka (since it is important race for Honda) and plan production to bring them for appropriate races, and fully shift focus to 2017 car design wise.



#135 Owen

Owen
  • Member

  • 12,944 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 12 August 2016 - 15:04

Speaking about correlation, could anyone confirm here if indeed Mclaren has been using the famous Toyota Wind Tunnel lately? I heard from one of the local F1 broadcasters that they were having correlation issues with the one at Woking.

Yes they have. The Woking tunnel isn't big enough to be used for F1 anymore.

#136 thez

thez
  • Member

  • 419 posts
  • Joined: August 16

Posted 12 August 2016 - 16:00

i'd be concerned if they continued design and development on this year's car after the break, at this point i'd expect them to be done with design for tracks till suzuka (since it is important race for Honda) and plan production to bring them for appropriate races, and fully shift focus to 2017 car design wise.

 

 

Maybe they cant just stop considering the momentum they have. Would you abandon the chance to beat Williams and FI for 2017? McLaren losing 3 years in a row to these teams is not something Ron or anyone in the boardroom wants. For this reason I think McLaren will keep pushing. FI stopped work on their car as far back as May, so McLaren should close the gap. However I cant see McLaren beating FI this season. They have a healthy gap and 2 good drivers. 



#137 Alonsofan007

Alonsofan007
  • Member

  • 2,214 posts
  • Joined: April 15

Posted 12 August 2016 - 16:28

Maybe they cant just stop considering the momentum they have. Would you abandon the chance to beat Williams and FI for 2017? McLaren losing 3 years in a row to these teams is not something Ron or anyone in the boardroom wants. For this reason I think McLaren will keep pushing. FI stopped work on their car as far back as May, so McLaren should close the gap. However I cant see McLaren beating FI this season. They have a healthy gap and 2 good drivers. 

not at the cost of next year's car, if anything history has shown teams that shifted focus early to next years car did well, and that has to be priority, its not like they are fighting for top places, if abandoning this year's car development and focusing on 2017 will give them better chance to compete they should do it and that has to be priority, FI i think is beatable next year with good engine, but i am bit worried about williams, they have shifted focus very early and pat symmonds with his resume is not be underestimated.



#138 CPR

CPR
  • Member

  • 5,116 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 12 August 2016 - 16:56

Some more thoughts on the most recent Hasegawa quotes:
 

Still, for instance if engine is improved and get power increase, then you can put more downforce for that amount, which then improves tyre life, which then makes strategy easier, so we should be able to go into positive spiral. Besides we were saving fuel quite a bit this time around too, but if power increases fuel consumption issue will be better as well. There is synergistic improvement cycle about it. So I dont consider that the actual gap is as big as it appears from outside. If one thing goes to positive direction, then the gap should be smaller and smaller, I reckon.


With EB talking about putting on more downforce once the engine upgrade arrives, looks like it's expected to make a decent difference. Though it would be interesting to hear some context about the next upgrade vs the upgrades to date - the change to the inlets led to a good improvement in power, so what's different about this upgrade? Maybe this will be the first upgrade where the usable power improves to a high enough level that fuel saving will become uncessary at many circuits? They still did fuel saving at Hungary after all, despite the previous upgrades. So if the next upgrade would mean that fuel saving was no longer necessary then they finally have some margin to spend on increasing downforce...? Is that how it works?

 

  • Drivers were able to push the pedal more than expected, therefore engine were using rpm range that's different from the expected/pre-calculated range, which as a result has made driveability bad.
- prepared engine mapping based on simulation result, but rpm range and throttle opening rate/degree that drivers actually used in real condition turned out to be very different from simulation/estimation. Then it took much effort and time to adjust the mapping (nuance is that they couldnt get the mapping right in satisfactory fashion). (info in the article, but format is transcription of Hasegawa's info)

 


Rather surprised at this. I could imagine some circuit specific tuning but affecting things like driveability due to more time spent on full throttle isn't what I would have expected.

 

For instance Russia was very severe on fuel consumption too, but at that time the competitors we were fighting against by saving fuel was Renault and Haas. However now it's Force India, Williams and STR that we are competing against, so we are now one stage up. To put it explicitly, it's impossible to fight against them by saving fuel.


It's nice that the progress is reasonably visible. The tightness in the pack helps I guess - though that meant we suffered a bit earlier in the year if we dropped a few tenths, it also makes the progress stand out a bit more.

 

This (PU component/count situation) has given us big boost in confidence for future development. During race I was always nervous though.

On the other hand, we were reminded painfully of severity of fuel consumption and lack of power in quali. We could see advancement in performance, but also the task/issue ahead to be solved has become clearer. Kind of race that's suitable for us / depicted us nicely.


:)





We were discussing on radio, but there were instances where Eric was giving order by saying "dont say that" etc. He was asking like, "if fuel is severe, then perhaps we can tell drivers by target laptime?" etc. I guess maybe he didnt want rivals to know that our fuel situation was severe, I guess that's why he was abstaining from saying sth explicit like "right now you are xx% short of fuel", "lift and coast here" and so on.


This was quite interesting to hear. btw, I did wonder if Fernando deliberately put in some quite laps at the end to try to make Perez give up. ie a bluff.

 

The objective is that we continue current evolution/improvement and keep the position of 4th best team in the field firmly with the next step-up. If we are able to be on par or surpass Mercedes, situation would change massively.


I'm not sure but from the context I'm guessing he means "if can clearly surpass the Mercedes powered teams of FI and Williams"...? (rather than literally surpassing Mercedes itself)


 

[on Friday] (Franz) Tost (of STR) told me off saying "Honda is fast" when I met him at toilet


Heheh  :up: 

 

In terms of performance of engine itself, I dont think we are at the level where we can clearly say that we have surpassed last year's Ferrari just yet. In terms of overall competitiveness, we have come to quite good point I think tho.


I wonder if he means what was seen from the Ferrari engine in the Ferrari last year or what is seen from the 2015 Ferrari engine in the STR this year...

 

Then the writer went to ask an engineer of Mercedes regarding the Horner's remark. He said,
"the gap is not like 35kW. I cannot tell you exact figure, but it should be a lot smaller than that. Needless to say, the gap b/w Merc and Ferrari is even smaller. According to our (merc's) analysis, current pecking order of PU is, Merc is on top, Ferrari in 2nd, then 3rd is Renault, followed closely by Honda in 4th. There is no doubt that last year's Ferrari PU that STR is using is positioned at the bottom."


Problem with quotes on engine power is often it's not clear if talking about quali or race pace or what. Will be interesting to see how the engines compare once all the planned tokens are spent.

 

With the new spec whose combustion efficiency is improved, we can expect not only increased power but also better fuel consumption. As of now, with the comprehensive performance including fuel consumption, we cannot yet match Force India. In that sense too, I'd like to introduce as soon as possible.


I wonder if he means fuel consumption will improve more than would be expected from the power increase alone - with the fuel limited formula, more power means less time spent on the straights which saves fuel. What could be done to save fuel on top of that? Maybe others can give better examples but I guess there's lots of options - eg if initial acceleration can be improved then that also means less time spent on the straights even if peak power doesn't improve. Also, there's probably things that could be done in the combustion chamber - eg tuning it more for "race fuel usage" (ie leaner mixtures) or to particularly improve power at lower rpm.



#139 BillBald

BillBald
  • Member

  • 5,745 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 12 August 2016 - 16:57

not at the cost of next year's car, if anything history has shown teams that shifted focus early to next years car did well, and that has to be priority, its not like they are fighting for top places, if abandoning this year's car development and focusing on 2017 will give them better chance to compete they should do it and that has to be priority, FI i think is beatable next year with good engine, but i am bit worried about williams, they have shifted focus very early and pat symmonds with his resume is not be underestimated.

 

For all we know it's just one fairly junior guy designing the updates, giving them a quick trial in the windtunnel, and then handing them over to the race team to use as they see fit. I don't think all the parts find their way onto the race car.

 

I'd be very surprised if the more senior engineers aren't working on next year's car 100%.



Advertisement

#140 Nathan

Nathan
  • Member

  • 4,988 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 12 August 2016 - 18:00

The Woking tunnel isn't big enough to be used for F1 anymore. 

 

 

I'm a little confused by this.  What has changed to make the tunnel not big enough?

 


It turned out to be that actual full throttle rate/period figure was bigger than what has been calculated/simulated beforehand.

 

 

 

Does this put into question the accuracy of simulators, or at least McLarens?  This seems an odd one to mis-calculate.  Is the correlation issue not with the tunnel but with the simulator?


Edited by Nathan, 12 August 2016 - 18:00.


#141 f1paul

f1paul
  • Member

  • 7,403 posts
  • Joined: April 16

Posted 12 August 2016 - 18:05

 

-

11_J7I7085-660x440.jpg

 

"You want 3 world titles Fernando and one more constructors, yes" 



#142 Quickshifter

Quickshifter
  • Member

  • 4,330 posts
  • Joined: April 15

Posted 12 August 2016 - 18:27

Improving this car does not mean they are not learning about next year's car from the development they are doing on this car.

 

Teams have limited testing opportunities, limited CFD and limited Wind tunnel time. So just because you stop the work on this year's car it does not guarantee that you will be allowed to do unlimited CFD and unlimited wind tunnel time. to develop a car for next year first you need to develop a base line. Everybody will use up their wind tunnel and CFD allocation, it is a matter of how judiciously you can put that to use.

 

Even last year Mclaren spent the last few races trialing extreme rake. Friday sessions carry so many parts  that are on the car just to get a better understanding of them for next year.  People need to understand that there are serious restrictions on everything in formula 1 when it comes to car development. It is not simple as, you stop this year's car development at the beginning of the year and suddenly you will be having a better car for next year by default. Teams like Mclaren which are heavily data driven and are extremely methodical in approach have a properly laid out developmental path for next year' project right from the time regulations are finalized. They know how to go about developing the car for next year.


Edited by Quickshifter, 12 August 2016 - 18:31.


#143 CPR

CPR
  • Member

  • 5,116 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 12 August 2016 - 18:31

For all we know it's just one fairly junior guy designing the updates, giving them a quick trial in the windtunnel, and then handing them over to the race team to use as they see fit. I don't think all the parts find their way onto the race car.

 

I'd be very surprised if the more senior engineers aren't working on next year's car 100%.

 

Yeah, pretty much. There's probably multiple things going on and I can only speculate. It's not like the team will find 1s if they ran 100% of the engineers on the 2017 car instead of 90%.

 

I don't think it's about the championship for this year btw. I do believe them when they say that the developments will feed into next year. There would be range of possible upgrades they could bring this year and the benefit for next year would be quite variable - some will feed into next year much more than others. Winter testing for 2017 is going to be particularly busy with all the changes. So if the workload can be reduced by testing some things this year, that helps. There might also be parts that are effectively taken from the 2017 car and "back ported" to the 2016 car, even if they are not actually raced and just evaluated in FP.

 

That would be particularly important for any high risk items. We've seen a number of teams introduce upgrades this year that don't work as expected. The longer you go without real world testing the bigger the risk that it doesn't work as expected.

 

How things will work out in practice, who knows...



#144 RainyAfterlifeDaylight

RainyAfterlifeDaylight
  • Member

  • 4,008 posts
  • Joined: February 15

Posted 12 August 2016 - 19:13

So are we going to have a new livery or not?  

 

I know, it is not funny anymore  :D



#145 pup

pup
  • Member

  • 1,466 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 12 August 2016 - 19:30

Does this put into question the accuracy of simulators, or at least McLarens?  This seems an odd one to mis-calculate.  Is the correlation issue not with the tunnel but with the simulator?

It just means that the car had more grip than they thought it would.  On the throttle earlier and on the brakes later, and able to push more through the corners.  



#146 chhatra

chhatra
  • Member

  • 2,062 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 12 August 2016 - 19:44

So are we going to have a new livery or not?

I know, it is not funny anymore :D


I'm secretly hoping they will unleash their proper livery once they are back to fighting at the front.

#147 BillBald

BillBald
  • Member

  • 5,745 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 12 August 2016 - 20:41

It just means that the car had more grip than they thought it would.  On the throttle earlier and on the brakes later, and able to push more through the corners.  

 

It's quite encouraging. It means that the car has a lot more grip than the 2014 car had. Which is what you would expect, but the difference was even greater than they expected.



#148 Owen

Owen
  • Member

  • 12,944 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 12 August 2016 - 21:21

McLaren aiming for steady improvement
http://en.f1i.com/ne...mprovement.html

#149 Owen

Owen
  • Member

  • 12,944 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 12 August 2016 - 21:34

I'm a little confused by this. What has changed to make the tunnel not big enough?



Does this put into question the accuracy of simulators, or at least McLarens? This seems an odd one to mis-calculate. Is the correlation issue not with the tunnel but with the simulator?

The wind tunnel in Cologne allows for actual size models and 60% models. The Woking equivalent is far smaller and this means the models need to be much smaller 1/10 and, consequently, the results are less accurate. It's used way more for automotive applications now. Although I do know there is a plan to replace it with a bigger tunnel but they need planning permission as it would have to be away from the main MTC due to the noise it would generate.

#150 mclarensmps

mclarensmps
  • Member

  • 5,956 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 12 August 2016 - 21:50

I'm secretly hoping they will unleash their proper livery once they are back to fighting at the front.

 

Funnily enough, I'm living in exactly the same hope. Almost as if they knew they'd be in the doldrums for these few years...

 

One can wish. :smoking: