283 replies to this topic

[gillesfan76]

If you had two options for seating position and theoretically they both provide equal 'downforce' potential then you go with the one the driver prefers. So the influence isn't zero.

The thought experiment you have to run with this however is that if RBR was winning with the Merc seating position would Hamilton be calling for the same thing now? I'd take a punt and say confidently no. He'd assume he was better than max and would be fine with that position. It's only because RBR are winning with a car that appears to be more orientated towards his preference he can boldly claim about seating positions. 

We're not privy as to what goes on at Merc, but if they are at the point of looking at their drivers for design suggestions then they really are in big trouble.

 

Has Hamilton actually said that the seat position is why the car is slow or has he only said that the seat position doesn’t allow him to get his usual feeling in the car?

 

It sounds like you’ve interpreted the former, when in fact he’s only said the later.

 

The car is slow because the car is slow (aero philosophy, concept, chassis, whatever). Team, engineers, drivers have all acknowledged that, but lap times more than anything. Regarding the characteristics of the car, Hamilton have George specifically said that it doesn’t have enough downforce. Hamilton has also specifically said that the aero balance shifts front to rear at different stages of the corner, from entry, mid to exit, in a poor way. These are what he’s attributed to the car being slow - global downforce and poor, unpredictable behaviour from corner entry to exit.

 

The two drivers are roughly separated by a tenth or so over almost two seasons and Hamilton has separately said that he can’t feel the car very well and he’s attributed that to the cockpit position. He hasn’t lumped everything together with its inherent pace. He’s specifically mentioned the cockpit position in relation to when George is able to get a notably better laptime out of it that he can’t. Lewis has said “George has shown that the lap time is possible but I can’t get the feeling out of it.,”

 

So to answer your little thought experiment based on the above. If the RBR was winning everything with a forward seat position, and George was getting a decent lap time out of the Merc while Lewis was on occasions 3 tenths or more behind at some weekends and he couldn’t feel the car, I suspect he will confirm the same i.e that he can’t feel the car. I really don’t understand why the mental gymnastics to try and interpret what a driver is saying other than what he is saying. We don’t actually know for certain if the seat position is affecting his feeling in the car, and we don’t know for certain it isn’t. But why start making aspersions that the driver is making up his perspective of it? His perspective IMO is one he genuinely believes, whether it’s correct or not.

[IrvTheSwerve]

6 inches is pretty massive on a motorbike too.

I’m disappointed we’ve got to just over a day with no ‘that’s what she said’ response to this post… 

[gillesfan76]

Indeed, a philosophy which they believed was right and effectively refused to change. At some point during this year, that philosophy has changed dramatically. Influenced by whom?

 

We don’t know that Lewis influenced this. I think likely not. 2022 they went with a zeropod concept and couldn’t develop it being restricted by trying to solve the porpoising. In 2023 they largely got on top of the porpoising and realised that the performance limitation of the car wasn’t porpoising but its architecture. They saw Aston, Ferrari and significantly, McLaren make large inroads into performance and they knew it was time to abandon the zeropod concept.

 

Separately, was Lewis repeatedly screaming out for them to follow the Red Bull philosophy? Probably, but that’s not the reason they changed or likely even had an influence. It was their own realisation, by relative lap times, that they’re not progressing with their 2022 concept.

Edited by gillesfan76, 03 October 2023 - 12:44.

[DW46]

I’m disappointed we’ve got to just over a day with no ‘that’s what she said’ response to this post…

JP must be busy . . . 😂

Edited by DW46, 03 October 2023 - 13:34.

[krea]

I think the driver always has some influence. You’re hilarious, I’ve never claimed anywhere that Hamilton is responsible for the Mercedes domination yet you’ve created this narrative in your own mind attributed it to me. Wow.

 

I’ve literally detailed this in my original post to which you quoted and replied!

I think part of the problem is what people have envisaged and assumed as the level of input and influence he could have; that he could think he has; that some of his fans think he has. In fairness to the last point, it seems that maybe some of his fans have also assumed he has more influence than perhaps he has.

 

You’ve assumed that I think he has far more influence than I actually think he has. I can’t make it any more clear for you. Go quote someone else if you can’t manage basic comprehension.

 

It's funny that you mention Alonso, which recurring theme is that the teams he is driving for slowly develop backwards at the end of his stints. But you are still trying to sell him as some experienced driver which somehow can push a team forward.

[gillesfan76]

It's funny that you mention Alonso, which recurring theme is that the teams he is driving for slowly develop backwards at the end of his stints. But you are still trying to sell him as some experienced driver which somehow can push a team forward.

 

No, I’m really not. It’s your lack of understanding I’m afraid. 

[krea]

No, I’m really not. It’s your lack of understanding I’m afraid. 

 

You were the person trying to sell the myth of an experienced driver Alonso having a positive effect on a team. 

[Risil]

I’m disappointed we’ve got to just over a day with no ‘that’s what she said’ response to this post… 

We're a grown-up forum for grown-ups

[milestone 11]

We don’t know that Lewis influenced this. I think likely not. 2022 they went with a zeropod concept and couldn’t develop it being restricted by trying to solve the porpoising. In 2023 they largely got on top of the porpoising and realised that the performance limitation of the car wasn’t porpoising but its architecture. They saw Aston, Ferrari and significantly, McLaren make large inroads into performance and they knew it was time to abandon the zeropod concept.

 

Separately, was Lewis repeatedly screaming out for them to follow the Red Bull philosophy? Probably, but that’s not the reason they changed or likely even had an influence. It was their own realisation, by relative lap times, that they’re not progressing with their 2022 concept.

With the greatest of respect GF76, you don't know who influenced this change any more than I do. However, unlike your contention, my implication carries more than a little evidence to support it. 

 

From Crash.net

 

“Like the Red Bulls for example, but they seem to have more downforce from their floor.

“We have a lot of work to do, I’m like a broken record.

“I’ve just gotta keep telling the guys: ‘we need to go in that direction’.

“I would like to see that either with this year’s car or next year.”

 

 

Or this

 

And this

 

And this

 

And this

 

And this

 

Need I go on?

[IrvTheSwerve]

We're a grown-up forum for grown-ups

 

 

[IrvTheSwerve]

Regarding the original topic...

 

I'm sure drivers have very little to zero input on any of the engineering behind these cars. Sure, they can feedback how the car feels and the engineers can take that on board...but in the vast majority of cases it'll be a pat on the head and cookie for the driver and they are sent on their way. Drivers can moan all they want about car characteristics, but for a manufacturer to change their whole engineering philosophy based on that is far-fetched. Where drivers have the most input is car set-up and how they can get the characteristics to work best for them.

 

In terms of engineers...I'm proud to have taught over a thousand motorsport engineering graduates down the years (some go in to F1, some work in the automotive industry, some go in to something unrelated) and I think it's selling them a bit short to think that they are just boffins that are stuck in front of a computer that have limited experience/knowledge of F1 and motorsport. Very often, they have track experience; not F1 obviously but I've had a couple over the years that have got to a decent level in single-seaters. The ones that don't have much experience on-track are absolutely huge F1 and motorsport fans that live and breathe the sport, just as much (if not more) than people posting on this forum. The fact that they're a whizz with the analytical stuff and software doesn't mean that they are lacking with racing knowledge.

 

I'm fairly certain that these driver visits at factories are nothing more than a team building exercise, for the engineers to feel included and encouraged. Put Lewis Hamilton in front of a Solidworks drawing or an Ansys CFD simulation and he wouldn't have a clue what is going on.

Edited by IrvTheSwerve, 03 October 2023 - 17:10.

[gillesfan76]

You were the person trying to sell the myth of an experienced driver Alonso having a positive effect on a team. 

 

Repeating your misunderstanding isn’t going to get you very far I’m afraid.

[gillesfan76]

With the greatest of respect GF76, you don't know who influenced this change any more than I do. However, unlike your contention, my implication carries more than a little evidence to support it. 

 

From Crash.net

 

 

Or this

 

And this

 

And this

 

And this

 

And this

 

Need I go on?

 

Honestly doesn’t mean much to me. It just sounds like a driver who sees a faster car and tells his team that we need to be doing that rather than what we’ve been doing for a year and a half that isn’t working, and that doesn’t look like what any other team are doing. I don’t know for sure, any more than I do about an experienced driver bringing something positive to a team, but my opinion is that the Mercedes abandoning the zeropod concept has very little if anything to do with Hamilton wanting to go down the Red Bull concept and more to do with the team’s own realisation based on the track performance and lack of progression with their original concept. Just my opinion, you know me by now.

[milestone 11]

I fulfil the criteria as designated by the Cambridge Dictionary to be referred to as an engineer, I don’t consider myself to be one in the context of racing car design, just a driver. The title, anyway, is far too loosely defined.

 

But then, neither was Colin Chapman nor Dan Gurney. Chapman was an engineer though, a structural engineer, the other fella, an artillery mechanic, even has a flap named after him. So please, don’t let yourselves be fooled into believing that a driver has no influence whatsoever in the design of a racing car.

 

I built a formula car back in the ‘70’s when I believed anything was possible. The result can be found elsewhere in this forum. Of course, leaving those qualified to do the job is the more sensible approach, which I learnt to my cost. Regardless, during this foray, I designed and had manufactured, a coupling component which I had been told by many at the time was an impossibility.

Edited by milestone 11, 03 October 2023 - 16:29.

[Skelly1927]

 Very often, they have track experience; not F1 obviously but I've had a couple over the years that have got to a decent level in single-seaters. 

Yep. I suspects there's more than one mechanic/engineer in the paddock with at least equal driving skill as some of the drivers. I am certain a few think it.

[Roadhouse]

It’s quoted as being the W15, which would be next year’s car. So it’s the right stage of the process.

 

At what stage of the process do they go into the windtunnel? I kind of assumed the mechanical engineers would also have "some" influence at the start since they'd have to find a way to fit everything in there, after which they'd go into the windtunnel to finetune, wouldn't be too late to change anything, but it would certainly be a big step backwards. What is the windtunnel used for nowadays? Overall concept, details, everything?

[PayasYouRace]

At what stage of the process do they go into the windtunnel? I kind of assumed the mechanical engineers would also have "some" influence at the start since they'd have to find a way to fit everything in there, after which they'd go into the windtunnel to finetune, wouldn't be too late to change anything, but it would certainly be a big step backwards. What is the windtunnel used for nowadays? Overall concept, details, everything?

I can’t answer for sure but the aerodynamic configuration will drive the rest of the car design so the concept will be tested from early days. No point in making a big change like moving the driver’s seat without checking that the overall configuration works aerodynamically before the detailed mechanical design is done.

[Roadhouse]

I can’t answer for sure but the aerodynamic configuration will drive the rest of the car design so the concept will be tested from early days. No point in making a big change like moving the driver’s seat without checking that the overall configuration works aerodynamically before the detailed mechanical design is done.

 

Oh yeah, for sure. But I'm wondering how they'd test that concept and how far into the process they're on the W15 by now.

[Primo]

Oh yeah, for sure. But I'm wondering how they'd test that concept and how far into the process they're on the W15 by now.

The model they put in the tunnel is "complete" in the sense that suspension stuff,  PU, and all the whatnots are accounted for. There was a time when different concepts was tested on models that was very rudimentary, but that was before CFD. Nowadays the car exists  as a 3D model first, every change of the design is immediatly present in the CFD simulations. For the wind tunnel, you must build a physical model. Unless there are something special that you are curious about in the early stages that needs to be correlated with the CFD, you build that model on an almost finished design.
Remember that you don't the wind tunnel to get more trustworthy answers than the CFD, both of them are "liars". 

[Rumblestrip]

Oh yeah, for sure. But I'm wondering how they'd test that concept and how far into the process they're on the W15 by now.

 

I guess maybe that's a limitation of the simulators. Hamilton would prefer the seat to be further back for driving 'feel', but I wonder if that just can't be felt except in a real-world car.

[gillesfan76]

A good but brief interview with James Allison https://www.gpblog.c...la-one-car.html

 

“I think that drivers sometimes conflate identifying a problem with knowing what the solution is."

 

“driver is a much better sensor”

 

Driver feedback needs to be specific: “If a driver says the car's lacking rear downforce, bang, I've solved it, go to the rear downforce shop, get me some downforce, then that's the point where it becomes slightly less helpful."

 

Drivers “have been saying a particular consistent thing about the car since the first laps of the 2022 cousin of this one and the 2023 version inherited that same behaviour, and we have been slow to react, slow to fix."

[jjcale]

Allison has also thrown his predecessor under the bus with this quote .... does he realise this, does he care?

 

I would love for someone to do a kind of investigative piece on the process that occurred within Merc that led to the zeropods being ditched - who was for, who was against and by what mechanism was the decision taken - and who changed their minds over time.

 

.... Allison's predecessor has clearly lost his job over this - no matter how nicely Merc have tried to dress this up.

 

So its probably too sensitive a topic to expect to get any sensible info on .... but maybe in time when its less of a sore point in the team they might open up ..... it would be fascinating to know where the drivers stood and if they had any influence ....and also did the team principal have any influence - because he is not an engineer either (and he knows even less than the drivers as he does not drive the car).

 

Was it just what I like to call the "soviet" of engineers* who acted autonomously? 

 

 

 

 

*look up the meaning of the word Soviet before reacting please.

Edited by jjcale, 22 October 2023 - 05:11.

[krea]

It's funny because Hamilton did a reminder that he isn't an engineer around the Suzuka GP - of course to move blame to the Mercedes engineering department for not being there where he wants. It really gets tiresome seeing those shifting blame games at Mercedes. 

[gillesfan76]

It's funny because Hamilton did a reminder that he isn't an engineer around the Suzuka GP - of course to move blame to the Mercedes engineering department for not being there where he wants. It really gets tiresome seeing those shifting blame games at Mercedes. 

 

Only for the frothing Grrrr Hamilton Grrrrr brigade 

[gillesfan76]

Allison has also thrown his predecessor under the bus with this quote .... does he realise this, does he care?

 

I would love for someone to do a kind of investigative piece on the process that occurred within Merc that led to the zeropods being ditched - who was for, who was against and by what mechanism was the decision taken - and who changed their minds over time.

 

.... Allison's predecessor has clearly lost his job over this - no matter how nicely Merc have tried to dress this up.

 

So its probably too sensitive a topic to expect to get any sensible info on .... but maybe in time when its less of a sore point in the team they might open up ..... it would be fascinating to know where the drivers stood and if they had any influence ....and also did the team principal have any influence - because he is not an engineer either (and he knows even less than the drivers as he does not drive the car).

 

Was it just what I like to call the "soviet" of engineers* who acted autonomously? 

 

 

 

 

*look up the meaning of the word Soviet before reacting please.

 

I don’t read it as harshly as that. Good organisations don’t play blame games like that. Who knows what really happened within Mercedes, but all I know is that good organisations don’t play in that way. I read it as Allison collectively putting his hand up as “Mercedes” saying they reacted too late. Which they did and it’s easy to see in hindsight without having to blame someone.

[Skelly1927]

I don’t read it as harshly as that. Good organisations don’t play blame games like that. Who knows what really happened within Mercedes, but all I know is that good organisations don’t play in that way. I read it as Allison collectively putting his hand up as “Mercedes” saying they reacted too late. Which they did and it’s easy to see in hindsight without having to blame someone.

This non-blame game culture rhetoric is semantic nonsense. When the bosses say "we" the person who made the decision knows exactly what they truly mean.

Edited by Skelly1927, 22 October 2023 - 09:41.

[Sterzo]

This non-blame game culture rhetoric is semantic nonsense. When the bosses say "we" the person who made the decision knows exactly what they truly mean.

I've worked in organisations where it most certainly isn't nonsense. Let's not pretend we know exactly what happens inside Mercedes.

[Skelly1927]

I've worked in organisations where it most certainly isn't nonsense. Let's not pretend we know exactly what happens inside Mercedes.

Sure, there's no 'blame' just people being held accountable for their decision making. 

[NotAPineapple]

Like everything, extremes of either blame-culture or no-blame-culture are unworkable. You need a balance. Trying to unterstand intra-team dynamics from press-statements is obviously silly.

[gillesfan76]

This non-blame game culture rhetoric is semantic nonsense. When the bosses say "we" the person who made the decision knows exactly what they truly mean.

 

“No blame” and “no accountability” are completely different things. It sure can seem like semantics when one doesn’t understand the difference between blame and accountability and just how significantly different they are.

[Skelly1927]

“No blame” and “no accountability” are completely different things. It sure can seem like semantics when one doesn’t understand the difference between blame and accountability and just how significantly different they are.

two sides of the same coin. 

You attribute responsibility of a fault on a particular person or group. That's blame. If they accept the fault they are holding themselves accountable for said responsibly. 

It's semantic nonsense to try and portray some false modern-cultural outlook to the media to make certain individuals look good. Obviously some companies are better than others, and wrongly attributing blame is a bad thing and fosters a culture of low-performance. But all this stuff Merc came out with was just them winning a lot and individuals trying to take credit for the job they do 'running the team'. It's transparent nonsense.


All Newey did over the last 10 years was blame Renault for RedBull's failings... and guess what? When they go a good engine from Honda he was proven right.

Edited by Skelly1927, 22 October 2023 - 15:21.

[P123]

two sides of the same coin. 

You attribute responsibility of a fault on a particular person or group. That's blame. If they accept the fault they are holding themselves accountable for said responsibly. 

It's semantic nonsense to try and portray some false modern-cultural outlook to the media to make certain individuals look good. Obviously some companies are better than others, and wrongly attributing blame is a bad thing and fosters a culture of low-performance. But all this stuff Merc came out with was just them winning a lot and individuals trying to take credit for the job they do 'running the team'. It's transparent nonsense.


All Newey did over the last 10 years was blame Renault for RedBull's failings... and guess what? When they go a good engine from Honda he was proven right.

 

Well, they are fortunate they didn't have that Honda PU when they had the Renault one.... 

[jjcale]

Maybe I am just too simple a guy ... but all I know is Guy A was in charge and he championed a controversial design. It failed and as a direct result Guy A is no longer in charge. Guy B who is now in charge speaks to press about how "we" failed in a manner that was avoidable during the period that Guy A was in charge (and by implication, that wont be happening anymore now that he is charge). 

 

In my pea brain that is called throwing someone under the bus....

 

And best of all, Guy B says the failure stemmed directly from refusing to listen to the drivers .... it's like he read this thread ..... thank you Guy B - couldn't have asked for a more apposite quote.  

 

edit - 

And if you are reading this thread  .... nice one, "Guy B".

Edited by jjcale, 22 October 2023 - 16:30.

[gillesfan76]

two sides of the same coin. 

You attribute responsibility of a fault on a particular person or group. That's blame. If they accept the fault they are holding themselves accountable for said responsibly. 

It's semantic nonsense to try and portray some false modern-cultural outlook to the media to make certain individuals look good. Obviously some companies are better than others, and wrongly attributing blame is a bad thing and fosters a culture of low-performance. But all this stuff Merc came out with was just them winning a lot and individuals trying to take credit for the job they do 'running the team'. It's transparent nonsense.


All Newey did over the last 10 years was blame Renault for RedBull's failings... and guess what? When they go a good engine from Honda he was proven right.

 

Sure, blame and accountability can go hand in hand. But also not. It’s not binary although I’m well aware that too many people are only able to consider things so simplistically. This discussion really doesn’t belong in this driver influence thread so feel free to PM if you’d like some real world examples of where blame and accountability go hand in hand versus accountability where someone isn’t to blame.