Given the wind tunnel lack of correlation, no wonder they have issues and are a dog chasing its tail never solving the problem. If Anderson is correct Ferrari should be ashamed lol! No matter the stats say alot about Red Bull. .9 faster than Ferrari and now with the volume of data on the Vettel being re-configured, Ferrari have even more to worry about. Again the Ferrari team have alot to answer for - mainly 6+ races with no real improvement to the car for the best driver on the grid. Given their resources its pathetic. Something is very very wrong.
To what benefit exactly? Fall guy? Possible I guess. You do know he was chief aerodynamicist at Ferrari until 2003, when he went to Mclaren prior to returning - The guy is no fool. +1 They don't understand it when they're in the tunnel or on the 'puter screen - No chance just by observing - Although, his theory does make a lot of sense. Anyway, I can't believe how harsh you guys are - They remain second in the WCC, ahead of the mighty boys from Woking. Second is hardly the huge disaster it's being painted..... Cheers, Ian
simple really no one in maranello can do what adrian newey and gangs can do but at least the car is reliable
Can't believe this comment... I hope you know who Gary Anderson is. It is not just *watching*, come on. He goes deep in details in quali and the race. It is actually very cool that somebody with his credentials goes and tells some of the facts of what's going on.
He also mentioned he reduced the level of complexity of his discussion. Significantly I would imagine as well. He has a good reputation around the F1 world. No matter though, fixing the issue is probably not easy at all.
and considering how little Felipe contributed due to his Schumie-esque year he has had I think some here should get their expections revisited ..... now if Mark had signed for Ferrari the WCC would almost be assured for next year
Hamilton was actually the one that was .9 faster than Alonso in quali. Alonso was about .6 slower than Webber and .5 slower than an under-fueled Vettel. Plus, you can't insinuate that Ferrari is .9 faster everywhere because 2012 is a year where a car's performance seems to vary immensely depending on the circuit. Look at India, McLaren were nowhere and then LH was suddenly fastest in Abu Dhabi. Red Bell is certainly faster than Ferrari at the moment but it sure as hell isn't by .9
You are going to compare Vettel's lap on fresh option rubber with Alonso's on much older primes and draw the conclusion that Red Bull is the faster car by .9 from that? Really?
1 1 Sebastian Vettel Red Bull Racing-Renault 54 18:47:43 192.320 1:43.964 2 5 Fernando Alonso Ferrari 53 18:45:54 192.087 1:44.090 So on lap 53 he sorta matches Red Bull? 53 laps into the race?? The Ferrari was better on the harder tire rather than the soft. .9 is the gap. Doesnt matter how you analyze it. Even then in Q3 where did Vettel end up? 3rd. FA still further back. The car is simply slower. Q3 02 Mark Webber Red Bull 1:40.978 0.348 03 Sebastian Vettel Red Bull 1:41.073 0.443 07 Fernando Alonso Ferrari 1:41.582 0.952 So they have some work to do.....
I do know who Gary Anderson is: a guy who made some decent cars and some not so decent ones a lot of years ago and who currently is out of the business. No disrespect intended but all the teams would not be investing kazillions in their aero department if they could fix their cars just staring at them. Even if Gary Anderson's trained eye is right, the solution to the problem can not be so obvious, or they already should have it fixed. I think this is another case of "I need to find some **** to fill todays article". Good entertainment between races but not really useful information.
No, it's not. It's more like .5, possibly less depending on the track layout. You need to learn to read! I never said Ferrari is faster than Red Bull but it's quite obvious that comparing Alonso's best lap (on worn primes) with Vettel's (on fresh options) and drawing conclusions about the speed of the cars relative to each other from that makes ZERO sense.
I read just fine. .4 or .9 who was ahead? Whatever. Comparisons are constantly made by the way. I added the Q comparions on fresh rubber. Ooops you missed that professor LOL! ??
It's not that hard to understand. Anderson sees the problem. Ferrari probably also know this, hence the different rear wings they've tried. Seeing the problem is something different than solving it. Maybe the stalling air is something not easily solved even with the resources Ferrari has.
Quoted for comedy. If you read my original post you would see that I never said Ferrari was the faster car. In fact, I said they were slower but not .9 slower. Here it is again for you to review, It's only a sentence but I hope you can manage: Now, Again, I said in my first post in this thread that Ferrari is slower than Red Bull but not .9 slower. The time comparisons you listed from qualifying back me up when I say the gap is more like .5. Or can you not do math, professor? What you are using to say the margain by which Red Bull is faster than Ferrari(.9): -One lap from one race where Alonso was on worn primes and Vettel fresh options. What I am using to say the margain by which Red Bull is faster than Ferrari (~.5): -Averaging out the gap from Q3 over the course of the last 5 races. These are laps done when the cars are on the same fuel load and same tires. Now which makes more sense? Plus the Ferrari has proven to be much quicker in the race than in qualifying relative to the Red Bull because Red Bull cannot use their DDRS to such a benefit in the race and Alonso is very consistent! Concrete facts and mountains of data that suggest otherwise be damned!
WOW dad you proved my point again with the use of a significant number of words vs me. Yep Red Bull is faster lol! Thats the spirit! .5 or .9 they still have some work to do. Glad you agree'd lol!!
OMFG this is literally the most incredible thing I've ever seen on this forum. I HAVE ALREADY SAID RED BULL IS FASTER THAN FERRARI! THAT WASN'T MY POINT! MY POINT WAS THE GAP ISN'T AS BIG AS .9 SECOND! I posted that and you tried to jump in and tell me how the gap is actually .9 based on a ridiculous lap time comparison that you, quite frankly, looked silly by saying. Now you can't admit your mistake and are trying to spin this like I was originally trying to say Ferrari is faster than Red Bull or something. Please stop, you're making yourself look ridiculous.
Schumie-esque year? I love that term. Seems like that impeccable MS legacy did take some beating after all...
