"Formula 1 needs equalisation moves says Red Bull's Christian Horner"

Also NJB13 you are forgetting that these engines use en electric motor to accelerate the turbo so the extra weight of this shaft connecting the inlet compressor and exhaust driven part is not a concern.

This is where I believe road cars will take off, using an electric motor to fill the boost holes of a turbo makes them far superior to a supercharger and one wonders why this has never been done before!
Pete

 

Best example of Ferrari's split is from Matt Somerfield's blog last year PowerUnit Architecture - SomersF1 - The technical side of Formula One

I haven't forgotten the hybrid/electrical parts of these cars (although perhaps if I'd driven one, a-la Fernando, that may have been zapped from my memory)

Clearly I'm not the only one who doesn't see Merc's solution as brilliant. None of the other engines have copied it, even though its common knowledge. No need for the that amount of weight and space lock-out to achieve separation. Ferrari's solution is way better IMO.

Are you interested in the FiA's move to add pressure sensors after the flow meter? I wonder which team that's aimed at. If anyone is doing something like that you'd expect it to give them a massive advantage in Q and with defending or completing overtakes.
FIA issues new directive to measure fuel pressure - F1 news - AUTOSPORT.com

 

Thanks for the link, very interesting.

I think the other engine suppliers have not copied it because it is such a massive change for them. The Ferrari option restricts the size of the air compressor but is definitely better than the unbelieveable conventional Renault design. No wonder RB are moaning.

In the end we are talking about a shaft that is probably around 400mm's long and likely made out of titanium. There is no weight or inertia issue (as I've already explained in previous post), or space lock out.

I still think the Mercedes layout is the best and allows for a bigger compressor BUT I am very pleased to see the separation of the hot and cold side of the turbo with the Ferrari engine. Maybe they are not quite as stupid as I though they were

As for the fuel pressure/flow stuff. All teams are abiding by the current rules and if somebody has found a way around it good on them. That IS what F1 is about . Ask Ross Brawn regarding the double diffuser ... there is a guy that can really read the rules!
Pete

 

Except the FiA have this little "catch all" clause in relation to the flow measurement which means any team that did find a way around it, they would be, and have been, in breach of 5.10.5 of the Tech Regs which says "any device, system or procedure the purpose and/or effect of which is to increase the flow rate after the measurement point is prohibited"

 

Within the framework of this opinion article I fully agree with Horner- A case for equalisation | Formula 1 | F1 features | ESPN F1

 

Why can't we let MB have their day in the sun like Lotus, Renault, Williams, McLaren, Ferrari, and RB before them without creating a commotion? This dominance will pass, its the nature of the sport as 50+ years of competition have shown...

 

+1 no matter how I feel personally the sport will go on. I see a long term dominance for Mercedes given the 'token' system and they have only used 5 so far lol!

 

Exactly my opinion.

If a team dominates because it has created a better mousetrap, why not let it catch the mice?

Why should "equalisation" be introduced. That's a weird concept.

When Carl Lewis was dominating sprint, nobody thought about forcing him to wear heavier shoes to allow someone else to win. That would have been unthinkable...

Why can't Mercedes enjoy success if it has done a better job than the other teams?
We had the Red Bull ear, and the Ferrari era before, and then the McLaren era in years gone by. F1 didn't suffer from that.

Horner, Marko and Red Bull should just wind their neck in and accept reality: Mercedes is at the top like they were in the past.

 

If you have one team dominate for four years despite having the FIA constantly trying to find things to ban on their car and then you have a new team dominate the field whilst the FIA sit on their hands, you are going to encourage animosity and rightfully so.

Red Bull weren't the only dominating team to have their cars picked over by the FIA whilst dominating either and it seems a tad unfair that Mercedes are left to do as they please.

That inconsistency is important to point out especially when we have a 30 second gap in the field on a good day.

 

Exactly. It's so typical for the "cool" crowd to right away call Horner a baby... that he's whining... etc. This situation is totally different and if you cannot admit that you're just one of those silly fan boys who cant even be remotely objective.

I'm not for slowing Merc down... I'm for allowing others to catch up. That fact that one team did better than the others is fine... it's inevitable... but legislating an inability for those teams... all teams... to continue to progress is absurd. I don't think no one really thought this new PU through in terms of real cost and complexity. I mean think about it... you have some of the brightest technological people working on these cars and they can't even get them to start sometimes. Go back to non-turbo car with ERS where you get the best of both worlds... engines people understand and applicable technology that doesn't bankrupt an industry.

If they can cut the cost of the engine, perhaps they could test once in awhile. Perhpas that could lead to more opportunities with fans to help the sport. Perhaps you wouldn't have 3-5 cars dropping out of a race. Perhaps you could have better racing because they're not worried about only having four engines. In my mind... it all comes down to the PU. It maybe good for the car companies... but it doesn't work for racing because everything else it costs.

 

Here we go again!.....

What, pray tell, rules have been changed during the season?

Renaults mass damper was the last I can think of. And even that was a famous Charlie 'clarification' and not a change per se.

I've said it before, it's *incredibly* unusual for the rules to be changed during the season. Charlie wanted to ban the Cans hot blowing a couple of years back by issuing a famous 'clarification', but couldn't even get that passed.

Sure, they'll (all) agree to outlaw stuff year on year, the double diffuser & blowing being good examples, but its not done to cripple the current frontrunner(s).

Agreed on having a problem with moving the goalposts, but again, please share examples of 'artificial stop gaps' they've used this millennium?

I'm sorry, but this belief that the rules are constantly changing is just wrong. They evolve over the years, until now at least, with the unanimous agreement of the stakeholders (now it's a majority year on year).

Bas first proposed the 'sliding testing based on how badly you suck' idea, and I kind of like it, but it's still tilting the playing field to favor a few. Something that F1 has *never* done and I hope never will. As others have said, build a better mousetrap, catch the mice. Many, many examples over the years.

This ain't sports cars where they'll make you breathe thru a hummingbirds sphincter, or add weight, or reduce tank size etc if you're too quick. Nor is it NASCAR where the rules can (and do) change week on week.

Cheers,
Ian

 

I feel the same way with regard to the gap.

Lets not punish teams that build great cars by taking away their advantage, lets instead give the other teams the opportunity to catch up if they earn it the hard way.

I have no problem with development being opened up without much restriction when a team engineers its way to say a 25+second advantage on the pack for the sake of the show. Teams and engine suppliers would only have themselves to blame in that event if they fall short.

When the data shows that teams have closed the gap bring back the token system. I'm sure if you gave Renault, Ferrari and Honda a window to close the gap and develop their engines unobstructed until the data shows the gap is closed or close to being, they would take it.

 

I hear you, but again what you're suggesting is giving everyone apart from the frontrunner(s) an *artificial* advantage - they can develop, but Merc can't? It's just wrong and strikes to the heart of what F1 is all about.

On the one hand, we have many whining that's 'it's all about the show & the racing doesn't matter' while on the other some want to artificially close the gap for the sake of the show? Can't have it both ways IMO.

Cheers,
Ian

 

I don't think that's what he's saying... well... its not what I'm saying anyway. Merc can develop too. Let's say hypothetically they're at 98% of the total performance they can get out of the PU and say Reanult is at 85%. In open development it should be easier for Renault to pick up 10% than it would be for Merc to get another... say 3%.

 

I would allow open development to all engine manufacturers.

Those that are struggling to catch them have to earn the closed gap the old fashioned way by out thinking and out engineering Mercedes during that window. If Mercedes do nothing but engineer themselves to maintaining the gap or increasing it then development stays open until the end of the season.

It would be interesting to hear the responses of manufacturers if the question was posed to them 'what is more damaging, having no chance to develop and have your product look so inferior to Mercedes or writing a bigger cheque to catch them if you had the opportunity?

If we have open development for engine manufacturers and still nobody can catch them then hard cheese. They wanted theses engines and if they want to build competitive ones they need the chance to do so and they need to get kicked in the balls financially for pushing so hard for them.(without passing those costs on to customer teams)

 

Which was exactly the situation with RB's dominance. Other teams were free to figure things out and update or innovate their aero... but they didn't/couldn't. I don't think RB had a 40, 50, or 80hp advantage like some are suggesting that the Merc's have.

And again... cudos to them for doing what they did. Clearly Honda couldn't do it given all the time they had plus having some history to look at. Actually shame on them. It really shows just how incredible a job Merc did. But to now lock that in is just stupid. Let development continue in a meaningful way for all teams and let's see what shakes out. If Merc is still dominent after four years like RB was... well then good for them and screw anyone who tries to diminish that accomplishment as if it wasn't earned (cue Red Bull haters).

 

Prior knowledge and even direction in the new engine specification, coupled with legislation preventing the competition from catching up.
Interesting time for Bernie to reveal this tid bit of information.

Ecclestone: Mercedes head-started as they knew a bit more

Bernie Ecclestone claims Mercedes had a head-start over its engine rivals at the start of F1's controversial turbo V6 era.

After the 2015 season opener, the F1 supremo on Monday sided with furious Renault-powered Red Bull as the former champions urged F1's governing body to intervene.

Now, Ecclestone says Mercedes got a head-start over 2014 rivals Renault and Ferrari when the new engine rules were being devised.

"It is why they had such a strong start last year and they are keeping that advantage now" - Bernie Ecclestone

"They knew a bit more about the (proposed) power unit," he is quoted by Italy's Sky Sport 24, "because the Mercedes people were in close contact with the FIA in defining the concept of this engine.

"It is why they had such a strong start last year and they are keeping that advantage now," the 84-year-old Briton added.

Ecclestone said efforts to close Mercedes' huge advantage should now be made, even though he admitted that Renault, "who pushed for this revolution, have failed".

 

Lifted from a conversation they had in the cool down room apparently.

I wonder if he'll show up?

Could be the best story the sport's had in a while......

Cheers,
Ian
Rosberg confirms Mercedes garage visit for Vettel - Pitpass.com

 

What a surprise. Ross Brawn and Whiting have pulled this trick too many times now.

 

Surely they all were! If the other engine suppliers were not in close contact with the FIA when they were defining the new engine regs then what the fnck were they doing? Gee I wish I was on the pay role of some of these teams ... millions for doing a ***** job and not sacked.

Remember when we changed to the 1.5 litre formula back in the 60's ... the English were still complaining while Ferrari just produced an engine and won.

Remember when we changed to the 3 litre formula ... again the English moaned and unfortunately Ferrari was experiencing funding issues so they tried to run with sportscar engines, but Brabham just got on with the job and bagged a WDC or two.

Honestly there is no excuse for sucking at this job, but yes they should be allowed to evolve their (Renault) boat anchor of an engine into a winner.
Pete

 

If I were Seb, I'd tweet back that I'd rather be invited to the next secret meeting Mercedes has with the FiA creating future specifications

 

The Mercedes-FiA relationship is going to come under a lot of scrutiny. Knowing that they were given a privileged position beyond the technical committees (the correct place for these sorts of topic discussions between the FiA and teams) on something as critical as the new engine specification. Mercedes knew full well that the rules gave a legislated advantage for 4 years to any team that could get an engine advantage.

We can add this to the whole tyre-gate episode in 2013 where the FiA gave Mercedes tacit approval for additional tyre testing.

 

You guys really trust everything Bernie says :-/

The reality IMO is that Merc applied mega resources to developing a powerplant and the others were LAZY

 

Yes! Remove the ban on testing. How unscientific is a ban on testing?! It's a crap shoot and MB won last year. SF caught up with a clever ploy to deal with the same side compressor/turbo combi and draw the heat for e recovery. That only happened over the winter. Now they are pretty much locked in again except for these farsical arcade game tokens.

 

The thing is, if someone else claimed this, we would all be supporting that person. Unfortunately it's the cry baby who claimed this, whose cars dominated 4 years in a row.

In some points, i do agree with him. The current rules are just stagnant. They need to really re-look at the rules, and bring back testing, etc.