Back in the unlimited days, Ferrari ran a second team only for testing... that's simply not sustainable from a cost point of view. And as we can see now, public testing with them all together at one venue is a lot more entertaining and enlightening than everything happening behind closed doors! However, just two testing sessions at the start of the season aren't really enough IMHO.
The restrictive test regime has not only been bad for the sport but I think that its ended up costing the poorer teams rather more than it saved. It hasn't leveled the playing field a whole lot either. Somehow the rich still end up on top.
+1 I'm also pretty sure it wasn't just a single test team, but the big guys had two, sometimes three dedicated test teams at its height! +1 again. Aren't they going to Bahrain twice ahead of Melbourne? Not sure now, but IIRC, there's 3 pre season tests and then 4 more after certain races this year. Personally, I'd like to see them stick around for a few days after 'most' races, but at least it's something. Cheers, Ian
Yeah, but track costs are a drop in the ocean compared to what running costs. I'd guess they all have over 100 folks in Jerez right now. (Minus Horner & Newey as of last night of course! ) Cheers, Ian
While the latter is true, I believe they're on record as saying that testing accounted for ~40% of their entire budgets back in the day. All we see is the lavish hospitality and 'overspending' that goes on. But all of their budgets ar now substantially less than they were. Cheers, Ian
Respectfully beg to differ there. Can't remember where now, possibly a Sylt piece, but testing accounted for anything from 25% for the minnows through to ~40% for the big guys. OK, they're still spending 10's, if not 100's of millions, but even the biggest computers and tunnels etc (also now limited course) don't cost anywhere near that kind of money. Cheer, Ian
Perhaps but I think that the long life components and locked (until now) formula saved more. In any case saving money shouldn't be F1's Raison D'être. Or any of its dried fruit D'être for that matter. (Appologies to Opus)
That's certainly 'helped', but I doubt as much as the testing ban. Couldn't agree more about what F1 should all be about! As I've said many times, if you don't like the cost, there's plenty of other Motorsport series you can go and play in. But testing was totally out of control a while back. They definitely over reacted by banning it completely but seems they've (at least partially) learnt that lesson. Cheers, Ian PS - apologies to Florian for dragging his excellent thread way off topic!
I've forgotten. What was this thread about? The "brains" behind F1 always seem to take things to excess. Fine when its about the tech but otherwise not as much.
Renault’s Deputy Managing Director (Technical) Rob White has been a man under pressure this week, and to their credit Renault’s PR folk tonight issued this Q&A, allowing Rob to address the problems seen in Jerez. We have seen very little running from the Renault-engined teams this week. What have the issues been? “We have not run enough laps, and when we have they have not been run at an acceptable performance level. The underlying causes are not straightforward: there isn’t a single component or system that has caused particular trouble. A number of related things have been troublesome, principally concerning the control and operation of the various sub-systems of the Power Unit within the car. For example on the first run day, we had problems with a sub-system within the Energy Store that did not directly concern either the battery nor the operation of the battery – it is an electronic part that was in the same housing as the Energy Store. We subsequently had problems with turbocharger and boost control systems with knock-on effects on the associated engine management systems, subsequently provoking mechanical failures.” What fixes did you implement in Jerez? “Between days 1 and 2 with the help of Red Bull, we implemented a later level of hardware for the rest of the test to address the problem within the Energy Store. This ran for the remaining days. In parallel to running in Jerez, the team at Viry has run dyno test programs to investigate the trackside problems and to propose solutions. We identified the probable root cause of our main turbo control issues, implemented some workarounds that were first seen at the end of day 3 and deployed in the three cars for day 4. This established a very minimalist baseline from which we could build.” Why were these issues not flagged up on the dyno? “We believed our initial configuration was a robust start point for track use but it has not proved to be the case. We have done substantial dyno running in a similar configuration with few issues. We now know that the differences between dyno and car are bigger than we expected, with the consequence that our initial impressions were incomplete and imperfect. Our intention was to run the car; we are very frustrated to face this litany of issues that we should have ironed out on the dyno and which have deprived us of a precious learning opportunity.” Have you learned from the limited running? “Absolutely, and at this stage every kilometre is hugely valuable. We recognize that when the cars have run, they are not running at an acceptable level. We are a long way from the type of operation we had planned and prepared for – largely as a result of the workarounds we have implemented – but all the information is useful. In dealing with the issues we have moved further away from the configuration we were comfortable with, which has resulted in the relatively slow times, but the running has given us a vastly greater understanding of the issues we face. We absolutely expect to have a more definitive solution in place for the next session in Bahrain.” Has every team experienced the same issues? “Several problems are common to all, as the power unit is the same specification in all the cars except for relatively minor installations differences. Some problems are particular to one installation environment, but it is our responsibility to deal with all of them. In general, the individual issues are understood; we have worked with all three teams running this week and despite appearances, have made some useful progress. We have not uncovered any big new fundamental problem, although we must recognize that our limited running makes it impossible to be certain.” What is the road map from now until the second test in Bahrain? “Of course we now have a large job list for Bahrain as a lot of the items we wanted to test in Jerez we have not been able to cover. The next stage is to identify the root causes for the problems we experienced, to develop the solutions to strengthen our validation process so we can be more confident to tackle Bahrain in a more normal way.” Are you concerned by the fact that engine specifications are frozen pre-season? “The homologation deadline is the end of February and is fundamental to regulations. Beyond that time, changes are permitted only with prior approval from the FIA. Change is not forbidden, but subject to the sporting regulations and we should not get so hung up on this date.” In view of this test, are you still in favour of the new regulations? “Yes absolutely. The powertrain regulations are a massive challenge but also an opportunity, and are hugely important in placing F1 back at the vanguard of technology. We have the necessary tools and determination to succeed. The step we must take to reach an acceptable level of in-car performance is bigger than we would have liked. It is unacceptable that we have not been able to mitigate the problems sufficiently to allow our partners to run at any length. We are working hard to correct this in time for Bahrain and aim to make amends there.”
Very interesting to say the least. For them to come out publicly and do this a lot of important people must be rather pissed off!
I guess we'll know better after Bahrain, but could we see the Renault powered cars as back-markers from the start? Can't deny I am not a little giddy about the potential for that. Also having the engineers on these teams focused on solving problems will impact their continued performance development projects in other areas. For the teams who have gotten it right, in addition to putting in the miles they also have the ability to keep progressing with their improvement plans without distraction. I really am not interested in seeing yet another season of RB domination. I root for McLaren first and then Kimi in one of those red cars second. >8^) ER
Seems to me one of the problems was the fact that they did not pick up on any of the seemingly many problems, whilst running on the dynos before the test.
And then FIA will regret the double points in last3 races as Vettel steals another win by pinching the high value points
The first thing to note is that none of the engines were being pushed to their ultimate limits around Jerez. Having watched some of the footage of the test on SKY TV, there was a lot of short shifting going on and the teams were concentrating more on putting miles on the engine at a reasonable pace rather than pushing them to a racing extreme (at least those who could get the engines to work did!). As for Mercedes having a power-plant advantage over Ferrari, it was noticed at the Jerez test just how small the Ferrari side-pods are compared with all the other cars. Talk in the paddock was that Ferrari have done a better/remarkable job with the cooling of their engine than the others, enabling them to run side-pods that are roughly the same size as last years. It was also noted that their air-box intakes on the Ferrari powered cars (not just Ferrari), appear to be slightly smaller than teams using other power plants. Rumour also has it that the Mercedes is a bit of a lard-arse and needs to go on a diet before the first race of the season! There was also talk about the turbo shielding that Ferrari are using. Basically, the FIA have mandated that the turbo must be shielded so that in the event of a turbo failing/exploding, no pieces of the turbo can come flying out of the car to hit anyone outside of the car (be it marshals/spectators/pit-crew or whoever). Mercedes and Renault powered teams have achieved this by incorporating ballistic material shields around and above the turbo. This places @ 4Kg's of additional weight fairly high up around the engine. Ferrari instead have simply made the turbo housing massively thick so that the housing itself can easily withstand a turbo exploding. Whilst this has added a bit of weight to the turbo, it is no where near 4Kg's, and the weight is kept lower in the car. As for the Renault engines in the Red Bull, Adrian Newey has done another very tight packaging design around the engine/turbo and gearbox and it's causing them problems. They tried cutting extra cooling holes in the bodywork to help extract the heat but the engine/turbo was still burning the paint off the engine cover!
The Ferrari engine features manifolds which pretty much proceed straight out and up to the turbo whereas the MB and even Renault units have a almost more traditional arrangement if you can call it that. Paddy I guess said the other day that a lot of teams are a bit overweight, no idea how much of course. IMO Renault need to get with a new battery supplier too. There's something wrong.
A blast from the past!: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fILdYrxnrf8 So far, the Red Bulls need something to keep going.....and going.....and going......and going.......and..........
Very true. There's a long way to go yet. But as Ted noted, the friggin' flatbed turned more laps than the Cans! Me too.... Pretty good summary of Teds notebook right there. True, he's done one hell of a 'coke bottle' for sure! But, I don't think thats where their problems are. We saw where they did the hack job - On the sides of the survival cell, not around the motor itself. That strongly suggests it's either the batteries themselves, or the electronics that are overheating. The regs state the batteries must be carried completely within the cell (5.3.6) and obviously the controllers are in there too. Cheers, Ian
For sure, something is very awry. But I'm not sure it's the batteries themselves that are the problem. This seems very similar to the problems Boeing are having with the 787 batteries, although with much less dire implications! In that case, the supplier (Yuasa IIRC) went as far as the unusual step of issuing a release saying (paraphrasing ) 'if your control circuits were any good our batteries are fine!' Seems they're being 'abused' somehow, and as Florian noted, Li-ion doesn't like that at all and take off into an exothermal meltdown...... A new battery supplier won't solve that problem.... Cheers, Ian
AFAIK, it's still 'just' the last race that's double points, right? Bernie was suggesting it be the last 3, but I think they at least shot that one down. Still complete BS, but it looks like it's going to happen. Cheers, Ian
