[Team] Aston Martin Racing in 2023. One of the cars still has Alonso.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Haas did. I believe they made a point about how they went to great lengths to do it themselves and employed new people (from Dallara IIRC) to help them with this.

Edit: Haas on this: https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/15...ke-duct-design

on point, thank you for the link!

Because before we bought the brake ducts, and now, we had to get additional designers from Dallara, and it's all traceable.

the follow up question being what knowledge did those Dallara designers bring with them?

is this within the spirit of the rules or is that a a whole other can of worms?

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by Adam43

As much as it may be enjoyable to drag Ferrari into this I just don’t see it as related. An also as much as we might want to be annoyed at the FIA - the issue doesn’t lie with the race stewards.

I still don't buy that Adam. It's a transparency issue....

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Haas did. I believe they made a point about how they went to great lengths to do it themselves and employed new people (from Dallara IIRC) to help them with this.

If you look at the 2019 Mercedes vs 2020 RP front ducts. You clearly see they are pretty much nearly the same. But not fully the same. Different enough that I think some real work went into tweaks. But they are VERY close.

If you look at the 2019 Ferrari front brake ducts (and I think they actually may have used a few different versions in 2019) vs. 2020 Haas front ducts. You can see they are again, pretty similar. Similar shape, number of openings, etc. But not as identical as the Mercedes vs. RP. But it is VERY clear that RP copied Mercedes and Haas copied Ferrari. BOTH subordinate teams had 2019 ducts from those respective master teams. Note that the Mercedes/RP and Ferrari/Haas does are quite different from each other.

The FIA decision says it knows the RP ducts are not completely identical to the Mercedes, but that the aero concept used in the 2020 RP ducts comes from the 2019 Mercedes. And it is the concept that counts. Can the same not be said about the 2020 Haas?

What is different here? (1) RP is rocking the boat with success while Haas frankly sucks. (2) Nobody has protested Haas, so it is untested. (3) Haas went about this differently than RP did.

Not that I am saying one method is more correct than the other, but it seems that on the Haas side they consulted more with FIA. But I have a hard time understanding how you put all of this together (including the FIA wording in their decision) and come the conclusion that RP is in error and Haas is not.

Note, I say all of this from just a few minutes of Google searching to look at photos. Clearly the stewards have more data than I do. But I do think its clear where the DNA originated from for the RP and Haas front ducts.

Richard

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

What is different here? (1) RP is rocking the boat with success while Haas frankly sucks. (2) Nobody has protested Haas, so it is untested. (3) Haas went about this differently than RP did.

The difference here is that it isn’t really about the rear brake ducts. They’re all that has been protested SO FAR.

Nobody in other teams is foaming at the mouth about the rear brake ducts. They are foaming at the mouth at the potential thought that the car and set ups are straight from Mercedes late 2019 spec.

Frankly it suits the RP and Merc narrative to keep talking about the brake ducts forever...

The revelation that RP have received parts from Merc that were manufactured by Merc also leads people to wonder what other parts weren’t designed, specced or even manufactured by RP, but were bought and paid for from Merc who made them, boxed them and delivered them with instructions as to how to use.

POTENTIALLY it’s a whole few levels above anything Ferrari/Haas or Red Bull/Toro Whatever have ever done.

To be honest, I wonder if somebody or two secretly wants Merc to quit F1 as a works team and is trying to bring that about for the end of next season.

[GT6]

They should look at the wheels on that racing point, they are round exactly the same shape as the mercedes, surely they copied that as well

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by peebee2

The difference here is that it isn’t really about the rear brake ducts. They’re all that has been protested SO FAR.

It's my understanding from reading the protest decision that the protest was for both the front and rear ducts. But I don't think that changes the discussion (front, rear, both). My comments was why is the Mercedes/RP situation different than the Ferrari/Haas one?

Originally Posted by peebee2

The revelation that RP have received parts from Merc that were manufactured by Merc also leads people to wonder what other parts weren’t designed, specced or even manufactured by RP, but were bought and paid for from Merc who made them, boxed them and delivered them with instructions as to how to use.

To my points made in my post, how is this different than Haas using 2019 brake ducts from Ferrari in 2019 and then using a copy (not quite as good of copy as RP did) in 2020?

I do agree the questions of "How much assistance has Mercedes provided?" and "Was it legal?" is the elephant in the room.

I recently took up competition in a new sport (unrelated to motorsports). One of the things everyone says is that when you go to your first competition that everyone will be very helpful, give you tips, loan you equipment, etc. My comment back was... "Yes, everyone is always very helpful until you start to beat them". I suspect that is a large factor as to why RP is the targets of protests and not Haas. Also, as we know they have taken the process of replicating someone elses solution to a new level.

Richard

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

I still don't buy that Adam. It's a transparency issue....

I can see that there is a transparency issue, but that is related solely to the Ferrari situation IMO. It concerns whether their car was technically legal. There are no such questions over Racing Point.

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

Go dark with "Silence of the Lambs" (Helmut Marko as Hannibal Lecter and #2 drivers at RBR going missing)

Shhhh - (whispering this quietly) - you may be closer to fact here than you intended to be.

[S griffin]

If the part isn't illegal, then there is no performance to be gained for it and therefore they shouldn't lose anything points wise. If the way they obtained was not right with the sporting code, then they should be fined for it by the FIA. It's no good being told it's legal, you can keep running it, but then keep getting told off for running it. It's a whole farce the way it's been handled

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by Adam43

I can see that there is a transparency issue, but that is related solely to the Ferrari situation IMO. It concerns whether their car was technically legal. There are no such questions over Racing Point.

Which makes it worse and makes the mud to be thrown even wetter, stickier and smellier.....

[wnut]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVA38y12Ty0


"Clarity transparency for the fairness of the competition and for the Formula 1 of the future is important” according to Ferrari team principal Mattia Binotto


Irony and hypocrisy much.

[S griffin]

So when are Ferrari going to release their engine spec details from last season?

[HDTVKSS]

One thing i haven't seen raised is the carbon component. Im not an engineer and this is a laymans take based off some limited experience.

Im sure the teams go to extraordinary lengths in forming and layering carbon to get the desired result in terms of stiffness and flex where its wanted / not wanted and also weight wise. To me, this is probably one of the bigger issues in copying a car next to the bits you cant see like ducting in the floor. You can copy a design as much as you like, but unless you can get it to flex the way you want and dont want its kind of pointless.

Id guess there are general rules in place for how this is done, but id be interested to see what the layered breakdown is of the TP vs the 2019 merc and how much similarity there is. Its something you cant get from detailed pictures.

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by HDTVKSS

One thing i haven't seen raised is the carbon component. Im not an engineer and this is a laymans take based off some limited experience.

Im sure the teams go to extraordinary lengths in forming and layering carbon to get the desired result in terms of stiffness and flex where its wanted / not wanted and also weight wise. To me, this is probably one of the bigger issues in copying a car next to the bits you cant see like ducting in the floor. You can copy a design as much as you like, but unless you can get it to flex the way you want and dont want its kind of pointless.

Id guess there are general rules in place for how this is done, but id be interested to see what the layered breakdown is of the TP vs the 2019 merc and how much similarity there is. Its something you cant get from detailed pictures.

Good points from someone who clearly has some understanding.

Sadly, many think you can recreate a car from close up high-speed photographs. You can’t.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by HDTVKSS

One thing i haven't seen raised is the carbon component. Im not an engineer and this is a laymans take based off some limited experience.

Im sure the teams go to extraordinary lengths in forming and layering carbon to get the desired result in terms of stiffness and flex where its wanted / not wanted and also weight wise. To me, this is probably one of the bigger issues in copying a car next to the bits you cant see like ducting in the floor. You can copy a design as much as you like, but unless you can get it to flex the way you want and dont want its kind of pointless.

Id guess there are general rules in place for how this is done, but id be interested to see what the layered breakdown is of the TP vs the 2019 merc and how much similarity there is. Its something you cant get from detailed pictures.

Very very well worded post. Great point.

[chillibowl]

Yeah great point.

But follow up, as a function of understanding how the ducts worked, particularly in conjunction with the parts they did build themselves, wouldnt these tolerances be something RP studied while legally using the parts last season?

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by HDTVKSS

One thing i haven't seen raised is the carbon component. Im not an engineer and this is a laymans take based off some limited experience.

Im sure the teams go to extraordinary lengths in forming and layering carbon to get the desired result in terms of stiffness and flex where its wanted / not wanted and also weight wise. To me, this is probably one of the bigger issues in copying a car next to the bits you cant see like ducting in the floor. You can copy a design as much as you like, but unless you can get it to flex the way you want and dont want its kind of pointless.

Id guess there are general rules in place for how this is done, but id be interested to see what the layered breakdown is of the TP vs the 2019 merc and how much similarity there is. Its something you cant get from detailed pictures.

While I comment below, I think you are spot on regarding both interior construction details and details that are not externally visible. I am a little less convinced about things like "flex" but I don't discount that. I think it is the non-visible details that are the hard part.

I do think that front wings (and secondarily rear wings) fit the concerns you talk about. There are lots of internal details (do the regulations still allow for blown front wings with internal aero passageways? I can't remember). We have focused on examination of static details (i.e. photometric analysis of cars on the grid or in the garage), but nothing prevents teams from doing their own dynamic analysis (high speed/slow motion video of cars on track) which should expose movement of aero (and other) parts.

But to your point, there are limits as to what can be found by pure reverse engineering and replication without understanding "why". For example you analyse the movement of a front wing. You find and categorize 6 different motions. Some large, some small. Which of those 6 are the "secret sauce" that you need to replicate and which are non-critical normal flex. Trying to replicate all 6 exactly would be hard and likely not a good investment (time and money).

I also think a large part of the aero surfaces have movements that are totally not intended and not key to the success of the overall concept. Watch various parts of the body move and vibrate as the cars go across curbs. I suspect those who design the body layup, know they could reduce that, but it's also a game of weight. So I "suspect" most body parts have a priority list of:

1. Fit the static aero profile (i.e. shape when at rest)
2. Strong enough to survive.
2. Be light as they can be.

Of course other things factor in such as impact of heat, fastener locations, etc. But some parts are more equal than others (front/rear wings as prime example and clearly brake ducts!)

If you have copies of the parts (such as Haas, Racing Point and maybe others had in 2019) then you can do non-destructive scanning (such as CT scanning which can get you down to handful of micrometer resolution) that will expose the interior details such as how the fiber was laid up (number of layers, orientation of layers, etc.), internal passageways/voids, material, etc. This is not a novel concept. There are services for this. The normal usage is for internal inspection, but you can use it to reverse engineer as well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbJiaQpNXYw

All of this analysis is not free. And in the end, someone has to convert that into working drawings, etc. and has to be tested to show that it works as intended.

We also focus on pure "copy" of design. If those doing the analysis are smart enough, they CAN expose/learn the secret sauce. So given my flexing front wing example above. Maybe they do figure out what motions are critical and which are not. Maybe their copies are not identical (by intention) but still perform well because they know what to look for when they test their own solution.

Richard

[tux]

Hahahaha now Colin Kolles is getting involved. https://www.racefans.net/2020/08/17/...odel-show-car/

TBH i think he has a point but hes not the one who should be most trusted.

[S griffin]

He has form on that though. Remember how he tried to take legal action against STR and Super Aguri over the legality of their cars?

[Moneyseeker]

This could get messy, I can't see Mercedes welcoming Kolles chipping in with more 'accusations'.

[S griffin]

I don’t think many people in the F1 take much notice of what Chavski says

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by S griffin

I don’t think many people in the F1 take much notice of what Chavski says

I wouldn’t be so sure. Also depending on who he’s acting as mouthpiece for.

[Adam43]

Amazing.

[wolfhound]

Renault are to withdraw their appeal against the Racing Point brake duct copying case after assurances that the new rules will prevent such cases in the future.



https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/15...ke-duct-appeal

[S griffin]

Finally! Now we can get back on with the racing without having to worry about who will protest RP