Round 1: 2015 Australian Grand Prix (Grand Prix Weekend Thread)

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by Oldtony

In summary the AGP put on show the structural, management, ethical and rule problems that the present FOM & HIA administration have foisted on F1.

The stupidity of the so called cost saving measures limiting testing and upgrading was put on show by the McLaren-Honda farce and the lack of progress by the other teams in closing the gap to Mercedes. Heaven save us from standardisation or parity rules, but freezing things for a season is not the "pinnacle of motor sport".

In my view this is exactly what the problem is. I read and re-read Horner's comments and Marko's comments and nowhere did I see either of them demanding that Benz be pulled back, as others in this thread have claimed. What they said is that they want to even the competition up.

Personally I don't think that it CAN be levelled up when those trailing behind are not able to test or in particular do much development of their power plants. Putting a spec freeze on the new engines in the first year with only limited updates permitted in the 2nd year was mindless stupidity. It only takes one engine builder to zig when the others zag and for zigging to turn out to be the best solution and the whole competition is ruined.

Benz have done a great job all round and congratulations to them but preventing the others from having ANY chance of closing the gap is frankly stupid beyond measure.

The cost reduction argument for the freeze and limited upgrades is a complete furphy - introduce MASSIVELY expensive and complex power plant rules and then kill the competition for the sake of a small percentage of the overall cost of the new power plants - dumb, dumb, dumb.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by Tourer

In my view this is exactly what the problem is. I read and re-read Horner's comments and Marko's comments and nowhere did I see either of them demanding that Benz be pulled back, as others in this thread have claimed. What they said is that they want to even the competition up.

Personally I don't think that it CAN be levelled up when those trailing behind are not able to test or in particular do much development of their power plants.........

..........The cost reduction argument for the freeze and limited upgrades is a complete furphy - introduce MASSIVELY expensive and complex power plant rules and then kill the competition for the sake of a small percentage of the overall cost of the new power plants - dumb, dumb, dumb.

Of course they didn't say outright the Mercedes should be pegged back, they are not quite that stupid. However, considering that the Mercedes package is at least a head and shoulder better than the rest of the field, then what they infer is that the Mercs should be "dumbed down" to the level of the competition.

You seem to overlook a number of factors. To start with, Mercedes and their PSU engineers have managed to produce a package that was way ahead of the rest of the field last year. The other teams have had 12 months, with virtually unlimited budgets in some cases, to see what Mercedes were doing and to try to replicate it. They failed to do so, and they are now paying the consequences.

If, as you suggest, more development and testing should be allowed for all teams and manufacturers, then what would you propose to do when the "newer" Mercedes, because they might now seem to have the best overall engineers, produce a new car and power-plant that is even more dominant than the current one?

To sum it up, the present rules and regulations are not open to allow free development, and pretty well every part of the car and the PSU has to comply with certain parameters, and this applies to Mercedes as much as it does to Red Bull/Renault. Assuming that they have both complied, then it can only mean that the guys from Red Bull were sending a message to the FIA and FOM that the only way that they can competes is if the Mercedes is pegged back.

[wolfhound]

Toto Wolff and Lauda hit back at RB and have noted all the noise was coming from one source. Ferrari seem happy with their progress but know there is more to be done where as RB are try deflect from their own failings.

http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/me...bull-criticism

The other thing is that Melbourne is not always an accurate indicator of how the season will work out. Remember there there were two McLarens on the podium last year and ended up in big fight with Force India in the championship for 5th place.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

Toto Wolff and Lauda hit back at RB and have noted all the noise was coming from one source. Ferrari seem happy with their progress but know there is more to be done where as RB are try deflect from their own failings.

http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/me...bull-criticism

The other thing is that Melbourne is not always an accurate indicator of how the season will work out. Remember there there were two McLarens on the podium last year and ended up in big fight with Force India in the championship for 5th place.

There was a quote somewhere or other, apparently anytime a team scores a 1 2 in Melbourne the winning driver wins the WDC and the team the constructor's championship.

[steve_r]

Originally Posted by Tourer

In my view this is exactly what the problem is. I read and re-read Horner's comments and Marko's comments and nowhere did I see either of them demanding that Benz be pulled back, as others in this thread have claimed. What they said is that they want to even the competition up.

Horner said this:-
“The FIA have a torque centre on every engine, a power output that they can see, that every engine is producing. They have the facts and they could quite easily come up with a way of finding some form of equalisation. I think you'd need to look in the rules [to discover the exact formula], but it certainly exists of one manufacture is out of kilter...”

Equalisation. I think he is implying that Merc should be pegged back, or that the others engine manufacturers should be given extra leeway to improve. Either way, it amounts to the same thing, and is quite funny considering the victim mentality RBR portrayed back when the legality of their flexi wings were put under scrutiny just a couple of years ago when they were annhialiating the field week in week out. It's all part of the game I suppose.

The spat between Renault and RBR is quite surprisingly public. And now RBR are making noises about leaving F1 altogther, while Renault are talking about launching a works team. Read into that what you will. Some of it may be journalistic nonsense of course...

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

Of course they didn't say outright the Mercedes should be pegged back, they are not quite that stupid. However, considering that the Mercedes package is at least a head and shoulder better than the rest of the field, then what they infer is that the Mercs should be "dumbed down" to the level of the competition.

You seem to overlook a number of factors. To start with, Mercedes and their PSU engineers have managed to produce a package that was way ahead of the rest of the field last year. The other teams have had 12 months, with virtually unlimited budgets in some cases, to see what Mercedes were doing and to try to replicate it. They failed to do so, and they are now paying the consequences.

If, as you suggest, more development and testing should be allowed for all teams and manufacturers, then what would you propose to do when the "newer" Mercedes, because they might now seem to have the best overall engineers, produce a new car and power-plant that is even more dominant than the current one?

To sum it up, the present rules and regulations are not open to allow free development, and pretty well every part of the car and the PSU has to comply with certain parameters, and this applies to Mercedes as much as it does to Red Bull/Renault. Assuming that they have both complied, then it can only mean that the guys from Red Bull were sending a message to the FIA and FOM that the only way that they can competes is if the Mercedes is pegged back.

You're completely missing my point - the other teams may have had 12 months but engine development was frozen under the rules and even now they are allowed a restricted number of changes to the package that they came up with at the start of 2014. In other words, even if they have the answer to the Benz, even if they had all the designs of the Benz engine and wanted to simply replicate it, they cannot do so as the rules do not allow them to change their start of 2014 packages to that extent.

No doubt, Benz could still be in front even if development was more open as they started in a better place but the others COULD have spent 12 months chipping away and at least getting the competition closer. Who knows, one of the others could have come up with something that jumped them in front of the Benz but we'll never know, because none of them are permitted to do anything other than a limited number of tweaks to their initial PSU design - and then that has only been permitted this year.

[GT6]

Well perhaps instead of putting limits on engine testing, spending on cars and developments the FIA should put strict limits of team PR spending and on the legal teams employed, i think we would all prefer that IMHO

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by steve_r

Horner said this:-
“The FIA have a torque centre on every engine, a power output that they can see, that every engine is producing. They have the facts and they could quite easily come up with a way of finding some form of equalisation. I think you'd need to look in the rules [to discover the exact formula], but it certainly exists of one manufacture is out of kilter...”

Equalisation. I think he is implying that Merc should be pegged back, or that the others engine manufacturers should be given extra leeway to improve. Either way, it amounts to the same thing, and is quite funny considering the victim mentality RBR portrayed back when the legality of their flexi wings were put under scrutiny just a couple of years ago when they were annhialiating the field week in week out. It's all part of the game I suppose.

The spat between Renault and RBR is quite surprisingly public. And now RBR are making noises about leaving F1 altogther, while Renault are talking about launching a works team. Read into that what you will. Some of it may be journalistic nonsense of course...

I think that it's quite interesting him talking about the torque measurement. With a number of things on the engines measured and limited (such as fuel pressure) maybe he feels that if torque was the measurement that was capped rather than a number of the existing restrictions then it might be possible for the others to make changes to their PSUs that allow them to catch up to the Benz' torque.

You infer that he's asking for the Benz to be held back, I'm inferring that he may be asking for some of the other shackles to be taken off and torque used as the restricted measurement and that as a result, the other teams could tune more performance into their PSUs.

[steve_r]

Equalisation is the word Horner used. As I said earlier, there is two ways that could be done.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by Tourer

I think that it's quite interesting him talking about the torque measurement. With a number of things on the engines measured and limited (such as fuel pressure) maybe he feels that if torque was the measurement that was capped rather than a number of the existing restrictions then it might be possible for the others to make changes to their PSUs that allow them to catch up to the Benz' torque.

You infer that he's asking for the Benz to be held back, I'm inferring that he may be asking for some of the other shackles to be taken off and torque used as the restricted measurement and that as a result, the other teams could tune more performance into their PSUs.

You seem to be looking at this problem through the wrong end of a telescope. Renault knew in February/March 2014 that their PSU was not able to compete with the Merc's unit. They, along with Ferrari, have had twelve months to make 32 (I think is the number) changes to their units for the 2015 season, plus unlimited changes during last year if they were for safety, reliability or because they reduce the costs of the unit (still applies this year as well). With all those changes allowed, they still haven't closed the gap to Mercedes, and if one takes any notice of Horner's moans, the PSU is actually worse than last years.

As it is noted either on this thread or another, Ferrari are not complaining and it would seem as though they have improved their PSU over the last 12 months. It is only Red Bull, not Renault, that are complaining, and when they start talking about the performance figures that the FIA will have and that the FIA should use some form of equalisation formula to level the playing field, then they can only mean that they want to see the Mercedes' PSU restricted in some way.

You do seem to be fighting a lone battle on your interpretation of what you think that Red Bull mean.

[chunterer]

If I may divert to the actual race for a mo (sorry fellas) I was mightily impressed with Nasr and Sauber (are we sure they have a year old engine, or was it just last years' Ferrari chassis that was crap?!)

Felipe N looked a bit on the ragged edge at times and I did wonder how he would cope with deg as he was supposedly no good at that in GP2...

Very good drive, albeit with a helping hand from some clowning about by Ferrari at the first corner and both Red Bull and I suspect STR suffering various dramas.

I don't think we've seen Williams full potential yet, either. Just a hunch.

[chillibowl]

Actually I'm quite surprised Ferrari are not being more vocal. Yes they have made improvements as surely they would love to pull Merc back if they could.

New management with some notable faces no longer around bemoaning everything seems to have resulted in a positive change in philosophy. Instead of complaining they are just working. Actually makes me proud to dawn my Ferrari kit again.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

Actually I'm quite surprised Ferrari are not being more vocal. Yes they have made improvements as surely they would love to pull Merc back if they could.

New management with some notable faces no longer around bemoaning everything seems to have resulted in a positive change in philosophy. Instead of complaining they are just working. Actually makes me proud to dawn my Ferrari kit again.

Exactly what Toto Wolff said, except that he used a rude word.

[steve_r]

Agree that Nasr was fantastic, and this years Sauber is obviously a very decent car. I don't particularly rate his teammate, but Nasr annhialated him.

Also Sainz drove very well. All the talk about Torro Rosso has been concentrated on Verstappen, but Sainz has a great weekend, despite his pitstop woes that cost him a few places.

[chunterer]

Originally Posted by steve_r

Agree that Nasr was fantastic, and this years Sauber is obviously a very decent car. I don't particularly rate his teammate, but Nasr annhialated him.

Also Sainz drove very well. All the talk about Torro Rosso has been concentrated on Verstappen, but Sainz has a great weekend, despite his pitstop woes that cost him a few places.

I think Sainz is a real dark horse for the medium term and never agreed with all the doubters. The fact is that he has massive natural talent and car control.

That Max has also had all the media attention has probably helped Carlos immensely.

[wolfhound]

Autosport gave Nasr and Hamilton 10/10 for there efforts on Sunday no arguement there except I would say that Nasr's performance was probably better than Hamilton's. It was Nasr first visit to Albert park as a driver, he had no FP1 and still managed to finish 5th without putting a foot wrong.

[alan1302]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

Autosport gave Nasr and Hamilton 10/10 for there efforts on Sunday no arguement there except I would say that Nasr's performance was probably better than Hamilton's. It was Nasr first visit to Albert park as a driver, he had no FP1 and still managed to finish 5th without putting a foot wrong.

Think I'd agree there. Hamilton did what we know he can do whilst Nasr really impressed.

[chunterer]

Poses even more questions about the 'real' level of GP2 if you ask me!

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

You do seem to be fighting a lone battle on your interpretation of what you think that Red Bull mean.

Doesn't mean I'm wrong though and also doesn't mean that I should stop expressing my view on a discussion forum.

I don't see reliability, cost or safety as being the issues that the others need to address, it is performance and they couldn't make any changes last year for that. This year they have 32 tokens of updates permitted - there are a number of tokens allocated to each change, so one change might cost 3 of the 32 tokens, or might cost 18 of the 32 tokens as examples. All of those 32 tokens may not let a manufacturer make the changes that they believe they need to catch up with awesome job that Benz has done.

The situation is better this year as teams can in fact do some development but it's still limited.

[TrapezeArtist]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

It's tempting to think along those lines, but I believe that you will find that it is the "packaging" of the power-units that seems to be one of the major problems that the teams are encountering. On a sports car, there is a lot more space in and around the PSU environment, plus they have additional space at the front and the sides in which to place parts that feed the PSU.

Yes, but there's absolutely no reason why they couldn't replicate the F1 packaging in their simulator vehicle. Perhaps initially they wouldn't bother, just to get some miles under their belt, but eventually the simulator would have to simulate the F1 installation in every way possible. The biggest problems would be weight and downforce, but they would still have something better than just running on a testbed.

[TrapezeArtist]

Originally Posted by Oldtony

The Sauber saga demonstrates that "contract law" and "ethics" are words that should no longer appear in the same sentence as "Formula One".

"Contract law" and "ethics" are words that should never appear in the same sentence. Indeed "law" and "ethics" shouldn't be assumed to have any relationship at all.

[steve nielsen]

Originally Posted by chunterer

I think Sainz is a real dark horse for the medium term and never agreed with all the doubters. The fact is that he has massive natural talent and car control.

That Max has also had all the media attention has probably helped Carlos immensely.

but if Max his engine had not failed him he would have finished higher, after his pitstop he was already aheady of Sainz and on soft tires when Sainz was on medium.

and Max of course also had bad luck in FP2 where he only could do 6 laps due to another engine problem while Sainz could do 41.

due to that problem Max also had not run on soft tires on friday.

[steve_r]

I think that Sainz would have finished ahead of Verstappen if he did not have that massive pitstop delay. Once again, Torro Rosso have two new drivers. It's hard to tell just how good they are without a teammate of known quality to compare them with.

It will be interesting to see how this pans out over the season - the lure of a RBR seat is there if Kvyatt fails to impress or if Ricciardo signs for another team etc.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by TrapezeArtist

Yes, but there's absolutely no reason why they couldn't replicate the F1 packaging in their simulator vehicle. Perhaps initially they wouldn't bother, just to get some miles under their belt, but eventually the simulator would have to simulate the F1 installation in every way possible. The biggest problems would be weight and downforce, but they would still have something better than just running on a testbed.

You might think so, but there are rules and regulations that stop the teams from doing just that sort of thing, and even using an prior year's chassis is no answer either. This is why Haas said that there was no point in their buying the Marussia or Caterham cars; they need to be the cars that will be running when they are racing.

But even assuming that Honda had used an endurance type vehicle to get some miles on the clock, it would be almost impossible to replicate how the air moved around the PSU, and if I am correct, it is this coupled with overheating that is the major problem that has had the most detrimental effect for all the teams apart from those running the Merc's units.

Honda have probably done the equivalent of many GPs on their test beds with their new PSU, but because it does not and never can replicate completely the operating conditions that it will encounter when in the back of a F1 chassis, they have to rely on the testing that is allowed by the FIA to see whether the experiment works. I bet that Mercedes were praying to their gods that theirs worked as they should at the start of last year; looks as though the gods smiled down on them and their prayers were answered. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said of Renault's, Ferrari's and Honda's prayers!

[Casper]

Mike, if Honda could not replicate an F1 in a sports car close enough to test the hybrid power plant then they are not going to win an F1 race.