[Official] Brazilian Grand Prix 2021: Grand Prix Weekend Thread - Round 19 of 22

[Sodemo]

I am not really a fan of Hamilton or Verstappen, but Max really was risking a lot yesterday. First he crowded Bottas off the road at turn 2, then his ridiculous "defence" going into turn 4 with Lewis. The guy is going to cause a huge crash at some point. Also, Bottas could have easily collided with Max at the start and taken him out, so kudos for Bottas for not playing THAT game.

[Taxi645]

Just to get carried away a bit more and to expand on the quantity of the engine advantage.

According to motorsport magazine:

https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/a...an-gp-analysis

The top speed advantage Hamilton had over Bottas in Q3 was 5.5kmh. That equates to roughly 43BHP extra power ( a) from a new engine and b) run in a much more aggressive mode). Will correlates pretty accurately with a 0.35s laptime advantage mentioned in the same article. 43bhp is a pretty significant number.

0.35s per lap over a 71-lap race is around 25s. Now he probably would not have net gain the whole race, but it does paint a pretty grim picture for RB. This is all without the diffuser stall effect even considered.

[Richard C]

Lots of good discussion. I really don't have much to say or pile on other than two things...

1. When I saw Lewis drive through the field on Saturday, I was relatively confident he would win on Sunday. I am actually surprised it took him as long as he did. Whatever was going on with Mercedes this past weekend. Be it a fresh power unit turned up to 11, stalled diffuser, or a combo of many things. They had a mightily advantage. I joke with my son that in movies they show the determined driver just downshifts and give it more gas to pass. That somehow the hero in the movie has some "trick" that the others just can't access. That was happening this past weekend for Mercedes.

Originally Posted by chillibowl

Should punishments be set as more punative by the best drivers abilities to overcome it?

2. In my opinion. Absolutely. Otherwise the penalty is pointless and in fact will allow exactly the behavior the system is trying to avoid.

Richard

[Ari33]

Ok, here's a conspiracy theory for you to pick apart..

Merc have had this additional performance with their new engines in their back pockets all this time but have intentionally not fully shown their full hand until now.
Run in a qualy mode for both qualy and the race (as per the rules) shortens its life quite aggressively but the performance difference from a new PU is still worth way more than the 5 place grid penalty that comes with replacing the PU.

If shown earlier they may have feared that the FIA might try to increase the new PU grid penalty to stop them running away with it and/or.. to keep Red Bull heavily invested in this season to the detriment of the development of their 22 car

With the mysterious 'ringing' engine they opted to replace for alleged reliability concerns it means they now have 2 low mileage PU's for the run in to choose from and based on that astonishing performance in Sao Paulo it is looking increasingly likely that they will not only go beyond reach in the manufacturers but alsi breeze past Max in the WDC... and its all over.

Yeah or nae?

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Ari33

Ok, here's a conspiracy theory for you to pick apart..

I propose that as with many things it may have developed more organically than a purposeful plan. I think it has been a long standing strength for Mercedes that they really have understood the longevity of their power units. That doing X reduces reliability by Y amount. When you know this, you know how much you can and can't push the power unit. Especially with a given targeted level of usage. But as we approach the end of the season, they can probably run a fresh unit much more aggressively knowing it will not need to last very long. Which also is inline with comments I think I read somewhere (here, maybe in an article, maybe both) in that Mercedes knows they would need to introduce new power units now vs. later because the later you introduce them, the more "performance" you leave on the table (i.e. units that are still VERY good after end of the season).

On top of that, while Mercedes probably knew they should do well this past weekend, maybe they were a bit surprised as to how well it worked? I haven't tried to examine which team is supposed to benefit the most given the tracks left in the championship. But if it is anything less than a leaning toward Red Bull, I think Max's championship is in serious risk.

Richard

[Anyopenroad]

I don't believe in complicated, long-sighted conspiracies.

I do believe in the ability of very very clever people to do very very clever things. Mercedes' dominance in recent years has come from their engine, so it makes perfect sense that the very very clever people who built probably the greatest ICE ever made would be able to work out how to extract additional performance from it.

I'm actually surprised it took them this long. At the start of the season - when Red Bull had clearly built a better car - my belief was that Merc would out-develop them during the season and Hamilton's experience would tell over Verstappen's talent. The latter has been much more even than I expected and the former hadn't materialised...but maybe it now has.

[Ari33]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

I propose that as with many things it may have developed more organically than a purposeful plan. I think it has been a long standing strength for Mercedes that they really have understood the longevity of their power units. That doing X reduces reliability by Y amount. When you know this, you know how much you can and can't push the power unit. Especially with a given targeted level of usage. But as we approach the end of the season, they can probably run a fresh unit much more aggressively knowing it will not need to last very long. Which also is inline with comments I think I read somewhere (here, maybe in an article, maybe both) in that Mercedes knows they would need to introduce new power units now vs. later because the later you introduce them, the more "performance" you leave on the table (i.e. units that are still VERY good after end of the season).

On top of that, while Mercedes probably knew they should do well this past weekend, maybe they were a bit surprised as to how well it worked? I haven't tried to examine which team is supposed to benefit the most given the tracks left in the championship. But if it is anything less than a leaning toward Red Bull, I think Max's championship is in serious risk.

You are most likely correct. It might be quite a big revelation for some of us but they will have known and had a strategy in place for a long time. I guess the side effects are largely co-incidental rather than part of a grand plan.

Another thing to consider might be that the new PU performance advantage was likely further advantaged by there being such a long straight in Sao Paulo. With it being flat out after turn 13. It's one of the longest straights on the race calendar.

I'm not really sure how the remaining tracks compare in that regard either..

[Ari33]

Originally Posted by Anyopenroad

I don't believe in complicated, long-sighted conspiracies.

I do believe in the ability of very very clever people to do very very clever things. Mercedes' dominance in recent years has come from their engine, so it makes perfect sense that the very very clever people who built probably the greatest ICE ever made would be able to work out how to extract additional performance from it.

Perhaps...or maybe it has been there all along and they have only waited until now to risk running it in its more aggressive qualy mode in the race? I believe they are allowed to do that as long as they use it in both qualy and the race.

[Anyopenroad]

Originally Posted by Ari33

Perhaps...or maybe it has been there all along and they have only waited until now to risk running it in its more aggressive qualy mode in the race?

I don’t believe they would have been 20+ point points behind if they could have avoided it. That would be a very high-risk roll. Ockham’s Razor says they have found something just in time.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Anyopenroad

I don’t believe they would have been 20+ point points behind if they could have avoided it. That would be a very high-risk roll. Ockham’s Razor says they have found something just in time.

not to add to the tin foil thoughts but its fun to speculate wildly...

you dont just find speed in F1 and rarely without new parts and upgrades coming in.

development cycles are long and for a team to who suggested that they stopped development much earlier in the season, that leaves the simplest answer being that this newly found speed was perhaps found in a more sinister way? certainly what Horner has been alluding to anyways!

rather i guess this is what Horner was getting at by saying that Merc are using their 'Monaco wing' which i guess had some questions surrounding it?

somewhat related, but it would be interesting to know how much left each team has in their budgets...a massive ask for sure but a running budget total as the season progresses would be insightful.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

I am not really a fan of Hamilton or Verstappen, but Max really was risking a lot yesterday. First he crowded Bottas off the road at turn 2, then his ridiculous "defence" going into turn 4 with Lewis. The guy is going to cause a huge crash at some point. Also, Bottas could have easily collided with Max at the start and taken him out, so kudos for Bottas for not playing THAT game.

He has already had a huge crash!
At Silverstone. And yes Id have put him at least 50% responsible for Silverstone.
And then another at Monza.


If Hamilton hadn't moved to the right and Max had cartwheeled over the top smashing his RB into oblivion would Horner have blamed Ham again?

[Greem]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

He has already had a huge crash!
At Silverstone. And yes Id have put him at least 50% responsible for Silverstone.
And then another at Monza.


If Hamilton hadn't moved to the right and Max had cartwheeled over the top smashing his RB into oblivion would Horner have blamed Ham again?

Yes. Of course he would.

[Skam85]

Originally Posted by steve_r

Ignoring = Taking no action

No.

Ignoring = not even noting the incident

[TrapezeArtist]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

He has already had a huge crash!
At Silverstone. And yes Id have put him at least 50% responsible for Silverstone.
And then another at Monza.

If Hamilton hadn't moved to the right and Max had cartwheeled over the top smashing his RB into oblivion would Horner have blamed Ham again?

I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Horner describe the Copse incident as "dirty driving" when Hamilton missed the apex by a foot or two? Yet when Verstappen misses the apex by half a car's width and just drives straight on to the run-off, Horner calls that "fair" (quoted on autosport.com). How does he keep a straight face while saying such things? And why doesn't a TV pundit pull him up on it?

[Adam43]

Horner needs to arrange a filming day at Interlagos to find out.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

I propose that as with many things it may have developed more organically than a purposeful plan. I think it has been a long standing strength for Mercedes that they really have understood the
On top of that, while Mercedes probably knew they should do well this past weekend, maybe they were a bit surprised as to how well it worked? I haven't tried to examine which team is supposed to benefit the most given the tracks left in the championship. But if it is anything less than a leaning toward Red Bull, I think Max's championship is in serious risk.

Richard

I'm not sure Max's championship is at risk.
Its a fine line but with a 14 point advantage that will take a lot of work for Hamilton to leverage out, but its not impossible. Certainly a crash for either one of them or for both of them (Monza repeat anyone?) would make a huge difference.
Two wins and a second would score Hamilton another 68 points not counting any fastest laps. But three seconds would give Max 54 points and the 14 he has 68 points. So really Lewis has to get three more wins to put it beyond doubt barring any misadventure to Max/RBR.

[Taxi645]

Not sure if true (it is not carried on the international version of motorsport.com);
https://it-motorsport-com.translate....&_x_tr_pto=nui

"Hywel Thomas, chief engineer of Brixworth, has prepared an engine 5 for Lewis which must have a life of 2,500 km compared to the 7,000 that normally are required for the resolution of a "standard" power unit. Not being able to change the characteristics of the approved engine components, the Stella engineers worked to take the management strategies of this unit to extremes."

If, true that would explain a lot and go against the very intend of the penalty system, but probably still legal.

Lewis managed to overtake 25 cars and win in just over a racing distance at race speed (71-6 + 24) against a competitor where he has been equal with the whole season and that had no main issues...


P.S. I think the reason why we see the faster acceleration before the onset of the diffuser stall, is because a forward shift in the electric deployment on the straights. If you know your car will drop down in height and drag from say 260kmh, you just fully deploy your electric power before that point to get to that point as early as possible and then rely on the reduced drag instead of the electric power to further gain speed. You can also start charging earlier in the second half of the straight so you can convert the lower drag into a higher battery state again and avoid drawing attention with very high top speed. That way you can run your car more efficiently over a racing distance (lower drag over a larger percentage of the lap) and have fuel to spare if your really need power for an overtake. If you want to overtake, with the early electric deployment profile you leap forward on your opponent to get to the low drag diffuser stall and tow as quickly as possible.

I think that would explain why RB were puzzled by the Mercedes strongly increased acceleration and inquired after the cooled intake air, which apparently wasn't the reason for the strong acceleration.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

I'm not sure Max's championship is at risk.
Its a fine line but with a 14 point advantage that will take a lot of work for Hamilton to leverage out, but its not impossible. Certainly a crash for either one of them or for both of them (Monza repeat anyone?) would make a huge difference.
Two wins and a second would score Hamilton another 68 points not counting any fastest laps. But three seconds would give Max 54 points and the 14 he has 68 points. So really Lewis has to get three more wins to put it beyond doubt barring any misadventure to Max/RBR.

You are right - but there is a lot to be decided on the upcoming tracks.
The expectation was that São Paulo is a RB track, and Hamilton proved otherwise.

The overall points difference between places is key here. 7 points is a large difference between 1st and 2nd, so a gap of 14 points can be overcome in 2 races regardless of other results.

So if Hamilton just gets two more wins, he will be level with Verstappen. Then he only has to finish ahead of Verstappen in the 3rd race - a win is not as vital.

If (as many are claiming) that the long periods on full throttle at São Paulo are the reason Hamilton was able to be so dominant in the last race, then the next few tracks are even more favourable.

Interlagos - 64% full throttle, longest run 1,394m
Yas Marina - 63% full throttle, longest run 1,233m

Monza, Italy - 264.4km/h
Jeddah Street Circuit, Saudi Arabia - 252.8km/h*
Silverstone, Great Britain - 251.6km/h

Losail - Main straight over 1km in length.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Taxi645

I think the reason why we see the faster acceleration before the onset of the diffuser stall, is because a forward shift in the electric deployment on the straights. If you know your car will drop down in height and drag from say 260kmh, you just fully deploy your electric power before that point to get to that point as early as possible and then rely on the reduced drag instead of the electric power to further gain speed.

I thought it was common knowledge (and something all teams did) that electrical deployment is concentrated at the earlier phase(s) of acceleration?

The cars are only permitted to deploy 4MJ per lap to the MGU-K, so it makes sense to use this when the benefit is highest. Simple physics will tell you this is at lower speeds.
How does ERS deployment work?

'To be more specific, the energy should be used at the start of the acceleration phase on the straight. In order to set quicker lap times, it is crucial to produce strong bursts indeed.

“We have a set quantity of energy at our disposal, which we will use on the circuit segments where the driver opens the throttle,” Renault’s engine technical director Rémi Taffin recently told F1i. “A mathematical analysis shows that you need maximum energy at the start of the acceleration phase so you can reach the highest speed as fast as possible.

“Therefore, we supply the driver with a lot of energy for the initial burst, even if this results in a small loss thereafter. That’s why, when we look to manage the energy efficiently, the driver is asked to lift and coast or we decide to cut the MGU-K at the end of the straight.”'

[Taxi645]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

I thought it was common knowledge (and something all teams did) that electrical deployment is concentrated at the earlier phase(s) of acceleration?

The cars are only permitted to deploy 4MJ per lap to the MGU-K, so it makes sense to use this when the benefit is highest. Simple physics will tell you this is at lower speeds.
How does ERS deployment work?

'To be more specific, the energy should be used at the start of the acceleration phase on the straight. In order to set quicker lap times, it is crucial to produce strong bursts indeed.

“We have a set quantity of energy at our disposal, which we will use on the circuit segments where the driver opens the throttle,” Renault’s engine technical director Rémi Taffin recently told F1i. “A mathematical analysis shows that you need maximum energy at the start of the acceleration phase so you can reach the highest speed as fast as possible.

“Therefore, we supply the driver with a lot of energy for the initial burst, even if this results in a small loss thereafter. That’s why, when we look to manage the energy efficiently, the driver is asked to lift and coast or we decide to cut the MGU-K at the end of the straight.”'

All true, but the difference is Mercedes by means of the low drag from the stalled diffuser can just afford to drain a much larger percentage of their battery because they can afford to charge more and earlier at the second half of the straight becahse jf the lower drag from the stalled diffuser.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

You are right - but there is a lot to be decided on the upcoming tracks.
The expectation was that São Paulo is a RB track, and Hamilton proved otherwise.

The overall points difference between places is key here. 7 points is a large difference between 1st and 2nd, so a gap of 14 points can be overcome in 2 races regardless of other results.

So if Hamilton just gets two more wins, he will be level with Verstappen. Then he only has to finish ahead of Verstappen in the 3rd race - a win is not as vital.

If (as many are claiming) that the long periods on full throttle at São Paulo are the reason Hamilton was able to be so dominant in the last race, then the next few tracks are even more favourable.

Interlagos - 64% full throttle, longest run 1,394m
Yas Marina - 63% full throttle, longest run 1,233m

Monza, Italy - 264.4km/h
Jeddah Street Circuit, Saudi Arabia - 252.8km/h*
Silverstone, Great Britain - 251.6km/h

Losail - Main straight over 1km in length.

Oh Yes.
Id agree with all of that but its still a long reach for Mercedes and Hamilton.
I had a look at some highlights showing different angles on the turn 4 largess of Max on Hamilton and from my experience in officiating there would be no question in my mind that what happened at turn 4 was deliberate.

One Brazilian commentator has said he believed Max was looking for an incident (to cause some contact) but Hamilton was wary enough to stay away from it.
And that is my main concern. That Max would not be afraid to create an incident (like Monza) that would inevitably sour his reputation much as the Senna (Suzuka) and Schumacher (Adelaide and Jerez) incidents marked their reputations.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Taxi645

All true, but the difference is Mercedes by means of the low drag from the stalled diffuser can just afford to drain a much larger percentage of their battery because they can afford to charge more and earlier at the second half of the straight becahse jf the lower drag from the stalled diffuser.

I thought that all teams are capped at 120kw, and so all teams are deploying the full 120kw as early as possible in acceleration, balancing their 4MJ allocation over a lap?

And even if Mercedes can afford to charge more and earlier - isn't this also capped at 2MJ of recovery per lap?

[Sodemo]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

He has already had a huge crash!
At Silverstone. And yes Id have put him at least 50% responsible for Silverstone.
And then another at Monza.


If Hamilton hadn't moved to the right and Max had cartwheeled over the top smashing his RB into oblivion would Horner have blamed Ham again?

Yep. I think Verstappen has a classic case of "the Schumachers", he just doesnt know when he is beat.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by TrapezeArtist

I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Horner describe the Copse incident as "dirty driving" when Hamilton missed the apex by a foot or two? Yet when Verstappen misses the apex by half a car's width and just drives straight on to the run-off, Horner calls that "fair" (quoted on autosport.com). How does he keep a straight face while saying such things? And why doesn't a TV pundit pull him up on it?

In fairness to Horner, he did say this after the T4 incident:

“If it was the other way around, I would have let my sporting director have a moan about it but I wouldn’t have expected anything from it.”

To be expected really - of course you are going to have a view that your own does no wrong, and the opposition are always in the wrong. That is sport.

At least he has admitted that, if the situation was reversed, he'd be appealing for a penalty.

[steve nielsen]

FIA just reased Max his onboard: Max only steers left, no steering right or opening the wheel like some claimed

And people who are this much and Max his case have probably forgotten a lot of simular incedents Lewis was involved in through the years