F1 » Analysis: What we learned in Jerez


Crash.net columnist Kate Walker considers the impact of testing at Jerez this week and whether Red Bull and Renault can bounce back in Bahrain...

Sort Comments: Oldest | Newest

pdfbt40

February 01, 2014 12:37 PM

Interesting, but still no analysis of what's behind the numbers. Why the different engine hours? What if anything stopped them. What's behind the lap times? Does the aero work, apart from obvious mechanical failures, could they get around every corner?

tim1rick

February 01, 2014 3:03 PM

Teraflops is a measure of processing power expressed in how many real (non integer) calculations a processor can perform (1flops = floating point operation per second). Data is measured in bytes so it should be "terabytes of data". Just saying.....

Firestorm

February 01, 2014 11:11 PM

Crash that was not a good analyse. That the Renault-powered teams are struggling with their unit(especially Red Bull) we already knew it, everyone have been speaking about it. That Mercedes engines leads the way on mileage, that's obvious too. What's the analyse here. You could speak a bit about aero too. I red that McLaren's nose has raised a few eyebrows.

Taipan

February 01, 2014 11:22 PM

Firestorm, I think the real talking point (other than the dismal Renault and the c*ck noses) is McLaren's rear suspension. From what I've read other teams are ready to question the FiA on it's legality but are already working on their own version of it in case it turns out to be the way forward. A bit like Brawn's diffuser of 2009.
It's an interesting piece of design that's for sure.

Firestorm

February 01, 2014 11:36 PM

Taipan I think that Red Bull already did raise a complaint toward the FIA about it. They seek for clarifications. Pat Symonds said that it will not be simple copying it, the entire structure of the car needs to be changed in order to implement the system. Still Newey downplayed the importance of McLaren's solution. They are not going to gain a massive advantage by it said Newey. I don't think that any team has found an aero solution to gain such an advantage as did Brawn GP in 2009 with the double decker diffuser.

richard

February 02, 2014 9:21 AM

firestorm. the consensus seems to be that whereas the blockers can be effective at slow speeds, the will cause too much drag at high speed, thus negating any perceived advantage.

but what is interesting is the matter of huge torque, which is causing the drivers to alter their style quite considerably. lulu (god bless him) said that last year, the hairpin meant a change down to second or third, but now it could be taken in fourth or fifth. ok,i know they have one extra gear this year, but still......

107SS2009

February 02, 2014 10:28 AM

Firestorm/Taipan/Richard, At least one team (speculated to be RB) has already enquired as to the legality of the mclaren rear suspension arms. Charlie W (FIA) is said to have given his ok, but how many times did Charlie W had to take his given OK back?, mclaren said they don't have a name for the arms but outsiders named them BLOCKERS, These arms might Create drag at high speed but there is not one aero bit o the car that doesn't, copying them might be easy but copying their installation will not as a new gearbox housing will be required, to understand their shape (the blockers) and effect on the air hitting them/the air rushing up to them draw a bell upright, tilt the bell from the top sideways (horizontal) 90 degrees to the right, the air will be rushing to this bell shape from the right side of the drawing (front of car) to the left side of the drawing (rear of car) from this picture one can understand the path the air will have to follow when hitting this bell shape.

richard

February 02, 2014 11:06 AM

sunny. no need to change the gearbox. any team can just make a cover fo the box, with new suspension points just as merc did last year.

re the blockers. as you say, Charlie has passed them, but as has been proven in he past, Charlie is not the arbiter, the fia is. so there could well be a challenge partly because they are movable aero devices (the gap opens and closes when suspension is working.) fairings on suspension arms have to be aero neutral.

but it will be interesting to see what happens.

incidentally, Charlie also approved some noses, but thee are now being actively queried by the fia. even if they are termed to be legal, if fia consider them to be dangerous, they can exclude a car on the basis of danger.

BoufieWolf

February 02, 2014 12:16 PM

Richard forgive me if I am wrong, didn't McLaren have a pointy nose in 95 with which they were able to run with all season. The FIA changed the regs for 96 to ensure a more rounded nose to prevent a percieved threat if a car was t-boned.

Page 1 of 2
1 2  »

Join the conversation - Add your comment

Please login or register before adding your comments.

Although the administrators and moderators of this website will attempt to keep all objectionable comments off these pages, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the poster, and neither Crash Media Group nor Crash.Net will be held responsible for the content of any message. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. If you find a message objectionable, please contact us and inform us of the problem or use the [report] function next to the offending post. Any message that does not conform with the policy of this service can be edited or removed with immediate effect.

© 1999 - 2014 Crash Media Group

The total or partial reproduction of text, photographs or illustrations is not permitted in any form.