Spare Parts (F1 odds and ends)

hmm, pinch of salt with that as he claims Brawn was on the engine group deciding the rules while at Ferrari, but he was at Honda/brawn then IIRC.

 

I guess it's just Bernie sticking his ore in again. I find it difficult to believe Merc would give any secrets away to anyone. They might be shooting themselves in the foot.
In fact aren't Merc the team who have the longest 'gardening leave' in their contracts even extending to 2 years for some staff!!!

 

Bernie still as mad as a box of frogs...

 

just trying to stay 'relevant' I think.

 

Yep. Several nuggets in there…

 

Think that stopped about 30 years ago.

 

Nothing new, but an interesting read on engine development and standardused components to entice new engine suppliers.

Personally I would love to see cosworth make a return.

 

point 5 seems to tie in with the 'traction control' we were discussing on the other thread.
Plug n play? any gearbox on any engine in any car? what's the point if they're all on commercial contracts? Or will we see constructors allowed to switch mid season?

 

I'm not sure what everyone has got against the MGU-H. I think it's thought of as far more complicated than it actually is because it's recovering energy from "heat".

Wonder how the teams will deal with the problem of turbo lag given they've been spoilt by the motor up to now. It'll never be 80's levels of lag but it'll no longer be non existent.

 

I'm not sure what the relevance is of parts dropped, but the intention is to standardise as many things as possible outside of the engine so that engine manufactures can turn up and plug and play everything else. In principle its a good idea. The @somersf1 article is quite good.

The manufacture competition will just be on the combustion side one would think. I think the current disparity and Mercs advantage is more in the longevity and power provided by all the other bits. I read somewhere that Merc is the most efficient at recycling the heat and converts over 50% of it into reusable power. It makes sense to standardised the most complex part of the power unit.

 

Is the ERS currently being used to plug gaps in the combustion engine output profile, or is it being tailored corner by corner as a pseudo-TC? I guess the idea now is to turn it more into a boost button, rather than a part of the cars "normal" power.

If the energy store and electronics are standardised, as well as the engine parameters, is that enough for Cosworth to just build an ICE, and Red Bull (for example) can then source the other components elsewhere?

I guess the "Plug n Play" is also to aid teams in changing supplier at a later stage in car development. The 2018 Mclaren will be a tough project for example, as they've only recently known the engine parameters they can design around. If a point is reached where you could theoretically swap engines race-to-race, it removes that problem and means teams aren't as tied to a supplier.

 

Yep, yep and err yep.

 

The PUs are already swappable of sorts. They have to have identical attachments points, but then all the ancillaries and the profile needs to be shaped.

I'm all for simpler and cheaper and all round plain fairer. It's just part of the pull for me in F1 is innovation and being the pinnacle. Maybe that's just my engineering side and the majority don't care. Ive seen many begging for a return to n/a engines but to be honest I'd just switch off. I enjoy the odd historical race, but I can't really take it seriously. Going out of your way to make an engine less powerful and less efficient, what's the point.

What they're going for now seems fair enough. As things are with current technology if you want to go fast you need a turbo hybrid. Anything else and your main concern is not power/speed. I'm assuming that part of the electrical side will be automatic. With the driver using the rest when they want. If it's fully driver control then it seems a bit contrived. Making a driver press a button for half a lap at points pre-determined by the engineers.

This will change multiple times before it comes in I'm sure. The FIA just need to decide what they want. They can't please everyone. If you want more noise then you're going to have to sacrifice power. If you want cheap then you'll have to be less restrictive to designs. If you want better racing then you're going to have to take off a lot of over car aero.

 

Probably best to just follow Somers on this. I'm never going to be able to break it down as well as him!

 

It’s tough one and I agree that as the pinnacle of the sport the development and creativity should not be overly restricted. However, I still believe that for the sport to flourish it has to be accessible for small teams and any engine manufacturer.

 

Mercedes not particularly happy, new regs mean a complete redesign of everything , which means £££. It'll be our luck that they'll reach an approximate parity in 2020 (maybe even Honda) and then it'll be all change in '21 and someone will do a better job than the others and well be back to 2014.

 

It’s interesting you say that, because they have an advantage somewhere in the PU, and it’s probably not the ICE. There advantage seems to be in the amount of power they can recover and the deployment period they can use it for. I can understand them being a bit p1ssed.

 

Seems none of the manufacturers are happy. The big 3 will have spent about $500m on this engine and it's being scrapped and replaced with something with very little carry over.

Yes probably the right thing to do in the grand scheme of things. But playing with fire if you're annoying the biggest players in your huge investment.

 

And so it begins , yes I know it's being mentioned already .


http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/41833948