FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

Discuss the sport you love with other motorsport fans

By What's Burning?
#427942
Really good simple write up on the Mercedes advantage this year. How it's not just about the engine, but about good design and hard work. Or like Sagi puts it, cheating, and how overboost puts it, stiffing competition and killing the sport. Cheering on an inept team can be difficult at times. I urge those who's team this year swung and missed to become better fans, not bitter fans. :thumbup:

SkyF1 For all that we’ve enjoyed some great battles this year between Lewis Hamilton and Nico Rosberg, the hope must be that other teams can close the gap to Mercedes GP in 2015. But realistically, what are the chances of that happening?

The Mercedes W05 sometimes had a race pace advantage of 1.5s per lap over the competition. Even at its least competitive, it remained around half a second clear of the field. It’s now well understood how that pace was derived, but understanding it is one thing, replicating it something else. The advantage over the non-Mercedes-engined cars came from a power unit that began the season with something like a 70bhp head start and better fuel efficiency. This was why it was dominant even over the Red Bull RB10, the only car with comparably good aerodynamics. The advantage over other Mercedes-engined cars came from a clever way around the two most difficult challenges presented by the much more restrictive aerodynamic regulations of 2014.

Sky Sports F1's Ted Kravitz believes Mercedes' potential Formula One dominance could be at risk in 2016 if their rivals in the paddock can force through a

So in essence the RB10 and W05 were the only two cars that had nailed the new aero requirements while the Mercedes power unit was the only one to properly meet the challenge of the new engine formula. As the only car combining both, the root of the Mercedes W05’s dominance was clear. As to how those solutions had been reached by Mercedes, it was due to better planning, deeper research and more co-ordination and motivation of the engineering talent within the organisation. The engine, chassis and aerodynamic departments worked in a much more integrated and co-operative way than elsewhere, within a ‘brains trust’ structure that had been set up by Ross Brawn and Mercedes’ engine chief Andy Cowell.

That’s how it was done. But now that the result is known, how feasible is it for the competition to incorporate those technical ideas? In terms of the engine, the Mercedes’ power advantage was mainly mechanical rather than electrical. With its compressor at the front of the engine, out of aerodynamic harm’s way, it was bigger than the rear-mounted Renault and Ferrari compressors. This involved a very demanding engineering solution however, with the shaft connecting the compressor to the rear-mounted turbine (where it has to be in order to be turned by the exhaust gases) running the whole length of the engine. This shaft is limited in diameter by regulation, turns at over 120,000rpm and drives the ersH motor which sits in the middle. The slightest bit of flex would have disastrously destroyed the bearings of the ersH and possibly the compressor. Engineering such a long and fast-spinning shaft to have zero flex within it was not the work of a moment and took Mercedes around two years to perfect. The time involved in overcoming this challenge is believed to be what has caused Renault and Ferrari to be pushing for a regulation change that would allow a mid-season change of specification.

Ted asks what makes the Mercedes W05 one of F1's most dominant cars.

With Mercedes consistently refusing to grant its blessing to this change and thereby thwarting the unanimous agreement needed, it’s looking increasingly likely that Renault and Ferrari will have to begin the season with developments of their current rear compressor designs. Both have identified plenty of areas where they can improve those power units and the Renault step (of its rear compressor motor) is believed to be in the order of 70bhp – which would bring it up to around the 2014 Mercedes motor. But Mercedes itself will not be standing still and is expected to have an extra 60bhp more again. This is almost certainly what is behind the politics of Christian Horner suggesting a new twin turbo format for 2016 (when only a majority agreement is required rather than unanimous) – which would wipe the current Mercedes advantage. With that threat around, might Mercedes relax its stance on allowing Renault and Ferrari their mid-season upgrades? Around that hangs the question of just how close Renault and Ferrari can get to Mercedes horsepower and fuel efficiency next year. Then there is Honda, newly entered for 2015. It’s not yet known outside McLaren and Honda whether this new motor features a front or rear-mounted compressor, but regardless it would be surprising if a new manufacturer would be instantly up to the level of a year two Mercedes.

McLaren-Honda reveal a first look at the MP4-29H following its debut run at a filming day at Silverstone.

Implementing the key of the Mercedes aero advantage might be less complex. Getting good downforce to both the front and rear of the car was incredibly difficult under the 2014 regulations. Having the front wings extend only about half way across the width of the front tyre - rather than being virtually flush with them as previously – hurt front downforce. Getting the air to flow around the tyre in such a way as to meet up and form a vortex (a circling current of air that can be used to accelerate the speed of the flow) in the necessary place became a very big challenge. Mercedes got around it by removing the obstacle of one of the lower front suspension’s arms. Instead of a conventional V shape for the lower wishbone, the Mercedes had just a single arm, with a forked end. Other teams had to generate front downforce by getting a diffuser effect from bringing the underside of the nose very close to the central section of the wing. But this limited the flow being fed to the underfloor towards the rear of the car. Mercedes, by being able to generate good front flow through its trick suspension arm, was able to keep the gap between the nose and the wing big – allowing more airflow through the underfloor and to the rear. Red Bull achieved it differently, but with a similarly aerodynamically effective end result.

Making a single suspension arm strong enough to cope with the loads previously taken by two was another significant engineering challenge – albeit not one beyond pretty much any of the F1 teams. It wasn’t copied during the season as it would have involved changes to the whole tub of the car in order to have the mounting points and strength in the right places. But it could presumably be copied for next year. Expect to see a version of it on most 2015 cars.

The challenge of catching up in one move to a car that had two very significant areas of advantage while that team continues to evolve and develop its design are huge. Assuming there are no other radical game-changing solutions in the pipeline and that 2015 is about evolution, it would be surprising if the gap to Mercedes was not reduced – but even more surprising if it was overcome.
User avatar
By racechick
#427951
That was good read WB. Thanks for posting.
By CookinFlat6
#427953
great read WB :thumbup:

I would disagree though with Ted Crevices statement
So in essence the RB10 and W05 were the only two cars that had nailed the new aero requirements


and elevation of Red Bulls aero above the other teams - as they have cheated to achieve their Aero aims this season this unlike other teams, so its a bit unfair to say RBRs aero was better than the other legal teams

but then Ted Crevice actually said that F1 engines had no sparkplugs :rolleyes:
User avatar
By sagi58
#427967
So you think Mercedes is refusing to budge on the in-season development because they have the best interests of the sport and other teams in their hearts?

No of course not, only an idiot would be so blind as to say their team can do no wrong. In this case Mercedes is in the right to hold steady to rules that Ferrari and Renault agreed to due to the spiraling out of control costs.

Yes, the rules were agreed upon; but, at the time there were discussions as to what might happen in this very situation:
 wrote:">[url][/url]...When the hybrid turbo rules were being drawn up all parties discussed what would happen if one manufacturer got a giant leap and it was agreed by all teams and manufacturers that this would not be in the best interest of the sport. The outcome was the rule we have whereby development is permitted on selected areas of the Power Units at the end of the 2014 and 2015 seasons, then the engines will be locked. In retrospect this was not enough...

Sure, Mercedes is in an enviable position where they don't have to agree to any further concessions;
but, please, let's not kid ourselves into believing that it's in the best interest of the sport!

Or that Mercedes is being altruistic in saying they want to keep costs from spiraling out of control causing further hardship on the smaller teams?


Well yes, because Mercedes sell the cheapest engine by a long shot to their customer teams. Not that this means anything to you since it's been repeated over and over again but you don't factor that into the way the world works in the cuckooria lounge where Ferrari can do no wrong.

So, you think Mercedes is being altruistic? Check Merriam-Webster for the definition of the word.
You'll quickly see that altruism has nothing to do with the business stance Mercedes has adapted.

p.s. How would you know what's being discussed in the Ferrari Lounge?

If you look hard enough, you might find a couple of conspiracies in their backyard, after all didn't they threaten to leave F1 if they had to revert back to the old engine specs?


Awww... You poor misinformed thing... you take a quote I used to beat up on Horner in the Red Bull support thread[/quote]

No, to be honest, I read most of what you post with a grain of salt. What I was referring to is this:

, Andrew Benson wrote:">Formula 1: Mercedes could have quit over engines

Mercedes says it would probably have quit Formula 1 if the sport had not adopted its new turbo hybrid engines.
User avatar
By sagi58
#427968
Really good simple write up on the Mercedes advantage this year. How it's not just about the engine, but about good design and hard work. Or like Sagi puts it, cheating, and how overboost puts it, stiffing competition and killing the sport. Cheering on an inept team can be difficult at times. I urge those who's team this year swung and missed to become better fans, not bitter fans. :thumbup:


I see you're having reading comprehension issues, too... or is it just a memory problem...

I did NOT say that Mercedes cheated. What I said was their opposition to in-season development
(even if it's only until July, 2015) has the same effect as cheating; but, it's within the rules.

I mean, isn't that what Red Bull's advantage was termed these last few years? And, let's not get
on the flexi-wing thing! They weren't caught cheating by the FIA, the rest is pure speculation.
By LRW
#427970
Sagi.

There is a BIG difference between threatening to leave over something and stating AFTER the fact that they would probably have left.

For someone that goes on and on and on and on about reading comprehension, you sure do fail on it so badly so often. !!!!
User avatar
By sagi58
#427976
Sagi.

There is a BIG difference between threatening to leave over something and stating AFTER the fact that they would probably have left...


They went public with that AFTER the fact, that's not to say they didn't make themselves heard at the time.
Just because we aren't privy to what goes on behind closed doors doesn't mean the threat wasn't there.

What is strange is that these new engines have cost a lot to get on the track, as the teams that are now bankrupt.
In fact, here's what some teams had to say:

...“None of [Lotus, Sauber and Force India] wanted the new engines,” said Lotus owner Gerard Lopez, speaking for the struggling trio. “They were forced upon us.”
User avatar
By stonemonkey
#427981
I'm sorry sagi but in my opinion trying to get the rules (that everyone has had to abide by) changed because they're behind is more akin to cheating. The constructors championship is just that, who can do the best job within the given rules.
It's like a sprinter saying 'Bolt is faster than me, I should get a 1 second head start, if Bolt doesn't agree to that then it is like he is cheating.'
By LRW
#427986
Sagi.

There is a BIG difference between threatening to leave over something and stating AFTER the fact that they would probably have left...


They went public with that AFTER the fact, that's not to say they didn't make themselves heard at the time.
Just because we aren't privy to what goes on behind closed doors doesn't mean the threat wasn't there.


Oh I see. Now we are making up what has been said. Gotcha.

I always tried to give you the benefit of doubt Sagi. But the drivel you've spouted the last few days has just taken it too far.
By What's Burning?
#427998
Sadly having to troubleshoot technical issues I have a high sensitivity to ineptitued. Statistically 90% of all network outages are self inflicted, in other words, people planning poorly for an upgrade or a change so I've been aware of the drivel for quite some time. I feel for those of you who now realized she's raised it to a level where it's not above the drivel din and it's causing other members headaches when you try to contort the "logic".

I'm at the point where I'm going to stop responding to the drivel because it just feels like...

[youtube]KOO5S4vxi0o[/youtube]
By What's Burning?
#428002
I watched a documentary on Marshall last night on BBC4.

But you understood what you were watching, see that's the difference...

[youtube]wtXkD1BC564[/youtube]
User avatar
By sagi58
#428109
Sagi.

There is a BIG difference between threatening to leave over something and stating AFTER the fact that they would probably have left...


They went public with that AFTER the fact, that's not to say they didn't make themselves heard at the time.
Just because we aren't privy to what goes on behind closed doors doesn't mean the threat wasn't there.


Oh I see. Now we are making up what has been said. Gotcha.

I always tried to give you the benefit of doubt Sagi. But the drivel you've spouted the last few days has just taken it too far.


I'm not making anything up, LRW. What I'm doing is speculating, just like so many others do.
You may be right about my taking it too far; but, then again, I'm not alone.

p.s. I'm sorry to have disappointed you! :(
User avatar
By sagi58
#428112
I'm sorry sagi but in my opinion trying to get the rules (that everyone has had to abide by) changed because they're behind is more akin to cheating. The constructors championship is just that, who can do the best job within the given rules.
It's like a sprinter saying 'Bolt is faster than me, I should get a 1 second head start, if Bolt doesn't agree to that then it is like he is cheating.'


You're right, the WDC is about building the best engine for each season, within the rules.
No argument there!!

But, no one is asking for a head start. No one is saying Mercedes can't continue to work
on their engine until we can catch up. That's the difference.

Everyone should bring the best they can to each and every race; but, that's not going give
us a more competitive grid if continued development isn't allowed, to some extent.
  • 1
  • 236
  • 237
  • 238
  • 239
  • 240
  • 254

See our F1 related articles too!