New teams buying BMW/Toyota Chassis IP for 2010

[marcush.]

in the interview stefanovic clearly gives the impression he´s considered at the very least the first reserve on Ecclestones list of entries.
So he seems to have his support in case a place gets available.

[Raptor22]

Fundamental to buying the chassis and aero IP is the understanding of the concepts behind that design and that is often not documented. They will need the engineers to whom that IP is attached.

the same engineers that are now looking for work..?

ever heard of reverse-engineering?
wonder why McLaren & Renault were so happy to get Ferrari IP back in SpyGate..
they didn't have engineers come across with the dossiers, yet found the risk worthy of taking.
With Toyota, you'd be acquiring it legitimately, and getting it all.

yes thanks for the sarcasm. I have heard of and have participated in re-verse engineering and do know how complex and time consuming it can be.

The Toyota and BMW IP's would only be useful for complex control systems wrt to the engine or gearbox, perhaps cooling. The cooling would be useless without a Toyota engine.
Engine and gearbox control well there you have some interesting stuff that can be reverse engineered quite quickly.

Chassis carbon layups are useful if you are building a Toyota. If you are building a McLAren then its not so usful this load paths through the chassis are different. It's interesting to understand how some else has conceptualised their design but it will little bearing on your car.

McLaren and Toyota knicking Ferrari IP was beneficial to each how? Understanding the concepts and design of the Ferrari car. Mclaren admittedly got off lightly in 2008 when their car did have Ferrari concept components fitted. That the WMC did nothing was more a sign of the times and fear of F1 disappearing down the tubes completely than a desire to do whats right. They did what is just.

So by buying IP to cars which are conceptually different and are running different engines and gearbox would help a smaller team how? Without the entire design team of the Toyota or BMW there is no point.

Owning the IP is not the same as owning the expertise.

[Fil]

Fundamental to buying the chassis and aero IP is the understanding of the concepts behind that design and that is often not documented. They will need the engineers to whom that IP is attached.

the same engineers that are now looking for work..
..With Toyota, you'd be acquiring it legitimately, and getting it all.

So by buying IP to cars which are conceptually different and are running different engines and gearbox would help a smaller team how? Without the entire design team of the Toyota or BMW there is no point.

Owning the IP is not the same as owning the expertise.

I think we've ended up saying similar if not the same thing. You are asking the question, inferring what i am saying.
And the proof is in reality with StefanGP's deal with Toyota F1, if all current talk is correct.

[Raptor22]

yes StefanGP does have a different set of challenges though. They were not granted an entry so if they are to take a place buying a design and perhaps components will shorten their development time to get on the grid. But they will know very little of the cars characteristics without the engineers who designed it.

Can they afford those engineers? Whom will come over to Stefan?
To hit the ground running will require possibly 90% of the design team.

YOu see its far more complicated than simply buying the IP and off you go.
Theres a lot of understanding behind the designs that needs to be learned, and then they will have adopt a development path for the car that caters for their resourse constraints while the Toyota was designed to be developed on a much bigger budget.

I'll use the Jordan GP F191 that Schumacher drove in Spa for the first time.

It was a pretty simple car. It used a mono shock activated from both ends. Had very simple set up procedure with pre determined settings for the engine mapping.

the team learned a lot from that simple design because it helped them understand how to set up a GP car for each track characteristics. if they had bought a Williams for example would they have achieved what Williams did in 1991? No, because they did not have the budget for new shock absorbers each race, Jordan refurbished them after each GP.
The same can be pushed to the chassis. Chassis requiring a different ride height for different circuits could be built by the wealthy teams whereas the poorer teams had to make do with a one chassis for all conditions. Ferrari was literally taking a completley new car for each track wheres Jordan had to run the same car under very many different guises and conditions.

So yes Stefan Gp can by the Toyota but they will find it difficult to develop the car race by race without a budget that would match the way Toyota would have thron money at the car.

[marcush.]

sorry ,but this is not as if the principles are hidden soewhere and cannot be retrieved by clever people living their passion.
Every single team last year where completely at sea with their setup during last season and hit the jackpot on other occasions spot on..So i don´t see a correlation
why you really need the guy who has drawn up thwe thing to actually make it work on the track.
In reality a lot of smart people are out there and available , so if they actually have the money this will have a good chance to work .

[Raptor22]

I'll use another example , this time america's Cup sailing.

The South African team Shosholoza bought one of the american boats a few years back to use as a trials horse against RSA83.

It took more than a year to get the bought in trials yacht up to speed simply because they needed to figure out how to get the balance between sail trim, hydrodynamic centre of pressure, aerodynamic centre of pressure and which sails would work under what conditions and what the performance windows are.

They had unlimited testing time and a lot of smart people working on it.

For Stefan GP, they have almost no testing time outside of the designated FIA test days to try to understand how a car they did not design works.

Its an impossible task. Sure they will turn up on the grid, but they will be at the back of the grid all season long, burned a hole in the wallet and achieved nothing.
they would be better off, entering in 2011, with their own car and create a platform of knowledge they can build on.

If you still don't see it then I can't help you. The only benefit to buying Toyota's car would be because they desparately want to be on the grid in 2010 and accept that they will loose money and face.

[axle]

Why would StefanGP be limited in testing? They are not part of F1, they are not recognised by the FIA as a running team.

This means they can buy all the track time they want...it's just a rich man playing with a toy.

[marcush.]

I'll use another example , this time america's Cup sailing.

The South African team Shosholoza bought one of the american boats a few years back to use as a trials horse against RSA83.

It took more than a year to get the bought in trials yacht up to speed simply because they needed to figure out how to get the balance between sail trim, hydrodynamic centre of pressure, aerodynamic centre of pressure and which sails would work under what conditions and what the performance windows are.

They had unlimited testing time and a lot of smart people working on it.

For Stefan GP, they have almost no testing time outside of the designated FIA test days to try to understand how a car they did not design works.

Its an impossible task. Sure they will turn up on the grid, but they will be at the back of the grid all season long, burned a hole in the wallet and achieved nothing.
they would be better off, entering in 2011, with their own car and create a platform of knowledge they can build on.

If you still don't see it then I can't help you. The only benefit to buying Toyota's car would be because they desparately want to be on the grid in 2010 and accept that they will loose money and face.

why would you assume the car they create themselves would be any better or faster than an evolution or based on toyotas long experience and obviously quite capable design of ? theres no logic in that .When I don´t understand what toyota did ,how can I design and build something to challenge the best racing teams in the world?
I guess having a proper car is better as starting from scratch ,saves a lot of expensive downfalls for the first year.To hope to realize the potential can work
immediatedly as seen by Tororosso in2008 or not work instantly as seen in 2009.....with basically the same team but unexperienced drivers....but at the end of both years tororosso came good with a bought design ,didn´t they? Do you think TR will be as competitive next year without Newey designed car..

[marcush.]

Why would StefanGP be limited in testing? They are not part of F1, they are not recognised by the FIA as a running team.

This means they can buy all the track time they want...it's just a rich man playing with a toy.

I guess the real issue will be to get valid data when not running the correct rubber.
Cannot imagine they are given a free pass on purchasing all Bridgestone rubber as used during the race weekends..this would give them such a huge head start o next season..But then when was Bridgestone quitting supplies to F1 ,so maybe that would make sense as they would test obsolete material then..alternatively they could test
for the then new supplier ..big time uproar guaranted ...

[axle]

Money will move mountains....

[Raptor22]

I'll reply without quotes since there three post to reply too.


why would StefanGP be limited for testing?

What is the assumption? That they are in the 2010 WC or not?
If they are in then they are bound by the concord agreement. If not then they can spend the year learning about Toyota's car and get to the bottom of the design and improve upon it. We were discussing the assumption that they in the 2010 WC so lets keep it there.

Why would I assume that the car they Stefan GP creates would be better than the Toyota?

I don't make that assumption. I do believe that a car of their own design would be better understood and therefore solving issues with it will be faster and therefore they can push the development of the car faster. Whether they buy Toyota's car or design their own the base they are starting from is only as good as the knowledge and experience of the engineering staff and the race engineering staff and the driver.
There is also no guarantee that Stefan Gp would be able to manufacture Toyota's design to the required specifications with the required materials etc due to budget constraints. The design of a F1 car is very complext due to each car in effect being a prototype and that requires very precise manufaturing that determines material and component behaviour under the f1 environment. These are surmountable but not in the 3 months it will take to get a car to the grid

But Toro Rosso used a RBR chassis an they learned how to use it?

Well you forget that the Toro Rosso crowd have been in F1 for over 20yrs. Names may change but they are a very established team of F1 professionals who also have the backing and support of Red Bull Technology who own the technology for the car. if TR has a problem with set up they can draw on the RBT team to help them solve it. Stefan GP won't have the same resources to draw on.

[marcush.]

you are cotradicting yourself in my view.

TR has experienced people ,and SGP has as well-Coughlan was longtime arrows mclaren employee,Stepney ,Vasselon is rumoured to be still involved and the remaining staff in cologne should be some people ther who know their trade...
So I do actually not see the problem of having no idea what this car is based on in terms of ideas.Of course loosing people always is equal to loss of knowhow but this is the same for everyone ,Sauber laid of a lot of people ,Brawn did ,the others have to follow.
I don´t think it is a huge advantage to make all your experience on your own errors in fact it is far more efficient to learn from others-faults-..
so in the pitlane copying is really always present anyways and i don´t think it is
like you have to go into f1 with only your own original ideas.of course the development will be faster as the thing you did on your own will be off seconds not tenths in terms of potential...

I guess it will get more and more difficult for the big teams to get all the jobs to perform actually get done with the reduced workforce available.So in effect you will have to extend the life of designs and components to cater for this just because theres no way to keep the steamroller at the current speed.Of course the more you already have tried -see Mclaren in 2009,Honda in2008 the more you know just what not to do in stable regulations.
As for ability to producing parts -SGP is based on producing the car in cologne ,so everything is actually designed to be produced in this environment ...SGP want to move to serbia but this is future .

Limit on testing -well no tyres - what are you runing on for tests?so effectively they will be limited by the supply of rubber ,or they choose to run on something commisioned by them and tret the whole thing as a giant fingerplay ...,of course
you will be able to ensure all systems work but without the correct rubber you will never know if the performance of the car ,adjustability or general layout is correct for the tyre wich is mandatory..

[Raptor22]

I am contradicting myself in your view because you do not understand the design process.

Who is this Stepney you refer to? Was he not banned from F1 for a period of 5yrs for his role in Stepneygate. Mike Coughlan rumoured to still be involved? Well that's one way to get your team banned before it has even received an entry.

why bring rumours into a discussion on truth or facts?

Please focus your arguement to how a team would go about reverse engineering a car they can neither produce nor knows anything about at this point in time.

You can start with the Design and engineering package that could be handed over upon sale of the IP.
from the top please

[hasalard]

First off all, as you can see from the link, Stefan GP is planing to test it's F1 car during the 2010 season if they fail to secure an entry.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/80619

Toyota did same thing in the past.They completed an extensive test program in 2001 and developed their prototype car for 2002 season.But as they proved whether you prepared well or not, during the first few years it is almost impossible to design a competitive car.So many variables like creating a harmony between engineers, understanding the nature of tyres, finding optimum aero-mechanic balance for most of the circuits etc...prevent new teams to gain instant success on track.Probably new teams -Manor,Lotus,Virgin- will suffer from same things in their early years.Each failure they will face, will get them to a new level of understanding on a F1 car's requirements.
So, instead of starting from zero, buying chassis ip from Toyota is a logical step i believe.Similar to Super Aguri's approach - they raced with a year old Honda chassis - Stefan GP team can be setup around a different teams data.In half a year they can understand the cars basic dynamics, strengths and weaknesses.- sometimes it take years for teams to completely understand-.
We must not forget that Toyota developed F1 cars for 9 full seasons with very high budgets and workforce.Based on their improving 2008 and 2009 performances, they probably carried strong areas to their 2010 design.In any conditions 2010 Toyota design should be more effective to a design created from zero and such a design can provide more accurate data to a new team.So with a better baseline, they can focus on other areas of running a f1 team.

[Raptor22]

a baseline is a baseline, it is not a foundation since they still won;t knwo exactly what make the "toyota" work well or not.
The follows up car could be pretty bad compared to the "toyota" because they could decide to head down a design and conceptual avenue that may seem logical but is a dead end.

What you say about a team requiring a few season to get up to compettive speed is true. The situation is even worse under the test restriction regulation. The luxury of mile and miles of testing is over and simulation is the future. But simulation requires a great big data base on which performance can be measured and benchmarked.

Stefan GP will have none of that data base with the simple purchase of a 2010 Toyota f1 chassis.

They may achieve a few fluke performances but the understanding of a car that is not created in the mind of teams design engineer is not as clear as a car that is.

what Stefan GP will know of course is;
how much downforce the car has
what it weight distribution is
how much adjustability is built inwrt to ballast, suspension, ride height centre of mass and centre of pressure alterations.
what size driver should they hire (an f1 team designs the car around a drivers physical properties

what they will need ot understand throught testing;
tyre behaviour at various fuel loads
optimise camber and castor angles to maximise tyre performance
optimise areo dynamic package for slow, meidum and high speed tracks.
how does the suspension influence aerodynamics under braking, under acceleratio, striaght line, high speed corners, low speed corners.
where does the car transfer tyre loads from mechanically induced to awrodynamically induced
how does the suspension behave when high aero loads are imposed
How does the suspension behave when low aero loads are imposed.

etc, etc, etc

Toyota don;t have this data. They have a data pack that is an instruction manual for how to build the car they intended racing in 2010. I doubt the engineers wrote down what they were thinking when they created various parts. They merely delivered a design. The assumptins they made to arrive at an answer are also usually kept in their brains, not on paper.

This is all part of the design process which make it very difficult to simply walk in and buy a design that is untried. I doubt there will be a hand over seminar for Stefan GP where Toyota trains them on how to go F1 racing as Porsche or audi would do for Joest, or Sauber did for BMW.

Toyota has made it clear that the personel and facilities are not for sale. The design of the 2010 car is possibly for sale.

If I were chief engineer of Stefan GP I would purchase nothing but the blue prints and tech manuals as reference material to becnhmark my own work. There could be 100 reason why an engineer designed a part to look and work the way it does. if changing the parts design has a knock on effect it won;t be easy for Stefan Gp to find out what that knock on effect is until the car is built and tested.

toyota's prototype f1 racer was a very simple car that helped the team make certain decisions about how to layout the the car they would race. it provided valuable input into the effect of weight distribution, aerodynamics effects at all attitudes, the effect of wheelbase, centre of gravity, centre of pressure, brakes and the effect of different models of f1 brake and brands and how to package these.

None of this data helped Toyota to a win. There is no easy road to the front of the grid. It's like the little boy who asked the famous musician how to get to Carnegie Hall....."practice practice practise was the reply"

Any notion that buying and racing Toyota's car won't be a problem is fancifull and a little naive.
and I know this because I have participated in reverse engineering programs in my past, one of which involved a Dakar racer and it certainly proved much less painful to start with a clean sheet of paper than to try to decipher what someone else was thinking when they penned their design. Sure you understand suspesion an damping and engines and layout and the influence of dynamics of the vehicle but its still a far cry fro designing your own car.

Hence so many customer LMP teams don;t perform as well as the works teams.
Hence you have the differences in performance in A1GP where the engine and chassis are similar across all cars.
Hence you have differences in performance in any category where std machinery is used.