Whats the cheapest route to performance convergence, Aero or PU development?

[alc59]

A fascinating topic. Without beng very close to the technology, it did occur to me that Aero convergence will generally be faster than PU, because you cannot hide the modifications. As soon as a double diffuser or whatever appears and gives impressive results, everyone spots it and takes it to their R&D teams and says we must have one. PU (includng all the hybrid stuff) is hidden. It would appear that convergence in the combustion chamber technology is taking longer, possibly just for this reason.

[SR71]

Cmon....370 million dollars?

How about, as I suspect, that Red Bull have their own R&D expense as listed. And the rest is made up of supplier costs, who have had RB R&D costs palmed off onto them as creative accounting?

Not suggesting subterfuge in any way here, I just find it implausible for an F1 team known for it's high end aero etc to spend 100 million on R&D, with 370million mostly unaccounted for.

Let's assume they spend 370 million on Aero. Could they build a PU system that beats Mercedes for less than 370 million?

Could anyone? Honda cant. Renault Cant.

[bhall II]

Let's assume they spend 370 million on Aero.

Noooo!!!

Challenging notions isn't easy. Being cognizant of that is the other half of an open mind (and it's the part I forget waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too often).

I don't think we don't have to assume anything. One way or the other, we'll get there.

[FoxHound]

Thanks for the info on that Ben, I've done a bit of reading on the costs...and like yourself I'm not getting very far.

For comparative purposes, AVL supply NASCAR teams with similar technologies...since 2008.

For all you gamers and virtual racers out there your ultimate fantasy world just might be a Sprint Cup race shop with all of the gizmos and gadgets the teams now have available to them. They can literally run an entire race on the many different machines in their shops to test engines, transmissions, rear gears, shocks, chassis geometry and just about everything else on their race cars.

http://espn.go.com/racing/nascar/icons/ ... id=3460865

I found their catalogue, and it unsurprisingly doesn't list costs.
http://tuvpr.com/pdf/ITS%20Product%20Ca ... 202013.pdf

But High end NASCAR teams have an annual budget of $20/25 million.
http://jacksonville.com/sports/racing/2 ... staggering

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/auto-raci ... r-cost.htm

Perhaps an F1 AVL rig would cost as much as $40m, but considering that there is allegedly 370m left over each season after Aero expenditure, you could buy a new AVL rig each season and still have $330m to spend.

[bhall II]

First, let's get the numbers on the same page, because it seems we might be drawing from several sources here.

According to The Independent, which is the source for both the Mercedes and Red Bull figures I referenced earlier, RBR's total budget for 2014 was £196m. Of that, £83m was spent on R&D. So, we're not talking about 370 million (whatevers) left over; it's more like £113. When you factor salaries (of which Vettel and Newey accounted for £21 million), materials, infrastructure (buildings and upkeep), promotion, etc, that figure doesn't seem entirely unreasonable...by F1's absurd standards.



Also, the $40 million figure I quoted for the "virtual test track" is just the number I recall being associated with it. I have no idea if it's accurate or not. I'd love to know more (about all of it); I just can't find anything that'll stick to ya ribs.

[FoxHound]

Ahhhh yes...the independent. Christian Sylt contributing....
http://www.independent.co.uk/author/christian-sylt

For matters of accuracy, I vote we abstain from any figures sourced by Sylt.

Not least for this travesty....
http://www.pitpass.com/39408/Mercedes-most-costly-loss

[bhall II]

Red Bull Racing Ltd's finances are a matter of public record (the Companies House reports are posted somewhere on this forum). Mercedes' engine costs were quoted by Mercedes in company documents.

At some point, the appropriate response becomes, "Well, I'll be damned..."

We've all been there. At one point, I thought I was sexual chocolate. Then one day...well, I'll be damned.

[SR71]

First, let's get the numbers on the same page, because it seems we might be drawing from several sources here.

According to The Independent, which is the source for both the Mercedes and Red Bull figures I referenced earlier, RBR's total budget for 2014 was £196m. Of that, £83m was spent on R&D. So, we're not talking about 370 million (whatevers) left over; it's more like £113. When you factor salaries (of which Vettel and Newey accounted for £21 million), materials, infrastructure (buildings and upkeep), promotion, etc, that figure doesn't seem entirely unreasonable...by F1's absurd standards.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOWz5AW2k-I

Also, the $40 million figure I quoted for the "virtual test track" is just the number I recall being associated with it. I have no idea if it's accurate or not. I'd love to know more (about all of it); I just can't find anything that'll stick to ya ribs.

Curious, why doesn't aero development get counted in the R&D budget? Seems to me aero is the kinda R&D a team like RB actually would do?

Also, how much of Red Bull Technologies budget is devoted to aero development and simulation?

[SR71]

Thanks for the info on that Ben, I've done a bit of reading on the costs...and like yourself I'm not getting very far.

For comparative purposes, AVL supply NASCAR teams with similar technologies...since 2008.

For all you gamers and virtual racers out there your ultimate fantasy world just might be a Sprint Cup race shop with all of the gizmos and gadgets the teams now have available to them. They can literally run an entire race on the many different machines in their shops to test engines, transmissions, rear gears, shocks, chassis geometry and just about everything else on their race cars.

http://espn.go.com/racing/nascar/icons/ ... id=3460865

I found their catalogue, and it unsurprisingly doesn't list costs.
http://tuvpr.com/pdf/ITS%20Product%20Ca ... 202013.pdf

But High end NASCAR teams have an annual budget of $20/25 million.
http://jacksonville.com/sports/racing/2 ... staggering

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/auto-raci ... r-cost.htm

Perhaps an F1 AVL rig would cost as much as $40m, but considering that there is allegedly 370m left over each season after Aero expenditure, you could buy a new AVL rig each season and still have $330m to spend.

Ok, so I'm Red Bull, I have 330m to spend.

Can I develop a PU system that would beat Mercedes power with 330m?

[bhall II]

Curious, why doesn't aero development get counted in the R&D budget? Seems to me aero is the kinda R&D a team like RB actually would do?

Also, how much of Red Bull Technologies budget is devoted to aero development and simulation?

It is.

Circa 2012, Red Bull considered Red Bull Technology to be a "supplier" in order to skirt the Resource Restriction Agreement. Or so goes my theory for the designation. It's a moot point now that the RRA has been abandoned, and the FIA has instituted its latest rounds of aero restrictions (max tunnel hours/runs per week, only one tunnel per calendar year, etc).

In any case, a Companies House report from Red Bull Technology Ltd is among the filings posted somewhere around here.

[SR71]

Curious, why doesn't aero development get counted in the R&D budget? Seems to me aero is the kinda R&D a team like RB actually would do?

Also, how much of Red Bull Technologies budget is devoted to aero development and simulation?

It is.

Circa 2012, Red Bull considered Red Bull Technology to be a "supplier" in order to skirt the Resource Restriction Agreement. Or so goes my theory for the designation. It's a moot point now that the RRA has been abandoned, and the FIA has instituted its latest rounds of aero restrictions (max tunnel hours/runs per week, only one tunnel per calendar year, etc).

In any case, a Companies House report from Red Bull Technology Ltd is among the filings posted somewhere around here.

Ok that makes sense. Thanks.

[rjsa]

A fascinating topic. Without beng very close to the technology, it did occur to me that Aero convergence will generally be faster than PU, because you cannot hide the modifications. As soon as a double diffuser or whatever appears and gives impressive results, everyone spots it and takes it to their R&D teams and says we must have one. PU (includng all the hybrid stuff) is hidden. It would appear that convergence in the combustion chamber technology is taking longer, possibly just for this reason.

Next year we'll have the token system scraped. There'll be a nice arms race on the engine side, let's see what comes out of it.

I hope the field will tighten up.

Right now it's pretty damning to conclude anything at all, with engine development severely restricted and customer engines price capped. Performance level from works to customer still a mistery to me too.

It's pretty tempting to try and massage the numbers to look like I intend them to. I'll refrain (for now at least ). I do think aero needs a do over and some severe restriction, but that's my opinion only.