dren wrote:I am guessing the new gear box gave them a lot of trouble.
why did it?
scarbs wrote:Stuff I've been told from my contacts at Williams
Monocoque construction outdated and over weight
Trouble with aero
In particuar the EBD which Williams were slow to develop and handicapped by the lack of complex blown mappings from Cosworth. Williams invested their own cash to have these. The late season floor was much better.
The Cosworth lacked drivability and was fuel thirsty too
No mention of any gearbox issues
Although Sam Michael has gone, so too has Jon Tomlinson and Patrick Head has shifted his attnetion away from the F1 team. I'm told many people that might have been normally considered for the Williams TD job, were not selected as the team want a new engineerign structure. I.E. not one tied to the people and stlye of the outgoing management. Coughlan altho not without his critics is a hard working, pragmatic and innovative engineer. Mark Gillan brings a scientific approach to engineering. Leaving only Jason Somerville as a William returnee, albeit via the very different environment of Toyota and Renault.
gilgen wrote:allstaruk08 wrote:dren wrote:I am guessing the new gear box gave them a lot of trouble.
why did it?
Because it was extremely low, and drive shafts came out at a considerable angle, far in excess of what was the norm. This put increased stresses on the u/js and gearbox.
Tyler wrote:I was just wondering what everyone's thoughts are for Williams in 2012?
Have they hired the right people for the task of trying to return to the top of the grid?
What are the reasons for them having such terrible cars in recent years?
I'm quite surprised that Sam Michaels landed himself a job at McLaren.
I would have thought he's pretty rubbish after Williams results over the last few years.
ringo wrote:The gearbox failures weren't really related to the geometry or structure.
Something like an oil seal can fail on any gearbox. I wouldn't really criticize the design.
It may return next year mated to the renault engine.
The only weakness i see with it is the width of it. It's a wide gearbox and it's width is occupying a lot of room on top of the center part of the diffuser.
Monocoque heavy you say?
That is interesting. How did they realize this if they don't know the mass of the other teams chassis?
did the new engineers come in an say "hey, this tub if heavy compared to the ones i've built at xxxx if you didn't know".
Coefficient wrote:ringo wrote:The gearbox failures weren't really related to the geometry or structure.
Something like an oil seal can fail on any gearbox. I wouldn't really criticize the design.
It may return next year mated to the renault engine.
The only weakness i see with it is the width of it. It's a wide gearbox and it's width is occupying a lot of room on top of the center part of the diffuser.
Monocoque heavy you say?
That is interesting. How did they realize this if they don't know the mass of the other teams chassis?
did the new engineers come in an say "hey, this tub if heavy compared to the ones i've built at xxxx if you didn't know".
I'm sure there is something in your speculations there. Maybe Coughlan turned up and said "it weighs how much? Jeez, they were lighter than that at Mclaren 4 years ago!"
Users browsing this forum: CCBot [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Juzh, kwanchepan, Undead_Mud and 27 guests