Muramassa Autosport forums...
Hasegawa interview articles
looking at the contents it's obviously from the same interview session on 21 Dec 2016
http://forums.autosp...rt-v/?p=7806901
http://forums.autosp...rt-v/?p=7808015
http://forums.autosp...rt-v/?p=7809444
==============================
2017.01.12
http://www.as-web.jp/f1/82001?all
----- In 2015 which was the first year of participation, you were plagued with lack of reliability, but 2016 saw significant improvement in reliability. How did you improve the reliability?
it wasn't just a single issue that plagued us in 2015, so we examined all of items thoroughly and reconstructed the reliability. For example, altered the procedure of confirming reliability, reorganized the method for the process of introducing pu to the race. In 2015 we had no choice but to make shift with/in the shortage of time, so we couldn't afford to work on such details. As a result of that, trifling problems occurred, then we got driven to tackle with it, so we had to compete in such state of being on the limit as if on a shoestring.
So for 2016 we created the baseline where you can at least finish the race as starters. Then, we started the season with an idea that we may sacrifice performance to some degree for that. In the winter testing on Feb 2016 which was my first task after being appointed to the leader role, I confirmed with the staffs that, "it wont be too late to make performance update even after confirming the reliability properly first". That's why we didn't introduce new stuffs blindly during the season as well.
-------- Regarding the reliability, how was the reaction of Mclaren like?
For McLaren, it was prerequisite that Honda would improve reliability, so in addition to that, they wouldve wanted us to increase performance as well. Therefore, in 2016 I had quite a lot of argument/quarrel/etc with Ron-san. For instance, at China GP upon the outcome that deficit in engine performance got manifested/highlighted, Ron-san told us "Stop being cautious about reliability, increase the performance more". But you could make such demand only because Honda's reliability improved, so if we had been having troubles in 2016 the same way as 2015, he wouldn't have asked for sth like that, I think.
-------- "had a lot of argument" means you had anything else?
At British GP we introduced token upgrade in intake, but there were some twists and turns regarding the case. New intake was a work of collaboration development with mclaren, so mclaren side as well was aware of how and on what schedule it would be introduced to the race. I cannot disclosed the specific date, but when Ron-san knew that, I got yelled by him like "why on earth does it take long time like that, introduce it earlier!". I explained to him like "there are this many things in the list to be cleared in order to be able to introduce it, so we can only introduce at Silverstone at the earliest", but Ron-san responded like "you can't be serious!". But it's not that Honda were working on it lazily, and regarding the decision of introducing at Silverstone too, we were actually trying to introduce one race earlier than the original/initial schedule. Not only that, we were making effort to introduce it even 2 races earlier at Austria. But due to various issues we couldn't make it in time for Austria, so we introduced at GBGP eventually. It's not like we were doing nothing. Even then, Ron-san was making phone calls each and every race, "ready for next race?" (laughs).
----- So how did you deal with it?
To take reg of 5 PU/season into consideration, you need reliability worth 4 races for 2016, so normally we do not introduce anything unless you confirm it on dyno first, but at that time we intended to introduce it (the new, token-upgraded intake at Siliverstone) as long as it could last just one race. (intake is not a sealed component restricted by 5PU/season rule, same as exhaust manifold etc so it's free to exchange anytime)
Especially after China GP, we had to achieve performance gain as soon as possible, so we were thinking to introduce it even if it can last for only one race. But at that time, there was good chance that it wouldnt have survived even one race. We cannot race properly that way. We as Honda did not intend to introduce something that we cannot be sure will complete the race. We were competing the 2016 season under the promise/conviction that we must not end the race by blowing the engine, so
----- After all you could make Dennis understand it?
Of course he understood it. But Ron-san is very pure person, so he has an aspect that he wouldn't hesitate at all if in order to win. I've worked with Ross Brawn in Honda's 00s F1activity as well and he also had such aspect.
---------- You've managed to improve realiability for 2016 by going through such hardships.
In 2015 we used 12 engines each for 2 drivers in 2015, but in 2016 it was 6 for Jenson, 8 for Fernando. Even then, if not for all those irregular occurrences like the crash in the opening race, we would have had durability enough to go through the season with 5 units in terms of basic quality. Therefore we'd like to give passing mark to us regarding the reliability. But it's merely a self assessment, so compared with rivals we are still behind by quite a margin in reliability side as well. Considering the fact that we still suffered from kind of troubles that stopped session and caused race retirement, we must aim for higher target one more step in 2017. Moreover, we must catch up with rivals in terms of horse power too.
=====================
2017.01.16
http://www.as-web.jp/f1/82011?all
------- Honda in 2016 has not only improved reliability but also gained performance of deployment and power. What has changed from 2015 PU?
I think we were able to achieve improvement of reliability and ERS at quite high level. As a result of that, we were able to achieve going through to Q3, ie the target we couldn't achieve in 2015, which lead to more point scoring results. In terms of improving deployment, we modified turbo first. Then at Belgium GP we updated compressor too. Regarding turbo, we changed the design of blade specifically. In 2015, we had no choice but to make it small in order to house it inside V, but for 2016 we increased the size of the scroll. However, it has got small not because told to do so by mclaren. It's just that we did so because we thought by ourselves it would be better to make it as compact as possible. Therefore we hadn't abandoned the concept of size zero for 2016, and in fact as a comprehensive package, 2016's has got more compact as well as lighter than 2015's. We are going to continue that approach/direction for 2017 too.
------- How about ICE itself?
Regarding engine too, we changed a lot from 2015 to 2016, and stepped up the performance. But compared to the improvement of deployment, we were not able to make satisfactory achievement, that's our honest feeling.
----- What was the issue?
Regarding the technical aspect of improving horse power, we were actually able to make an improvement as expected. For example to put it in lap time, we gained about -0.5sec/lap. We upped the power by that amount (about half a second) from 2015 to 2016, then achieved roughly the same amount of gain throughout 2016 as well. Such an improvement would be impossible in NA era. Annual gain in NA era was like -0.1sec, so.
------ So, what were you not satisfied with?
Because rivals achieved even more power gain than Honda. For instance, quali times of Honda at Melbourne 2016 was faster than Lewis Hamilton's 2015 pole time of 1:26.327, with 1:26.125 by Fernando and 1:26.304 by Jenson. But both cars were unable to make it into Q3... That's the reason why we couldn't get satisfactory outcome.
------- The prospect you had was too optimistic?
At the start of winter testing, while we didn't think we could be champion, we thought we would be able to be bit more competitive. We thought we would be able to obtain decent result as long as you don't retire due to reliability issue. Perhaps even podium. Going to Q3 as well, we thought we would achieve that earlier, but we had to wait until Spain. But unfortunately that was our capability.
----- How about the prospect for 2017?
Towards 2017, we intend to accelerate what we've been doing during 2016 further, rather than change something from 2016, that's the direction. In 2015 which was the first year of challenge, each and every thing was new, so we were in a situation where we'd better keep calm and concentrate on our own task, but in 2016 the level of our staff has been rising, so I'd like to strengthen/extend that aspect.
----- Token system will be abolished in 2017.
In 2017 token system will be removed so that development wont be restricted by token, but token system was not the only reason why Honda is behind rivals. It was also limited by resource and time restrictions. Besides, the number of PU per season will be reduced to 4 in 2017, so even if development will be freed up, the timing of introducing update will be limited to 3 times. That means, I am not thinking we'd simply be able to make more development than 2016 just because it will be token-free. In fact in 2016 we were not able to use all of the tokens available but left it unused
- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
