I've heard it said that Lewis does some pretty balls-out quali laps, but having somewhere specific on the floor to strap his "lunch box" is a new one on me.Coefficient wrote: ↑26 Feb 2019, 18:41Yeah, at this rate next it'll just have an empty floor with Lewis' lunch box fastened to it.
No, they didn't, not at all, which is why he's laughing.pantherxxx wrote: ↑26 Feb 2019, 19:05My assumption was based on the fact that last year the same thing happened with Mclaren in the winter tests. They built a spec A chassis which wasn't fast enough, and soon the B spec came into the picture.
Read his post again, we all know this is not doable in weekend time, he posted in January...
Bunch of jokers.Coefficient wrote: ↑26 Feb 2019, 18:36There is an interesting nugget in that video where they state that there are in the region of 1500 components in the update which I think settles the debate as to whether this was planned or panic driven.Just_a_fan wrote: ↑26 Feb 2019, 18:265 minutes of my life I won't get back. That video is a waste of time, to be honest. You'll get more from reading posts on here.Wynters wrote: ↑26 Feb 2019, 18:08Autosport commentary on the update package
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHJ07PQJRFM
Not having a go at you, by the way, just the Autosport stuff these days is pretty hand-wavy guff mostly.
ALL the cars you see in Melbourne will look different to those used at testing, it's the same for every team every year !pantherxxx wrote: ↑26 Feb 2019, 19:05You don't support your opinion with arguments. My assumption was based on the fact that last year the same thing happened with Mclaren. They built a spec A chassis which wasn't fast enough, and soon the B spec came into the picture. This may mean that development has gone in the wrong direction, which they could have noticed in January. Of course, AMUS says that it's just a basic package which was necessary for further development, but I'm still skeptical. I'm not buying the "Mercedes needed more time in the wind tunnel" story. And before you say it is just speculation, the truth is that everything is just speculation here.
Oh I know. I mentioned that they were present in the first week of testing. They just disappeared from the RW at various times (looking at some of the photos from the first week).Just_a_fan wrote: ↑26 Feb 2019, 21:21The strakes were there previously:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DzSmWhcX4AURoO6.jpg
I tend to be in agreement with your assessment. Great explanation, btw.jjn9128 wrote: ↑26 Feb 2019, 15:58Slots in an aerofoil work a number of ways, one of which is to introduce a fresh boundary layer - so after the slot the air flow is laminar, the pressure gradients on such high camber aerofoils is so extreme (the rear of the flap is almost vertical) that the air then transitions back to turbulence and even separates toward the trailing edge. The separation is not a bad thing necessarily and wont mean any loss of downforce, it just indicates that it is being worked to the absolute limit.
A leading edge separation on the other hand would be catastrophic.
Or they already planned this change and had the internals laid out correctly for this but just went with a more conservative cooling solution for the first week of testingUnc1eM0nty wrote: ↑26 Feb 2019, 15:55As has been said already these parts must have been many weeks if not months in the making.
It's the changes to the rear of the sidepod that strikes me most though, this must have cased an awfull lot of work, all the plumbing and internals would need to be re-routed and re-positioned to fit this new profile, that's tons of work right there.
