Alfa Romeo C39 Speculation Thread

A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter does not belong here.
saviour stivala
saviour stivala
-18
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 11:54 am

Re: Alfa Romeo C39 Speculation Thread

Post

Big Tea wrote:
Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:32 pm
saviour stivala wrote:
Mon Dec 23, 2019 9:40 pm
aral wrote:
Sat Dec 21, 2019 1:50 pm
Really, it is no big deal. Expensive yes, but every year, there are a number of crash test failures with all the teams
I couldn't understand the fuss about this crash-test fail. its not like its happened for the first time.
The important thing is 'how' it failed, which we are not being told. If it is simply outside the limit of deflection, not a problem, but if it involves 'curves not meeting the calculated strength' or similar, or shattering of some sort it could be very time expensive.
The two ends are probably a month apart in damage.
Have you or anybody following F1 ever been told how and why (details) a crash test had failed?.

User avatar
Big Tea
74
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2017 7:57 pm

Re: Alfa Romeo C39 Speculation Thread

Post

saviour stivala wrote:
Tue Dec 24, 2019 5:59 am
Big Tea wrote:
Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:32 pm
saviour stivala wrote:
Mon Dec 23, 2019 9:40 pm


I couldn't understand the fuss about this crash-test fail. its not like its happened for the first time.
The important thing is 'how' it failed, which we are not being told. If it is simply outside the limit of deflection, not a problem, but if it involves 'curves not meeting the calculated strength' or similar, or shattering of some sort it could be very time expensive.
The two ends are probably a month apart in damage.
Have you or anybody following F1 ever been told how and why (details) a crash test had failed?.
No, but it does not change the statement (Does it?)
Its always speculation
One test is worth a thousand expert opinions

aral
aral
Moderator
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 9:49 pm

Re: Alfa Romeo C39 Speculation Thread

Post

But rather pointless speculation ! why create suspicion etc when you have no actual information?

User avatar
Big Tea
74
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2017 7:57 pm

Re: Alfa Romeo C39 Speculation Thread

Post

aral wrote:
Tue Dec 24, 2019 2:36 pm
But rather pointless speculation ! why create suspicion etc when you have no actual information?
How is that creating suspicion?
I just remarked that the manner of the fail can mean little or a serious problem. I have not suggested that it is either.
One test is worth a thousand expert opinions

User avatar
FrukostScones
187
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 4:41 pm
Location: European Union

Re: Alfa Romeo C39 Speculation Thread

Post

I d say they failed with Merc style nose as Ferrari Guineapig.

Lets see how many layers they need to add. Front heavy ughhh?
Finishing races is important, but racing is more important.

cramr
cramr
8
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 7:51 am

Re: Alfa Romeo C39 Speculation Thread

Post

FrukostScones wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 8:51 pm
I d say they failed with Merc style nose as Ferrari Guineapig.
That makes no sense. Ferrari has more than enough resources to "guineapig" themself and not push a smaller more limited team to do it.
Also, it says that the chassis test failed, not the nose crash test

User avatar
ESPImperium
119
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 11:08 pm
Location: Glasgow, Scotland

Re: Alfa Romeo C39 Speculation Thread

Post

Been out of F1 over Christmas, wanted a few weeks without F1 this winter.

As i see it, the chassis and nose passed all the tests, but one, the one that was added at the start of 2018 i think. That one is the chassis and nose being propelled to a surface that is at a 45 degree angle to the chassis and its pad it is on for testing. It has completely destroyed the chassis from the bulkhead to the cockpit entry. This will really hamper the team as chassis number 1 is gone, a €875,000 cost for the chassis and the nose at maybe €55,000 as a guess, this will be costly financially to the team as well as well as in lost development.

The guys there would need to be putting in work over the festive season when other teams may have a bit more time off. All this overtime will cost the team financially as well. The last chassis to fail pre season was the Lotus E21, it was an easy fix, an extra couple of layers of carbon fibre and it passed, with a weight penalty of 550 grammes from what i heard, an extra 550 grammes that somehow aided the E21s weight distribution and centre of gravity as well as it was a lower portion of the chassis.

If this is bad, id suggest the Alfa Romeo guys may have to start with last years cars. Sauber did do this before in 2015 in pre season testing as a stop gap.

It's bad, but not as bad as what it could be, you could pass all the tests and turn up with a power unit that's just utter garbage, like McLaren in 2015 and worse in 2017, or you could have a car not even turn up whatsoever for the first couple days of testing, like Williams last year. Ill even say it could be HRT bad, but ill not go there.

User avatar
FrukostScones
187
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 4:41 pm
Location: European Union

Re: Alfa Romeo C39 Speculation Thread

Post

ESPImperium wrote:
Mon Jan 06, 2020 9:01 pm
Been out of F1 over Christmas, wanted a few weeks without F1 this winter.

As i see it, the chassis and nose passed all the tests, but one, the one that was added at the start of 2018 i think. That one is the chassis and nose being propelled to a surface that is at a 45 degree angle to the chassis and its pad it is on for testing. It has completely destroyed the chassis from the bulkhead to the cockpit entry. This will really hamper the team as chassis number 1 is gone, a €875,000 cost for the chassis and the nose at maybe €55,000 as a guess, this will be costly financially to the team as well as well as in lost development.

The guys there would need to be putting in work over the festive season when other teams may have a bit more time off. All this overtime will cost the team financially as well. The last chassis to fail pre season was the Lotus E21, it was an easy fix, an extra couple of layers of carbon fibre and it passed, with a weight penalty of 550 grammes from what i heard, an extra 550 grammes that somehow aided the E21s weight distribution and centre of gravity as well as it was a lower portion of the chassis.

If this is bad, id suggest the Alfa Romeo guys may have to start with last years cars. Sauber did do this before in 2015 in pre season testing as a stop gap.

It's bad, but not as bad as what it could be, you could pass all the tests and turn up with a power unit that's just utter garbage, like McLaren in 2015 and worse in 2017, or you could have a car not even turn up whatsoever for the first couple days of testing, like Williams last year. Ill even say it could be HRT bad, but ill not go there.
which test from 2020 regulations you refer to? which paragraph?
Finishing races is important, but racing is more important.

User avatar
ESPImperium
119
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 11:08 pm
Location: Glasgow, Scotland

Re: Alfa Romeo C39 Speculation Thread

Post

FrukostScones wrote:
Thu Jan 09, 2020 6:52 pm
ESPImperium wrote:
Mon Jan 06, 2020 9:01 pm
Been out of F1 over Christmas, wanted a few weeks without F1 this winter.

As i see it, the chassis and nose passed all the tests, but one, the one that was added at the start of 2018 i think. That one is the chassis and nose being propelled to a surface that is at a 45 degree angle to the chassis and its pad it is on for testing. It has completely destroyed the chassis from the bulkhead to the cockpit entry. This will really hamper the team as chassis number 1 is gone, a €875,000 cost for the chassis and the nose at maybe €55,000 as a guess, this will be costly financially to the team as well as well as in lost development.

The guys there would need to be putting in work over the festive season when other teams may have a bit more time off. All this overtime will cost the team financially as well. The last chassis to fail pre season was the Lotus E21, it was an easy fix, an extra couple of layers of carbon fibre and it passed, with a weight penalty of 550 grammes from what i heard, an extra 550 grammes that somehow aided the E21s weight distribution and centre of gravity as well as it was a lower portion of the chassis.

If this is bad, id suggest the Alfa Romeo guys may have to start with last years cars. Sauber did do this before in 2015 in pre season testing as a stop gap.

It's bad, but not as bad as what it could be, you could pass all the tests and turn up with a power unit that's just utter garbage, like McLaren in 2015 and worse in 2017, or you could have a car not even turn up whatsoever for the first couple days of testing, like Williams last year. Ill even say it could be HRT bad, but ill not go there.
which test from 2020 regulations you refer to? which paragraph?
The test they failed was the test where the chassis with nosecone attached, is fired at a static object that is lying at a 45 degree angle to the car. Not the one where the car is fired at a static object that is lying at a flat angle to the car. They past that one, just not the 45 degree angle one.

User avatar
ScrewCaptain27
524
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2017 12:13 am
Location: Udine, Italy

Re: Alfa Romeo C39 Speculation Thread

Post

Crash test passed with “minimal modifications” according to Motorsport.com
Link (Italian) :https://it.motorsport.com/f1/news/alfa- ... k/4658086/
"Stupid people do stupid things. Smart people outsmart each other, then themselves."
- Serj Tankian

User avatar
FrukostScones
187
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 4:41 pm
Location: European Union

Re: Alfa Romeo C39 Speculation Thread

Post

ScrewCaptain27 wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 12:56 pm
Crash test passed with “minimal modifications” according to Motorsport.com
Link (Italian) :https://it.motorsport.com/f1/news/alfa- ... k/4658086/
https://translate.google.com/translate? ... 4658086%2F

So the extreme nose concept was the cause,

according to the article.
Finishing races is important, but racing is more important.

User avatar
Morteza
2006
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 5:23 pm
Location: Bushehr, Iran

Re: Alfa Romeo C39 Speculation Thread

Post

"A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool."~William Shakespeare

User avatar
Holm86
208
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:37 am
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Re: Alfa Romeo C39 Speculation Thread

Post

All the workers clothes still says Sauber??

User avatar
jjn9128
264
Joined: Tue May 02, 2017 10:53 pm

Re: Alfa Romeo C39 Speculation Thread

Post

Holm86 wrote:
Fri Feb 07, 2020 12:55 pm
All the workers clothes still says Sauber??
The company is still called Sauber as homage to Peter Sauber, the race team is Alfa Romeo... it's one of those quirks of F1 the company and team are often separate to protect bosses from repercussions.
It is not strictly an out-and-out factory operation, as Sauber's ownership and management remain unchanged and independent of Alfa.
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14127 ... meo-racing
#aerogandalf

User avatar
Holm86
208
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:37 am
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Re: Alfa Romeo C39 Speculation Thread

Post

jjn9128 wrote:
Fri Feb 07, 2020 1:00 pm
Holm86 wrote:
Fri Feb 07, 2020 12:55 pm
All the workers clothes still says Sauber??
The company is still called Sauber as homage to Peter Sauber, the race team is Alfa Romeo... it's one of those quirks of F1 the company and team are often separate to protect bosses from repercussions.
It is not strictly an out-and-out factory operation, as Sauber's ownership and management remain unchanged and independent of Alfa.
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14127 ... meo-racing
Ahh okay, thank you :-)