2014 Austrian Grand Prix - Red Bull Ring

[basti313]

Do any one has the List of how many components each driver has after the Austria GP?

At the twitter account from the Catalan engineer Albert Fabrega, he used to work for Hispania as a team coordinator, he publishes this information at every race. That's because now he's a commentator for the public catalan television TV3.

https://twitter.com/AlbertFabrega/statu ... 1033576448

I thought before the season that ES will be crucial...but this is not a problem at all. I would have never thought about CE being a such problematic device.

[tranquility2k4]

One thing that's frustrating is how Hamilton is consistently saving a lot more fuel than Rosberg, yet he seemingly is not being able to take advatange of this as they both still have to run the same engine settings for "fairness". This in-fact will mean that Hamilton's running with a heavier car. His team don't seem to inform him of this and instead keep asking him to save fuel. I believe it would be fairer if the drivers could run with the maximum engine setting their remaining fuel will allow them to (within reason), so at least this advantage can be measured. It's kind of like having a driver save tyres but then being told to drive to a lap delta and follow the car behind because their tyres are worse.

You're making a big assumption there that Hamilton didn't start with less fuel.

Not to mention that it has nothing to do with "fairness" but with the rules. There is a fuel flow limit after all. So the only way to really capitalize from better fuel mileage is to start lighter.

Wrong. If Hamilton has more fuel left in the car at the end of the race then he could run a more aggressive engine mode that uses more fuel. But Mercedes do not allow this as apparently they must be on the same engine setting at all times, which seems bizzare.

[thomin]

You're making a big assumption there that Hamilton didn't start with less fuel.

Not to mention that it has nothing to do with "fairness" but with the rules. There is a fuel flow limit after all. So the only way to really capitalize from better fuel mileage is to start lighter.

Wrong. If Hamilton has more fuel left in the car at the end of the race then he could run a more aggressive engine mode that uses more fuel. But Mercedes do not allow this as apparently they must be on the same engine setting at all times, which seems bizzare.

It sounds bizarre because it is.

Again. You can't go more aggressive than the fuel flow limit, no matter how much fuel you've got in hand. Just ask Ricciardo.
Secondly, I've never heard that either driver was limited by fuel issues other than in pre-safety car Canada. Nico was upset when Lewis used a more aggressive engine setting during their duel not because he didn't have enough fuel to counter him, he did, but because they agreed to nurse the engine with a more conservative setting. Which brings us to:
Thirdly, there are other limiting factors on these settings, most notably heat and longevity. Just ask Lewis and Nico about Canada.
And lastly, you once again ignore the fact that you don't know with how much fuel each driver started.

In short, you make up your own facts while ignoring reality, no wonder your conclusions sound bizarre.

[WaikeCU]

It sounds bizarre because it is.

Again. You can't go more aggressive than the fuel flow limit, no matter how much fuel you've got in hand. Just ask Ricciardo.
Secondly, I've never heard that either driver was limited by fuel issues other than in pre-safety car Canada. Nico was upset when Lewis used a more aggressive engine setting during their duel not because he didn't have enough fuel to counter him, he did, but because they agreed to nurse the engine with a more conservative setting. Which brings us to:
Thirdly, there are other limiting factors on these settings, most notably heat and longevity. Just ask Lewis and Nico about Canada.
And lastly, you once again ignore the fact that you don't know with how much fuel each driver started.

In short, you make up your own facts while ignoring reality, no wonder your conclusions sound bizarre.

Both cars were informed to run Strat-6 settings to bring the cars home for the last 6 laps I think. Then suddenly they informed their drivers on the last lap to use the overtake button, which was pointless imo.

[Harsha]

Do any one has the List of how many components each driver has after the Austria GP?

At the twitter account from the Catalan engineer Albert Fabrega, he used to work for Hispania as a team coordinator, he publishes this information at every race. That's because now he's a commentator for the public catalan television TV3.

https://twitter.com/AlbertFabrega/statu ... 1033576448

Thanks for the Info mate
Sebastian is clearly had torrid season, He is the only one who used more components overall than any driver and only one more allocated component remains for him except Energy Store He will start to get penalties for each new component.

[thomin]

It sounds bizarre because it is.

Again. You can't go more aggressive than the fuel flow limit, no matter how much fuel you've got in hand. Just ask Ricciardo.
Secondly, I've never heard that either driver was limited by fuel issues other than in pre-safety car Canada. Nico was upset when Lewis used a more aggressive engine setting during their duel not because he didn't have enough fuel to counter him, he did, but because they agreed to nurse the engine with a more conservative setting. Which brings us to:
Thirdly, there are other limiting factors on these settings, most notably heat and longevity. Just ask Lewis and Nico about Canada.
And lastly, you once again ignore the fact that you don't know with how much fuel each driver started.

In short, you make up your own facts while ignoring reality, no wonder your conclusions sound bizarre.

Both cars were informed to run Strat-6 settings to bring the cars home for the last 6 laps I think. Then suddenly they informed their drivers on the last lap to use the overtake button, which was pointless imo.

Again, lots of assumptions going on there.you simply don't know what all that means.

For instance, I understood "strat 6" to be a more aggressive setting that both drivers could use after overcoming the heat issues before.

The overtake button on the other hand is coupled with the electric motor. Once again we're dealing with a different set of limiting factors. It may well be the case that aggressive discharges could hurt the batteries. Furthermore, Austria is a track where the ERS isn't harvesting as much energy per lap as elsewhere, you therefore want to limit the use. Apparently the situation was fine, so the drivers were allowed to use it in the end.

[RZS10]

What is "Sustiucio Gears/Dog" in that list?

[basti313]

You're making a big assumption there that Hamilton didn't start with less fuel.

Not to mention that it has nothing to do with "fairness" but with the rules. There is a fuel flow limit after all. So the only way to really capitalize from better fuel mileage is to start lighter.

Wrong. If Hamilton has more fuel left in the car at the end of the race then he could run a more aggressive engine mode that uses more fuel. But Mercedes do not allow this as apparently they must be on the same engine setting at all times, which seems bizzare.

Wrong. Hamilton was absolutely on the edge with his brakes. There were several team radios reminding him, that his front brake temperatures are too high. A more aggressive engine mode would have resulted in more speed and, thus, would have killed the brakes (again).
They could do nothing but nurse both cars home and keep Hamilton in the range to have a chance to overtake if Rosberg makes a fault.

[Phil]

Well, IMO, Hamilton drove a very strong race yesterday. He effectively made his race on the first lap and then got held back by a Williams for 2/3rds of the race. When both Bottas came in on the first pitstop, you could really see how much quicker Lewis could run until he himself pitted. That in turn got him passed Massa, but not ahead of Bottas.

On the other hand, Rosberg never really got that far ahead of Bottas, which IMO tells me that Rosberg wasn't that comfortable in the car. Perhaps the set-up changes he made on Saturday during Q2 weren't for the better. That Hamilton practically got from running 9th to and within his team-mates DRS on the last lap was nothing short of impressive IMO - although Perez also played into this nicely who clearly held up Nico earlier.

One thing I can agree on is that Hamilton certainly ruined what should (could) have been an easy win for him on Saturday. I don't think Rosberg looked that strong this weekend and I'm sure he'll be very happy to walk away with the win and a 7 point increase to his WDC standings here. This means there will be even more pressure on Hamilton next race to close the gap.

[iotar__]

Wrong. If Hamilton has more fuel left in the car at the end of the race then he could run a more aggressive engine mode that uses more fuel. But Mercedes do not allow this as apparently they must be on the same engine setting at all times, which seems bizzare.

What makes you say that? After Monaco strategy, pitstops, unprecedented dissecting of meaningless first or failed runs in Q (I was faster when I ran wide - who cares? I don't recall anyone given such luxury after failures) and gluing sector times to prove I don't know what another Hamilton non-story subject. IMO (of course and speculating, I didn't really check it):
1. If he does end with more fuel - let's say at least in Austria - it may be reliability related - brakes, cooling problems.
2. These are small differences (? correct me) - 50-48 or sth like that transfer to relatively small lap losses, problem is running out of fuel, changing style during the race (Monaco) and lifting and coasting which leads to:
3. They do it in phases, running in fuel saving mode (they have dozen of those I think) can be managed when you don't lose position/a lot of time, Merc's huge advantage helps. There's some connection to tyres probably and they can spread it over several laps.

So no - being better on fuel helps but does not automatically mean Ham can push boost button and blitz past Rosberg at some stage and only evil Merc rules are preventing that. There's nothing preventing Hamilton attacking when Rosberg has to save fuel or gaining advantage when he leads - I'm sure it happened already many times.

BTW you've got to love local coverage (Sky website): 1. "...at last month’s Monaco GP, when Hamilton failed to back his team-mate after Rosberg ran off the road in qualifying and then claimed they were no longer friends." Yep - he just ran off the road.
2. Pitstops in Austria, you really need to read it all http://www1.skysports.com/f1/news/12433 ... its-damage but highlights: "Hamilton crossing the line 1.9 seconds behind race victor Nico Rosberg - precisely the margin Hamilton lost to his Mercedes team-mate in two tardy pit-stops." "With Hamilton actually within half a second of Rosberg during the final lap before easing off at the final corner, social media was inevitably saturated with conspiracy theories" And later: 'But there was no way past his team-mate thereafter with Hamilton's clear speed advantage over Rosberg blunted by their respective pit-stops with the Englishman's first stop nine tenths slower than the German's and his second a full second worse off. On such small margins are races decided..."

Manipulation on three levels: pitstops, margin towards the end and "clear speed advantage". What clear speed advantage?! What race were they watching? What about pitstop timing for leading driver, traffic etc.? They did mention "marginally over-shot his pit box at his first stop." but without relating to times - full pitlane time, clinging to this 1,9 BS. Of course track position means nothing - Ham wins without bad pitstops. Plus social media and conspiracy theories.

[thomin]

I don't get the British press or the die hard Hamilton fans for that matter. On the one hand, they pretend as if Hamilton is Senna's second coming and that everything he touches turns to gold, on the other they're quick to rip him apart in the most mean spirited way once he does make a mistake, behaves stupidly or simply has a bad run.
Same is true for football: If you expect Rooney to carry England to victory at the World Cup, you'll equally rip him apart if he doesn't deliver.

A little moderation would do wonders at times. Hamilton had a great race at Austria and he made the most of his bad position after his error in qualifying. But he wasn't driving in his own league, Rosberg was just as quick and controlled the gap nicely till the last lap. Everytime Hamilton got closer, Rosberg answered by pulling away in order to keep Ham out of the DRS window.

You see, once you have realistic expectations, you don't need conspiracy theories or some cosmic injustice in order to explain what happened.
Like: "Hamilton is a fine driver, one of the quickest in the field, but so is Rosberg." There, problem solved, no need to go to great lengths coming up with rationalizations why an inferior driver would win in Austria.

[RicerDude]

What is "Sustiucio Gears/Dog" in that list?

Replacement dog rings/ gear ratios.

[komninosm]

That first pit stop wouldn't have changed anything. Lewis wouldn't have gotten the undercut on the second stop, so if anything he could have fallen behind Bottas if Williams were to cover for Nico's second stop and thereby undercut Lewis. Granted, that's an unlikely scenario, but even so, the gap would have been comparable to what we ended up with.


Nico was just asked whether he was on the edge in that last lap and he replied that he wasn't at all. He was on the couple of laps before that where he fought to keep Lewis out of the DRS range, but he said that on that last lap, he knew that Lewis was in no position to overtake him, as there are only three corners to try and do so and Lewis wasn't close enough to give it a go.

You're imagining things if you think Williams could keep up with Mercedes once they go ahead (Rosberg was toying with Perez to keep his DRS and give DRS to Williams so Hamilton could not pass them.)
What would happen if Hamilton had a better first pitstop is he would come out ahead of Bottas and start pressuring Rosberg right from there. After Perez got out of the way Rosberg would have no DRS and Hamilton would wear him down.

What Nico actually said was that in the last lap his tires started becoming quite a bit less efficient, but he wasn't worried because there were only 3 turns and Hamilton could not pass him. He did not say he was not on the edge. In fact if Hamilton had pressured him a lot longer (if he had a better first pitstop as above) it's reasonable to assume Rosberg would have used up his tires a lot more and maybe even made more mistakes in the end and got passed. He already made a big mistake once in the race and got off track. If Hamilton was behind him in such a mistake he would overtake for sure.
This is how an unbiased analysis is made.

[basti313]

This is how an unbiased analysis is made.

=D>

So if Hamilton is driving long enough behind Rosberg the unbiased analysis will always state that Hamilton will finish first.
All you have doubts in Hamilton: How hard can it be? Why don't you get it?

[thomin]

That first pit stop wouldn't have changed anything. Lewis wouldn't have gotten the undercut on the second stop, so if anything he could have fallen behind Bottas if Williams were to cover for Nico's second stop and thereby undercut Lewis. Granted, that's an unlikely scenario, but even so, the gap would have been comparable to what we ended up with.


Nico was just asked whether he was on the edge in that last lap and he replied that he wasn't at all. He was on the couple of laps before that where he fought to keep Lewis out of the DRS range, but he said that on that last lap, he knew that Lewis was in no position to overtake him, as there are only three corners to try and do so and Lewis wasn't close enough to give it a go.

You're imagining things if you think Williams could keep up with Mercedes once they go ahead (Rosberg was toying with Perez to keep his DRS and give DRS to Williams so Hamilton could not pass them.)
What would happen if Hamilton had a better first pitstop is he would come out ahead of Bottas and start pressuring Rosberg right from there. After Perez got out of the way Rosberg would have no DRS and Hamilton would wear him down.

What Nico actually said was that in the last lap his tires started becoming quite a bit less efficient, but he wasn't worried because there were only 3 turns and Hamilton could not pass him. He did not say he was not on the edge. In fact if Hamilton had pressured him a lot longer (if he had a better first pitstop as above) it's reasonable to assume Rosberg would have used up his tires a lot more and maybe even made more mistakes in the end and got passed. He already made a big mistake once in the race and got off track. If Hamilton was behind him in such a mistake he would overtake for sure.
This is how an unbiased analysis is made.

I explicitly called it an unlikely scenario, so I don't understand you focusing on that.

However, you're too quick in dismissing Perez. He set the pace for Rosberg and Bottas and Hamilton couldn't pass either of them, so what makes you think he could have passed Perez? Or Rosberg for that matter?

But even if Lewis could have put more pressure on Nico than Bottas did (big if) during their second stint, I don't see how that would have changed anything. At best there would have been an outside chance but given the performances over the year so far, I just don't see it. We have seen both drivers pressure one another at various stages and so far we haven't seen one successful overtaking maneuver.

I mean the third stint is the best indicator. Nico managed the gap and kept it above 1s until the very last lap. Why would the second stint have been any different?