2024 Aston Martin | Aramco F1 Team

[makecry]

My first voice of concern was way before AMR23’s downturn and that was in form of one of the early statements that were made. One of the statement was they were surprised with how easy the initial gains were. I remember saying that concerns me because that seems like they fluked into it without having an understanding of it. Here we are.

I don’t think they know what’s really going on.

[diffuser]

You correlate your CFD with wind tunnel data, until you can get on track data.

If your wind tunnel is wrong, your code will be wrong as well.

I don't think the wind tunnel is ever wrong? It's the interpretation of the wind tunnel data by a human that is fed into the CFD that can be wrong.

Seems like someone in the factory messed up the variables..

From what I've read, it isn't that easy .....

The combination of wind tunnels and CFD is often used to validate the accuracy of CFD simulations. Wind tunnel testing provides a physical representation of the airflow around an object, while CFD simulations provide a numerical representation. Like any test, a wind tunnel test can be flawed by not controlling all the variables or other reasons. CFD, on the other hand, is a numerical method that uses algorithms and equations to simulate the behavior of fluids. Someone has to build these CFD models, the floor aero is relatively new to F1, so that increases the chances of the models/algorithms/equations of being flawed as well. Engineers can then compare the results of the two methods, validate the accuracy of their CFD simulations and ensure that their designs are aerodynamically optimal.

[diffuser]

My first voice of concern was way before AMR23’s downturn and that was in form of one of the early statements that were made. One of the statement was they were surprised with how easy the initial gains were. I remember saying that concerns me because that seems like they fluked into it without having an understanding of it. Here we are.

I don’t think they know what’s really going on.

Why do they not seem to have problem with off season upgrades, that this only happens with in season upgrades? Is it not the same people ? Do they skip steps in season ?

[makecry]

My first voice of concern was way before AMR23’s downturn and that was in form of one of the early statements that were made. One of the statement was they were surprised with how easy the initial gains were. I remember saying that concerns me because that seems like they fluked into it without having an understanding of it. Here we are.

I don’t think they know what’s really going on.

Why do they not seem to have problem with off season upgrades, that this only happens with in season upgrades? Is it not the same people ? Do they skip steps in season ?

They said Imola package was a response to findings of preseason testing. Makes you wonder. Is the data acquired from track of poor quality or has issues with accuracy?

They have the most performance upgrades this season. Why is the car falling back then? What is it that's causing the parts to not work? To me that looks like a clear disconnect between what their simulation tools are showing and what's actually happening on the track.

[wiktor977]

Doesn’t AM share Mercedes wind tunnel?

It seems Mclaren has taken a leap forward with correlation with their own wind tunnel.

Not saying a correlation = causation, but the two teams sharing the same WT do seem to be struggling with correlation.

McLaren developed the 2023 car (including the major upgrades later in the season) in the old Toyota wind tunnel. Even their 2024 car was conceived using the old tunnel, even though upgrades for this car will likely come from parts tested in their new wind tunnel.

However, it is their 2025 car that will be fully developed (from the get-go) with their in-house wind tunnel.

Anyway, if the correlation is good, the wind tunnel is not a major limitation. RedBull is currently using an archaic tunnel compared to the competition, but clearly that's not holding them back.

For McLaren, the biggest benefit to having the wind tunnel at their factory comes in form of logistics. It's way less efficient to ship parts back and forth from Woking to Cologne, but of course, you can't mitigate the benefits of newer technology. For sure they are getting some benefit from the modern facilities.

You correlate your CFD with wind tunnel data, until you can get on track data.

If your wind tunnel is wrong, your code will be wrong as well.

True. But Mercedes gives their own facility but not software and computing power to work on data you get from wind tunnel

[wiktor977]

Any hope that Aston click at Monaco in a specialist slower speed circuit?

Struggling to read their car this season, last year looked like it was a very good car out of the box with mechanical grip but not the high speed efficiency of RBR.

This season they have seemed a little lost in finding their direction and gains, lots of talk saying they designed an SF23 where there was one lap pace but zero race pace.

Although that seemed to disappear a little the last couple of races, I thought it may give them a small window oto surprise at Monaco quali.

The sf23 was the best car in qualifying several times, the Aston was maximum the third fastest car in qualifying. Having said that, Monaco should help, but I don't see a qualifying in the top 5, considering the strength of McLaren in the slow and also of Mercedes lately. Let's hope so

Alonso said the car was hard to drive. That usually equals ¨Death nail" at Monaco. Add to that how bad the car was in slow corners @ Imola

They need to figure something out before next Saturday, so there is always hope. On the positive side they finished ahead of both 6th place team cars.

Remember that Monaco is max downforce set-up track. Also, Imola was surprisingly bumpy so cars had to run stiffer to stop bottoming out, stiff car is bad in slow corners even more, if you add big kerbs like at turns 14 and 15.

[Farnborough]

McLaren developed the 2023 car (including the major upgrades later in the season) in the old Toyota wind tunnel. Even their 2024 car was conceived using the old tunnel, even though upgrades for this car will likely come from parts tested in their new wind tunnel.

However, it is their 2025 car that will be fully developed (from the get-go) with their in-house wind tunnel.

Anyway, if the correlation is good, the wind tunnel is not a major limitation. RedBull is currently using an archaic tunnel compared to the competition, but clearly that's not holding them back.

For McLaren, the biggest benefit to having the wind tunnel at their factory comes in form of logistics. It's way less efficient to ship parts back and forth from Woking to Cologne, but of course, you can't mitigate the benefits of newer technology. For sure they are getting some benefit from the modern facilities.

You correlate your CFD with wind tunnel data, until you can get on track data.

If your wind tunnel is wrong, your code will be wrong as well.

True. But Mercedes gives their own facility but not software and computing power to work on data you get from wind tunnel

It does appear that both team start with concept, ultimately to then corrupt the platform they are running

Looks more suspicious the more it happens .... that something in common is not accurately accounted for. This not a conspiracy theory, more observation of pure common cause, or a potential one.

The PU check across in McL validates it's relative parity against two other successful unit too.

The AMR & MB development cycle APPEARS to be feeding backwards from track actuality, as opposed to development stream pushing both forward into realising conceptual gains.
Like the race team is leading the development cycle as opposed to optimisation of good design gains.

[xReVo]

The sf23 was the best car in qualifying several times, the Aston was maximum the third fastest car in qualifying. Having said that, Monaco should help, but I don't see a qualifying in the top 5, considering the strength of McLaren in the slow and also of Mercedes lately. Let's hope so

Alonso said the car was hard to drive. That usually equals ¨Death nail" at Monaco. Add to that how bad the car was in slow corners @ Imola

They need to figure something out before next Saturday, so there is always hope. On the positive side they finished ahead of both 6th place team cars.

Remember that Monaco is max downforce set-up track. Also, Imola was surprisingly bumpy so cars had to run stiffer to stop bottoming out, stiff car is bad in slow corners even more, if you add big kerbs like at turns 14 and 15.

Yes, but also remember that the suspensions were stiff for a setup in favor of race pace, so they could make a setup that greatly benefits qualifying and play on that.

[xReVo]

You correlate your CFD with wind tunnel data, until you can get on track data.

If your wind tunnel is wrong, your code will be wrong as well.

True. But Mercedes gives their own facility but not software and computing power to work on data you get from wind tunnel

It does appear that both team start with concept, ultimately to then corrupt the platform they are running

Looks more suspicious the more it happens .... that something in common is not accurately accounted for. This not a conspiracy theory, more observation of pure common cause, or a potential one.

The PU check across in McL validates it's relative parity against two other successful unit too.

The AMR & MB development cycle APPEARS to be feeding backwards from track actuality, as opposed to development stream pushing both forward into realising conceptual gains.
Like the race team is leading the development cycle as opposed to optimisation of good design gains.

Last year I read an official article, in which half the team was busy developing the car while the other half was busy designing the following year's car. Consequently, I think this is precisely the problem at this point. That team that takes care of the updates needs to be reviewed

[Redragon]

Fisrt Alo lap on Q have to be aborted for lack of fuel and a mistake from the team.

About development. It feels that they are trying to overcome the limits of that rear suspension.

Definitely were o. The right path as many teams adopted their design and philosophy. Eg McLaren. Now they are ahead. The difference is McLaren designs their own suspension. Let’s see where they are when they have their own wind tunnel, own suspensions, gear and honda engine.

[Nikosar]

Last year Alonso was absolutely flying in Monaco. He missed pole by 0,085 sec & his message was :

Alonso: "Well done guys. Don’t be disappointed, this is magic." He had strong faith in car development. A year later it will be a miracle if get to Q3...

Sources are saying that they will have a new package for Monaco, will it be a new one or a "correction" of the Imola one we will see. Other sources say a package will be available for Canada before Barcelona.

Krack said after Imola : "Dan talked about aggressive evolution and that's necessary if we want to gain ground. We have to take risks. We won't go backwards, we need to understand how to make these parts work."

They seems to have confidence in the package and see it a high risk to get a high reward. But honestly I was very optimistic until Imola, now I don't buy anything they say.

Forecast say Saturday is the day with the highest chances of rain

[OnEcRiTiCaL]

Fisrt Alo lap on Q have to be aborted for lack of fuel and a mistake from the team.

About development. It feels that they are trying to overcome the limits of that rear suspension.

Definitely were o. The right path as many teams adopted their design and philosophy. Eg McLaren. Now they are ahead. The difference is McLaren designs their own suspension. Let’s see where they are when they have their own wind tunnel, own suspensions, gear and honda engine.

Guys could we just leave alone the Mercedes suspension at least till we are not fast as Mercedes? Everybody pushing this bulls**it. If really this would be a problem,then they should to know what causes it in the suspension so they after Bahrain test could make their own design or adjustment or even looking up an outside company who manufacturers it for them. Obviously they have tyres problem and low downforce just make it even worse. Luckily Monaco is coming where the mechanical grip is a high factor so we can see how doing there the Mercedes rear suspension.

[diffuser]

True. But Mercedes gives their own facility but not software and computing power to work on data you get from wind tunnel

It does appear that both team start with concept, ultimately to then corrupt the platform they are running

Looks more suspicious the more it happens .... that something in common is not accurately accounted for. This not a conspiracy theory, more observation of pure common cause, or a potential one.

The PU check across in McL validates it's relative parity against two other successful unit too.

The AMR & MB development cycle APPEARS to be feeding backwards from track actuality, as opposed to development stream pushing both forward into realising conceptual gains.
Like the race team is leading the development cycle as opposed to optimisation of good design gains.

Last year I read an official article, in which half the team was busy developing the car while the other half was busy designing the following year's car. Consequently, I think this is precisely the problem at this point. That team that takes care of the updates needs to be reviewed

I can't speak for how it works specifically at AMR but I've read that it is common practice to have 2 teams and sometimes 3 teams. I read that Bob Bell was hired to head up a 3ird team for 2026 car.

Generally the year Starts with the Current year car having everyone in it, All the resources.
At some point, around now, the next year's car team get's started with maybe 4 or 5 people.
Gradually, as we get deeper into the season more and more design people move to the new car. By September or October most if not all of design team has move to the New car.
Manufacturing just keeps humming along, as designs/tasks for the current year car run out, it picks up manufacturing tasks for the new car.
Generally, year in year out, it's not the same people staying and the same people moving.

I'm not saying that isn't or is the problem. just the way it is. In either case this would fall under both Luca Furbatto an Dan Fallows responsibility.

[makecry]

Last year Alonso was absolutely flying in Monaco. He missed pole by 0,085 sec & his message was :

Alonso: "Well done guys. Don’t be disappointed, this is magic." He had strong faith in car development. A year later it will be a miracle if get to Q3...

Sources are saying that they will have a new package for Monaco, will it be a new one or a "correction" of the Imola one we will see. Other sources say a package will be available for Canada before Barcelona.

Krack said after Imola : "Dan talked about aggressive evolution and that's necessary if we want to gain ground. We have to take risks. We won't go backwards, we need to understand how to make these parts work."

They seems to have confidence in the package and see it a high risk to get a high reward. But honestly I was very optimistic until Imola, now I don't buy anything they say.

Forecast say Saturday is the day with the highest chances of rain

You can’t have a correction package ready in 5 days. This isn’t magic fairy land.

[AR3-GP]

I find it strange that Alonso says it's hard to drive while Stroll is happy as a clam.