McLaren race engineering

[fausto cedros]

I think that LH was maybe not that out of the world blaming at the radio race engineering in the first part of the season:
In the last races, he was about to screw it at SPA on the extra lap on slicks, then in monza race engineers chose the least conservative setup when they had to race webber, then in singapore LH was in the situation that he had to try because their engineers were too slow to understand the right moment for the tyre switch. In monza and in this one JB tyre strategies have been at least controversial. I would look for another one than Phil Prew.What do you think?
Regards,

[thestig84]

I think they have been fine.

-Spa - All the leaders went for that extra lap on the slicks, it was the correct decision at the time as the team explained well after if I recall

-The Monza choice was down to LH personal preference.

-Singapore - Both drivers NEVER had the 27 odd second gap over Webber they required. Webber was approaching traffic so they left them out to see if the gap would grow if Webber got held up. When he cleared the traffic fine they pitted. Nothing lost.

Today was Buttons call. Whitmarsh didnt seem convinced but Button said he was more comfortable on the hard tyre. On leaving him out for a while. Im not totally sure why they did but it made little difference. That call would have been made by the strategists back at Woking, noting to do with Phil Prew.

[fausto cedros]

I understand, but I am still not fully convinced, especially over singapore and what have been supposed pilot's choices.
Another thing i cannot fully understand, but it's nothing to do with track management, is the reason why several times the developments brought to the tracks have not been working. I thought that with all the aero data gathered with those strange rakes in pre season testing, it would have been a lot more straightforward. But maybe they are at the beginning of this new parts development philosophy, after all...

[deus1066]

They made a poor choice over Hamilton's gearbox. They could have changed it after Singapore free of charge, but didn't as to avoid running a 4th race gearbox in the last race, on the assumption they'd still be competing in the championship. Instead they left it in, cost him 5 places on the grid, after a very impressive qualification, and then to rub salt in the wounds, the gearbox dropped 3rd gear in the race, possibly necessitating another change. This possibly cost him a podium.

There has been other bizarre choices e.g. pitting Hamilton for tyres in Australia unnecessarily, and Buttons tyre strategy toady.

[marcush.]

I don´t think there was much wrong with Buttons tyre choice today .He did qualify not bad and the one thing that he was not able to do was to stretch out a sufficient lead over the RedBulls when in front to make use of track position.I don´t think he had the speed today to do any better.
Hamilton was well positioned when the gearbox develeoped a malfunction....the original gearbox failure is likely to be friday crash related so if he had used box no4 it would be a write off now.So i think it is just as it panned out for him ..luckily others helped McLaren on a day when they were not on top not to drop too many points.

[deus1066]

Apparently the damage to the gearbox was due to the incident with Webber at the previous race:

"...things got worse when it emerged that McLaren had to change his gearbox, earning him a five-place grid penalty. This, it emerged, was as a result of damage it incurred in Hamilton's race-ending collision with Webber in the previous race in Singapore."
Ref: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/andrewbenson ... nging.html

Makes sense bearing in mind Friday's accident was barely a brush along the barrier compared to a fairly heavy shunt up the drive shaft at Singapore.

I agree with you Button's tyre strategy though.

[marcush.]

If they really misjudged the severity of damage -signed of a part that has received
punishment beyong set limits-their process is obviously lacking ...but from their reliability records this seems to be rather unlikely.I do not buy this .You would not risk anything with a new box still available ,would you?

[feynman]

Makes sense bearing in mind Friday's accident was barely a brush along the barrier compared to a fairly heavy shunt up the drive shaft at Singapore.

Teams generally don't run their race gearbox/engine on Friday, it would be very surprising if they did in Suzuka. The Singapore gearbox clearly passed all the diagnostics they could perfom whilst still sealed, but then gave indications of imminent failure after its FP3 run on Saturday morning.

The question of risk, clearly if they thought it likely to fail they would have taken the free change after the crash ... but with Suzuka already looking like a Red Bull write-off after Friday FP, they obviously hoped that the remaining circuits would prove kinder, and would prefer a newer box for somewhere like Abu Dhabi where they might be closer.

Either way, we saw what happened when the spare box was fitted, failing after half a race, so it doesn't much matter what way they played the Singapore box, whether dropping from a 3rd to 5th or from a 4th to 5th, same bag o' bones.

The rules allow a new gearbox for next race.

[fausto cedros]

For anyone willing to comment:

http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2010/10/b ... the-price/

I still think that race management is responsible for the lost ground in the championships.

[donskar]

For anyone willing to comment:

http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2010/10/b ... the-price/

I still think that race management is responsible for the lost ground in the championships.

Fausto, as a Ferrari fan I think of Mclaren as "The Dark Side." However, there is no denying that they are one of the best managed, best organized, most professional teams on the grid. They have excellent engineering and management personnel -- both on the track and back at HQ. There's no need to look for someone to blame when McLaren loses. They get beaten on occasion by better cars, better drivers, better tactics -- not by any particular incompetence on their team.

[fausto cedros]

Thank you, Donksar, as a McLaren fan i have to say that you've got a point on me, but i still cannot believe the way it's gone from monza on.

[marcush.]

I was one of the advocates of trying to start races on hard rubber this year but somehow this tactic seems to work only for a lowish grid position.
I´m not sure why this is so but it seems to be a case of option tyre not going off enough in most of the races to play into the hands of the prime-option sequence....

[DaveKillens]

If I may offer an alternate strategy to the scenario played out, was that McLaren decided it was too late in the season to support two drivers, and were prepared to sacrifice Button's WDC shot in support of Mr Hamilton. To make this happen, Button chose a strategy that would put him in front of the pack for an extended period, backing up the cars behind, offering Mr Hamilton the maximum opportunity to close with the leaders, and attack.

There appears to be a slight hint that McLaren engineers dropped the ball on not completely checking out the gearbox after the "incident" with Webber. The transmission is a sealed unit, and to break any seals would incur a penalty. The only parts that could be changed are the gear ratios and dog rings, so access to the other components of the transmission while under seal is very difficult. To ship the transmission back to the factory to put it on the test rig would expose the transmission to extra stress and mileage, and the logistics of doing this on a fly-away schedule is taxing.

Sadly, the transmission did slowly fail, and here we are.

[PlatinumZealot]

So Button is weak character then. Even Massa wouldn't submit himself as a sacrificial Lamb. I mean I cannot complain. I believe Button doesn't have what it takes to win the WDC in a situation such as this one we have in 2010, so I fully support the practice of Mclaren supporting the "sniper" out of the two drivers. Right now only "head shots" can get the job done and Hamilton is the man with the 50 cal.

[Sean H]

I doubt a "sniper" shoots himself in the foot as often as LH does.