Mercedes AMG F1 Team 2012

[turbof1]

I've seen what marcush is talking about. A good leader joining a dysfunctional team will have a catalytic effect to unlock the latent potential of that team, or knock sense into those who need it.

Admittedly it'd take some time to filter through the design and manufacturing processes, but you should be able to see it rapidly taking place in the day to day activities and communications. For example, the excuses for poor performance that sound like "the dog ate my homework" would stop.

A good leader: absolutely agreed. Though I am not sure he was talking about a person with a leader function. I think he was talking more about a competent engineer that could bring in fresh aerodynamical/mechanical/... ideas. Still different from a leader and as a team and as that person you need to be very carefull with introducing someone like that as a leader in a malcontent and dysfunctional team: if he gives the idea he's in charge and orders are there to do his bidding, he will never be accepted. Someone like that, even if he was taking in for a leading job, first needs to be an equal to the others.
IMO the best leader you can have is one that actually does not participate actively into the subjects, but the one that keeps steering the topic back to the subject and keeps track of all the ideas and notes them down. One also that get the spirit into the group. In a dysfunctional team that will take time.

Believe me, people always say Newey made Red Bull what they are today, and he certainly had an impact, but he too had to fit in such a business model in order to get Red Bull succesfull.

This.

Come on, Newey is not the guy looking for loopholes each and everytime: he is being given far too much credit IMO. I actually feel sorry for the fellow employees in that team, who are not lauded in the same picture.

Fact of the matter is, a successful team needs to be successful in every single area. This is not the case at MGP. In contrast, Ferrari have managed to turn their season around with rapid development; quite a very difficult picture at Maranello.

Who knows: the secret of Newey might not even at all his knowledge about aero. He might be just as well that person that can get a team work tightly together and generate the solutions he was looking for.

[marcush.]

to deviate a bit far from the MGP theme-sorry for that- you completely misunderstand neweys position and his strength.
Newey is not integrated within any of the teams he has worked in .He pretty much is the lone cowboy coming up with a weird pack of drawings dropped on the CAD guys desk with the short message-scan those in and create CAD Data from it...
It´s really what you would call reverse engineering ..but from paper drawings.
To me he is just an independend genius and this very much showed when he changed from team to team.I´m not even sure if the design team really understands all of his ideas ..RedBull has a very much indepenend design team from Newey who is in my view conceptualising the main layout and giving general design directives to the team by handing down the concept drawings..his way of communication..
I´d think other team leaders would take a more vocal or written approach to communicate the design directives for the project.

[marcush.]

What´s missing with MGP?
In short: lack of performance.
correct analysis of their own and the compettions situation and defining /executing the correct counter measurements
pursuing the important(performance relevant )developments and sorting out the ideas that just cost money but don´t differntiate in terms of lap time
I have the feeling MGP tries too often to hide their own shortcomings behind things they cannot really influence.(tyres)
Remarkably they have taken weird decisions in car design every year now -perhaps in the state of mind to find THAT unfair advantage again -as with Doubledeckdiffussers but in everything else they are very much a conservative team almost always going with the flow when it comes to startegies for example.
Would the right leader make an instant impact ? who knows
Would some bright lead engineers change the situation? absolutely.
Ferrari just kept their head down and brilliantly got on top of their moron in a very short time.They are the best example that for not accepting defeat and working your way out of the mud.

[SeijaKessen]

What´s missing with MGP?
In short: lack of performance.
correct analysis of their own and the compettions situation and defining /executing the correct counter measurements
pursuing the important(performance relevant )developments and sorting out the ideas that just cost money but don´t differntiate in terms of lap time
I have the feeling MGP tries too often to hide their own shortcomings behind things they cannot really influence.(tyres)
Remarkably they have taken weird decisions in car design every year now -perhaps in the state of mind to find THAT unfair advantage again -as with Doubledeckdiffussers but in everything else they are very much a conservative team almost always going with the flow when it comes to startegies for example.
Would the right leader make an instant impact ? who knows
Would some bright lead engineers change the situation? absolutely.
Ferrari just kept their head down and brilliantly got on top of their moron in a very short time.They are the best example that for not accepting defeat and working your way out of the mud.

You'd think with Ross's expertise at the Scuderia, he would know how to get everyone to keep their head down and working out of the mud.

Of course that implies Ross actually had any expertise to begin with.

Sadly to say, we're almost 2 weeks away from Belgium, so we'll know for sure come Friday practice, whether or not the W03 is nothing more than a midfield car for the duration of the season.

Looking for the magic bullet ala double diffusers is something that they may be looking for well into 2013. Given the restrictions nowadays, the magic bullet is a lot harder to find. To be honest, I'm not even sure there is one left to be had any longer within the current rule book.

[elf341]

I think they said they had a big upgrade coming in the second half of the season.
I doubt they will have it by Belgium. I think they will aim for Japan, since Schumacher is a bit of a Suzuka specialist, and the circuit suited the characteristics of the W01/W02.

That said, I think Brackley would benefit from releasing upgrades when and as they come out of the sausage factory. This car needs more drag-efficient downforce. Pirelli just as much said it the other day when they talked about the double-diffuser enhanced R30 not showing the "critical tyre window" problem as these 2012 cars do. Finding drag-efficient downforce is an traditional vector for performance improvement, with supposedly vanilla/rote development in the windtunnel yielding one tenth every two weeks. This should not be hard.

Mercedes should take a page out of Red Bull's book, and cheat - they could have some windtunnel hidden away in Daimler's huge and searchless infrastructure churning away over the summer break, giving a handy 2 tenths in the bag.

[zyphro]

Mercedes should take a page out of Red Bull's book, and cheat - they could have some windtunnel hidden away in Daimler's huge and searchless infrastructure churning away over the summer break, giving a handy 2 tenths in the bag.

I've been thinking about this myself lately.

[bhall]

Red Bull's success was spurred on by having four car's worth of data in 2009 when every other team had two. I don't think Mercedes can replicate that.

[aral]

Mercedes should take a page out of Red Bull's book, and cheat - they could have some windtunnel hidden away in Daimler's huge and searchless infrastructure churning away over the summer break, giving a handy 2 tenths in the bag.

Accusing a team of cheating is a very serious matter. Red Bull have NEVER been found to be cheating.

[marcush.]

Is it really experience and data collected that´s driving performance?
I do not see much correlation in this .
If something someone is good .. bang you see results.If someone finds the week point and understands how to tackle the iussue (understands the physics or even chemistry underlying )he can define a programme to get on top of it .
Mercedes have shown a habit of analysing and reporting of understanding the root of their issues but it did not really improve considering the effort.

windtunnels at DAI? Are you kidding? Tunneltime is scarce ..you would not find a slot suitable for the needs of a Formula 1 team and then you´d start to correlate after adapting the model to the tunnnel tech ..that really does not make much sense..

[bhall]

Is it really experience and data collected that´s driving performance?
I do not see much correlation in this .

[...]

Red Bull Technology, aka Adrian Newey, (legally) supplied two teams with identical chassis in 2009, and Red Bull's rate of development was vastly superior to every team on the grid that year. I think that's because they effectively had twice the mileage as the other teams, who, because of the testing ban, were limited in the amount of data they could collect. This is not without precedent, either. The Sauber C23 was remarkably and eerily similar to the Ferrari F2004, and I don't think that was a coincidence.

Data is what prevents teams from going down dead-end development paths.

To that end, I think Mercedes should "supply" Force India with a chassis next year that only has superficial differences between it and the one they themselves will race. I think both teams would see their fortunes improve under such a scenario. The other teams will inevitably cry bloody murder. But, that's not exactly a rare occurrence in F1, nor is it an especially fruitful tactic.

[turbof1]

Red Bull's success was spurred on by having four car's worth of data in 2009 when every other team had two. I don't think Mercedes can replicate that.

Red Bull's succes was spurred by regulation changes which created oppertunities. Torro Rosso never got close to anything what Red Bull accomplished that year, plus the updates Red Bull got throughout were very late introduced at the torro rosso. Mid season the 2 teams basicilly were driving with different cars. Not to mention that was such a long time ago; if they ever got an advantage out of it, that advantage is by now erased.

Is it really experience and data collected that´s driving performance?
I do not see much correlation in this .
If something someone is good .. bang you see results.If someone finds the week point and understands how to tackle the iussue (understands the physics or even chemistry underlying )he can define a programme to get on top of it .
Mercedes have shown a habit of analysing and reporting of understanding the root of their issues but it did not really improve considering the effort.

windtunnels at DAI? Are you kidding? Tunneltime is scarce ..you would not find a slot suitable for the needs of a Formula 1 team and then you´d start to correlate after adapting the model to the tunnnel tech ..that really does not make much sense..

Today cars don't just have a weak spot. You can look at the Mercedes and say: airflow is everywhere well managed, nowhere where it goes wrong. Yet they are not the fastest. Even if you do find one weak point, it's not easy to change it due you are automatically altering the complete airflow over the car. Getting a car better means changing the car from the front to the back. Not always noticable changes, but they are there! Honestly, I am just astounded by how fast Red Bull, Mclaren en Ferrari were able to introduce such dramatic changes to their cars and make them work spot on. I am ellaborating here too much and essentially missing the point by that, so in short: someone can really be good, but he never will be able to say "that is the weak spot! you have to alter that alone and the car will go faster. That's just not happening in current F1. Current F1 means redesigning atleast half of your car to go faster. I don't see an aero specialist also taking care of the internal packaging.

[marcush.]

you gave the answer:
RED Bull ,Ferrari and Mclaren have solved their issues and have made a genuine step forward.So in effect it is possible to pinpoint problems and turn them around.
I very often see people who think everything ios a compromise and you have to sacrifice to make gains elsewhere.
But I completely digress .The good solutions are win win solutions erasing not a single issue but adress a whole problem area with one thing turned right .That´s the real benefit of having a real hero in your team -someone who can step back and is able to visualize not only the problem but is coming up with a practical solution on top of it.
Where is the achievement throwing millions of euros at a problem chipping away at it in increments? anyone can do this ,don´t you think so ? It takes a Paul Morgan to walk by and say :hey guys ,that contraption will fall off after 5 minutes on the dyno...and being proved right after exactly 5 minutes of dynotime...

[turbof1]

you gave the answer:
RED Bull ,Ferrari and Mclaren have solved their issues and have made a genuine step forward.So in effect it is possible to pinpoint problems and turn them around.
I very often see people who think everything ios a compromise and you have to sacrifice to make gains elsewhere.
But I completely digress .The good solutions are win win solutions erasing not a single issue but adress a whole problem area with one thing turned right .That´s the real benefit of having a real hero in your team -someone who can step back and is able to visualize not only the problem but is coming up with a practical solution on top of it.
Where is the achievement throwing millions of euros at a problem chipping away at it in increments? anyone can do this ,don´t you think so ? It takes a Paul Morgan to walk by and say :hey guys ,that contraption will fall off after 5 minutes on the dyno...and being proved right after exactly 5 minutes of dynotime...

And they all did it without bringing in someone new. They had issues, they solved it with their current team. Clear example: McLaren had huge problems with their pitstops. They didn't kick out anybody our brought in someone else. No they just kept working with their current crew. Result: they are fastest now and on a bad pitstop they loose barely 2-3 tenths compared to other teams.
It is also a matter of what you define as pinpointing. I might have misunderstood you, thinking you were using it in the sence of: "ok we did not have this or that element in place there. Lets put it there so we fixed the issue". However, if you are using it in the sence of: "we pinpointed our problem: we lack rear end downforce" then you are just noticing what everybody else is noticing. In current F1, Eureka-effects don't exist anymore. There are no hidden ready-to-be-used solutions anymore. Current ways of making a F1 car faster is by optimizing the current package or by rebuilding the car into a new package. I wished it was different you know, current F1 simply lacks innovation. Mercedes tried, but it did not gave them the edge they wanted. Now suddenly they are faced with big difficulties, never having tested for instance McLaren spec exhaust solutions. They know they need to implement such a solution to go faster, but that's a huge effort.

[marcush.]

my claim:
you have to realise what is driving the performance.
Mercedes have publicly stated :tyre understanding is the key but yet they have not made any inroads on this but dropped back in the order.
MCLaren,RedBull and Ferrari have all admitted to having difficulty understanding the tyres as well-but have never stopped developping the whole package trying to find the weak link and won races .
I think the chipping away at problems is just one of the truths we see .You can optimise a dog of an idea to perfection -see Porsche 911.The end result is a quite remarkable piece of dynamics -but still the base concept is just not the best..period.

[turbof1]

my claim:
you have to realise what is driving the performance.
Mercedes have publicly stated :tyre understanding is the key but yet they have not made any inroads on this but dropped back in the order.
MCLaren,RedBull and Ferrari have all admitted to having difficulty understanding the tyres as well-but have never stopped developping the whole package trying to find the weak link and won races .
I think the chipping away at problems is just one of the truths we see .You can optimise a dog of an idea to perfection -see Porsche 911.The end result is a quite remarkable piece of dynamics -but still the base concept is just not the best..period.

Obviously you are taking risks with introducing updates, especially with full package upgrades. Tyres will behave differently suddenly. Brawn GP had that problem mid 2009. I can understand that they are cautious. However, they should take the risk anyhow. they have tyre problems all year long, so they are better off with a tyre eating but fast machine instead of a tyre eating and slow machine.
I gotta say though... rumors are that their DDRS is at the root of the problem. If they have to remove that and have to rebuilt the complete back they are basicilly having a Mercedes W04. A huge cost. I wonder if Brawn would still say then it only costs a few thousand pounds. I am astounded how far the top 3 already went just to get a few tenths out of it; those upgrades had to cost individually atleast a million. Just look at Mclaren: the testing spec Mp4/27 differs as much from the mid season spec mp4/27 as the mp4/26. Mercedes will have a though time to convince Daimler to stay in F1 if they did the same.