PlatinumZealot wrote: ↑
Thu Jul 20, 2017 5:38 am
henry wrote: ↑
Wed Jul 19, 2017 10:42 am
PlatinumZealot wrote: ↑
Wed Jul 19, 2017 3:07 am
The Mercedes hasn't any upgrades since Baku confirmed by the drivers. Any differences in speed is down to set up and mapping.
And that isn't development?
Why split hairs? Yes it is but he meant part upgrades.
Each track has its own map and setup even if the parts are the same. Sometimes the engine itself is undeveloped and the mapping is for general power increase for all tracks.. See renault engine. This is development without an upgrade. But most of the time.. If the engine spec is developed, the mapping at each track is done to make the engine drieveable to the characteristics of that track and of course to maximise the ERS. In other words for the same engine Spec the monza map would not be the same as the Monaco Map. It not a develepment if the maps are already scripted so to speak. Just a different mode.
In colloquial f1-tech terms... Development is 90% of the time taken to mean new parts. But if you want to split hairs.... Yes.. Creating the various engine maps does count as development.
In the case of Ferrari and Mercedes at Silverstone.. I can assume that Ferrari had an optimized engine map for that track.. And behavoral trait of the chassis and their setup was probably the difference in the race. Hamilton and Bottas said there is no upgrade on the car so i believe them.
I split hairs because I hope it will help in understanding the sport.
"Development" is the intellectual process
of understanding how to improve the car to get to the end of the race in the shortest time. Sometimes that process ends up in physical parts, some of which we can see and some we can't, sometimes it ends up in software, on and off the car, and sometimes it results in procedures used by drivers, engineers, mechanics etc.
Toto Wolf recently reported that a team of people spent 10 days on the simulator understanding
the reasons they couldn't set up the car as they wanted. From that they developed
some things that helped them in the next races. We don't know if these were procedures, or tyre or engine maps, or analysis techniques, or anything else. We do know that they have performed consistently better even though there are no visible changes.
And splitting hairs again. I don't think the cars are set up optimally for race tracks. That would suggest that there is no room for improvement and given the complexity of the cars that seems unlikely. The development process will include improving the tools they use to get closer to the optimal.
If we don't split hairs like this, and this is a technical forum, we will end up with the X is quicker, I can't see a change, they must be cheating,conclusions.
Fortune favours the prepared; she has no favourites and takes no sides.
Truth is confirmed by inspection and delay; falsehood by haste and uncertainty : Tacitus