Funny you mention that, Scarbs recently talked about the CAD system used in F1 and how Ferrari was still using version 5 of Catia Solutions CAD while Mercedes has been using version 6 which is supposed to be far deeper in capability.dans79 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 06, 2019 5:54 pmIt would be hilarious if we find out 20 years form now that the reason Mercedes has been so good, is because they had the best developers. They wrote more computationally efficient code and thus spent less processing time to run a given simulation. That would allow them to run more simulations than other teams and gain an advantage.
- Almost no contradiciton. Efficiency matters but is no subsititute for size (people, budget). Every team has the same amount of CFD/tunnel and yet there's 3 seconds between Williams and Mercedes with (almost ) the same engine. There's no 3 s in any efficiency. Costs of production (versions) and people that working on said versions/options matter. No inside knowledge but logic, Mercedes don't hire all those people to waste their talents on limited tools (wind tunnels CFD).Xwang wrote: ↑Thu Jun 06, 2019 5:03 pmSorry, but since there is a limit on how much aero tunnel and CFD a team can use, it seems to me that having more people and spending more shouldn't permit a team to have a better aero (if every teams uses the maximum allowable amount of wind tunnel and CFD specified by rules). Is it correct?iotar__ wrote: ↑Thu Jun 06, 2019 3:09 pm
I've been saying it for a long time, Mercedes simply outspent and outdeveloped the likes of Red Bull. Their aero department is twice (or something like that) as big as RB's (Newey) and can focus on current car and future rule changes simoultanesly. That's why they were whinging about FW changes or 2021. Perhaps Ferrari are still catching up and IMO are close enough considering 2014 starting point.
A team can outspend and outdevelop another team only if they have a more "efficient" way of working (if they are able to extract more data from a given wind tunnel time or a given number of CFD megaflops) and in that case having more people seems useful.
If otherwise the "efficiency" of aero research is preatty the same for each team and every team uses all allowable by rules wind tunnel/CFD, doubling aero staff seems a way to have half of their time turning thumbs waiting for the availability of wind tunner/CFD. Do you agree?
I think that putting tyres in operating window is THE most important thing. And cant imagine why every other team except Mercedes underestimated this. All teams have same data after tyre testing...bosyber wrote: ↑Sun Jun 16, 2019 12:14 pmThanks for the summation, useful (still to find time to read the article itself).
A few points there: the mercedes - yes, they were/seemed weak until the last hours of the test (according to Mercedes, even they were worried, until a somewhat serendipitous setup change that showed them the way, if I recall correctly), but, not everyone (even w. Merc. excepted) is having the same amount of problems with the tyres, so I'm not quite sure that change is due to the black bits only.
Also, on the concept of the car: Red Bull's issue isn't that they went too efficient, they seemed to just have gotten the chassis a bit suboptimal again (so not quite as big a mistake as with the last two rule changes then), and Mercedes seemed quite convinced from the start that more downforce would be the best compromise for the new rules, including the extra fuel allowance, and given what they learned about the 2019 tyres from last years Abu Dhabi tyre test. Haven't heard any other team were trying for more efficient, even if it costs ultimate DF.
Since Ferrari should have similar data from the end of last year, what led them to this completely opposite, and now obviously wrong, path? Weren't they already last years if anything a bit too easy on the tyres, which on its own should have led to going for 'more if we can', as much as most other long running trends in F1 should have pushed them in that direction too? Overtaking is one thing, but with the extra DRS allowed, that doesn't seem to need less DF automatically, right?
edit: I do guess there is something to the persistent idea that the Mercedes PU is ultimately more fuel-efficient, so maybe that's one thing that led Ferrari to try and tweak that with more efficient aero, but, again 'more fuel allowed' this year makes that quite a bit less obvious of a choice.
Managing the tires, has been the most important thing since the beginning of the Pirelli era!
In my opinion Vettel is a smart (alpha male) driver and he nudged Hamilton to pull out.Ferrari lodges official FIA request for review of Vettel's penalty
The Ferrari Formula 1 team has lodged a request for the FIA to review the decision to punish Sebastian Vettel at the Canadian Grand Prix, as predicted by Autosport.
Amid ongoing unhappiness over the five-second penalty that cost Vettel victory in Montreal, Ferrari wants the FIA stewards to look again at the verdict that Vettel rejoined the track in an unsafe manner and forced Lewis Hamilton off the circuit during their lead battle.
Although the sanction could not be appealed under the FIA's rules, the governing body's International Sporting Code does give competitors the option of a post-event review of decisions, providing that new evidence that was not available at the time has come to light.
Article 14.1.1 of the code states that if "a significant and relevant new element is discovered which was unavailable to the parties seeking the review at the time of the competition concerned," then the FIA can reconvene stewards or replacements to look again at the case.
Ferrari had until this Sunday to lodge its review request and the team confirmed on Monday that it had written to the FIA to request the review.
No further details of what new evidence it has lodged were immediately available.
The FIA will most likely convene stewards over the French GP weekend to look at the case, with their first decision likely to be whether or not the new evidence is admissible.
If they are satisfied that the new information is significant, then the FIA will hear Ferrari's argument for why the decision to punish Vettel was wrong.
Ricciardo went to Renault for a long term journey. He will surely not go to Ferrari after 1 or 2 seasons.seventhsin wrote: ↑Thu Jul 04, 2019 10:18 amNew rumours linking Ricciardo to Ferrari. Please Lord
https://wwos.nine.com.au/motorsport/f1- ... 04c9a90045
https://autoaction.com.au/2019/07/03/ri ... -wish-list
Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk