F1technical.net

tpe wrote: ↑

11 Aug 2021, 20:28

No Engineer will say they did something illegal.
Having MY answering, is a trick from Mercor the press, to discredit any claim because MY is treated like a semi-God and whatever he says is the absolute truth.

Who is MY?

MY is what the autocorrect thinks is LH...

tpe wrote: ↑

17 Aug 2021, 00:49

MY is what the autocorrect thinks is LH...

I was curious too! So you mentioned Merc, not Mercor?
I figured that part out but was too much of a vag to ask about MY, haha.

I still try to figure out the Mercor thingy...
It is in list of "learned" words.
Anyway, we go off topic

Craigy wrote: ↑

11 Aug 2021, 14:00

Technical Directives should be public since they are effectively part of the regs. I have often wondered why they are allowed to operate in the quasi-rulebook way they do.

It's a pretty strange way of legislation indeed.
I vaguely remember a press conference where Charlie Whiting was questioned about these TD's and why they weren't made available to the public. iirc he said there wasnt a real reason for it, it was just the way things were done.

Craigy wrote: ↑

11 Aug 2021, 14:00

Technical Directives should be public since they are effectively part of the regs. I have often wondered why they are allowed to operate in the quasi-rulebook way they do.

I think this is due to the fact that the directive may contain information that may reveal some secrets about the motor, which the manufacturer would not want to be made public.

_cerber1 wrote: ↑

27 Aug 2021, 13:16

Craigy wrote: ↑

11 Aug 2021, 14:00

Technical Directives should be public since they are effectively part of the regs. I have often wondered why they are allowed to operate in the quasi-rulebook way they do.

I think this is due to the fact that the directive may contain information that may reveal some secrets about the motor, which the manufacturer would not want to be made public.

The irony is that most outside of F1, they release the why's in the technical directive and in some cases, display the part for everyone to see "don't do this".

For selfish reasons, I would love to know what they were doing.

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/perez-and-latifi-set-for-f1-dutch-gp-pitlane-starts/6660948/

Perez started the Dutch GP from the pitlane.

However, it has now emerged via FIA documentation that the energy store is of a different specification. A Honda spokesperson declined to give any further information, beyond noting that the reasons behind the change were "nothing special."

Reliability update ? Who knows.

I want to share this video here because of relation with mgu-h.

Hoffman900 wrote: ↑

27 Aug 2021, 16:59

_cerber1 wrote: ↑

27 Aug 2021, 13:16

Craigy wrote: ↑

11 Aug 2021, 14:00

Technical Directives should be public since they are effectively part of the regs. I have often wondered why they are allowed to operate in the quasi-rulebook way they do.

I think this is due to the fact that the directive may contain information that may reveal some secrets about the motor, which the manufacturer would not want to be made public.

The irony is that most outside of F1, they release the why's in the technical directive and in some cases, display the part for everyone to see "don't do this".

For selfish reasons, I would love to know what they were doing.

It would be interesting, a further insight into the technical workings of the sport. If the teams all see the directives then I can’t see any reason not to make them public.

etusch wrote: ↑

14 Sep 2021, 09:20

I want to share this video here because of relation with mgu-h.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhu3s1ut3wM&t=631s

https://drivetribe.com/p/the-williams-f ... TNvrqycJXw

Williams tried it already in 2010, but opted for battery ES anyway. The flywheel battery was used by Audi’s LMP1 winner eventually.

NL_Fer wrote: ↑

29 Sep 2021, 07:34

etusch wrote: ↑

14 Sep 2021, 09:20

I want to share this video here because of relation with mgu-h.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhu3s1ut3wM&t=631s

https://drivetribe.com/p/the-williams-f ... TNvrqycJXw

Williams tried it already in 2010, but opted for battery ES anyway. The flywheel battery was used by Audi’s LMP1 winner eventually.

There's still a flywheel energy storage company at Silverstone, although I don't know what they are doing at the moment. (edited to add: https://punchflybrid.com/ )

bigblue wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2021, 11:07

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/perez-and-latifi-set-for-f1-dutch-gp-pitlane-starts/6660948/

Perez started the Dutch GP from the pitlane.

However, it has now emerged via FIA documentation that the energy store is of a different specification. A Honda spokesperson declined to give any further information, beyond noting that the reasons behind the change were "nothing special."

Reliability update ? Who knows.

Now that we know Honda introduced a faster charging/discharging ES since Spa, can we expect better performance especially in the race? I would think so. Max followed Bottas quite well in Monza sprintrace while being slower in qualy. Faster thus more charging at every braking zone is most helpful in the race. RB didn't seem to have clipping at the end of the Q lap this season so I don't think it would make a big difference in Q.

I like the "nothing special", given that they've now said it's been a years long effort, giving performance and weight gains etc. https://honda.racing/f1/post/new-energy-store-f1

Edit : more-or-less the above Honda press release in video form with a little added context by the-race.com at youtube : https://youtu.be/WUjEE2sG3Lw

bigblue wrote: ↑

02 Oct 2021, 12:04

I like the "nothing special", given that they've now said it's been a years long effort, giving performance and weight gains etc. https://honda.racing/f1/post/new-energy-store-f1

Are there any clues to how much the new type ES has improved lap time in the race? Must be a few tenths because RB went from behind on pace in Hungary to sightly ahead in Zandvoort