Mercedes AMG F1 Team 2012

[zyphro]

Isn't AMG an arm of Mercedes anyway?

AMG = Mercedes-AMG GmbH

Sounds like some bull crap someone decided to make up; slow news cycle.

The funniest thing was this:

would continue to be run by team boss Ross Brawn, with Michael Schumacher in the cockpit.

Definitely made up for sure.

[Ferraripilot]

Could this be Mercedes posturing to please the shareholders whom they just had to report a below expected couple of quarters to? Calling it Mercedes-AMG, AMG, Benz, MB, whatever makes no difference to me but it may to the public ear.

If this means they are simply handing more control over to Ross, I believe that is what they should have done in the first place. Allow it to be Ross' team, yet funded by Mercedes cash. I saw absolutely no reason why MB needed to make any decisions regarding F1 other than the decision to allow Ross to make the decisions. He's won a few championships after all.

[xpensive]

Could this be Mercedes posturing to please the shareholders whom they just had to report a below expected couple of quarters to?
...

If that was the case, DrZ would be better off planting a story that they will offload the sorry outfit to BMW or Audi?

[SeijaKessen]

Why are people still giving Ross all the credit for the championships at Benetton and Ferrari?

[SeijaKessen]

Could this be Mercedes posturing to please the shareholders whom they just had to report a below expected couple of quarters to?
...

If that was the case, DrZ would be better off planting a story that they will offload the sorry outfit to BMW or Audi?

No one would take it seriously...

"There’s a very good reason why we are not in F1. There’s no relevance to the road. Audi has always been engaged in motorsport that's relevant to our customers such as rallying and touring cars, which brought quattro, FSI and TFSI to our road cars. This is why in 1999 we decided against F1. Instead we decided to take on the greatest race in the world. We went for Le Mans." -Wolfgang Ullrich

Maybe Merc needs to be informed of this?

[Adamski]

Why are people still giving Ross all the credit for the championships at Benetton and Ferrari?

And why are people do not give him time and credit? I think we have to accept what he has achieved in the past.

What we can see now is that Formula 1 is a team sport. There are no guaranteed results because of one or two big names and sometimes people forget it.

We can't say that the main problem for Mercedes is Brawn. It's just a bullshit. It depends on so many factors. If it would be that easy, than a 5 years old children could navigate a whole Formula 1 project.

[yener]

It's a fact that Ross Brawn managed to build a car which sucks three years in a row. The good performance and the first win earlier this year was a relief for everybody in a team which was really under pressure.
But now after the first half of the season everybody can see that the gap between the fast runners is getting bigger and bigger.
There is no sign of improvement not even in the interviews!
If i was the head of Mercedes i would pull out the plug for sure.

But i think we will have to see and wait for the next race. Lets see what they have done at summerbreak. If there arent major updates i think its definitly over this time.

[wunderkind]

Could this be Mercedes posturing to please the shareholders whom they just had to report a below expected couple of quarters to?
...

If that was the case, DrZ would be better off planting a story that they will offload the sorry outfit to BMW or Audi?

No one would take it seriously...

"There’s a very good reason why we are not in F1. There’s no relevance to the road. Audi has always been engaged in motorsport that's relevant to our customers such as rallying and touring cars, which brought quattro, FSI and TFSI to our road cars. This is why in 1999 we decided against F1. Instead we decided to take on the greatest race in the world. We went for Le Mans." -Wolfgang Ullrich

Maybe Merc needs to be informed of this?

The reason VW-Audi is not in F1 is not because of the lack of technological relevance F1 has on roadcars. The VW-Audi motorsport people (Stuck, Ulrich, and now Durheimer) have always had one eye on what is happening in F1. VW-Audi is not in F1 because VW-Audi has not come up with a sure-fire plan to be a regular winner in F1.

Unlike F1, in DTM, le Mans, touring cars and sportscars, you don't have to throw big money to hire top quality personnel from a very small talent pool just to ensure competitiveness, let alone winning regularly. Audi's le Mans program began as an offshoot of their DTM activity and did not become a stand-alone effort until a few years after. A lot of the engineers there were reassigned from touring car and the roadcar duties. There is just no way VW-Audi could achieve success in F1 with the same modus operandi.

The level of know-how and technologies in F1 are such that designers and engineers coming from lesser racing formulae or roadcar background will get drowned by the sheer steepness of the learning curve. Furthermore, even if VW-Audi had the money to throw around, many of the top-line F1 designers and engineers are not available to them at this time. They will have to build up slowly or acquire a mid-tier team like Sauber.

You said F1 technologies have little or no relevance to roadcars. Yes, the aerodynamics of a F1 car is more rocket science than automotive science. But I beg to differ, the use of composites is slowly being trickle down to roadcars. Many electronic systems such as traction control, engine and transmission ECU have migrated to roadcars. Same with IC engine and hybrid technologies.

F1 is still the best test-bed for automotive technologies. I personally believe the greatest contributions F1 has made to the automotive industry are the F1 designers and engineers going back to designing and engineering roadcars with their F1 knowledge and experience.

SeijaKessen, I could have taken the easy way out and just said F1 is just about going fastest and winning and marketing exposure and has very little to do with roadcars.

[NewtonMeter]

Could this be Mercedes posturing to please the shareholders whom they just had to report a below expected couple of quarters to?
...

If that was the case, DrZ would be better off planting a story that they will offload the sorry outfit to BMW or Audi?

No one would take it seriously...

"There’s a very good reason why we are not in F1. There’s no relevance to the road. Audi has always been engaged in motorsport that's relevant to our customers such as rallying and touring cars, which brought quattro, FSI and TFSI to our road cars. This is why in 1999 we decided against F1. Instead we decided to take on the greatest race in the world. We went for Le Mans." -Wolfgang Ullrich

Maybe Merc needs to be informed of this?

First thing that comes to mind is: KERS? Right there I see an opportunity to pass down technology to the road cars.

Another is what I'll call secondary technology. Things like, say, manufacturing techniques, software, simulators, algorithms.

Another is purely intellectual. Research done on the F1 program that might not have found an application on the F1 side, might be usefull for the road cars.

The most important lesson I've learnt in my career is: "there's always someone that knows more than you do". With F1 engineering the technological highway that it is, having that resource pool to draw from is a sure fire way to find those very people.

Ofcourse it isn't always as easy as Claus Stuttgart phoning Geoff in Brackly for a quick consult. But I've experienced first hand the use of good partnerships in business and technology and if it can be made to work well, it's massively usefull. But in fairness that relationship isn't built overnight and requires a lot of trust and patience to reap the full benefits.

[SeijaKessen]

The reason VW-Audi is not in F1 is not because of the lack of technological relevance F1 has on roadcars. The VW-Audi motorsport people (Stuck, Ulrich, and now Durheimer) have always had one eye on what is happening in F1. VW-Audi is not in F1 because VW-Audi has not come up with a sure-fire plan to be a regular winner in F1.

Unlike F1, in DTM, le Mans, touring cars and sportscars, you don't have to throw big money to hire top quality personnel from a very small talent pool just to ensure competitiveness, let alone winning regularly. Audi's le Mans program began as an offshoot of their DTM activity and did not become a stand-alone effort until a few years after. A lot of the engineers there were reassigned from touring car and the roadcar duties. There is just no way VW-Audi could achieve success in F1 with the same modus operandi.

The level of know-how and technologies in F1 are such that designers and engineers coming from lesser racing formulae or roadcar background will get drowned by the sheer steepness of the learning curve. Furthermore, even if VW-Audi had the money to throw around, many of the top-line F1 designers and engineers are not available to them at this time. They will have to build up slowly or acquire a mid-tier team like Sauber.

You said F1 technologies have little or no relevance to roadcars. Yes, the aerodynamics of a F1 car is more rocket science than automotive science. But I beg to differ, the use of composites is slowly being trickle down to roadcars. Many electronic systems such as traction control, engine and transmission ECU have migrated to roadcars. Same with IC engine and hybrid technologies.

F1 is still the best test-bed for automotive technologies. I personally believe the greatest contributions F1 has made to the automotive industry are the F1 designers and engineers going back to designing and engineering roadcars with their F1 knowledge and experience.

SeijaKessen, I could have taken the easy way out and just said F1 is just about going fastest and winning and marketing exposure and has very little to do with roadcars.

wunderkind-

I'm not sure if you are aware of it, but Buick actually had traction control way back in 1971.

Here's a quick link I found.

http://www.buick-riviera.com/maxtrac.html

[fiohaa]

Why are people still giving Ross all the credit for the championships at Benetton and Ferrari?

And why are people do not give him time and credit? I think we have to accept what he has achieved in the past.

What we can see now is that Formula 1 is a team sport. There are no guaranteed results because of one or two big names and sometimes people forget it.

We can't say that the main problem for Mercedes is Brawn. It's just a bullshit. It depends on so many factors. If it would be that easy, than a 5 years old children could navigate a whole Formula 1 project.

because all his success in other teams was not entirely down to him. He wasnt' totally in charge, like he is now, and the schumi benetton/ferrari years had a team of world class people, from engine to aero to team manager.
it was never just brawn, he was more famous for his strategies than anything else.

yes schumi mentioned him as the prime reason for coming back, but he probably thought he was coming back to an F1 where he could do repeats of hungary 98 or france 2004 again.

[fiohaa]

First thing that comes to mind is: KERS? Right there I see an opportunity to pass down technology to the road cars.

Another is what I'll call secondary technology. Things like, say, manufacturing techniques, software, simulators, algorithms.

Another is purely intellectual. Research done on the F1 program that might not have found an application on the F1 side, might be usefull for the road cars.

The most important lesson I've learnt in my career is: "there's always someone that knows more than you do". With F1 engineering the technological highway that it is, having that resource pool to draw from is a sure fire way to find those very people.

Ofcourse it isn't always as easy as Claus Stuttgart phoning Geoff in Brackly for a quick consult. But I've experienced first hand the use of good partnerships in business and technology and if it can be made to work well, it's massively usefull. But in fairness that relationship isn't built overnight and requires a lot of trust and patience to reap the full benefits.

i agree with this. you might not be able to find a tangible DIRECT link with F1, but i bet there are numerous indirect links.
Such is the talent of engineering in F1, theres a high chance something might be developed which could have possible applications later on - it might not even be in the car industry.

a lot of science is like that, an experiment is set up and something else is discovered that was not expected or was found entirely by accident.

i doubt that nothing practical has come out of f1.

besides who cares, the whole car industry is a joke. catering for peoples pathetic desires - all you need is 1 manufacturer in the world to make a car that gets from A to B, it should be a government led thing.

[xpensive]

Oh get over it, according to the spin-doctors, having their own team is not a marketing-lure anymore for a manufacturer, Daimler was just a Johnny-come-lately in that regard. Even if they surprisingly would succeed, it's sooo 00-ish...

[marcush.]

I recently read something about invention .disruptive invention and sustaining invention that is.
Formula1 in itself is more and more sustaining not inventing and this is quite in line with automotive engineering concepts.
Still i don´t see ANY link with the Formula 1 team apart from Schumacher paying a visit to the workforce in UT days before the German GP.
It´s not like you could call anyone at MGP to lure some information in your development project at DAI ...when this is entirely possible with AMG or Benz Trucks or Evobus..
The whole thing is a marketing venture more than anything else and as soon as there is no value-Schumacher retireing- the thing will not get any support -moneys.
Just imagine they did not have Schumi in those 3 years but Heidfeld ....who would not have fared worse maybe ,but just has not any marketing value -same as Rosberg...

[aral]

First thing that comes to mind is: KERS? Right there I see an opportunity to pass down technology to the road cars.

Another is what I'll call secondary technology. Things like, say, manufacturing techniques, software, simulators, algorithms.

Another is purely intellectual. Research done on the F1 program that might not have found an application on the F1 side, might be usefull for the road cars.

The most important lesson I've learnt in my career is: "there's always someone that knows more than you do". With F1 engineering the technological highway that it is, having that resource pool to draw from is a sure fire way to find those very people.

Ofcourse it isn't always as easy as Claus Stuttgart phoning Geoff in Brackly for a quick consult. But I've experienced first hand the use of good partnerships in business and technology and if it can be made to work well, it's massively usefull. But in fairness that relationship isn't built overnight and requires a lot of trust and patience to reap the full benefits.

Well, Merc have got it right, and Audi have it wrong! KERS is already in commercial use on transport vehicles and on some supercars. Then there are paddleshift gearboxes, as debuted by Ferrari in F1. Not to mention the development of diffusers, now in common use. Movable aero devices to minimise drag are also in use. There are no diesels in F1, but Audi have certainly benefited by racing in LMS.