Motorsports Thread

[ClichéGuevara]

And yours wasn't?

Nope. I'll leave you to howl at the clouds.

 

[Deleted member 26715]

Nope. I'll leave you to howl at the clouds.

I wonder why I ever took you off ignore?

 

[Beebo]

I saw that Toto felt he had to offer an explanation as to why Russell was ahead of Hamilton again.

Personally I think Russell has a huge advantage with the car as he's spent his entire F1 career fighting with the Williams car, so he's used to a car that is difficult to manage whereas Lewis has maybe become a bit to used to a car that works exactly the way he would like it to.

That said Hamilton has also not been favoured by luck this year at all and yet again he was one of the few drivers able to work his way through the field.

Russell is 24. Hamilton is 37.
Age catches up with everyone. that bouncing is clearly going to affect an older driver and Hamilton is struggling physically.

 

[Illaveago]

You can't say that lewis isn't trying !

I was wondering if all of the bouncing up and down would cause brain injuries later on ? A bit like heading a football.

 

[Reynard]

It's not just the Mercedes... If you watch the McLaren from head on, it's vibrating like a pneumatic drill. Russell has a point. And I'm beginning to think that the FIA might have bloopered here. Although of course, they won't admit it.

Because back in the late 70s / early 80s, they were running these cars with massive tyres (which would absorb a lot of vibration) and, later, assorted grades of active suspension, which would trim the car and keep it level.

No active suspension and switching from 13 inch to 18 inch rims on these cars definitely makes for a very harsh ride.

 

[Bonefish Blues]

You can't say that lewis isn't trying !

I was wondering if all of the bouncing up and down would cause brain injuries later on ? A bit like heading a football.

They're racing drivers

 

[ClichéGuevara]

It's not just the Mercedes... If you watch the McLaren from head on, it's vibrating like a pneumatic drill. Russell has a point. And I'm beginning to think that the FIA might have bloopered here. Although of course, they won't admit it.

Because back in the late 70s / early 80s, they were running these cars with massive tyres (which would absorb a lot of vibration) and, later, assorted grades of active suspension, which would trim the car and keep it level.

No active suspension and switching from 13 inch to 18 inch rims on these cars definitely makes for a very harsh ride.

But as it's not all cars suffering to the same extent, and they all operate to the same rules, why should the ones that got it right effectively lose their advantage over those that got it wrong?

 

[Reynard]

But as it's not all cars suffering to the same extent, and they all operate to the same rules, why should the ones that got it right effectively lose their advantage over those that got it wrong?

To be honest, if you look closely at the cars, no one has really "got it right". Mechanical failures, bits of bodywork flying off / not working. It's not just Mercedes with problems.

I'm looking at this with my automotive engineer's hat on. The way the rules are panning out, is that we're seeing most of the downsides of ground effects and not much in terms of the positives.

 

[ClichéGuevara]

To be honest, if you look closely at the cars, no one has really "got it right". Mechanical failures, bits of bodywork flying off / not working. It's not just Mercedes with problems.

I'm looking at this with my automotive engineer's hat on. The way the rules are panning out, is that we're seeing most of the downsides of ground effects and not much in terms of the positives.

Some have got it 'much less wrong' than others though, so it amounts to the same thing.

Can those getting a bumpy ride adjust the height to minimise it? That could encourage those not suffering as much to adjust theirs, and still maintain the advantage they've earned.

I accept that would slow them down. but you'd think engineers of their experience and pay grades would have factored in all options.

 

[classic33]

To be honest, if you look closely at the cars, no one has really "got it right". Mechanical failures, bits of bodywork flying off / not working. It's not just Mercedes with problems.

I'm looking at this with my automotive engineer's hat on. The way the rules are panning out, is that we're seeing most of the downsides of ground effects and not much in terms of the positives.

As shown to Toto yesterday, the floor of the Mercedes is flexing more than any other car, on track yesterday.
There's other issues they seem to have that the other teams don't.

 

[icowden]

But as it's not all cars suffering to the same extent, and they all operate to the same rules, why should the ones that got it right effectively lose their advantage over those that got it wrong?

That's essentially Horner's point. Our car is working fine so nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah to our competitors. Mercedes have gone one route and they don't seem to have a way out of it.

 

[Reynard]

The thing is, in motor racing, you're always trying to push the boundaries. It's an arms race, but in terms of chassis and aero. If everyone thought the same way, we may as well go to a single spec chassis. Part of the problem, as I've said up-thread, is a lack of testing. Solutions that look good on paper (or a simulation) may not necessarily be so good in practice. I've experience there, looking at the correlation between simulations and and practical applications.

As far as the Merc floor is concerned, it's a good way of generating downforce. As the speed increases, so does the downforce, which makes the edges of the floor form a "seal" with the track surface. It works much like the old side-skirts used to do on the original ground effect cars. The issue there is that it seems to be *too* effective at times. Again, as I said up-thread, the relationship between velocity and downforce is squared, so a small change in velocity will lead to big changes in downforce.

Christian Horner is in danger of the old "what goes up, must come down" because Red Bull have their own technical problems as well. DRS failures and fuel feed issues. Max is already down an engine - something he's conveniently glossing over right now.

Compared to BOTH the Red Bull and the Ferrari, the Merc might have its pogo-ing problems, but, touch wood, the car's been pretty reliable so far. This could potentially be a massive advantage for them later in the year when other teams around them are going to have to start taking penalties for components. It's no point having a fast car if it keeps breaking down.

 

[Illaveago]

That's essentially Horner's point. Our car is working fine so nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah to our competitors. Mercedes have gone one route and they don't seem to have a way out of it.

They had to back off yesterday when one car broke it's rear spoiler as they were using the same type .

 

[classic33]

I think that the "break in the racing" has come just at the right time for Hamilton. He can focus on his role as producer in the latest Brad Pitt film.

 

[classic33]

Not the first time it's been raised this year.

https://www.news24.com/sport/motors...-brad-pitt-working-on-f1-film-script-20220612


"Lewis Hamilton is involved in the production of a Top Gun-style feature film about Formula 1 that will star Brad Pitt.

Reports from Baku suggest the movie will be produced by Joseph Kosinski and Jerry Bruckheimer, who were behind the popular Top Gun sequel."