2022 Mercedes-AMG | Petronas F1 Team

[ringo]

You mentioned there are no accidents so the rules are good. But ignore long term effects. The formula has flaws and is not safe. Anything that causes pain while on the job needs to be fixed. Even if they are not crashing into walls because of proposing and bouncing, drivers can still suffer from long term injury. The back is one of the worse injuries to heal.

And as others say Redbull will be least affected by these rules because they wont need to change a thing about their card.
Ferrari should probably be more concerned, but again I doubt they will lose much performance.

Now shifting to the team.. how were redbull able to poach so many top engineers and still adhere to the budget cap?
Wolf is saying he needs to pay his workers more money. Aren't redbull experiencing the same with their premiere league assortment of engineers?

[Ryar]

You mentioned there are no accidents so the rules are good. But ignore long term effects. The formula has flaws and is not safe. Anything that causes pain while on the job needs to be fixed. Even if they are not crashing into walls because of proposing and bouncing, drivers can still suffer from long term injury. The back is one of the worse injuries to heal.

Every physical sport has occupational hazards and professionals undertake such careers with full awareness of on the job, short term and post career, long term effects. They have a choice and can quit if they don't want to bear those occupational hazards. F1 drivers already face lateral g forces and train to manage such impact. Just like the way they train their necks, I am sure they train their backs too and this time there is probably a little more emphasis on it, for some drivers of some teams. Just because these things were not spoken often, doesn't mean they didn't exist. Trying to blow the old trumpet harder to push an agenda is a weak experiment, with a lot of noise of course. In my opinion, MotoGP has far bigger dangers than F1 and yet, riders go on.

[Espresso]

You mentioned there are no accidents so the rules are good. But ignore long term effects. The formula has flaws and is not safe. Anything that causes pain while on the job needs to be fixed. Even if they are not crashing into walls because of proposing and bouncing, drivers can still suffer from long term injury. The back is one of the worse injuries to heal.

Every physical sport has occupational hazards and professionals undertake such careers with full awareness of on the job, short term and post career, long term effects. They have a choice and can quit if they don't want to bear those occupational hazards. F1 drivers already face lateral g forces and train to manage such impact. Just like the way they train their necks, I am sure they train their backs too and this time there is probably a little more emphasis on it, for some drivers of some teams....

From own knowledge....You cannot train this. There's extensive knowledge in this field. Damage is done to the interspinal disc.
You can only have 1-3 crack .. until your career ends...
FIA could lookup the literature to quickly set the rules.

Damaging is that:
A) Lewis suddenly doesn't have any back problems anymore.
B) Teams take a deliberate choice to put porpoising above driver's health so the FIA has to take action.

E.g. read following:
https://sites.nd.edu/biomechanics-in-th ... the-spine/

[ispano6]

I have no idea what you’re complaining about, TBH. Whatever happens going forward will probably help RBR the most, so you should be happy lol.

Ofcourse I am happy that Red Bull don't have issues with porpoising and have won 6 races in a row.

Like I mentioned before, Toto's bickering has brought about a TD that no team, even Mercedes, really wanted. In Toto's latest interview he admitted that the porpoisiong is "their issue, they need to OWN it".

BTW, here's Dieter Rencken's take:

...
Once at the circuit, it is clear to me that FIA Technical Directive 39 continues to raise ire amongst team bosses, some of whom suspect the decision to allow additional stays and aerodynamic tweaks are designed to benefit Mercedes - since the recent departure from the FIA of Peter Bayer, the governing body's top F1 executive is Shaila-Ann Rao, previously special advisor to Mercedes Team Principal Toto Wolff.

...
The second topic is 'bouncing' – aka 'porpoising' – and Wolff is said by multiple sources to have aggressively attacked his peers, accusing them of politicking while the safety of drivers is at stake. He maintains at least one driver per team has complained – true, although the loudest complainants have been the drivers of silver cars – but he was given short shrift, with the resounding message being: "Sort your car…"

It was the first such meeting attended by Netflix, so Wolff's table-thumping crusading was recorded in full technicolour, so should make for spicy viewing come next February, but the question remains: Why make fans wait that long, why not flight such footage topically and again later?
...

On Thursday, the FIA issued a TD, a Technical Directive, stating that they would intervene against porpoising. One of the temporary measures the teams were allowed to apply in Canada, however, was the installation of a second 'stay', or a rod that connects the chassis to the floor and makes the floor stiffer.

The teams were already allowed to use a stay, but as the rules in Canada on porpoising by the TD were to become stricter, the FIA gave the teams permission to use a second stay. Mercedes made good use of this and drove with a second stay attached to the car's floor on Friday.

Rival teams found this unusual, because Mercedes had managed to respond to the changes within a day. Moreover, the TD is at odds with the official technical rules, which do not mention the use of a second rod, so one of the rival teams indicated that they would not be surprised if a protest against Mercedes would follow.

Mercedes' did make the 2nd stay black as if to make it less visible and noticeable, and it definitely seems unusual that they would have the area where the 2nd stay would go already designated. It seemed Lewis called Friday's set up "experimental" and perhaps a coy attempt at making it seem like a whimsical spur of the moment decision to add them.
You say that it did nothing so they took them off - why would a TD specifically mention such a solution and Mercedes be prepared with such swiftness? To be suspicious of underhanded dealings is of course something natural to be complaining about.

Source- articles from https://racingnews365.com/authors/dieter-rencken

[zibby43]

I have no idea what you’re complaining about, TBH. Whatever happens going forward will probably help RBR the most, so you should be happy lol.

Ofcourse I am happy that Red Bull don't have issues with porpoising and have won 6 races in a row.

Like I mentioned before, Toto's bickering has brought about a TD that no team, even Mercedes, really wanted. In Toto's latest interview he admitted that the porpoisiong is "their issue, they need to OWN it".

BTW, here's Dieter Rencken's take:

...
Once at the circuit, it is clear to me that FIA Technical Directive 39 continues to raise ire amongst team bosses, some of whom suspect the decision to allow additional stays and aerodynamic tweaks are designed to benefit Mercedes - since the recent departure from the FIA of Peter Bayer, the governing body's top F1 executive is Shaila-Ann Rao, previously special advisor to Mercedes Team Principal Toto Wolff.

...
The second topic is 'bouncing' – aka 'porpoising' – and Wolff is said by multiple sources to have aggressively attacked his peers, accusing them of politicking while the safety of drivers is at stake. He maintains at least one driver per team has complained – true, although the loudest complainants have been the drivers of silver cars – but he was given short shrift, with the resounding message being: "Sort your car…"

It was the first such meeting attended by Netflix, so Wolff's table-thumping crusading was recorded in full technicolour, so should make for spicy viewing come next February, but the question remains: Why make fans wait that long, why not flight such footage topically and again later?
...

On Thursday, the FIA issued a TD, a Technical Directive, stating that they would intervene against porpoising. One of the temporary measures the teams were allowed to apply in Canada, however, was the installation of a second 'stay', or a rod that connects the chassis to the floor and makes the floor stiffer.

The teams were already allowed to use a stay, but as the rules in Canada on porpoising by the TD were to become stricter, the FIA gave the teams permission to use a second stay. Mercedes made good use of this and drove with a second stay attached to the car's floor on Friday.

Rival teams found this unusual, because Mercedes had managed to respond to the changes within a day. Moreover, the TD is at odds with the official technical rules, which do not mention the use of a second rod, so one of the rival teams indicated that they would not be surprised if a protest against Mercedes would follow.

Mercedes' did make the 2nd stay black as if to make it less visible and noticeable, and it definitely seems unusual that they would have the area where the 2nd stay would go already designated. It seemed Lewis called Friday's set up "experimental" and perhaps a coy attempt at making it seem like a whimsical spur of the moment decision to add them.
You say that it did nothing so they took them off - why would a TD specifically mention such a solution and Mercedes be prepared with such swiftness? To be suspicious of underhanded dealings is of course something natural to be complaining about.

Source- articles from https://racingnews365.com/authors/dieter-rencken

If you’re so happy, what are you doing in here lol? Anyone notice that despite Merc being third best, almost all the coverage still surrounds either them or Ferrari? It’s like RBR is terminally boring.

Next up, Dieter Rencken makes Franco Nugnes look like a Pulitzer-prize winning journalist. The bit about the stay being black for camouflage purposes is hilarious.

It’s black because it’s likely made of a cheaper material that they had on hand as a spur-of-the-moment reaction, which also inconveniently puts to bed the conspiracy theories of some kind of far-fetched cooperation between Merc and the FIA lol.

[zibby43]

It's not like teams don't have a choice to fix the problem. The affected drivers should talk to their management to fix it, instead of asking FIA to bring a regulatory change. The TD seems to have shown them the way and if the driver health is of most concern, then the TD should help in teams adhering to maximum vertical impact. Nobody complained in Canada, which means the problem has moved in safe zone. All good.

Bring back ICE quali modes, DAS, and FRIC.

I know arguments are good way of information exchange. But nonsense is not. But let's continue the nonsense and bring back V8s, Blown Diffusers, Flexible Floor and Wings. Is that enough or go back further in time to tyre war, V12s, Mass Dampers?

All irrelevant. You supported all the bans I listed above when they benefited the team you support.

I’m against all those anti-innovation, competitive order meddling-type moves.

I’m against the FIA meddling here, too, although this issue is arguably a safety one. Engine modes, DAS, FRIC, etc. were not.

See, I’m consistent. Gosh y’all are making this easy.

[PlatinumZealot]

Canada was a positive weekend overall. 1 second slower in the rain, but at least the car is only 0.4 to 0.5 seconds in the dry. Not bad for jacking the car up considering it wasn't optimal for suspension or aero.

[zibby43]

Canada was a positive weekend overall. 1 second slower in the rain, but at least the car is only 0.4 to 0.5 seconds in the dry. Not bad for jacking the car up considering it wasn't optimal for suspension or aero.

I would agree that 0.5s was probably the realistic gap despite some graphs showing 0.35s. Merc were a tiny bit flattered by better deg later in stunts relative to the top 2 that were pushing flat-chat.

Very positive overall. Bring on Silverstone.

[Ryar]

Bring back ICE quali modes, DAS, and FRIC.

I know arguments are good way of information exchange. But nonsense is not. But let's continue the nonsense and bring back V8s, Blown Diffusers, Flexible Floor and Wings. Is that enough or go back further in time to tyre war, V12s, Mass Dampers?

All irrelevant. You supported all the bans I listed above when they benefited the team you support.

I’m against all those anti-innovation, competitive order meddling-type moves.

I’m against the FIA meddling here, too, although this issue is arguably a safety one. Engine modes, DAS, FRIC, etc. were not.

See, I’m consistent. Gosh y’all are making this easy.

I can absolutely vouch for your consistency.

[ispano6]

If you’re so happy, what are you doing in here lol?

You happen to be on my ignore list but I happened to see your response while not being logged in, unfortunately, lol. You can ignore me, as I will you, lol!

On a separate note, Mercedes has already used their 2nd filming day so they shouldn't be able to legally run their Silverstone update prior to the race weekend like they did last year. It'll be interesting to see if Mercedes' upgrade package is full of a bag of tricks or a copy of Red Bull, maybe it's a Silver Red Bull? It does seem Mercedes has spent a lot of time examining Red Bull and it's rake and ride height. Did they raise their ride height in Canada so that the data gathered against the chassis doesn't look as bad as it was in Baku? A case of Mercedes "eating crow"?

[zibby43]

If you’re so happy, what are you doing in here lol?

You happen to be on my ignore list but I happened to see your response while not being logged in, unfortunately, lol. You can ignore me, as I will you, lol!

On a separate note, Mercedes has already used their 2nd filming day so they shouldn't be able to legally run their Silverstone update prior to the race weekend like they did last year. It'll be interesting to see if Mercedes' upgrade package is full of a bag of tricks or a copy of Red Bull, maybe it's a Silver Red Bull? It does seem Mercedes has spent a lot of time examining Red Bull and it's rake and ride height. Did they raise their ride height in Canada so that the data gathered against the chassis doesn't look as bad as it was in Baku? A case of Mercedes "eating crow"?

You do you, but I don't feel the need to. I actually like seeing differing opinions and appreciate that there are different fans of different teams. Strongly dislike echo chambers.

“I have to say that the [FIA's] general approach of saying ‘We’re going to come up with a metric and then, if you don’t fall the right side of that metric, we will impose upon you certain changes’, that is a tricky way forward,” James Allison told Sky F1.

“At a very minimum, if that were the way forward, then the metric that is derived would need to be very transparently communicated, the data on which it is based very transparently available and everyone’s metric be live and continuously viewable by everyone.

“That would be a prerequisite or else we’re going to wind up in a really horrid situation where we’re told we must do something and we’re looking at another car that is bouncing and saying ‘What about them?’ to be told ‘Their metric is fine’.

“That would have to be all very much out in the open and – I think – a problematic way forward.”

Given that porpoising is an inescapable phenomenon caused by the use of ground effect, the teams chasing performance and coping with the bouncing has resulted in the excessive problems being encountered by some of the drivers.

With teams unlikely to ever take the performance hit caused by making changes to reduce porpoising, Allison said the governing body’s stance to enforce the changes is a much-needed intervention.

“It’s welcome the FIA are recognising that it’s not a happy situation,” he said, “where lap time and drivers’ health are in very sharp contrast with each other.

“As a sport, it is really helpful if that is recognised and we try to tiptoe our way out of the corner that the sport is wedged into at the moment.

“Certainly, we’re very keen on working very constructively with them, as will everyone else in the pitlane be. The general direction of travel of saying that this is a problem and we need to fix it as a sport, is extremely sensible.”

[ringo]

If you’re so happy, what are you doing in here lol?

You happen to be on my ignore list but I happened to see your response while not being logged in, unfortunately, lol. You can ignore me, as I will you, lol!

On a separate note, Mercedes has already used their 2nd filming day so they shouldn't be able to legally run their Silverstone update prior to the race weekend like they did last year. It'll be interesting to see if Mercedes' upgrade package is full of a bag of tricks or a copy of Red Bull, maybe it's a Silver Red Bull? It does seem Mercedes has spent a lot of time examining Red Bull and it's rake and ride height. Did they raise their ride height in Canada so that the data gathered against the chassis doesn't look as bad as it was in Baku? A case of Mercedes "eating crow"?

Are you bored of the undue negativity?
Yes we get it. Mercedes are the most vile F1 team. The cynicism gets tiring.

[Ryar]

If you’re so happy, what are you doing in here lol?

You happen to be on my ignore list but I happened to see your response while not being logged in, unfortunately, lol. You can ignore me, as I will you, lol!

On a separate note, Mercedes has already used their 2nd filming day so they shouldn't be able to legally run their Silverstone update prior to the race weekend like they did last year. It'll be interesting to see if Mercedes' upgrade package is full of a bag of tricks or a copy of Red Bull, maybe it's a Silver Red Bull? It does seem Mercedes has spent a lot of time examining Red Bull and it's rake and ride height. Did they raise their ride height in Canada so that the data gathered against the chassis doesn't look as bad as it was in Baku? A case of Mercedes "eating crow"?

You do you, but I don't feel the need to. I actually like seeing differing opinions and appreciate that there are different fans of different teams. Strongly dislike echo chambers.

“I have to say that the [FIA's] general approach of saying ‘We’re going to come up with a metric and then, if you don’t fall the right side of that metric, we will impose upon you certain changes’, that is a tricky way forward,” James Allison told Sky F1.

“At a very minimum, if that were the way forward, then the metric that is derived would need to be very transparently communicated, the data on which it is based very transparently available and everyone’s metric be live and continuously viewable by everyone.

“That would be a prerequisite or else we’re going to wind up in a really horrid situation where we’re told we must do something and we’re looking at another car that is bouncing and saying ‘What about them?’ to be told ‘Their metric is fine’.

“That would have to be all very much out in the open and – I think – a problematic way forward.”

Given that porpoising is an inescapable phenomenon caused by the use of ground effect, the teams chasing performance and coping with the bouncing has resulted in the excessive problems being encountered by some of the drivers.

With teams unlikely to ever take the performance hit caused by making changes to reduce porpoising, Allison said the governing body’s stance to enforce the changes is a much-needed intervention.

“It’s welcome the FIA are recognising that it’s not a happy situation,” he said, “where lap time and drivers’ health are in very sharp contrast with each other.

“As a sport, it is really helpful if that is recognised and we try to tiptoe our way out of the corner that the sport is wedged into at the moment.

“Certainly, we’re very keen on working very constructively with them, as will everyone else in the pitlane be. The general direction of travel of saying that this is a problem and we need to fix it as a sport, is extremely sensible.”

If only James would be using all his intellect to solve their current problems or heck, contributed in identifying the problems up front while he was still the Technical Director back when the car was being designed, he didn't need to join the Wolff Cry Cacophony.

[Stu]

.

Now shifting to the team.. how were redbull able to poach so many top engineers and still adhere to the budget cap?
Wolf is saying he needs to pay his workers more money. Aren't redbull experiencing the same with their premiere league assortment of engineers?

Most of those engineers were employed by Red Bull Powertrains, where, much like Mercedes HPP staff, their salaries are not within the cost cap.

[RonMexico]

The AMuS article from today seems to indicate that there is quite a bit of pushback against Mercedes at the moment behind the scenes. I'm surprised to see Alpine standing up to them also, the use of a second stay on Friday so soon after it was allowed has aroused suspicion in the paddock.