2022 Mercedes-AMG | Petronas F1 Team

[Big Tea]

"Head of" is management. They're the people that get in the way of the people doing the work.

Former head of HPP Andy Cowell included? What a relief he's gone, so they were finally able to produce a PU they always wanted but were being held back by evil management /s

The point is that the heads of departments aren't the only ones in an organisation that come up with ideas, turn ideas in to reality, etc. Indeed, the best managers are those that make it possible for others to do those things. Heads of departments that don't allow their staff to do these things tend to end up with underperforming staff and poor results.

Yes, the people that have moved will be a loss, but it isn't a "oh well, they've left so we better all just turn off the lights and give up" scenario.

Oh, and the laughing emoji at the end - there's a clue as to the seriousness of my original post there. Hint: it was humour.

Heads of department do tend to be the filter, for good or bad which streams are followed and which cut off.
Not coming down either side here, but they are the people who decide if the high return but risky route is taken, or the we know it works so just do it more path, even if it is nearing the end of life.

Is what we see the teething problems of a newborn, or the final struggles of a long used concept? (rhetorical question)

[holeindalip]

This zero pod design was meant to be 1-1.5s faster than the design they brought to Barcelona testing. Where did them times go!!

Maybe it did in the simulator but they can't extract all of it right now because of the bouncing/porpoising, how do you know that a fix isn't coming and they gain 2.5s/lap?

[continuum16]

This zero pod design was meant to be 1-1.5s faster than the design they brought to Barcelona testing. Where did them times go!!

Maybe it did in the simulator but they can't extract all of it right now because of the bouncing/porpoising, how do you know that a fix isn't coming and they gain 2.5s/lap?

We don’t know for sure, but I don’t think there is any example of a single in-season update bringing over 1s of relative lap time gain in the last 20+ years, let alone 2.5s

I’d be interested to know what the most effective mid-season update (not a new car) has been since 2000… 2015 Force India? McLaren in 2009? Genuinely curious. Maybe a different thread?

[holeindalip]

This zero pod design was meant to be 1-1.5s faster than the design they brought to Barcelona testing. Where did them times go!!

Maybe it did in the simulator but they can't extract all of it right now because of the bouncing/porpoising, how do you know that a fix isn't coming and they gain 2.5s/lap?

We don’t know for sure, but I don’t think there is any example of a single in-season update bringing over 1s of relative lap time gain in the last 20+ years, let alone 2.5s

I’d be interested to know what the most effective mid-season update (not a new car) has been since 2000… 2015 Force India? McLaren in 2009? Genuinely curious. Maybe a different thread?

Yeah I exaggerated a bit but you get the point. They could gain .7s from chassis and another .25sec from the power unit if it’s not turned up yet. That would put them right in the mix….I wouldn’t expect anything less from someone being from Kansas

[Hammerfist]

This zero pod design was meant to be 1-1.5s faster than the design they brought to Barcelona testing. Where did them times go!!

Maybe it did in the simulator but they can't extract all of it right now because of the bouncing/porpoising, how do you know that a fix isn't coming and they gain 2.5s/lap?

We don’t know for sure, but I don’t think there is any example of a single in-season update bringing over 1s of relative lap time gain in the last 20+ years, let alone 2.5s

I’d be interested to know what the most effective mid-season update (not a new car) has been since 2000… 2015 Force India? McLaren in 2009? Genuinely curious. Maybe a different thread?

Redbull have done it plenty of times, Just on top of my head 2015, 2019, 2020. In all those years they closed down the gap to the front of the grid significantly throughout the season. 2020 was notable as they started something like 0.8 sec down and the car won the last race of the season on merit. It can be done, but it usually happens when a car starts the season with an obvious flaw that begs to be addressed. I'd say the w13 qualifies as a car with more than a few bad flaws. Merc will fix their issues. It remains to be seen how much of the gap they will close though, as the top 2 teams aren't going to stand still.

[continuum16]

Maybe it did in the simulator but they can't extract all of it right now because of the bouncing/porpoising, how do you know that a fix isn't coming and they gain 2.5s/lap?

We don’t know for sure, but I don’t think there is any example of a single in-season update bringing over 1s of relative lap time gain in the last 20+ years, let alone 2.5s

I’d be interested to know what the most effective mid-season update (not a new car) has been since 2000… 2015 Force India? McLaren in 2009? Genuinely curious. Maybe a different thread?

Yeah I exaggerated a bit but you get the point. They could gain .7s from chassis and another .25sec from the power unit if it’s not turned up yet. That would put them right in the mix….I wouldn’t expect anything less from someone being from Kansas

Just because I live in Kansas, doesn’t mean I’m from there…

I didn’t actually believe you meant 2.5s but it did get me thinking about how effective a single update or update package could be. I’m not talking evolution and iteration over 20 races, but like 1-3 races, step-change kinda stuff.

Anyways, it’s a moot point and trying to predict exactly how much Merc can improve and when they can do it is about as straightforward as guessing the winning lottery numbers. All we know at the moment is that there’s room for improvement.

[zibby43]

This zero pod design was meant to be 1-1.5s faster than the design they brought to Barcelona testing. Where did them times go!!

Somebody from Mercedes said, the package didn't deliver as they anticipated. There could be some correlation issues. It could also be possible that it was indeed a second faster, but the other didn't show their full hand in first test.

They didn't say it didn't deliver in the context of missing performance targets, but in rectifying the porpoising.

One thing that is widely accepted from aero experts is that the extreme porpoising is likely partially a consequence of having the most downforce of any team. If they can start to use that downforce efficiently, without jacking up the rear of the car and having to rely on the inefficient wing surfaces, they're going to gain a chunk of laptime.

[silver]

This zero pod design was meant to be 1-1.5s faster than the design they brought to Barcelona testing. Where did them times go!!

Somebody from Mercedes said, the package didn't deliver as they anticipated. There could be some correlation issues. It could also be possible that it was indeed a second faster, but the other didn't show their full hand in first test.

They didn't say it didn't deliver in the context of missing performance targets, but in rectifying the porpoising.

One thing that is widely accepted from aero experts is that the extreme porpoising is likely partially a consequence of having the most downforce of any team. If they can start to use that downforce efficiently, without jacking up the rear of the car and having to rely on the inefficient wing surfaces, they're going to gain a chunk of laptime.

James Allison says it's not the aero which is responsible for porpoising. Your reasoning of porpoising occuring due to most downforce of any team appears to be not aligning there. Most cars have faced the porpoising problems, including Alpha Tauri and Ferrari, who in terms of performance are at two different ends of that spectrum and adopt a compromise to get away from the problem. Ferrari, even with a compromise, is fighting at the front. I am sure every other team is looking at solutions for porpoising that can then allow them to run the car lowest possible to gain further downforce. Mercedes is not alone in that regard.

[dans79]

James Allison says it's not the aero which is responsible for porpoising. Your reasoning of porpoising occuring due to most downforce of any team appears to be not aligning there.

I think you are misinterpreting what he said. The DF isn't what's causing it, but once it gets started the DF makes it worse.

[Henri]

Maybe it did in the simulator but they can't extract all of it right now because of the bouncing/porpoising, how do you know that a fix isn't coming and they gain 2.5s/lap?

We don’t know for sure, but I don’t think there is any example of a single in-season update bringing over 1s of relative lap time gain in the last 20+ years, let alone 2.5s

I’d be interested to know what the most effective mid-season update (not a new car) has been since 2000… 2015 Force India? McLaren in 2009? Genuinely curious. Maybe a different thread?

Redbull have done it plenty of times, Just on top of my head 2015, 2019, 2020. In all those years they closed down the gap to the front of the grid significantly throughout the season. 2020 was notable as they started something like 0.8 sec down and the car won the last race of the season on merit. It can be done, but it usually happens when a car starts the season with an obvious flaw that begs to be addressed. I'd say the w13 qualifies as a car with more than a few bad flaws. Merc will fix their issues. It remains to be seen how much of the gap they will close though, as the top 2 teams aren't going to stand still.

They need to stop the bouncing and have s stable car in order for us to see if the upgrades work.. but i hope merc succeeds

[atanatizante]

Some interesting thoughts coming out from Anthony Davidson, their sim driver, regarding what's causing Mercedes' poor performance:

[atanatizante]

On the same note of porpoising issue, "(Mark) Hughes spoke to several aerodynamics specialists who tell you that any porpoising problem they ever encountered was solved by either restricting the venturi inlet or expanding its outlet. Surrendering some theoretical downforce that’s forever inaccessible for some real-world downforce."

Source: https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/107731/m ... oblem.html

[clownfish]

James Allison says it's not the aero which is responsible for porpoising. Your reasoning of porpoising occuring due to most downforce of any team appears to be not aligning there.

I think you are misinterpreting what he said. The DF isn't what's causing it, but once it gets started the DF makes it worse.

Stupid question then, what is causing it, if not the downforce?

[Spoutnik]

This zero pod design was meant to be 1-1.5s faster than the design they brought to Barcelona testing. Where did them times go!!

Maybe it did in the simulator but they can't extract all of it right now because of the bouncing/porpoising, how do you know that a fix isn't coming and they gain 2.5s/lap?

We don’t know for sure, but I don’t think there is any example of a single in-season update bringing over 1s of relative lap time gain in the last 20+ years, let alone 2.5s

I’d be interested to know what the most effective mid-season update (not a new car) has been since 2000… 2015 Force India? McLaren in 2009? Genuinely curious. Maybe a different thread?

I would say Merc 2nd half of the year/last 3rd of the year in 2021.
IIRC Red Bull 2012 was something else too in the second half.
Ferrari do gain a lot of times in the second half of the championship in 2006.
Ferrari in 2007 bring upgrade on their car in the second half and they changed the suspension of Raikkonen in order to suit to his driving style more and it proved to be very effective.

[chrisc90]

Is there any ‘upgrades’/ ‘test parts’ coming for Australia?