- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
They will need it because they now have the least windtunnel time.
Can they use next years budget to make parts already and test them on the '22 car?
The budget cap is an annual cap which can be spent however they see fit towards this year's car or next year's car. So no they cannot "use next year's budget" in the literal sense of spending money from 2023's cap.
That rules that out then. I reckon RB would be on the limits of the budget cap this year, unless they allocate some budget towards next seasons project in terms of parts that can be made relatively cheap and easy to implement.
Whenever these new cars get anywhere close to 150KPH, they appear to be leaning backwards. The front floor has slot opening and the rear appears to be scraping the track . Think that rake is more about getting the car to rotate easier at slow speeds. The @as comes up and induces oversteer.henry wrote: ↑20 Jun 2022, 15:03Meanwhile…
Toto Wolff mentioned that the RB18 runs more rake than most. Obviously not the tail high levels of yesteryear but even a small rake could, I think, have some benefits. It would, for instance, lead to the front of the floor striking the ground instead of the whole floor, this will bring into play the front floor suspension mechanism which will reduce the contact force and hence drag. This would definitely reduce peak Gs compared with a full floor slam.
It will also allow lower spring rates at the rear which will lower the natural frequency of any oscillations giving the undercar airflow more time to reattach if it were to become disturbed.
The RB18 also has a good deal of anti-dive in the front suspension kinematics, this will reduce the load on the front floor during high speed braking manoeuvres. I made an earlier suggestion that hysteresis in the front floor suspension could be beneficial, maybe the anti-dive points at it being less useful than I suggested.
The way teams really operate is, by around July/August time frame, the current car's work is almost stopped and the next year's car takes precedence and majority of resources would be moved to it. So, in that sense, the work for next year's car would be carried out by 2022 spend. Budget cap, like AR-3GP said, is annual budget cap. It does not dictate which car's work you can do with 2022 budget or in other words, it does not stop using 2022 spend for creating 2023 car parts. Even the wind tunnel time they have now, can be used for 2023 if their new wind tunnel model is ready, which forces this year's model to be out of wind tunnel.chrisc90 wrote: ↑01 Aug 2022, 22:30That rules that out then. I reckon RB would be on the limits of the budget cap this year, unless they allocate some budget towards next seasons project in terms of parts that can be made relatively cheap and easy to implement.
Speaking of which, if costs are managed on an annual basis, be interesting to know how they balanced budget with the 2021 season and working on the 2022 car with a whole new set of regulations. I know it'll have been over 2-3 years of development, but I still imagine there would be significant cost involved.
I remember at the beginning of the season at testing, Scarbs saying the new front suspension layout of RB18 was pro dive and not anti-dive like you are saying. His reasoning back then was that, with front wings now situated higher than previous generation cars and the rear is set to run lower without loads of rake of the past, they need front of the car to now go down in cornering to get better aero platform. I am surprised you say, it's anti-dive setup.henry wrote: ↑20 Jun 2022, 15:03Meanwhile…
Toto Wolff mentioned that the RB18 runs more rake than most. Obviously not the tail high levels of yesteryear but even a small rake could, I think, have some benefits. It would, for instance, lead to the front of the floor striking the ground instead of the whole floor, this will bring into play the front floor suspension mechanism which will reduce the contact force and hence drag. This would definitely reduce peak Gs compared with a full floor slam.
It will also allow lower spring rates at the rear which will lower the natural frequency of any oscillations giving the undercar airflow more time to reattach if it were to become disturbed.
The RB18 also has a good deal of anti-dive in the front suspension kinematics, this will reduce the load on the front floor during high speed braking manoeuvres. I made an earlier suggestion that hysteresis in the front floor suspension could be beneficial, maybe the anti-dive points at it being less useful than I suggested.
Wouldn't surprise me if this is an indication that RB have already decided that the Audi collaboration from 2026 onwards makes RB Powertrains superfluous to requirements.organic wrote: ↑02 Aug 2022, 13:10https://honda.racing/rbr-sat/post/honda ... wer-trains
Excellent news
Honda extend their technical support of the power unit to 2025
https://www.redbullpowertrains.com/int- ... nt=Article
I thought this was confirmed a long time ago?organic wrote: ↑02 Aug 2022, 13:10https://honda.racing/rbr-sat/post/honda ... wer-trains
Excellent news
Honda extend their technical support of the power unit to 2025
https://www.redbullpowertrains.com/int- ... nt=Article
.AR3-GP wrote: ↑02 Aug 2022, 15:13.organic wrote: ↑02 Aug 2022, 13:10https://honda.racing/rbr-sat/post/honda ... wer-trains
Excellent news
Honda extend their technical support of the power unit to 2025
https://www.redbullpowertrains.com/int- ... nt=Article
I thought this was confirmed a long time ago?
