Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
Id date say late 1.28's is perfectly possible. We at a 1.30.3 now in testing and in sure there will be a good second left on the table for qualifying as opposed to testing.
OId be very sceptical of any team wanting to do that much of a 'glory run' in testing and not holding back any performance.
Yeah, but add halve a sec for the C3/C4 difference, and suddenly a high 1:28 is 2s away .. which is steep, but in 6dys we'll know.
I know, thats what I am saying, they should bring them back, succesful teams get the least amount and unable to update their car fully, if they want to close up the grid.
Manufacturers didn't complained about their engine performance, so they should be happy with what they had, developing car is open.
important assertion made by Brawn he said terms will be within a two tenth of another not over seconds we got accustomed to .he was wide off the mark.
Even if they knew how to they are stopped by the budget cap and frozen engine.
Maybe the wind tunnel and CFD time should have being even more strict then it is, or, this maybe would have being a better idea, bring back the tokens,for both car and engine, and again weigh down the grid.
Redbull has least amount of tokens, Williams have the most, this would have brought the grid closer together, cause even if Rebull knew how to go even faster they'd have being restricted by not being able to add all of their developments.
Interesting idea. Why not just go with success ballast then? We are already treading on the BOP water with the cascading windtunnel time treatment. Now some teams get to upgrade more than others? That is a fundamental shift in the core principals of F1.
Pirelli haven't hit their brief, and it'll be hard to overcome the engineering mountain to get rubber to warm up quickly, not overheat, offer performance and wear life sufficiently for racing. The warmup phase is an issue.
I am not against the blankets, it is where the F1 is heading so Pirelli are doing what it is told. That's what my point was.
It is not Pirelli building a rubbish compound is F1 who is making them. They still have time so maybe they come with the solution.
Surprise Hamilton is not behind it after gaslighting about climate change and what you should do to improve it while flying on private jets, racing on a F1, etc....
Even F1 probably has not much to do behind the decision as EU has the law to target net zero, so if F1 is not a net zero sport could be banned on racing on EU territory, sounds ridiculous but it is where we are heading.
Caring about the planet is gaslighting now?
You should really look up that term since you are not remotely using it correctly.
I am not saying caring about planet is gaslighting, but telling you to care when you are in one of less greeniest sports, from travelling, fuel consumption, to logistics. If some of the drivers are so corcern about climate change do something else or better stay quiet in that sense. That to me is gaslighting and how i was using it. No if you don’t mind back to topic.
Pirelli haven't hit their brief, and it'll be hard to overcome the engineering mountain to get rubber to warm up quickly, not overheat, offer performance and wear life sufficiently for racing. The warmup phase is an issue.
I am not against the blankets, it is where the F1 is heading so Pirelli are doing what it is told. That's what my point was.
It is not Pirelli building a rubbish compound is F1 who is making them. They still have time so maybe they come with the solution.
Surprise Hamilton is not behind it after gaslighting about climate change and what you should do to improve it while flying on private jets, racing on a F1, etc....
Even F1 probably has not much to do behind the decision as EU has the law to target net zero, so if F1 is not a net zero sport could be banned on racing on EU territory, sounds ridiculous but it is where we are heading.
Are we really talking tyre blankets when we have a Jeddah-break-Australia-break-Baku-break-Miami-Europe-Canada-Europe calendar? Also there's a ton of ways you can limit the use of blankets, say: 2-3 sets max per team use it as you want for no more than 60 min. Is that gonna kill the world as much as weekly 8000km flights for freight, staff and fans?
It is were the regulations are going, logically or not
important assertion made by Brawn he said terms will be within a two tenth of another not over seconds we got accustomed to .he was wide off the mark.
Even if they knew how to they are stopped by the budget cap and frozen engine.
Maybe the wind tunnel and CFD time should have being even more strict then it is, or, this maybe would have being a better idea, bring back the tokens,for both car and engine, and again weigh down the grid.
Redbull has least amount of tokens, Williams have the most, this would have brought the grid closer together, cause even if Rebull knew how to go even faster they'd have being restricted by not being able to add all of their developments.
Interesting idea. Why not just go with success ballast then? We are already treading on the BOP water with the cascading windtunnel time treatment. Now some teams get to upgrade more than others? That is a fundamental shift in the core principals of F1.
Red Bull has the least amount of development yet they opened the gap to Ferrari and Mercedes! This just shows that even with the sliding scale development, big teams will always produce better cars! Says a lot about the new rules, budget cap and penalties when surpassing the budget cap!
*success ballast sounds like a nice penalty for a team cheating the budget cap…after all the reduced development didn’t do any harm to them! They will dominate 2023 even with 63% of development…
"The only rule is there are no rules" - Aristotle Onassis
Red Bull has the least amount of development yet they opened the gap to Ferrari and Mercedes! This just shows that even with the sliding scale development, big teams will always produce better cars! Says a lot about the new rules, budget cap and penalties when surpassing the budget cap!
*success ballast sounds like a nice penalty for a team cheating the budget cap…after all the reduced development didn’t do any harm to them! They will dominate 2023 even with 63% of development…
The % time reduction of aero testing will have a slight impact, but will be mitigated by top teams from use of top tier tools/facilities. Not all wind tunnels are the same. That's why midfield teams are investing in their own (e.g. McLaren and AM). It doesn't surprise me that RBR have kicked on from last year's very good baseline. Without the aero testing restriction, I think there would be even less hope for the other teams.
Even if they knew how to they are stopped by the budget cap and frozen engine.
Maybe the wind tunnel and CFD time should have being even more strict then it is, or, this maybe would have being a better idea, bring back the tokens,for both car and engine, and again weigh down the grid.
Redbull has least amount of tokens, Williams have the most, this would have brought the grid closer together, cause even if Rebull knew how to go even faster they'd have being restricted by not being able to add all of their developments.
Interesting idea. Why not just go with success ballast then? We are already treading on the BOP water with the cascading windtunnel time treatment. Now some teams get to upgrade more than others? That is a fundamental shift in the core principals of F1.
Red Bull has the least amount of development yet they opened the gap to Ferrari and Mercedes! This just shows that even with the sliding scale development, big teams will always produce better cars! Says a lot about the new rules, budget cap and penalties when surpassing the budget cap!
*success ballast sounds like a nice penalty for a team cheating the budget cap…after all the reduced development didn’t do any harm to them! They will dominate 2023 even with 63% of development…
For teams that were not able to outdevelop RB when they spent 70 million a year more year after year you couldn't possibly have been expecting another outcome than we have now. https://www.essentiallysports.com/f1-ne ... l-ferrari/
BTW: fill in RB 2021 spend the right way and they are under the budgetcap (catering by % of personnel that falls under cap and spareparts by june 2022 rule) so it's an administrative breach, no overspend in reality.
Does anyone know what our favorite twitter guy is trying to communicate?
I think the plot has potentially very interesting (and or frightening...) implications, if only I could determine what the source of the data was from. whether it is from all laps, the fast lap, and the time of day.
Interesting idea. Why not just go with success ballast then? We are already treading on the BOP water with the cascading windtunnel time treatment. Now some teams get to upgrade more than others? That is a fundamental shift in the core principals of F1.
Red Bull has the least amount of development yet they opened the gap to Ferrari and Mercedes! This just shows that even with the sliding scale development, big teams will always produce better cars! Says a lot about the new rules, budget cap and penalties when surpassing the budget cap!
*success ballast sounds like a nice penalty for a team cheating the budget cap…after all the reduced development didn’t do any harm to them! They will dominate 2023 even with 63% of development…
For teams that were not able to outdevelop RB when they spent 70 million a year more year after year you couldn't possibly have been expecting another outcome than we have now. https://www.essentiallysports.com/f1-ne ... l-ferrari/
BTW: fill in RB 2021 spend the right way and they are under the budgetcap (catering by % of personnel that falls under cap and spareparts by june 2022 rule) so it's an administrative breach, no overspend in reality.
Redbull was one of the biggest spenders I believe, they wasn't a poor back of the grid budgeted team.
slightly off topic but I still haven't gotten used to looking at these clumsy and heavy boats
compared to this 2020 q3 lap they just look (and sound) silly. i don't understand how fom managed to completely f**k up onboard sounds to such degree.
Yeah, it´s frustrating but not nearly as much as the turd cars from 2014-2016.
At least the current cars are insanely fast on places like Suzuka(which I care more). Eventhough they lapped 2s slower than previous generation cars(2019), they were MUCH quicker on the corners, I´m sure you remember very well. So, it´s not the aero regulation´s fault.
The only people who dislikes the current regulation are the same group of people that loved the horrible 2014 one(ie Hamilton fans). We have closer racing now, pretty and fast cars, and the field is more bunched up.
The cars look like heavy boats on the slow corners because Pirelli supply turd tyres. Super GT cars(around 400kg heavier than current F1) take Suzuka´s hairpin at similar speeds to F1(72 vs ~75kmh, on average of all the onboards you shared) and that with narrower tyres. Pirelli tyres were already slow on lighter F1 cars, now it just derailed more.
Pirelli says they have additional compounds into their tyres this year and it´s tyres are, on average, 1.5s faster. Maybe there will be noticeable difference, eventhough I didn´t spot any on Perez lap(still lazy and slow to my eyes, and that´s despite RB looking the sharpest of all cars by a good margin)
Red Bull has the least amount of development yet they opened the gap to Ferrari and Mercedes! This just shows that even with the sliding scale development, big teams will always produce better cars! Says a lot about the new rules, budget cap and penalties when surpassing the budget cap!
*success ballast sounds like a nice penalty for a team cheating the budget cap…after all the reduced development didn’t do any harm to them! They will dominate 2023 even with 63% of development…
For teams that were not able to outdevelop RB when they spent 70 million a year more year after year you couldn't possibly have been expecting another outcome than we have now. https://www.essentiallysports.com/f1-ne ... l-ferrari/
BTW: fill in RB 2021 spend the right way and they are under the budgetcap (catering by % of personnel that falls under cap and spareparts by june 2022 rule) so it's an administrative breach, no overspend in reality.
Redbull was one of the biggest spenders I believe, they wasn't a poor back of the grid budgeted team.
RBR was the only top team that never had to develop their own engines, comparing budgets to make that conclusion when other teams were full works and they were just buying engines doesn't make much sense.
For teams that were not able to outdevelop RB when they spent 70 million a year more year after year you couldn't possibly have been expecting another outcome than we have now. https://www.essentiallysports.com/f1-ne ... l-ferrari/
BTW: fill in RB 2021 spend the right way and they are under the budgetcap (catering by % of personnel that falls under cap and spareparts by june 2022 rule) so it's an administrative breach, no overspend in reality.
Redbull was one of the biggest spenders I believe, they wasn't a poor back of the grid budgeted team.
RBR was the only top team that never had to develop their own engines, comparing budgets to make that conclusion when other teams were full works and they were just buying engines doesn't make much sense.
those budgets don't include engines. They are team budgets.
Redbull was one of the biggest spenders I believe, they wasn't a poor back of the grid budgeted team.
RBR was the only top team that never had to develop their own engines, comparing budgets to make that conclusion when other teams were full works and they were just buying engines doesn't make much sense.
those budgets don't include engines. They are team budgets.
The engine budgets would frighten you...
That's fair. I think the engine budget is about the same amount on its own, at least according to this:
RBR was the only top team that never had to develop their own engines, comparing budgets to make that conclusion when other teams were full works and they were just buying engines doesn't make much sense.
those budgets don't include engines. They are team budgets.
The engine budgets would frighten you...
That's fair. I think the engine budget is about the same amount on its own, at least according to this:
According to that, excluding engine people, RBR had 680 employees working for the team, Ferrari had 480 and Mercedes 500.
The estimated number of employees working in the team (not the engine side) in 2018 in that link is 680 for Red Bull. 950 for Mercedes and 950 for Ferrari.
I'd have to laugh very hard if you think Mercedes only had about 500 team staff. . Not only is that number comically low, but it's less than the figures reported for Williams in that same source. So you can be sure it's 950, not 500 RB had always been the smallest of the big 3. Newey always complained about this.
The 480 figure is the number of engine staff at Ferrari and the 500 figure for Mercedes is the number of engine staff Brixworth . These are separate figures to that of the team and they are just estimates.
. Not only is that number comically low, but it's less than the figures reported for Williams in that same source. So you can be sure it's 950, not 500