This forum contains threads to discuss teams themselves. Anything not technical about the cars, including restructuring, performances etc belongs here.
Can someone tell me please how good is Merc's wind tunnel compared to the other teams?
It's the same one Aston Martin is using. Plenty good enough.
Aston used RB's general sidepod design last year, then waited a year and added the RB floor and perhaps some other concepts they found using Merc's wind tunnel and increased CFD time... And they are still around .6 in single lap and almost a minute off race pace of RB. Thus, the Aston situation supports what Merc has been saying about it not being helpful to just copy RB's design, because you still end up behind them and a year further away from their understanding of the design. This means that RB will be dominant in the way Merc was between 2014-2020. If that's the case, the best AM, Ferrari and Merc can hope for is second best. This is why it makes sense that they didn't want to go in the same design direction as RB, but it definitely doesn't answer why they stuck with a design that they said would go at the front of the factory to remind them how bad it can get. Which leaves the key question: Is there either a fourth design philosophy that is faster than RB, or can they spot a modification to RB's design that RB have missed?
Last edited by BAKf1 on 06 Mar 2023, 19:39, edited 1 time in total.
Do people not realize that Daimler AG (Mercedes parent company) have a large holding in Aston Martin Lagonda PLC. Tobias Moers, the ex head of AMG Mercedes is now CEO of Aston!
Merc have had their run in F1 and all the publicity that goes with it, the "brand" the bigwigs are pushing now is Aston Martin as can be seen by the safety car changes and factory/people investment.
If you think it`s all Lawrence Stroll behind this, think again, the full weight of the parent company is behind Aston and not the team that carries its name but is two thirds owned by Ineos and Wolff.
They`re now pretty much just another team making up the numbers, in my opinion Aston Martin will take their place in the top three and when the next concorde agreement comes round, just before the new engine regs (2026) I wouldn`t be surprised if the team gets sold or Daimler pull out completely.
The top engineers/people aren`t there anymore and haven`t been for a few years, Think Cowell(engine), Costa(design+engineering), Vowles(Srategy), Braun(Technical),Lowe (good with suspension), Lauda(all round good egg). James Allison steping back a bit and being replaced with Elliot can`t have helped either, I really don`t get a good F1 vibe off the bloke, he seems nice enough though, maybe that`s half the problem!
I have an idea to add a sweeping undercut to the zero-pods.
The sidepod has to go straight down to the floor or be convex (outwards) in order to legalise the SIPS wing. If there was an undercut (concave curve) to the sidepod, the SIPS wing is not legal.
It's not possible to have an undercut and keep the SIPS wing.
Has Mercedes messed up their Suspension or was it just a setup issue? Their tyre life has been screwed. The long run data suggested as such in testing and the race yesterday clearly exposed that. Last year, it was their major strength.
Little bit of rear downforce was they are saying. Means poor traction so less tyre life. Bahrain track exposed this more too.
I have an idea to add a sweeping undercut to the zero-pods.
The sidepod has to go straight down to the floor or be convex (outwards) in order to legalise the SIPS wing. If there was an undercut (concave curve) to the sidepod, the SIPS wing is not legal.
It's not possible to have an undercut and keep the SIPS wing.
Start it after the SIPs wing. Simples.
You cant. The view from the front would contain 1 too many shapes. Your only allowed a maximum of 2.
The sidepod has to go straight down to the floor or be convex (outwards) in order to legalise the SIPS wing. If there was an undercut (concave curve) to the sidepod, the SIPS wing is not legal.
It's not possible to have an undercut and keep the SIPS wing.
Start it after the SIPs wing. Simples.
You cant. The view from the front would contain 1 too many shapes. Your only allowed a maximum of 2.
It would not pass any more curves than RedBull or Ferrari.
Count how many curves on a cross section of this side pod..
Last edited by PlatinumZealot on 06 Mar 2023, 20:49, edited 3 times in total.
Different legality box id imagine. I’m not even sure how it would work/look even if they could do it. If the legality box for the intake scoops is say 450mm from the front for example , then you have to include your SIS/mid wing into that.
Care to annotate where the legality boxes are in regards to the current setup they have?
Even so, if they maintain that SIS, it can only have 1 plane that goes down to the floor. It would just be a major obstruction trying to flat a engine cover out after your bodywork to keep the mid wing legal. It would just be a huge obstruction in the airflow.
