2023 Scuderia Ferrari F1 Team

[ferkan]

Binotto was not fit for TP, he should have been given the same financial incentives to step back to TD, just put PR out there that due to the scope of job, and quality you have as technical person, TP was assigned to someone else to take burden of you.

In any case, Binotto's idea to pursue TP and TD at the same time was his downfall (and was quite a optimistic idea tbh).

[Vanja #66]

sainz had a lot more bouncing on his car, so they couldnt had the same setup for both cars.
this should be de explanation about the diferent degradetion and de higher straight speed for Sainz.

I think Ferrari are always sabotaging his throttle pedal at 95% max and also reduce his steering wheel angles

[organic]

Sainz's bouncing only started when his fuel tank got empty enough. Leclerc's car broke down before that could happen for him too

[PlatinumZealot]

Binotto was not fit for TP, he should have been given the same financial incentives to step back to TD, just put PR out there that due to the scope of job, and quality you have as technical person, TP was assigned to someone else to take burden of you.

In any case, Binotto's idea to pursue TP and TD at the same time was his downfall (and was quite a optimistic idea tbh).

A more tasteful position for him would be CTO. It's a director role and he gets to influence making the car.... But what news seems to say is that Binotto decided to resign on his own out of "honour" not sure how true this is tho.


On Sainz. He drives with a very different style to Leclerc. Last year it was the same pattern at high traction tracks.

[organic]

It was the same pattern at every track

[ing.]

To be honest, this team absolutely does deserve bashing. They have failed to deliver for years and even still they make silly mistakes. Imagine Lec losing both his CEs in one race. Potentially starting with a penalty on the 2nd race. Such gross incompetence should not happen inside a championship contender team.

What does not deserve bashing is the car concept & direction. It has potential and is limited by weak front end problems. That and porpoising.

Agree… and disagree about the car concept. With almost 3/4 of a year to prepare (with clear targets and objectives) and with basically just a warmed over ‘22 car—same roll-hoop/inlet, same cooling scheme inside similar “cleaned-up” sidepods, same suspension layout with front push-rod, rear pull-rod—with only the steering rack lowered to provide lower CG, better aero management and maybe better bump-steer characteristics this car should have hit the ground running and chased the RBs hard. Not run around chasing “set-up” issues, floppy front and rear wings, toasted electrics and tires, etc.

So, yeah, maybe a legacy of the Binotto era—where no faults were seen or admitted—and maybe because of the TD vacuum left by the same Binotto, but not an impressive start by the team. Hope they get their act together soon for their sake.

Yes but we cant say for sure that these are concept problems. These are more like teething issues, which a top team shouldnt have, but if the pace is there after solving them then there's nothing lost yet for a championship fight. Also a lot of wing issues are likely due to aggressive weight saving rather than total incompetence. Can't really fault them there, plus they'll prbly get on top of those quite easily.

I think it is the concept at fault allied to lack of creativity—wow, tiny little S-duct!—and no new ideas. They couldn’t even change the lower SIS tubes so as to eventually try a larger undercut if in-season development required this. The pull-quote from this Autosport article sums it up pretty nicely:

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/why-a ... /10441483/

”While others have ploughed their own furrow – like Ferrari with its in-wash solution and Mercedes with its zero-pod idea – the evidence appears to be mounting that the best design for the 2022 rules era cars is what Red Bull has done”

If they did offer Sanchez a lower position, I expect they have an internal candidate to replace him as these aero groups are so big.

[JPBD1990]

Binotto decided to resign of his own volition the same way politicians resign after a scandal. He was asked to, or be fired. This is typical Ferrari - they do poorly, so they fire everyone, and then we’re left with no one. Looks like Sanchez is the next in a long line, but I hope it’s simply BS.

As others have pointed out, yes Bahrain was a disaster - but it’s all relative. Everyone bar redbull (and maybe Aston considering their progress) should be disappointed. Only redbull have ‘succeeded’. So should everyone be fired? Surely not.

The SF-23 is still the second best car. They’ve done the best job, bar redbull, regardless of the failure in the ES/ECU, and regardless of the wobbly wing. You shoot for the stars and hope you reach the moon. Better they go aggressive on weight saving (using the example people have clung to today) than to go conservative and simply be slow (F14T anyone?)

Is Sanchez has really been forced to fall on the blade for this round of ‘failure’ then the brain drain continues. Simple as.

[Vanja #66]

Right, Autosport said Ferrari mucked it up again, must be true. Let's pack it up everyone, Max is 5-times WDC already, see you in 26...

[LM10]

I think it is the concept at fault allied to lack of creativity—wow, tiny little S-duct!—and no new ideas. They couldn’t even change the lower SIS tubes so as to eventually try a larger undercut if in-season development required this.

Sure, it's the concept... the concept which worked perfectly last season. But if you say so, it is true, right?

Lack of creativity? The team which has been one of the most creative ones in the last few years?

New ideas? S-duct, lowering the chassis on the front to allow a new suspension geometry, a new front nose and wing, an amazingly tight engine cover... to name a few. In short, many changes which absolutely make sense. These are the obvious ones only.

Lower SIS tube to "TRY" a larger undercut? What?

To sum it up: What are you talking about?

[organic]

Head of aerodynamics David Sanchez has resigned, destination McLaren.
The successor is still unknown but it is believed to be an internal resource.

[SoulPancake13]

Sanchez is off to McLaren then. Great pick up by them, wouldn't be shocked to see him do well over there. Really disappointed.

Nothing really in the formu1a uno article that explains why he is leaving. Having Binotto and Sanchez leave within months of one another is a huge technical blow...

[LM10]

Looking at his achievement as a leader in designing the F1-75, which was a wonderful car, that's a sad thing. Probably a product of big Ferrari bosses having no understanding of the technical aspect of F1 yet again. I don't believe that this was Fred's move.

[MTL79]

Binotto decided to resign of his own volition the same way politicians resign after a scandal. He was asked to, or be fired. This is typical Ferrari - they do poorly, so they fire everyone, and then we’re left with no one. Looks like Sanchez is the next in a long line, but I hope it’s simply BS.

As others have pointed out, yes Bahrain was a disaster - but it’s all relative. Everyone bar redbull (and maybe Aston considering their progress) should be disappointed. Only redbull have ‘succeeded’. So should everyone be fired? Surely not.

The SF-23 is still the second best car. They’ve done the best job, bar redbull, regardless of the failure in the ES/ECU, and regardless of the wobbly wing. You shoot for the stars and hope you reach the moon. Better they go aggressive on weight saving (using the example people have clung to today) than to go conservative and simply be slow (F14T anyone?)

Is Sanchez has really been forced to fall on the blade for this round of ‘failure’ then the brain drain continues. Simple as.

Maybe they want to have the right people in place for the new regulations in 2026. That may mean sacrificing 2023, but what do I know.

[ing.]

I think it is the concept at fault allied to lack of creativity—wow, tiny little S-duct!—and no new ideas. They couldn’t even change the lower SIS tubes so as to eventually try a larger undercut if in-season development required this.

Sure, it's the concept... the concept which worked perfectly last season. But if you say so, it is true, right?

Lack of creativity? The team which has been one of the most creative ones in the last few years?

New ideas? S-duct, lowering the chassis on the front to allow a new suspension geometry, a new front nose and wing, an amazingly tight engine cover... to name a few. In short, many changes which absolutely make sense. These are the obvious ones only.

Lower SIS tube to "TRY" a larger undercut? What?

To sum it up: What are you talking about?

Are you referring to the concept that worked so well that they almost got beat by Merc after they had to fix the floor, post TD? The concept that, after 3 days testing and 3 practice sessions they were still trying to find the proper set-up? The same concept used by Haas to have a stinker of a race? Early days yet—and hope to see an improvement—but doesn’t sound good to me.

Also, I’m not alone in saying it. Here’s Autosport’s take:
“While others have ploughed their own furrow – like Ferrari with its in-wash solution and Mercedes with its zero-pod idea – the evidence appears to be mounting that the best design for the 2022 rules era cars is what Red Bull has done.”

As for creativity, apart from the high-mounted sidepod inlets—that everyone else copied —and last year’s car that stopped working after they have to fix their floor trick, they have done nothing innovative. The previous era cars all had the same nose (more or less) year in and year out while the opposition were all trying new designs.

Now, if they decided—like Aston Martin did last year—to go in a new development direction in-season (like Merc are doing) so as not to waste another year and the wind tunnel tells them a deeper undercut (like they did last year) is a big improvement, they won’t even be able to implement it because of the lower SIS location.

You almost always hear other teams say at their launch that they plan their design to allow for development, i.e., give themselves latitude to “try” new stuff—it’s called development—and you need to be able to apply it to the car without a complete redesign.

And just like Ferrari “tried” a new (for them—and again late to the party) single-pillar rear wing which was, sadly, a “flop”, so they’ll now “try” something else, yes?

[F1NAC]

Looking at his achievement as a leader in designing the F1-75, which was a wonderful car, that's a sad thing. Probably a product of big Ferrari bosses having no understanding of the technical aspect of F1 yet again. I don't believe that this was Fred's move.

But also under his guide there was SF90, SF1000 and SF21. Not much wonders