2023 - McLaren Formula 1 Team

[MTudor]

Was it just AoA because from what I saw the wings were also lowering and as the front wing gets too close to the ground it can stall. Do we know this wasn't happening? By doing so how much airflow was it preventing from reaching the floor?

But the point I was making was that the flexi wing changes wouldn't lose rear grip and that they are just about drag. It is the floor and underfloor changes that could affect downforce. I'm hoping there will be a flex comparison for visible aspects of the car that someone creates in time.

I'm interested to learn more on the effect downstream of the lowering wing though, if you have the time to explain.

From what I understood(I'm not a techy guy) the combination between the plank and flappy joints were acting like a 3rd wing creating extra downforce without any drag.

Which flappy joints? On the wing?

No,on the underfloor.

[mwillems]

From what I understood(I'm not a techy guy) the combination between the plank and flappy joints were acting like a 3rd wing creating extra downforce without any drag.

Which flappy joints? On the wing?

No,on the underfloor.

It'll be interesting to.understand that at some point.

But time will tell if this us a one off or the order has changed, a few races should do it.

[mclaren111]

https://sun9-14.userapi.com/impg/qqC29f ... type=album

Where did Lando lose his time ?

[CjC]

just watched an interview from Karun with Lando and George reacting to their Singapore friday practice laps on the sky pad thing. This was interesting in that even only after FP2, they knew exactly where everyone was at. Especially with Lando. It wasnt I think maybe this, maybe that - it was they are here, we are there - with absolute confidence. None of that "we dont know what programme they were running" stuff.
"Is there a chance you can out qualify the red bull" ... "absolutely, a lot of people will".

So when Sainz said that Red bull, Mercedes and Aston Martin have better deg than Ferrari, Ferrari in turn have better deg than Mclaren?

[mclaren111]

Lets assume by the end of the year that the rule change shafted Red Bull hard and Mclaren literally nullified the difference from the top would you go for.

A) A car evolution that will continue the current car but not sure how much more potential you can unlock.
B) A completely new car with new philosophy that might exploit some loophole and make you do a Red Bull but also a possibility you screw up the design.

I can answer this question very briefly, or I can write an entire dissertation. Which option would be better? I never want to hurt anyone here, offend anyone, etc., but from my point of view I can judge the following: the basic version of the chassis was extremely far from ideal. The direction in working with the car to eliminate weak points began in the winter; at the presentation, I remember very well Stella’s words that the car at the presentation was far from ideal and that they knew the weak points and that they knew how to eliminate the weak points in the aero package.

We saw the first work on the bottom in Baku, there were other minor updates earlier, but it doesn’t matter. The starting point will still be the weekend in Baku. Then the team presented the first sketches of a new direction of work, studied it well on the track and, based on this, developed a large package that was presented in Austria. And so he showed the capabilities of the machine. Next, consolidate the results of the work by bringing the second part of the update package.

I have repeatedly read Lando's words that the whole package has helped eliminate the downforce deficit, but the balance and handling remain essentially the same. The update package for Singapore should fix the problem in slow corners, I don't yet know how much the chassis balance has changed. If the updates here are only intended to add downforce, then by next year they will have to work significantly to improve handling, since this also affects tire wear and the driving approach that is comfortable for the driver.

The 2024 chassis needs to be designed to accommodate some modifications based on Rob Marshall's experience, as he needs to be very knowledgeable about suspension. Perhaps in 2024 more than half of the peloton will be very similar to the RB19. To what extent should McLaren redesign the car? I don't know. But I understand that the current direction of work is bearing fruit, and perhaps the resource and potential have not yet been exhausted.

Rob Marshall only starts in Jan 2024...

[MTudor]

Which flappy joints? On the wing?

No,on the underfloor.

It'll be interesting to.understand that at some point.

But time will tell if this us a one off or the order has changed, a few races should do it.

The FIA ​​specifies in four points what it considers to be illegal in the future: gaps, cuts or butt joints in the relevant part of the reference plane, systematic damage, cracks or breaks on the surface of the reference plane near the holes intended for the skids, highly flexible materials on the plank or folded surfaces and connections.
It is speculated that RBR is using flappy joints at those points and those at certain speed tend to form a 3rd wing.

[mwillems]

No,on the underfloor.

It'll be interesting to.understand that at some point.

But time will tell if this us a one off or the order has changed, a few races should do it.

The FIA ​​specifies in four points what it considers to be illegal in the future: gaps, cuts or butt joints in the relevant part of the reference plane, systematic damage, cracks or breaks on the surface of the reference plane near the holes intended for the skids, highly flexible materials on the plank or folded surfaces and connections.
It is speculated that RBR is using flappy joints and those at certain speed tend to form a 3rd wing.

Yeah the rules I get I'm curious to learn more about this third wing. There is a lot of speculation around the RB philosophy but so far I think it is just speculation.

Whilst I'm not suggesting this is you, there is a fervour to see RB fall flat and to label it with a reason, or in some cases argue it cant be the regs.

It sounds like you might know something but for me I will wait and see what happens over the next few races.

[djos]

I don’t think the TD is responsible for the issues RB had this weekend. If you look at the car changes for this weekend, there were some minor changes to the floor edges and the rear wing.

I think it’s much more likely that they screwed up the setup badly, combined with the gearbox shift quality issues they had.

viewtopic.php?p=1158932#p1158932

[LionsHeart]

Lets assume by the end of the year that the rule change shafted Red Bull hard and Mclaren literally nullified the difference from the top would you go for.

A) A car evolution that will continue the current car but not sure how much more potential you can unlock.
B) A completely new car with new philosophy that might exploit some loophole and make you do a Red Bull but also a possibility you screw up the design.

I can answer this question very briefly, or I can write an entire dissertation. Which option would be better? I never want to hurt anyone here, offend anyone, etc., but from my point of view I can judge the following: the basic version of the chassis was extremely far from ideal. The direction in working with the car to eliminate weak points began in the winter; at the presentation, I remember very well Stella’s words that the car at the presentation was far from ideal and that they knew the weak points and that they knew how to eliminate the weak points in the aero package.

We saw the first work on the bottom in Baku, there were other minor updates earlier, but it doesn’t matter. The starting point will still be the weekend in Baku. Then the team presented the first sketches of a new direction of work, studied it well on the track and, based on this, developed a large package that was presented in Austria. And so he showed the capabilities of the machine. Next, consolidate the results of the work by bringing the second part of the update package.

I have repeatedly read Lando's words that the whole package has helped eliminate the downforce deficit, but the balance and handling remain essentially the same. The update package for Singapore should fix the problem in slow corners, I don't yet know how much the chassis balance has changed. If the updates here are only intended to add downforce, then by next year they will have to work significantly to improve handling, since this also affects tire wear and the driving approach that is comfortable for the driver.

The 2024 chassis needs to be designed to accommodate some modifications based on Rob Marshall's experience, as he needs to be very knowledgeable about suspension. Perhaps in 2024 more than half of the peloton will be very similar to the RB19. To what extent should McLaren redesign the car? I don't know. But I understand that the current direction of work is bearing fruit, and perhaps the resource and potential have not yet been exhausted.

Rob Marshall only starts in Jan 2024...

You got me wrong. The 2024 chassis needs to be made in such a way that changes can be made to it, because that's when Rob comes in 2024.

[Ben1980]

Just realised a 1pm start. Bonus!

[mclaren111]

I can answer this question very briefly, or I can write an entire dissertation. Which option would be better? I never want to hurt anyone here, offend anyone, etc., but from my point of view I can judge the following: the basic version of the chassis was extremely far from ideal. The direction in working with the car to eliminate weak points began in the winter; at the presentation, I remember very well Stella’s words that the car at the presentation was far from ideal and that they knew the weak points and that they knew how to eliminate the weak points in the aero package.

We saw the first work on the bottom in Baku, there were other minor updates earlier, but it doesn’t matter. The starting point will still be the weekend in Baku. Then the team presented the first sketches of a new direction of work, studied it well on the track and, based on this, developed a large package that was presented in Austria. And so he showed the capabilities of the machine. Next, consolidate the results of the work by bringing the second part of the update package.

I have repeatedly read Lando's words that the whole package has helped eliminate the downforce deficit, but the balance and handling remain essentially the same. The update package for Singapore should fix the problem in slow corners, I don't yet know how much the chassis balance has changed. If the updates here are only intended to add downforce, then by next year they will have to work significantly to improve handling, since this also affects tire wear and the driving approach that is comfortable for the driver.

The 2024 chassis needs to be designed to accommodate some modifications based on Rob Marshall's experience, as he needs to be very knowledgeable about suspension. Perhaps in 2024 more than half of the peloton will be very similar to the RB19. To what extent should McLaren redesign the car? I don't know. But I understand that the current direction of work is bearing fruit, and perhaps the resource and potential have not yet been exhausted.

Rob Marshall only starts in Jan 2024...

You got me wrong. The 2024 chassis needs to be made in such a way that changes can be made to it, because that's when Rob comes in 2024.

[FittingMechanics]

I don’t think the TD is responsible for the issues RB had this weekend. If you look at the car changes for this weekend, there were some minor changes to the floor edges and the rear wing.

I think it’s much more likely that they screwed up the setup badly, combined with the gearbox shift quality issues they had.

viewtopic.php?p=1158932#p1158932

They don't have to publish changes made in order to satisfy TD - for example making wings stronger or making them in a different way. They need to publish changes only if they changed the design/idea.

[mwillems]

I don’t think the TD is responsible for the issues RB had this weekend. If you look at the car changes for this weekend, there were some minor changes to the floor edges and the rear wing.

I think it’s much more likely that they screwed up the setup badly, combined with the gearbox shift quality issues they had.

viewtopic.php?p=1158932#p1158932

They don't have to detail any of the TD changes.

[djos]

I don’t think the TD is responsible for the issues RB had this weekend. If you look at the car changes for this weekend, there were some minor changes to the floor edges and the rear wing.

I think it’s much more likely that they screwed up the setup badly, combined with the gearbox shift quality issues they had.

viewtopic.php?p=1158932#p1158932

They don't have to publish changes made in order to satisfy TD - for example making wings stronger or making them in a different way. They need to publish changes only if they changed the design/idea.

AIUI, If they changed the wings or the floor etc at all, they need to publish those changes. TD or not.

[MrGapes]

In terms of tyre strategies, It maybe better to go for the two extremities for Oscar, softs and pit early or hards and go long in search for free air.

Lando is on the dirty side (and the dirty side is terrible here) so keeping 4th will require a softer compound and some wide elbows, strategy is very dependent on the leaders. I think the car has good tyre wear compared to some, so maybe go softs, pit very early and go long on the hards till the end could be plausible.