Hoffman900 wrote: ↑22 Apr 2024, 18:38
I’m always reminded that there is no guarantee of a fix either, because the issues that caused it to be wrong in the first place (something like correlation) aren’t a given to be fixed.
People don’t design things to be “wrong” from the get go and unless the tools and knowledge on the front end of the design is completely understood, you’ll never fully correct anything.
Three seasons in, and it’s clear Mercedes is having big issues with their modeling, correlation, and engineering prowess. How many times now have we heard that they “fixed it” over the last three seasons?
THIS!
I don`t know now how many are reading other threads but in the Ferrari team thread there is the following post from our forum member @ferrarifire, in which he explains (don`t know how much are speculations, rumors, or the plain truth) why Merc team is struggling with the correlations between the simulations and the real world:
“There is a lot of emotional discussion going on here. Have we considered how Ferrari's on-track results have suddenly improved? Simulations, software, edge computing, and AI play a more significant role in car design than before. Ferrari has made strategic investments in these areas for the last two years, starting with the replacement of Spyder with Dynisma and its driver feedback simulator. They've also partnered with Amazon, incorporating edge computing (sending data from the car to the AWS cloud along with simulations). They've recently updated their race strategy software with a new AI model. These strategic moves were made before the cost cap was tactically implemented.
Last year was primarily about understanding the new systems and in the initial stages, Ferrari engineers struggled as there was a lot of new learning. Now they are comfortable with these systems and this is a major reason why Ferrari has managed to catch up with Mercedes and McLaren, even though Ferrari adopted the design quite late. These processes were previously conducted internally at Ferrari and lacked a mature model, as Ferrari relied heavily on track testing data. Ferrari is more optimistic than before because of these investments in tech. Ferrari has always had a strong engine department; it was not a concern. We can say that Ferrari will start challenging Red Bull much better than before. Now all Ferrari needs is a few leaders and engineers to lead and strengthen the existing groups.
Red Bull made these strategic investments at least five to seven years ago. Oracle OCI is one of the main reasons for Red Bull's success, and Horner has mentioned this multiple times in interviews. They had a head start since there was no need for them to focus on engines and they did all the investments in simulations and tech software. We always tag Adrian as the design guru but in reality, he is supported by 100+ engineers in the background with these softwares. There is no denial about his leadership qualities but you can't attribute a team's success to an individual.
Note, Mercedes is struggling for the same reason. Their HPP division uses outdated software and simulations (I can vouch for this as my friend works there), and they won't recover until they update their simulation systems and resolve their on-track correlation issues. Of course, they won't publicly acknowledge this.
Most discussions focus on individuals, but in reality, having the right infrastructure is more critical. It's also important to have a team that understands these systems well because if your design is flawed, everything else will suffer.”
Source:
viewtopic.php?p=1205399#p1205399
There were some questions after this post which he replied with this post:
“Dont want to go too much in details , In short i have few connections in mercedes hpp , obviously they know about their competitors SWOT more than what is available in public forum . Now more or less ferrari have the required ingredients to success and lets see how it is getting unfolded in the future . This also indirectly answers the question about Lewis switch . f1 racing is a very small closed group and everyone knows where the wind is moving .”
Source:
viewtopic.php?p=1205410#p1205410
From my point of view, I`m on the AI and machine learning side and I don`t understand why many deny what he is saying. Firstly I`m sure they didn`t know much about this stuff and more of that are thinking there is a kinda mumbo-jumbo thing. This is the old generation who denies what valuable assets these things are nowadays, considering there will always be some genius like Newey who could lead to which design directions the car should go. I know it’s hard to recognize, but they should acknowledge that this is the future. Unfortunately, they don`t know or disregard that machine learning could be filled with all the knowledge available now and could easily surpass in creativity and productivity what a group of people or even a genius can do. That`s why Ferrari is getting rid of that engineer responsible for simulations. More of that, back from the last couple of years and putting pieces together I understand in this context why Newey is overrated now, although not trying to deny or disregard his achievements and contributions to this sport. I mean he is a living legend, a kinda “dinosaur„ who in last year's official F1 podcast himself stated that he finds computers & CFD very annoying. Sadly it seems that his time was past now …
