2024 Mclaren Formula 1 Team

[LionsHeart]

Sums it up. Sometimes the rules give and sometimes they take.

Well, there are completely different things here, in one case there is a safety car, in the other there are red flags that can teleport the driver back to the top of the table. In both cases there is a luck factor.

And if everything is clear with the safety car, the race director makes the decision there, then in the case of red flags I would change a couple of rules. For example, a ban on changing tires, provided that the tires are intact and in good order, there is no puncture or slow puncture. If there is one, then allow this driver to change tires, but at the same time oblige him to change tires later in the race.

I don't follow IndyCar or Nascar, but I sometimes follow the guys who play iRacing, and I know some of the rules, including in real racing. For example, under red flags, cars cannot be touched, repairs cannot be made, and tires cannot be changed.

For example, in Formula 1 I would allow teams to repair cars under red flags, but would prohibit changing tires. Tire changes should only occur during the race when drivers are in race mode. For Monaco specifically, it is not necessary to ask Pirelli to bring even softer sets of tires. It is enough to oblige all teams to make two pits.

You explained it perfectly in the first statement. It is luck, and sometimes it goes your way and sometimes it doesn't. The rules don't always and can't always work for everyone, but in general they don't discriminate save a few high profile examples over the years and it does balance out. Ish.

Our luck gave us a race win that we didn't outright deserve because of our Saturday performance, so for me I take it with good grace when we get it our way or when we don't.

That's exactly how it is. You just have to accept it.

Mwillems, about on the next update package: Lando said after winning in Miami that the victory came almost on time, directly hinting that he expected to win in his home country at Silverstone. Is this a definite hint that the team will bring a second package there? The team has already completed three racing weekends with the updated chassis. Next on the calendar are Canada, Spain, Austria and only then Great Britain. How likely is it that the next package will appear there?

There is really one caveat here: the next three weekends will take place in June, and Silverstone takes place on July 5-7. There are exactly 2 months between the weekend in Miami and Silverstone. Will the team have time to prepare updates? If we assume that the development was completed back in March, and then the process of manufacturing all the parts and spare parts went on. In this case, we have the whole of April, May, maybe the beginning of June to develop the next updates, and then the production of new parts that still need to be produced for two chassis.

Or has the lag between development and appearance on the track become even longer now? Previously, I remember teams could bring updates in a month if they managed to adopt successful concepts from other teams, be it the exhaust system or aerodynamic parts.

[mwillems]

That's exactly how it is. You just have to accept it.

Mwillems, about on the next update package: Lando said after winning in Miami that the victory came almost on time, directly hinting that he expected to win in his home country at Silverstone. Is this a definite hint that the team will bring a second package there? The team has already completed three racing weekends with the updated chassis. Next on the calendar are Canada, Spain, Austria and only then Great Britain. How likely is it that the next package will appear there?

There is really one caveat here: the next three weekends will take place in June, and Silverstone takes place on July 5-7. There are exactly 2 months between the weekend in Miami and Silverstone. Will the team have time to prepare updates? If we assume that the development was completed back in March, and then the process of manufacturing all the parts and spare parts went on. In this case, we have the whole of April, May, maybe the beginning of June to develop the next updates, and then the production of new parts that still need to be produced for two chassis.

Or has the lag between development and appearance on the track become even longer now? Previously, I remember teams could bring updates in a month if they managed to adopt successful concepts from other teams, be it the exhaust system or aerodynamic parts.

Speaking from my own uneducated guess, I think the capabilities of the three cars are similar and that some of the differences are in how they are being set up. Obviously there are differences in what the car can do, Red Bull and bumps are a good example, but in terms of outright downforce and speed through different corners, these cars are quite close I think.

So I'm not sure if we will be the team to win at Silverstone, I think it is really hard to understand who will be on top now at any given track and I think the drivers will be in a position to make a bigger difference at many of the weekends than they have in the recent past.

I Hope we have updates before the summer break but will they be in time for Silverstone? I guess it depends. Do many of the parts need releasing as a complete package or are we in a position to bring changes piece by piece? As a package, somewhere between Silverstone and Spa seems sensible but I guess we need to wait for some clues from the team. They suggested 2-3 big upgrades this year, if it is only 2 then perhaps it will be a bigger upgrade in the second half.

[BMMR61]

For me it was a racing incident. Sainz could have driven better for sure, but it wasn't a punishable offence I don't think. It is frustrating, but no more.

Yep. There seems a kind of magnetic attraction Carlos's Ferrari has for Oscar, plenty of touches going back to Spa 2023. And Carlos seems to have a bit of an attitude of entitlement when it comes to Oscar that he doesn't show with most clashes. Maybe it's an attitude to a rookie who's up there with the big boys. Oscar just stays chill..... He's coming.... I'm sure his first win will come soon, maybe Silverstone or Qatar - he's getting stronger and stronger in subtle ways. I would say the floor damage would account for his loss of pace in the last 10 laps when the heat went on.

[mwillems]

The team think Piastri lost .25s once they'd repaired the car as much as they could.

Naturally that wouldn't reduce his total Race time, but it would have given him more tire life at the end and he'd have been able to keep a bigger gap to Sainz and pull away from Norris. Not sure he'd have kept sight of Leclerc but hey, hood performance.

https://www.racefans.net/2024/05/27/sai ... p-mclaren/

Edit: corrected typo from would to wouldn't

[HammerHead]

The only "complaint" I have about the Sainz situation is that all the running cars except Zhao passed the s1 line (I think?)

So the order is clear, Zhao was last, the rest passed the line. There was no need to go back to an earlier point to establish the correct order.

If there had been two or more cars, fine, but the sole purpose is to establish an order. So you don't need every car, you just need all-but-one.

Regardless, it was a good result and I'm feeling optimistic for the rest of the season, so I'll get over it!

[LionsHeart]

The team think Piastri lost .25s once they'd repaired the car as much as they could.

Naturally that would reduce his total Race time, but it would have given him more tire life at the end and he'd have been able to keep a bigger gap to Sainz and pull away from Norris. Not sure he'd have kept sight of Leclerc but hey, hood performance.

https://www.racefans.net/2024/05/27/sai ... p-mclaren/

Well, it wouldn't affect the race at all. Russell told his engineer that he could go 3 seconds faster, which of course I didn't believe. Then Leclerc wanted to speed up, which he was forbidden to do. Then I see how Bottas compensates for 17 seconds in 5 laps after his pit stop. But then he runs into Zhou and cannot overtake him. A typical case for Monaco, when track position is more important than speed. Therefore, in the case of Oscar, this did not affect his race in any way, and most importantly, the outcome of the race would not have changed.

I still remember Ricciardo's victory, when even with the hybrid part failing he still won. This is enough to understand.

Changed your avatar? At first I even thought that there was a new person on the forum.

[mwillems]

The team think Piastri lost .25s once they'd repaired the car as much as they could.

Naturally that would reduce his total Race time, but it would have given him more tire life at the end and he'd have been able to keep a bigger gap to Sainz and pull away from Norris. Not sure he'd have kept sight of Leclerc but hey, hood performance.

https://www.racefans.net/2024/05/27/sai ... p-mclaren/

Well, it wouldn't affect the race at all. Russell told his engineer that he could go 3 seconds faster, which of course I didn't believe. Then Leclerc wanted to speed up, which he was forbidden to do. Then I see how Bottas compensates for 17 seconds in 5 laps after his pit stop. But then he runs into Zhou and cannot overtake him. A typical case for Monaco, when track position is more important than speed. Therefore, in the case of Oscar, this did not affect his race in any way, and most importantly, the outcome of the race would not have changed.

I still remember Ricciardo's victory, when even with the hybrid part failing he still won. This is enough to understand.

Changed your avatar? At first I even thought that there was a new person on the forum.

I meant to say wouldn't and not would, it was a typo about the race time.

[LionsHeart]

The only "complaint" I have about the Sainz situation is that all the running cars except Zhao passed the s1 line (I think?)

So the order is clear, Zhao was last, the rest passed the line. There was no need to go back to an earlier point to establish the correct order.

If there had been two or more cars, fine, but the sole purpose is to establish an order. So you don't need every car, you just need all-but-one.

Regardless, it was a good result and I'm feeling optimistic for the rest of the season, so I'll get over it!

I think everything is much simpler. The rules apparently state that all drivers who can drive must have time to cross the first or second sector of the track, from where the actual cutoff will take place. There's a lot of electronics and stuff in there, so it can't be easily marked or removed. Therefore, if the cars did not even have time to pass the first sector, then the cutoff is carried out along the first line of the safety car. And this is actually the first turn. Therefore, Sainz is third at the restart, and Stroll is in front of Ricciardo. Although according to the qualifying results, Ricciardo is higher than Stroll.

[dia6olo]

Sums it up. Sometimes the rules give and sometimes they take.

I bet it didn't feel unfair to him when he went from P4 to P1 because of a safety car at Miami...

[billamend]

I bet it didn't feel unfair to him when he went from P4 to P1 because of a safety car at Miami...

How is that a comparable situation??

[dia6olo]

I bet it didn't feel unfair to him when he went from P4 to P1 because of a safety car at Miami...

How is that a comparable situation??

How is it not?
Did the powers that be apply a different set of rules than normal to accommodate Sainz?
No they did not, Sainz was fortunate just as Norris was at Miami, no rules were broken or bent in both cases.

[Emag]

I bet it didn't feel unfair to him when he went from P4 to P1 because of a safety car at Miami...

How is that a comparable situation??

How is it not?
Did the powers that be apply a different set of rules than normal to accommodate Sainz?
No they did not, Sainz was fortunate just as Norris was at Miami, no rules were broken or bent in both cases.

Getting a self-inflicted puncture in the first lap. Then the race gets red flagged and all but one car passes through the safety car line. A single car, which is enough for stewards to reset back to the initial order, is exactly the same magnitude of luck compared to managing your tires in the first stint to the best of your abilities, proceeding to set the pace on track for continuous laps, even compared to drivers which already had pit for fresh tires, and extending for a hope of a possible safety car on a track which has had a 100% safety car chance in the years we have raced.

Of course, these are exactly the same amount of lucky.

Not to mention the impeding incident in qualifying for which he did not get penalized, despite doing exactly the same thing a driver who got penalized just a week before did.

[ringo]

These last few pages sounds like the race thread.

[mwillems]

How is that a comparable situation??

How is it not?
Did the powers that be apply a different set of rules than normal to accommodate Sainz?
No they did not, Sainz was fortunate just as Norris was at Miami, no rules were broken or bent in both cases.

Getting a self-inflicted puncture in the first lap. Then the race gets red flagged and all but one car passes through the safety car line. A single car, which is enough for stewards to reset back to the initial order, is exactly the same magnitude of luck compared to managing your tires in the first stint to the best of your abilities, proceeding to set the pace on track for continuous laps, even compared to drivers which already had pit for fresh tires, and extending for a hope of a possible safety car on a track which has had a 100% safety car chance in the years we have raced.

Of course, these are exactly the same amount of lucky.

Not to mention the impeding incident in qualifying for which he did not get penalized, despite doing exactly the same thing a driver who got penalized just a week before did.

The impeding incident is a separate issue and you appear to be making it about your frustration with Sainz rather than the right outcomes. I agree the impeding should have been a penalty, the first lap incident wasn't and he was lucky with the restart.

Remember though that Lando did a false start that was obvious to the world and didn't get penalised because the automatic system to flag false alarms is flawed? We catch just as many breaks as others, and misfortune.

[dia6olo]

How is that a comparable situation??

How is it not?
Did the powers that be apply a different set of rules than normal to accommodate Sainz?
No they did not, Sainz was fortunate just as Norris was at Miami, no rules were broken or bent in both cases.

Getting a self-inflicted puncture in the first lap. Then the race gets red flagged and all but one car passes through the safety car line. A single car, which is enough for stewards to reset back to the initial order, is exactly the same magnitude of luck compared to managing your tires in the first stint to the best of your abilities, proceeding to set the pace on track for continuous laps, even compared to drivers which already had pit for fresh tires, and extending for a hope of a possible safety car on a track which has had a 100% safety car chance in the years we have raced.

Of course, these are exactly the same amount of lucky.

Not to mention the impeding incident in qualifying for which he did not get penalized, despite doing exactly the same thing a driver who got penalized just a week before did.

The puncture is irrelevant, the correct rules were applied.
As for a penalty, let's not go there, it was a racing incident to pretty much everyone including the stewards, the only people that saw it different were McLaren people, what a shocker...