2024 Oracle Red Bull Racing F1 Team

[organic]

I have never heard such a thing, and I don't think any F1 driver really likes a loose tail.
I do know Max prefers a very pointy front end, and can handle the loose tail which is sometimes a result of setting up a pointy front.
I think we have a pretty

At a given grip level, a more pointy front equals a looser tail, but yes, let's split that hair and make this place fun!

This isn't splitting hairs, it's correcting the concept of a drivers preferred style. You are turning a 'necessary evil' into a 'preference'. If you don't care about the accuracy of this then there isn't much point in discussing it either.

Ok but no driver actually wants the rear itself to be loose. So it's always an undesired characteristic.

When we as fans describe a driver preferring oversteer we are obviously (using context and logic) talking about liking the more positive turn-in rather than the loose rear given that no driver would like the loose rear itself. So it goes without saying in these discussions, in my opinion, what is being referred to

[Quantum]

He's a mechanic in the garage every weekend

Not sure I was clear.
Yes, he's a mechanic in the garage every weekend. We established this fact by way of the citations I provided.
Specifically, prepping the PU and checking it's fluids.
Not responsible for the brakes or any lines associated to the brake function. This would be a role for someone else. Maybe that's clearer.

Not sure if you were trying to be condescending, but it's not helpful to constructive discussion and not appreciated.

My point is that he doesn't work on the power unit in a vacuum. Your suggestion that because he works on the PU he would therefore necessarily not know anything about the braking system of the rb20 is ridiculous

I was making clear my point. There's nothing condescending or personal at all in my post. Please chill.
I provided a quote directly from an RB employer that is a mechanic for the team and installs PU's.
You replied that he is a mechanic for the team.
I outlined that he installs the PU for clarity.

I'll outline my point is not "ridiculous" (surely that's condescending )
And I will provide citations, which I note conspicuously absent in countering my post.

Phil Turner Chief Mechanic at RBR:

We build it in pieces. We have the chassis side, and the front end mechanic builds all the internal and external front suspension and fits all the driver controls—the brake pedal, throttle pedal, steering systems, braking systems. The number-one mechanic tends to build all the fuel systems inside the chassis. The second element of the car is the PU. We work alongside the PU guys to fit what we call the stage two kit to the engine—basically that includes clutches, oil and water pipes, ERS water systems. And the last bit is the gearbox. We also have a rear-end mechanic, who builds the external suspension and fits the rear wing. Everyone is bespoke to their different parts of the car,”

https://www.redbull.com/us-en/theredbul ... neers-rb19

It is safe to assert that what Calum knows about the braking system is about the same as the engine installer did in the MP4-13 brake-steer system. Not much at all.

[Holm86]

This valve getting stuck could explain the brake failure for Max in Melbourne, overheating only the right side brake disc

[Vaexa]

u/GaryGiesel (who, you know, actually works in the sport, unlike Windsor, Scarbs or the guy who wrote the RN365 article) seems convinced the system peddled by the article and Scarbs wouldn't even work.

https://www.reddit.com/r/F1Technical/co ... s/lidrnd8/

Even if this thing were real, the system Scarbs has shown literally wouldn’t work. The pressure everywhere in the rear hydraulic circuit will equalise so the valve doesn’t do anything unless it’s fully blocking off one side of the brakes (which it won’t be because you’d end up doubling the caliper pressure on the inside wheel or locking the pressure on in the outside one… not at all doing what you’d want)

We're all collectively falling for fanfiction sprinkled with some technical jargon because it fits some circumstantial evidence. Very disappointing.

[Holm86]

u/GaryGiesel (who, you know, actually works in the sport, unlike Windsor, Scarbs or the guy who wrote the RN365 article) seems convinced the system peddled by the article and Scarbs wouldn't even work.

https://www.reddit.com/r/F1Technical/co ... s/lidrnd8/

Even if this thing were real, the system Scarbs has shown literally wouldn’t work. The pressure everywhere in the rear hydraulic circuit will equalise so the valve doesn’t do anything unless it’s fully blocking off one side of the brakes (which it won’t be because you’d end up doubling the caliper pressure on the inside wheel or locking the pressure on in the outside one… not at all doing what you’d want)

We're all collectively falling for fanfiction sprinkled with some technical jargon because it fits some circumstantial evidence. Very disappointing.

These cars have variable brake pressure on the rear wheels due to variable ERS harvesting, so I'm pretty sure the "doubling of caliper pressure" could be worked around if that was the case

[214270]

Mark Hughes: https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/arti ... oho+Social

[Tiny73]

Isn’t Occam’s razor more relevant in his denial of this? He’s not going to say “yeah, you caught us, that’s what we were doing and got busted” is he?

[Vaexa]

Isn’t Occam’s razor more relevant in his denial of this? He’s not going to say “yeah, you caught us, that’s what we were doing and got busted” is he?

I find it far more likely he just wouldn't have said anything at all if Red Bull were actually doing anything like what the RN365 article proposed.

[Curbstone]

u/GaryGiesel (who, you know, actually works in the sport, unlike Windsor, Scarbs or the guy who wrote the RN365 article) seems convinced the system peddled by the article and Scarbs wouldn't even work.

https://www.reddit.com/r/F1Technical/co ... s/lidrnd8/

Even if this thing were real, the system Scarbs has shown literally wouldn’t work. The pressure everywhere in the rear hydraulic circuit will equalise so the valve doesn’t do anything unless it’s fully blocking off one side of the brakes (which it won’t be because you’d end up doubling the caliper pressure on the inside wheel or locking the pressure on in the outside one… not at all doing what you’d want)

We're all collectively falling for fanfiction sprinkled with some technical jargon because it fits some circumstantial evidence. Very disappointing.

These cars have variable brake pressure on the rear wheels due to variable ERS harvesting, so I'm pretty sure the "doubling of caliper pressure" could be worked around if that was the case

If you can achieve uneven braking through the ERS-system without being caught, why would you go through the trouble of trying to achieve the same thing with the traditional brake system?

I always thought highly of Scarbs, but I reckon GaryGiesel is right and Scarbs really misses some basic fluid mechanics in his design.

[yooogurt]

He's a mechanic in the garage every weekend

Not sure I was clear.
Yes, he's a mechanic in the garage every weekend. We established this fact by way of the citations I provided.
Specifically, prepping the PU and checking it's fluids.
Not responsible for the brakes or any lines associated to the brake function. This would be a role for someone else. Maybe that's clearer.

Have you ever seen a current employee admit that a team is using a gray zone of regulation?
It's obvious he would deny it, whether that theory is true or not.

[Holm86]

u/GaryGiesel (who, you know, actually works in the sport, unlike Windsor, Scarbs or the guy who wrote the RN365 article) seems convinced the system peddled by the article and Scarbs wouldn't even work.

https://www.reddit.com/r/F1Technical/co ... s/lidrnd8/



We're all collectively falling for fanfiction sprinkled with some technical jargon because it fits some circumstantial evidence. Very disappointing.

These cars have variable brake pressure on the rear wheels due to variable ERS harvesting, so I'm pretty sure the "doubling of caliper pressure" could be worked around if that was the case

If you can achieve uneven braking through the ERS-system without being caught, why would you go through the trouble of trying to achieve the same thing with the traditional brake system?

I always thought highly of Scarbs, but I reckon GaryGiesel is right and Scarbs really misses some basic fluid mechanics in his design.

Read it again, never said you could use the ERS system to achieve uneven braking left to right, i said the brake system already have valve reducing brake pressure to the rear when the ERS is harvesting, it could be used to not have double brake pressure on ONE caliper, but you would still need some sort of diverter valve left to right as scarbs is suggesting. And nobody is saying that scarbs drawing is 100% correct, it's only a suggestion

[basti313]

This valve getting stuck could explain the brake failure for Max in Melbourne, overheating only the right side brake disc

No. The idea of a valve is just completely wrong. This would need an adjustable pressure regulator and bleeding system which is very obvious and blatant cheating as by the rules since years. You are on the wrong track with this, sorry.
Brake pad force left to right NEEDS to be the same by the rules since many years.

The new rule clarification only goes into ERS and engine braking. It simply has nothing to do with hydraulics.

If you can achieve uneven braking through the ERS-system without being caught, why would you go through the trouble of trying to achieve the same thing with the traditional brake system?

I am surprised, but most posters here on this brake topic do not even know about the brake-by-wire system or how it works.

Funny thing with the new rule: In principle a differential always gives asymmetric engine braking depending on the steering angle...so I have a feeling they really had issues with even finding that wording.

The most clear indication for me is the downshift issues. It was always ridiculous, slapstick how RedBull was struggling with shifting gears while the AT/RB was somehow able to operate the same engine and gearbox. In hindsight that nicely fits the tracks where they were struggling with braking or getting the car round a corner. So for me this is the smoking gun...

I always thought highly of Scarbs, but I reckon GaryGiesel is right and Scarbs really misses some basic fluid mechanics in his design.

Yep. The idea of the valve is technically nonsense and nonsense by the rules as it is clearly against the rule about the brake pad force and the "mass damper rule" that forbids any inertia driven system.

... i said the brake system already have valve reducing brake pressure to the rear when the ERS is harvesting, ...

There is no valve. It is always brake master cylinder to caliper, nothing else. An F1 car has three master cylinders, one front to calipers, one rear to BBW and one in the BBW system to calipers.

[Jurgen von Diaz]

You design the car for a full year, not just half a year. Let's have a look at the points tally and number of wins at the end of the year before we state Red Bull did a great job with it's car design.
I have some strong doubts. Looking at the steps others have made it doesn't seem they are close to the performance ceiling, so I don't believe RB should be either.

Yes, you design the car for the full year. They have chosen their aim for the WDC, and if Max will be champion, how can we doubt their design path? They clearly haven't got such dominant tools like the hybrid-Mercedes that they can run their cars underpowered, so Red Bull has chosen this design path so Max can push it to the limit and towards the championship. If they had chosen a different design path, could they even fight either championship and Perez would be happier? We'll never know.

How do you know they have chosen to aim for WDC? At the end of last year they were convinced the could sort out the weaknesses of 2023, last years they already put a lot of effort to give the car a wider set-up window in order to have Perez be more comfortable with the car, and for this year they changed some concepts in order to bring more room for development. This doesn't sound like a team that will design a car just for Max. Also, Max has been complaining a lot about not having a strong front-end and having difficulties to rotate the car.
I don't believe it's a design path that suits Max. I think the car has some serious flaws which makes it hard to setup and which requires an exceptional driver to drive around the issues.

With Pérez, the WCC would be a difficult main goal; he is just that bad. The WDC is a more natural main goal for them. I mean, if Max wins the championship, how much can we criticize Red Bull about their design path? Not every team is perfect, but come on, let's look at this from another perspective; the Red Bull driver is leading the championship by 78 points, and we are talking about what Red Bull should have done differently.

[organic]

Not sure I was clear.
Yes, he's a mechanic in the garage every weekend. We established this fact by way of the citations I provided.
Specifically, prepping the PU and checking it's fluids.
Not responsible for the brakes or any lines associated to the brake function. This would be a role for someone else. Maybe that's clearer.

Not sure if you were trying to be condescending, but it's not helpful to constructive discussion and not appreciated.

My point is that he doesn't work on the power unit in a vacuum. Your suggestion that because he works on the PU he would therefore necessarily not know anything about the braking system of the rb20 is ridiculous

On the topic of condescending, unhelpful, unconstructive posts, what do you think about calling someone else’s opinion “ridiculous”?

If someone is a mechanic who has worked at the team in many roles over the years, who speaks to their colleagues daily, helps to build/take apart the car every weekend. In my view it is plainly absurd, silly, ridiculous to assume they cannot know anything about the brake system and their view should therefore be discounted because their current primary role is working with the PU. I don't see how that's unhelpful, condescending etc. just my view on someone else's point being incorrect.

Aside:

Calum Nicholas is not the only rbr employee that works on the rb20 that has said publicly they've never heard of such a system being on the car. But hey, maybe it's all a coordinated response

[emp]

Not sure if you were trying to be condescending, but it's not helpful to constructive discussion and not appreciated.

My point is that he doesn't work on the power unit in a vacuum. Your suggestion that because he works on the PU he would therefore necessarily not know anything about the braking system of the rb20 is ridiculous

On the topic of condescending, unhelpful, unconstructive posts, what do you think about calling someone else’s opinion “ridiculous”?

<personal stuff removed>

<personal stuff removed>

Also, it is ridiculous to even think that mechanics work in a vacuum on a car in a race weeekend. Just because it's not their job at the moment doesn't mean they are clueless, otherwise a lot of the armchair experts would've worked in F1.

What if one is sick, or more are sick in a weekend, the team will just not compete because no one else can do their job ? Ridiculous indeed.