Ferrari F10

[Astro1]

Larger scan:
http://img94.imageshack.us/img94/8039/ferrari2010b.jpg

Can somebody please translate less obvious changes(3,4,5,7)?

Sure here you go,

English translation and a bit more info about the launch. Looks like Ferrari will have two chassis 281 and 281 ready at or near the same time.

F2010 Launch Details & Translation
http://ferrarif1forum.com/2010/01/11/fe ... ch-details

[segedunum]

And the defensive backside covering starts..........

Wow! You got all that from a cut-away sketch and some Italian journo guesswork? Or did you use tea leaves?

I looked at it and saw a RBR rip-off. We also have some photos of the design kicking around this site with the RBR front-end in plain view. From there it's not rocket science to think that RBR are going to know more about their design than Ferrari.

SO "everyone else" had their "Red Bull catch-up design" BEFORE the first race of last season?

They would have certainly learnt from some of the things that Red Bull were doing as well as Brawn early on last season and tested them 'in races', and went in their own directions based on their own 2009 cars. Ferrari basically did no work last season and tested no parts they would use for 2010 on their 2009 car, and with the lack of testing that is a pretty brave thing to do. They will have to hope their data stands up and hope that they turn up next month and the car is instantly fast and stable. If it isn't they've got little chance of catching up.

Pills? Pipe? Needle? Alcohol? Share, please.

You're going to need all of the above if you think Ferrari are going to beat Red Bull, McLaren and Mercedes with that approach.

[segedunum]

How is Ferrari any further back(aero wise) from Red bull than anyone else? They are playing the same catch up game McLaren, Renault, "BMW", Williams, FIF1 all are to both Reb Bull and Merc.

The difference there is that those teams all turned around their 2009 cars and have race-proven and tested parts, components and ideas that they can take straight into 2010. Ferrari don't. With the lack of testing in competition with other teams who have done that it might well prove fatal. They are the only team who have done this. I suppose they felt they didn't have a choice, but they're definitely a long way behind.

Thats the beauty of a brand new year, anyone can come with a trick bit and trump the field.

From 2008 to 2009 as Brawn did then yes, because there was pretty much nothing you could take from a 2008 car or test on it during the season. That's most certainly not the case from 2009 to 2010. What's good and what you've tested and proved can be carried straight over. McLaren's huge amount of work to completely overhaul their 2009 car will pay off handsomely for 2010 - and it's tested. It's all or nothing for Ferrari.

I'd actually be a bit surprised if either were any significant amount faster than the Merc or the RBR...aero wise.

I wouldn't. They might well come in and suprise us, but the approach they've taken puts them at a serious disadvantage to their rivals.

[timbo]

From 2008 to 2009 as Brawn did then yes, because there was pretty much nothing you could take from a 2008 car or test on it during the season. That's most certainly not the case from 2009 to 2010.

That is highly debatable. Even if they only had to use different tyres that would require complete aero/mechanical redesign (remeber Renault @2007 - same aero, different tyres). But they also have to cope MUCH larger fuel tank.

[WhiteBlue]

The difference there is that those teams all turned around their 2009 cars and have race-proven and tested parts, components and ideas that they can take straight into 2010. Ferrari don't. With the lack of testing in competition with other teams who have done that it might well prove fatal. They are the only team who have done this. I suppose they felt they didn't have a choice, but they're definitely a long way behind.

Ferrari in my view have yet to prove that they can build a truly dominant car without Rory Byrne and Ross Brawn. I have my doubts that they have the talent to react to rule changes and come up with something that beats the competition like Newey can. I view them currently more like a team that can turn superior resources into mediocre performance. In the age of resource restrictions that may carry them over 2010 but they may start to struggle from 2011.

Edit: for typos

[segedunum]

Ferrari in view have yet to prove that they can build a truly dominant car without Rory Byrne and Ross Brawn.

Well, they have Nikolas Tombazis who is a very talented guy. I rather suspect he was more responsible for the speed of that 2005 McLaren than even Adrian Newey was (he turned up in 2004 and really seemed to make a difference) and Ferrari quite wisely poached him back after a disastrous 2005 when Rory Byrne had already taken a back seat. Without Brawn at the helm, and even Schumacher involved, yes, they need to prove themselves.

However, as Newey has found at Red Bull, a talented engineer and designer cannot do it all by himself. I just don't get the impression that they have anything over McLaren, Mercedes and especially Red Bull, and no, I can't see Alonso waltzing in and taking titles there any time in the next few years. It's not just McLaren they're competing against now but at least two other teams. I worried the instant they announced they would stop work on their 2009 car for 2010, because they were a year behind Brawn with that decision. I just took it as an admission that the 2009 car was so terrible they could do nothing to develop it into 2010.

[segedunum]

That is highly debatable. Even if they only had to use different tyres that would require complete aero/mechanical redesign (remeber Renault @2007 - same aero, different tyres).

I doubt it. Ross Brawn and pretty much all the teams have confirmed that it is very much a case of evolution rather than evolution. In the case of Renault they had to bolt tyres onto their car that were a complete polar opposite of the Michelins they had before. You couldn't get two tyres built differently than the Michelins and Bridgestones.

For 2010, whereas the front tyres will be narrower there's no reason to believe they will cause that kind of effect that Renault encountered and certainly nothing that would prompt a complete aerodynamic redesign. We still don't know what happened to Renault because their performance dip certainly wasn't reflected at other teams who had used Michelins. Even if that were the case, with a complete lack of testing you want to be basing anything new on something you have already tested if possible, so you move from a known point. Ferrari are pretty much the only team that don't have that and it's a definite problem. They need to turn up in February and be at least on a par with the other teams immediately.

But they also have to cope MUCH larger fuel tank.

Pretty negligible change. It's the same for everyone, aerodynamic and mechanical regulations remain the same and so you will still carry over what works from 2009 to 2010 as much as possible. The main variable really is tyre wear, an area where Ferrari have been extremely strong these past few years - almost too strong to the detriment of their raw speed at times.

There are certainly variables, but not as many as between 2008 and 2009. Those who were strong last year will be strong this, and if Red Bull aren't champions then they need to have a serious inquest.

[WhiteBlue]

Greece born Tombazis seems to be a pretty good aerodynamicist and chief designer, but he is hardly charged with the overall technical responsibility at Ferrari. In fact he may suffer from reporting to Aldo Costa since he went back to Ferrari. It is typical that the techical director Costa is never mentioned when it comes to Ferrari engineering strengths.

[timbo]

Even if that were the case, with a complete lack of testing you want to be basing anything new on something you have already tested if possible, so you move from a known point.

Ferrari did devoted quite a bit of their Friday time to the development work for 2010.

[timbo]

Ferrari in my view have yet to prove that they can build a truly dominant car without Rory Byrne and Ross Brawn.

Yes, but cars from 2006, 2007 and 2008 (all built with little or no Rory Byrne input) were quite good.
And if you mention McLaren, their initial interpretation of 2009 were no better or even worse than Ferrari's.
Anyway, we'd see, seem like interesting season is looming.

[marcush.]

to me those who did a nightmare car in 2009 must have learned a lot in the last months.
Given the state of MACS Ferrari and BMW at the beginning of 2009 all 3 cars were
not to be counted towards the top 3 or 4 designs by quite a margin.
BUT whereas Brawn had hit the bell instantly , these three really had to lift every stone and get to the root courses of underperforming .
You learn most when you really get thing wrong .You have to understand this as opportunity not as a failure.
Macs did brilliant in analysing their problems and solving them .with the cost /recourcecap i doubt this would be possible.
Ferrari seemed to be content with some solution and preferred to lve with the fundamental flaws ,relying on driver magic in my view ,whereas BMW took the Macs approach and had to dig very deep to find and remove the dog burried in the chassis of their 2009 contender.
So to me MACs and Sauber are those who learned a LOT last year .Ferrari should as well and MAYBE they already knew the recourcecap would be coming already in 2010,
so after analysing the flaws of their design they instantly switched to the development of their 2010 contender to shift a large batch of cost into the previous year...clever that.

[Astro1]

This is all too funny.

I fail to see how a duplicated design concept is somehow a sign of Ferrari struggles.

F1 teams copy each others "concepts" all the time. Some adapt to them better than others. However I don't see how you guys can judge that Ferrari know less about a design than RBR just because RBR had it on their car first. A logical, but unproven statement.

When Ferrari wheel caps were copied by other teams I hardly think that their engineers took a long time to figure out how they work and whether they'd be beneficial on their cars or not. The RBR nose, is not the only thing that made that car fast LOL.

Another issue, is that when a team introduces a new concept that clearly works, DDD, RBR nose, BRAWN undercut sidepods, etc. During the year, I would agree that a copy of the design would not prove AS beneficial as to the original team.

However you'd be naive to think that F1 engineers could not have the potential to maximize a new "copied" design concept in their next car. Especially given early development focus which is just what Ferrari have done.

An interesting concept, is that the new car's development started right after the RBR nose was tried on the F60 You'd have to assume Ferrari engineers are fools to think that the'y design a car iploying a concept that they don't understand fully.

Are you suggesting that Ferrari out of all teams simply looks at the Brawn, copied the DDD and sidepod concept, then looked at the RBR copied the nose and rear crush structure and said.... "Whola here's the F2010"? Doubtful.

[Astro1]

Or we can forget what I said and go along with the German media who having never seen the car on track are saying that it lacks aero efficiency

http://ferrarif1forum.com/2010/01/13/ge ... fficiency/

[raceman]

German media who having never seen the car on track are saying that it lacks aero efficiency

this is getting rather funny



[-X

[Fil]

Raceman +1!

It lacks aero efficiency? compared to which rival 2010 car..?

internal goals & tests wouldn't be known by anyone but the top guys at Ferrari.. and they won't be admitting anything like this publicly!