Ferrari F10

[gridwalker]

Hold on a sec here, even if they are running TC, I don't see a problem.

This is not an FIA sanctioned event. Their times are not being used for competition. They would have been running under sub optimal conditions for a portion of the afternoon and traction control would be useful for increasing safety and preserving the equipment on track.

If you'd just seen Webber's crash (essentially caused by excessive closing speed) and were driving a road car being followed by an F1 car, wouldn't you want to take every step possible to make sure that the F1 car was as controllable at low speeds as possible? Reducing and controlling the power curve of the engine is a useful and easily implemented safety measure.

So long as that technology doesn't appear on-track, I don't see any reason why it can't be used at a promotional event.

Running all of those updates for a promo event though ... I guess it is another example of a badly phrased restriction on activities being stretched to its limit ... for such a big business, f1 sure does look unprofessional when all of its rules are constantly being called into question!

I said at the beginning of the testing ban that teams should be made to provide a homologated test car in launch spec at the beginning of the season. All promotional driving and test driver training should be done in that car; the only updates allowed on the car are ones that have been on the race car for at least 4 races or fixes for known safety problems.

Problem solved.

[Just_a_fan]

The big question is: if they have got a TC system, how are they doing it? It can't be done by the engine ECU because that is a standard system.

And if they have one fitted to their car for the promo event to protect the car as suggested above, what's to say they don't have the same system on the cars at a race event.

The suggestion that the system is there but isn't used smacks of the Benetton TC system...

[gridwalker]

The big question is: if they have got a TC system, how are they doing it? It can't be done by the engine ECU because that is a standard system.

And if they have one fitted to their car for the promo event to protect the car as suggested above, what's to say they don't have the same system on the cars at a race event.

The suggestion that the system is there but isn't used smacks of the Benetton TC system...

Yeah, I remember the 1994 discovery of the hidden launch control that Benetton claimed was a remnant from the 1993 season.

I don't know how accurate the information is, but it says earlier in the thread that they would not be using the FIA ECU as the filming wasn't an FIA sanctioned event. If they are using third party electronics, they could be using an ECU system from before the standard ECU was introduced.

I understand that the talking point is the fact that we don't know, but there are always things that will remain obscure.

Can anyone provide any documentation indicating whether FIA ECUs can be used at non-sanctioned events?

[wesley123]

The big question is: if they have got a TC system, how are they doing it? It can't be done by the engine ECU because that is a standard system.

And if they have one fitted to their car for the promo event to protect the car as suggested above, what's to say they don't have the same system on the cars at a race event.

The suggestion that the system is there but isn't used smacks of the Benetton TC system...

If they really have tc then i can only say that they are failing really really hard, afterall such TC would give alot of laptime advantage and less tire wear due to the less wheelspin.

[forty-two]

Why would a properly mounted camera on a helmet vibrate?
It is no more likely than any other camera mounting.
The sound is consistant with the cylinders firing and the rpm heard before and after the vibration confirm this as there is a delay in the increase of rpm over the miss fire gap in the sound wave.
I know of no sound caused by any vibration that can reduce the increase in rpm of a mechanical device during the time range that it is audible.

There are a number of possible factors which need to be taken into consideration on the topic of the sound, most of which I am sure you are aware of but just to clarify my thoughts:

1. The audio in question MIGHT WELL (and more than likely would) have been edited, or perhaps passed through a compressor before being released. They might be playing mind games, or an over eager sound engineer might have "tidied up" a glitch.
2. There could be a data compression artefact which is causing the anomaly.
3. It is entirely possible that constructive/destructive interference caused by resonance and/or damping caused by the fleshy connection between car and mic (the driver's neck) could massively amplify or attenuate some select frequencies. Think of the "kangaroo petrol" behaviour of some learner drivers whereby the car accelerates promptly, causing the drivers foot to leave the accelerator pedal causing a rapid deceleration whereby the drivers foot is then forced back onto the pedal. Imagine this behaviour, only on a microscopic scale whereby the resonance is caused by the damping characteristics of the drivers neck.

I personally trust little from a promo, and with the best will in the world, any firm who is promoting themselves is likely to want to cover any mistakes they might have made in production!

Just my tuppence!

[ringo]

apparently the car is fitted with bigger radiators. I was wondering how it would deal without the gills and tighter cover.

http://www.formula1.com/news/technical/ ... 2/764.html

Ferrari have made radical changes for Valencia, introducing their version of Red Bull's exhaust-blown diffuser. They have dramatically modified the shape of their exhausts, from the previous design (1), to a lower, more RB6-inspired layout (2). They've also introduced a new gearbox case to Felipe Massa's car to raise the rear suspension pick-up points to help accommodate the changes. There's also a larger radiator layout (3) to handle the additional heat within the lower and more enclosed bodywork. Inset, you can see the exhaust on the F10 is shorter, and therefore ends before Red Bull's.

New gearbox casing as well. So teams are free to change the rear end as they like basically.

[forty-two]

On the matter of teams using "Promotional Events" to sneakily avoid testing regulations, I have a number of suggestions and I'd appreciate the thoughts of the members of this forum.

Virtually banning all testing is a very un-natural for a sport which wishes to remain "the pinnacle of motorsport".

If the driving force behind the idea of the testing ban is to prevent the richer teams from having too much of an advantage over the poorer teams, how about this as an alternative:

Use some method for determining the success of all teams (just an idea, but let's say last year's constructor's championship points standings).

Any team which wishes to have a day's track testing (which can also be used for promotional purposes if they so desire), must be applied for to the FIA. The FIA will then charge that team for the priveledge, a pre-fixed fee depending upon the team in question's standing. This money is they paid out in reverse order to the other teams.

For example, a really successful team such as Ferrari pay a fee of £100,000 for one days testing. This money gets divied out to all the teams, with the Lotus/HRT/Virgin teams getting the lion's share of the cash, and the more successful teams such as Mclaren perhaps getting a token payout of £1000 each.

Similarly, if a team such as Lotus/HRT/Virgin wish to have a day's testing, they pay a far lower fee (something like £1,000) and this money is then divided between the lowest ranking three teams.

This would (in theory) have the effect of allowing both the poorer and richer teams to test, while also sharing the wealth around within the teams. For example, if Ferrari fancy a test day, Lotus would be gifted enough cash to both pay their FIA fee to do so, but also to pay for some of the parts used in the testing.

The figures I have quoted above are doubtless WAY off the mark, but I think you get the idea. I expect the likes of McLaren/Ferrari/RedBull/Mercedes would be reasonably happy to pay a surcharge payable to the lower ranking teams in return for un-fettered testing.

I stress though, that the FIA should NOT make any cash out of this scheme, instead the "fee" chargeable for a day's testing should go into the pockets of the other teams to allow them to develop their cars.

Perhaps this somewhat socialist or even communist idea might not fly with everyone, but I do think it's crazy to deny teams the opportunity to test, and I'd like the see the likes of Virgin/HRT/Lotus able to put more time and money into testing to enable them to challenge closer to the front of the field.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on this, and I expect a number of you to shoot me down for the obvious problems that would be caused by this.

[Italiano]

Just make test days after races, like a repeat of the friday and saturday sessions and that's it. All team must report parts or whatever they want to test before the test day.

[Italiano]

Oh and if there is any doubt as to what the rules say:

Track testing shall be considered any track running time undertaken by a competitor entered in the
Championship with the exception of :
i) promotional or demonstration events carried out using tyres provided specifically for this
purpose by the appointed supplier ;

During all track testing cars must be fitted with the FIA ECU required by Article 8.2 of the FIA Formula One Technical Regulations.

So Ferrari could have used a different ECU.

[godlameroso]

I do not wish to be rude but I do have experience of sound recording.
The miss fire is not the recording equipment.
It is no good throwing a ferrari fan boy fit and lowering yourself to personal insult.
This is not a conspiracy anything, the miss fire exists and no explanation has yet been given.

Someone doesn't listen to onboards, all the different engines do that. I would spout some psychobabble about how you hear what you want to hear based on your biases

[aral]

I do not wish to be rude but I do have experience of sound recording.
The miss fire is not the recording equipment.
It is no good throwing a ferrari fan boy fit and lowering yourself to personal insult.
This is not a conspiracy anything, the miss fire exists and no explanation has yet been given.

Someone doesn't listen to onboards, all the different engines do that. I would spout some psychobabble about how you hear what you want to hear based on your biases

Autogyro is a very talented person! (At least, so he says), However, the simple fact is that Ferrari are not using traction control, and his dislike for the team, makes him believe what he wants to. There are a nunber of reasons to cause the sound that he hears, and from his "experience" of sound recording, he should know of all the drawbacks of recording very loud noise.
There is little point continuing TC debate. The Ferrari has been passed as fully legal by FIA, so who are we to question that?

[ringo]

It's an interesting discussion though, because the sound was nowhere to be heard during the race weekend, even the lesser more minute versions of the sound we usually hear with the mclaren on it's out lap was absent.

Maybe Ferrari were investigating what redbull are accused of doing to keep the exhaust flow over the diffuser. You can't put it past them to investigate the possibilities of their new exhaust diffuser system.

[timbo]

It's an interesting discussion though, because the sound was nowhere to be heard during the race weekend, even the lesser more minute versions of the sound we usually hear with the mclaren on it's out lap was absent.

Because nobody is running helmet cam in the race weekends.
C'mon! The basic tone of engine is different, not only the "sound".

[autogyro]

Listen carefuly to the sound track.
The sound occurs just as power is applied after an upshift
(exactly where you would expect a TC system to operate).
During the time the noise is heard, there is no increase in engine revs and no noticable acceleration on the video. This is the fact that needs to be explained.
I know of no audio equipment characterisitic that can directly effect the rpm of an engine.
It could be an attempt to maintain gas flow across the BDF but I doubt this unless this capability, (which would logicaly be used on over run when the throttle is off)is manifesting itself as a pick up problem just after throttle apply.

[timbo]

Listen carefuly to the sound track.
The sound occurs just as power is applied after an upshift
(exactly where you would expect a TC system to operate).

Not on the 5th to 7th gear.

During the time the noise is heard, there is no increase in engine revs and no noticable acceleration on the video.

What? No noticeable acceleration?
Even if you think it is TC, wouldn't its sole purpose to maintain maximum possible acceleration.

It could be an attempt to maintain gas flow across the BDF but I doubt this unless this capability, (which would logicaly be used on over run when the throttle is off)is manifesting itself as a pick up problem just after throttle apply.

Of course any engine map tricking to make EBD work better is needed only when driver is off throttle. There's no need to do anything when driver is on full throttle.

As for audio mechanism -- gear change->bang->driver's head vibrates->helmet cam mic vibrates->IM affects pitch.