McLaren MP4-26 Mercedes

[Just_a_fan]

So seg, what about my point about trying different configurations for a reason? Have you any of your famous "thoughts" on that?

[gridwalker]

Given that McLaren have never had any windtunnel calibration issues, and that Nick Wirth has proven that CFD produces accurate results every time, why on earth would McLaren ever want to verify their data on the circuit ... they have obviously spent millions building up their manufacturing capacity just to let it sit idle, as testing hardware on the track is a sign of clueless desperation.

</sarcasm>

Really, if you can't see the benefit in putting your ideas to test in the real world then you obviously aren't living in it.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Really, if you can't see the benefit in putting your ideas to test in the real world then you obviously aren't living in it.

+10

[myurr]

They've probably experimented with goodness knows how many exhaust positions which is why we can't keep up. In one picture it looked as if the exhausts curved inwards somewhere. If they were tinkering in an area then that would be fine, but it looks as if they have looked at forward facing exhausts as well as more conventional rear facing ones. It doesn't inspire confidence. You should have that worked out definitively before you get to a test.

And Red Bull and other teams have used flow vis paints and experimental parts. They must all be so clueless. All hail the great segedunum, master of all he surveys, one man human CFD machine, and F1 expert.

What exactly are your qualifications again, or are you just an armchair expert?

[kalinka]

Yeah, and I remember very well that when pitot-arrays appeared on McLaren first time, everyone just went crazy, saying that's the sign of big trouble. Well, yes, they were in trouble back then, but the concept proved over the time, and now every team is using it regularly. Ditto for flowis. So I think we can trust them that they have very well developed and systematic testing strategy, and what we see is only that they're extracting every bit of info that they can from it.

+1 for the idea that differnet exhaust configs are for different tracks.

[segedunum]

It's pretty basic stuff and if you don't understand it you're highly unlikely to be successful at testing anything no matter what other methodology you use.

If you have a finite amount of time to test something in the practical environment in which it is going to operate then you need to use that time wisely. That means turning up to those test sessions with an idea that you have already thought through, developed and tested, short of putting it on track, and where you know that's the direction you will go in. You don't have time to change your mind later.

For example, Renault turned up with their exhausts in a forward position and they've stuck with it and given themselves the maximum amount of time to tinker. Red Bull added a new exhaust positioning on their car and they've stuck with it. You don't have time to fully develop the direction you're going in if you're radically changing the a component every day or so. It also means that you still have no idea what direction you're really going in. This is also from a team that skipped the first test because they wanted more development time.

If you had unlimited testing like we did a few years ago then you could do live development on track, or certainly the larger teams could. We don't have that now.

Seriously, it's basic stuff.

[kalinka]

I must disagree a bit. Generally you're right, but if you see how other teams are developing exhausts, it's not so simple. We are seeing Reanult putting temp stickers everywhere on the rear suspension though they have FEE. In fact every team are using them on suspension and other parts, we see opening and closing gills, different shapes of exhausts, differnet sizes of coolong inlets-outlets. Why is that ? I'm not an expert as you know, but I think that F1 teams doesn't have yet a powerful and exact-enough software to simulate heat distribution and heat exchange, and simply they are experimenting weather one or other component can whitstand heat in that position. Maybe McLaren had some ideas for positioning exhaust, but they must see wheather other components close to the exhaust can be packaged (thermally). No offense just a thougth.

[jody391]

Being a newby to this forum please forgive me if this has already been mentioned!
whilst looking through the various threads I noticed somebody has put together some side on shots of all the 2011 cars, and I could not help but notice that the front nose of the Mclaren is by some way very low compared to all the other cars!?
If you look most cars nose's are just higher than the wheels, but the Mclarens is a good 25mm ish (guesstimation) lower?

[segedunum]

Really, if you can't see the benefit in putting your ideas to test in the real world then you obviously aren't living in it.

You can put at least three completely separate ideas into the real world where you don't know what will stick, or you can test one firm idea in the real world that you've thought through and give yourself the full amount of time to develop it. Putting exhausts forwards, to the rear and possibly inwards are completely different philosophies. I thought that's why McLaren skipped the first test.

What you've written there makes zero sense no matter what parts you put in bold. There just isn't the time to do live development on track and see what sticks to the wall.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

There just isn't the time to do live development on track and see what sticks to the wall.

Am I actually reading this?
I guess testing is just for mugs to go round and round for the fans to have a closer look at their-new-for 2011 wares, right?
Probably not much more mileage in further debate.

[Mandrake]

Being a newby to this forum please forgive me if this has already been mentioned!
whilst looking through the various threads I noticed somebody has put together some side on shots of all the 2011 cars, and I could not help but notice that the front nose of the Mclaren is by some way very low compared to all the other cars!?
If you look most cars nose's are just higher than the wheels, but the Mclarens is a good 25mm ish (guesstimation) lower?

It has been mentioned before

The difference in concepts has also to do with the different sidepod philosophy of the other teams. Most teams want to maximise airflow under the car around the sidepods to the diffusor. McLaren however want as much air as possible to flow above the sidepods through their channel towards the beam wing/ diffusor area. Therefore they need a lower nose.

[gridwalker]

Seg, you have proven to me time and again that you will argue against the dictionary if it will suit your purpose, so please bait away : it doesn't mean that you have the first clue about what is actually happening on the ground.

The tone of the vitriol that you direct towards Merc and McLaren hasn't changed in over a year and most of us are getting a bit bored with it : a lot of us would just tune you out if we could.

Plumping for a single philosophy and testing it over and over doesn't necessarily mean that you will get it to work. If they are doing something radically different to what they have done before, but have the manpower and resources to produce and compare different configurations, why shouldn't they do so?

It is claimed that Albert Einstein once said "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again but expecting different results."

I would say that testing the same configuration over and over again isn't necessarily going to produce meaningful data when you have nothing to compare your data with : how do you know that your new innovation is a superior configuration when you don't have a baseline?

Oh, yeah, wait ... I know the answer for this ... you know that it is superior if Mr Newey has signed off the blueprint! Did I get it right Seg, huh? I am just dying for your approval *yawn*

[Richard]

Probably not much more mileage in further debate.

+1

[Pup]

Well, one can't be a McLaren fan for long before admitting that the team invariably seems a bit optimistic about what can be accomplished at a field test. Whether that's because they are indeed optimistic or because they're terrible at organizing their testing or a little of each one can't say with any certainty. But it's unfortunately true that they rarely accomplish what they've set out to do. You only have to look at the testing kms to confirm that. There's no team with McLaren's resources who say, year after year, "we're only going to do half of our allotted testing, just because."

[okibcn]

RB and McLaren seem to be lost trying to find the hidden technology that could cut down that extra second per lap instead of doing the last fine tunning of their solution. The rest of the teams are working in fine tunning their own technology without any major modification but doing small improvements (Renault, Mercedes, Williams) while topping the scoreboards, or they have solid technology package in the garage ready for the first race while they get used to the new Pirelli "shoes" and test the reliability of the car (Ferrari).

After all those changes in the RB7 and MP4-26 we haven't seen any sensible performance improvement so we are just seeing that they are trying to find a key technology in a desperate effort. Otherwise I do not understad why they need to test so many options too close to the first race leaving no time for fine tunning the whole car for the final technology and the new tyres.

Regards,

Oki