Ferrari F2012

[munudeges]

I'm not saying they were necessarily bad, just that he never seemed to be able to sustain a constant development. His designs could be great one year and terrible another. Maybe not his fault, but who knows.

I don't understand what that means to be honest. He certainly isn't without some success, certainly taking into consideration the starting point of Jordan, and he repeated the feat at a second team (Stewart) before Jaguar flushed it down the toilet.

I often don't think he explains things well enough sometimes, but he's certainly done it. I don't think questioning his background is a particularly productive way to discredit his current opinion to be honest.

Besides, his current idea of a Ferrari problem is easily remedied without any alteration of the car -- just ask driver to close DRS a moment before the brake application.

Errrr, no. They're already going that. The point is that even when they are closing the DRS the airflow isn't re-attching fast enough.

And the car's failure to improve Q3 results is most likely because of the temperature drop as Ferrari struggles to heat tyres over one lap.

That doesn't constitute the one second gap between pole and Alonso and relative performance in the race. That was Anderson's point.

[godlameroso]

I think the Ferrari has pitch issues, and that has been the main crux of the car. No doubt it's fast, but it's very difficult to drive. It works against Massa's driving style of braking as late as possible and trying to carry as much speed through the apex. The car is extremely knife edged, as we've seen it bite Massa quite a few times this season. The car still has high potential, for instance it's beastly on corner exit, and direction change, and it has great high speed stability. However under braking with severe bumps it's piss poor, probably only slightly better than the Sauber, I'm not claiming it's the pull rod suspension, but it is a mechanical issue. Perhaps their 3rd damper isn't working as it should, who knows.

[wesley123]

the car certainly has pitch issues, the front wing shows it all.

[donskar]

"But, Gary, Alonso did run a less aggressive DRS package in Abu Dhabi."

"See, Gary? The larger and more numerous end plate vents on Massa's rear wing means it shed more downforce/drag when DRS was activated than did Alonso's wing. Got any more explanations, big guy?"

Couldnt agree more..for some reason Gary Andreson thinks the rest of the world is stupid..and that he can just make up something and everyone will believe it

I think that Andersons thoughts are just as valid, if not more so, than many of the aero experts here.
It is very easy to sit behind a keyboard and pronounce that all the highly paid aero experts at Ferrari are wrong. But funny, they are the ones that are being paid by Ferrari.[/quote]

I could not agree more. This oh-so-serious "technical" thread can be very amusing as wanna-be's and poseurs attack those who have actually been in the game, who have actually designed F1 cars. Sincere apologies to those posters who have actual race car design experience.

[bhall]

I could not agree more. This oh-so-serious "technical" thread can be very amusing as wanna-be's and poseurs attack those who have actually been in the game, who have actually designed F1 cars. Sincere apologies to those posters who have actual race car design experience.

Some of us have tenaciously followed this car's development all year, so we have a pretty good idea about what's going on and what's not going on. When someone like Gary Anderson then chimes in with whatever he has to say this time, we realize he's just talking because people pay him to talk.

The Ferrari is not a good car, as everyone in F1 knows, but the damp conditions meant its weaknesses were not as exposed as they are in the dry because the forces through the car are not as great. It backs up my theory that there is a problem with the front end of the Ferrari, that it cannot cope with lateral forces in corners because the front-tyre contact patch is moving around. - Gary Anderson

Ferrari seem to be trying to get more consistency from the front wing. Whenever the car rolls in a corner, the outboard end gets closer to the ground. The team probably believes it suffers from too great a stall when the front wing gets closer to the ground so it has taken a section out of the outer end. This means that when it does stall, you lose a smaller percentage of downforce. But the more slot gaps you put in, the less downforce you have a slow speed with higher ride height. So it comes down to compromise, I believe that Ferrari's problem lie more with the endplate than with the wing and here we can see it trying to be adventurous with 3D thinking. The aim is to get the airflow better around the outside of the tyre to keep control over the separation over the front wing without losing downforce. It's still a very basic endplate and needs to turn the air more around the tyre- which is the blockage that stalls the front wing. - Gary Anderson

"What's that about slots, Gary"?


With a pushrod you can jack weight around the car at different steering angles if the pushrod is mounted on the upright. With steering lock you can unload the outside front wheel for low-speed corners, a bit like putting a soft rollbar in it, and for highspeed corners with less steering lock you can keep the car stiff. You can’t do that with a pullrod. It also changes the steering feeling. With a pushrod you can use the weight jacking as an aid rather than putting on more power assist, which loses you feel. More concerning is what happens over a bump, which tends to break the tyre’s contact patch. The contact patch can be made stable but only by using static negative camber so that it pulls upright under cornering load. But that means it’s less stable under braking. - Gary Anderson

Frankly, I wouldn't let Gary Anderson change the oil in my 20-year-old truck.

[raymondu999]

Bhall - sorry, but could you please switch image hosts from postimage? Postimage doesn't work with forum IMG tags. We end up having to click through to the image to see it on the postimage website.

[bhall]

How's that?

[raymondu999]

Cheers bhall. Works a treat now.

[donskar]

bhallg2k, I have followed the car's development, too. I have followed Ferrari and F1 since 1964. During that time I came to see Gary Anderson as a professional race car designer. Not a Chapman or Newey, but a thoroughly competent professional. Again, I apologize to anyone in this thread who speaks from a background as solid as Gary Anderson's.

[timbo]

I don't understand what that means to be honest. He certainly isn't without some success, certainly taking into consideration the starting point of Jordan, and he repeated the feat at a second team (Stewart) before Jaguar flushed it down the toilet.

Look at the results of the team -- a fifth place first yeat, than drop for two years, than a chain of 5ths and 6ths etc. They always looked poised for a big break but never managed to actually accomplish that. Whether it's because of him or Eddie or something else I don't know.

I often don't think he explains things well enough sometimes, but he's certainly done it. I don't think questioning his background is a particularly productive way to discredit his current opinion to be honest.

Agreed.

Errrr, no. They're already going that. The point is that even when they are closing the DRS the airflow isn't re-attching fast enough.

So they have to close DRS earlier. I'm sure they clever enough to do that if that was a problem.

That doesn't constitute the one second gap between pole and Alonso and relative performance in the race. That was Anderson's point.

And this is the weak point to be honest.
What exactly was Alonso's relative performance? He finished the race within a second from Raikkonen, and in qualifying he was just over three tenths behind. We don't know how big the gap to Lewis would be had he finish the race. Now if we look at Vettel, who started from the pit-lane and had unscheduled stop and with all that managed to be within a couple seconds from Alonso on the line, what does it tell us? If you look at India, Vettel was able to control the gap, maybe Ferrari was just a little better over a race distance, but everything can be explained by different tyre management.


And finally, the argument actually is not ME vs ANDERSON. It's Anderson vs Fry&Tombazis. Quite a bit different angle, no?

[f1316]

And finally, the argument actually is not ME vs ANDERSON. It's Anderson vs Fry&Tombazis. Quite a bit different angle, no?

Not necessarily; perhaps Ferrari are aware of the problem but it's slightly more difficult to fix without other compromises than Anderson thinks. That would also provide a rationale for all the rear wings variations they keep trying.

[flyboy2160]

perhaps because i'm just in one-beer aerodynamics mode, i can't follow gary anderson's reasoning. if you activate DRS and reduce rear lift, why does the rear end go down? if the drs is closed and you have more rear downforce, wouldn't that drive the rear down even more, and then, according to his analysis, cause the diffuser to stall even sooner????
maybe this needs to be a two-beer aerodynamic analysis.......

[banibhusan]

We have clearly seen all year the horrible coorilation issues Ferrari suffers between sim and track. Off season is almost here and it looks like they will go into that space in about the same position as they were at the start of this year as they develop the 2013 car.

During the off season, are teams not allowed to run on track at all? I forget what is permitted in the off season.

That's why they have planned to shut down their WT during winter and get it completely sorted out. I guess they would be working at the Toyota WT in the meantime.

[f300v10]

perhaps because i'm just in one-beer aerodynamics mode, i can't follow gary anderson's reasoning. if you activate DRS and reduce rear lift, why does the rear end go down? if the drs is closed and you have more rear downforce, wouldn't that drive the rear down even more, and then, according to his analysis, cause the diffuser to stall even sooner????
maybe this needs to be a two-beer aerodynamic analysis.......

I also have difficulty following his logic. In qualifying, the car has minimum fuel and max use of DRS. Both of these would tend to raise the floor of the car, and thus reduce the tendency of the diffuser to stall. Conversely at the start of the race with max fuel and no DRS, the car would be at its lowest and the diffuser should then stall the most.

This seems directly the oposite of the observed performance of the F2012 which as we have seen has very competitive race pace but is missing outright speed in qualifying. Personally I believe this has more to due with how the F2012 uses its tires than it does stalling the diffuser.

[scuderiafan]

It's probably just some good 'ol Maranello Magic!