Mercedes AMG F1 W05

[Shrieker]

But what was the actual problem ? What was the cause for losing a cylinder I hope it wasn't something as daft as a kaput spark plug or something...

[OppositeLock]

But what was the actual problem ? What was the cause for losing a cylinder I hope it wasn't something as daft as a kaput spark plug or something...

I think all the engines are direct injection.

[beelsebob]

But what was the actual problem ? What was the cause for losing a cylinder I hope it wasn't something as daft as a kaput spark plug or something...

I think all the engines are direct injection.

And?

[timbo]

I think he alludes to the injector failure.

[heimana]

updates for sepang?

[alexx_88]

updates for sepang?

As if the W05 is not fast enough.

My feeling is that they'll concentrate just on reliability for the next few races, while probably testing new parts in practice.

[Burgess]

updates for sepang?

The new nose maybe?

[aral]

But what was the actual problem ? What was the cause for losing a cylinder I hope it wasn't something as daft as a kaput spark plug or something...

I think all the engines are direct injection.

And?

Sounds as if he was listening to the Sky commentary!

[turbof1]

The current topic seems to be drifting into generalities that aren't specific towards the W05.

The discussion is very interesting and useful, but doesn't belong here. I'll flag the discussion to be moved to the 2014 intercooling topic: http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... &start=120

Please understand this not an intention to end the discussion or to preach towards the participants, but to continue the discussion in the appropiate thread, and keeping focus and what you can "touch and see" specifically on the W05.

[andrewf1]

New infos about the car and the weekend in Melbourne from AMuS

http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 13021.html

- the revised engine cover is the result of a new cooling concept, with rearrangements happening under the skin, which had not been tested before they went into the weekend
- one of the reasons why the new front wing didn't end up being used is because they only had 1 for each driver. it was deemed wise to avoid a situation similar to what happened with Red Bull at Silverstone 2010
- the other reason is that the new front wing works best with the new nose which has not yet passed its crash tests. they must basically meet the crash test standards with 75 cm of material at hand.

[SectorOne]

- one of the reasons why the new front wing didn't end up being used is because they only had 1 for each driver. it was deemed wise to avoid a situation similar to what happened with Red Bull at Silverstone 2010

How hard can it be to tell two drivers they have one new wing each, if you f*ck it up you´ll get the old wing.
I don´t know, it just seems pretty straight forward to me.

Seems like the other bit made more sense and this was more in the process of creating news rather then reporting it.

[mikeerfol]

- one of the reasons why the new front wing didn't end up being used is because they only had 1 for each driver. it was deemed wise to avoid a situation similar to what happened with Red Bull at Silverstone 2010

How hard can it be to tell two drivers they have one new wing each, if you f*ck it up you´ll get the old wing.
I don´t know, it just seems pretty straight forward to me.

Seems like the other bit made more sense and this was more in the process of creating news rather then reporting it.

Well he doesn't have to screw up, one wing failure is enough...

[SectorOne]

Well he doesn't have to screw up, one wing failure is enough...

Even with a wing failure, say Rosberg´s wing fails at top speed. You tell Hamilton the wing isn´t safe, here´s the old one.
Level playing field once again.

there´s also two weeks until the Bahrain GP so getting a new wing out there should be no problem.

[NewtonMeter]

- one of the reasons why the new front wing didn't end up being used is because they only had 1 for each driver. it was deemed wise to avoid a situation similar to what happened with Red Bull at Silverstone 2010

How hard can it be to tell two drivers they have one new wing each, if you f*ck it up you´ll get the old wing.
I don´t know, it just seems pretty straight forward to me.

My reasoning was that perhaps the new wing requires a different aerodynamic setup. So they set the car up for it, qualifies with it and then has a first corner incident and they need a wing change. Bam, right there the setup is compromised.

If the previous wing still worked well and they saw that they still have the legs on the rest of the field, why risk it?

I don't know if this was their reasoning though. It just made sense to me from a risk/reward perspective.

[SectorOne]

My reasoning was that perhaps the new wing requires a different aerodynamic setup. So they set the car up for it, qualifies with it and then has a first corner incident and they need a wing change. Bam, right there the setup is compromised.

If the previous wing still worked well and they saw that they still have the legs on the rest of the field, why risk it?

I don't know if this was their reasoning though. It just made sense to me from a risk/reward perspective.

But that´s not the point though. The issue supposedly was the Silverstone 2010 incident in which Vettel´s wing broke and they took Webber´s wing and gave it to Vettel.

It just seems like the "new nose works better with it" scenario is a much more realistic answer then having a new 2010 Silverstone incident.

Or the air is stopping the metal atoms from moving around too much which in turn stops the water atoms from moving around.

Water atoms?
I know a water molecule, or hydrogen & oxygen atoms...

Well spotted - my mistake.