Which site?ferkan wrote:There is a report from Italy saying that, according to source close to Ferrari and Haas, Haas actually has better data from wind tunnel and that Ferrari is aware of that. What kind of humiliation would that be if rookie team beats or even matches them. Again, generally the site hasnt been wrong one time that I know of so its a worrying report.
F1analisitecnica. That could be longer wheel base as well who knows. In any case they are reporting today that Ferrari might have problems at testing and that there still are vibrations in engine. Said that there is a completely new and very agressive gearbox that created bunch of problems on dyno and are still unsure how that one will go and if it will be used in Barca 1st test.Alcatraz wrote:Which site?ferkan wrote:There is a report from Italy saying that, according to source close to Ferrari and Haas, Haas actually has better data from wind tunnel and that Ferrari is aware of that. What kind of humiliation would that be if rookie team beats or even matches them. Again, generally the site hasnt been wrong one time that I know of so its a worrying report.
I couldn't tell what is exactly his role, and I don't think even Ferrari has clarified much about it, but I can tell you he is an extremely clever guy...Alcatraz wrote:Which is his role in Ferrari?TechF1 wrote:yes, he is talking with ArrivabeneC Plinius Secundus wrote:
Is it Jock Clear at 0m06s ?
Their info come from Sky Italyferkan wrote:This is not livery according to F1analisitecnica. They are good with their info so I would take their word for it.
Anyway, 5 days till the launch?
It's easier to make a quick car reliable than it is to make a reliable car quick.ferkan wrote:In nutshell, very agressive design from Ferrari on all fronts but plenty of problems with heat, engine vibrations and new gearbox. Who knoes how this will turn out.
Tell that to the McLaren MP4-18..!!bhall II wrote:It's easier to make a quick car reliable than it is to make a reliable car quick.ferkan wrote:In nutshell, very agressive design from Ferrari on all fronts but plenty of problems with heat, engine vibrations and new gearbox. Who knoes how this will turn out.
Source?ferkan wrote:There is a report from Italy saying that, according to source close to Ferrari and Haas, Haas actually has better data from wind tunnel and that Ferrari is aware of that. What kind of humiliation would that be if rookie team beats or even matches them. Again, generally the site hasnt been wrong one time that I know of so its a worrying report.
pciarro wrote:Source?ferkan wrote:There is a report from Italy saying that, according to source close to Ferrari and Haas, Haas actually has better data from wind tunnel and that Ferrari is aware of that. What kind of humiliation would that be if rookie team beats or even matches them. Again, generally the site hasnt been wrong one time that I know of so its a worrying report.
HASS won't beat Ferrrai even with better aero.ferkan wrote:There is a report from Italy saying that, according to source close to Ferrari and Haas, Haas actually has better data from wind tunnel and that Ferrari is aware of that. What kind of humiliation would that be if rookie team beats or even matches them. Again, generally the site hasnt been wrong one time that I know of so its a worrying report.
Tbh if Haas has better aero then its pretty much expected other well funded teams have as well (Merc, RBR, TR abd Mclaren). And if Haas as a rookie team with 5 times less budget has better aero then maybe they should hire someone else to look at the issue.FrukostScones wrote:ferkan wrote:There is a report from Italy saying that, according to source close to Ferrari and Haas, Haas actually has better data from wind tunnel and that Ferrari is aware of that. What kind of humiliation would that be if rookie team beats or even matches them. Again, generally the site hasnt been wrong one time that I know of so its a worrying report.
HASS won't beat Ferrrai even with better aero.
so if HAAS has a better aero, good thing for Ferrari, their engineers surely will be allowed to look into the issue.
...was to close the loophole that allowed a number of Ferrari engineers to briefly stop working for the Scuderia in order to temporarily join Haas' design team. That means nothing about Haas' car is a secret in Maranello.Eurosport, Nov 30, 2015 wrote:1 ) No employee or consultant of a competitor who is involved in aerodynamic development may pass any information obtained under their own ATR quota to an employee or consultant of another competitor.
2 ) No employee of a competitor who is involved in aerodynamic development, who leaves that company and takes up a similar position with another competitor, may do so without a suitable (or normal) period of "gardening leave" or "isolation".
3 ) No employee of a competitor who is involved in aerodynamic development, and who leaves that company and takes up a similar position with another competitor, may then return to the original competitor without a suitable (or normal) period of "gardening leave" or "isolation".
4 ) No employee of a competitor who is involved in aerodynamic development, and who then leaves that company, may pass information obtained under their former employer's ATR quota to an employee or consultant of another competitor before a suitable (or normal) period of "gardening leave" or "isolation" has elapsed.
5 ) No employee of an external entity who is involved in F1 aerodynamic development may be employed by a competitor, on a permanent or temporary basis, without a suitable (or normal) period of "gardening leave" or "isolation".
6 ) No employee of a competitor who is involved in aerodynamic development may be seconded to, or temporarily employed by, another competitor unless such secondment or employment is a genuine long term arrangement for the sole purpose of providing the other competitor with technical expertise. Any seconded employee must not then return to the original competitor without a suitable (or normal) period of "gardening leave" or "isolation". Three months would be considered as a genuine long term arrangement.
7 ) No competitor may acquire aerodynamic surfaces from an external entity (even if such entity claims to have designed them for its own purposes), unless any aerodynamic testing resource used to develop the surfaces is counted within the relevant competitor's ATR quota.
8 ) Teams sharing a windtunnel (or any other aerodynamic testing resource as referred to in Appendix 8, including a CFD cluster) must put appropriate procedures in place to avoid any breach of confidentiality or of the general restrictions of Appendix 6 and Appendix 8. This would include (but not be limited to):
(i) ensuring staff shared by both parties or employed by one party but involved in the operational part of the aerodynamic testing of the other party (such as operating or maintaining the windtunnel and/or CFD hardware) give contractual covenants not to pass information or to allow information to pass between the parties.
(ii) putting the physical infrastructure in place so the two parties operate their support activities (such as windtunnel model preparation), other than the operational part of the testing mentioned above, in separate environments.
(iii) putting the IT infrastructure in place so the two parties operate on separate networks and store their data on separate (at least virtually) storage hardware.
Note: "A suitable or normal period of gardening leave or isolation" must be 6 months except in the case of force majeure or a competitor ceasing operations (for example due to bankruptcy). Normally "gardening leave" is a contractual matter between the employee and the competitor from which that employee is leaving, and "isolation" is a similar arrangement and obligation for the competitor to which the employee is moving.
