Red Bull RB12 TAG-Heuer

[lio007]

And without a monkeyseat !? in Monacco!

[Morteza]

[flickerf1]

Bite-size tech: Red Bull RB12 RW endplates: http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/bite- ... es-740374/

[Pierce89]

And without a monkeyseat !? in Monacco!
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CjUDzA2XIAA7nwi.jpg:large

Its most likely a package that simply sees no benefit from a monkey seat. Maybe the flows in that will see a monkey seat mostly just adding drag.

[ME4ME]

Some stunning pics:













Source: F1fanatic, XPB

[lio007]

Very interesting read:
http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 03249.html

Fast facts:
- deal with Renault for 2017 might be done in Monacco
- RB very happy with the PU upgrade

- RB has a "super-test-bed" since this year
- they can test the whole configuration (chassis + PU)
- the driver is in the simulator and next to the simulator is chassis+tyres+gearbox+PU+rolling road => simulator + VTT are linked together
- RB's test bed is (at the moment) more advanced than the ones in Viry, this (test bed) is an advantage for Renault too
- Lauda said, RB is a step ahead with this configuration, Merc can only test PU+gearbox on their VTT
- RB can test day and night
- RB has a new 360°-simulator

edit:
Ferrari has a similar configuration (chassis+gearbox+PU) => both are from AVL
Teams are allowed to test with such configuration, but WITHOUT any kind of wings / winglets

[bill shoe]

As remarkable as the whole (rumored) simulator is, the most difficult part would be using actual tires on a rolling road to simulate the real equivalent. I haven't heard of any serious attempt to do this before. Many difficulties starting with: what tires?

Can they buy current F1 tires from Pirelli as long as they don't violate the "no testing at tracks" rules? I can't think of any reason why not. It would seem to be bad ethics on the part of Pirelli, but Pirelli didn't shy away from supplying the Mercedes secret-test-that-wasn't-a-test a few years ago.

If not Pirelli, can they commission custom tires from another tire company? I don't see any rules or ethical problem with that. Red Bull would decide what parameters were important from their extensive Pirelli use and spec the new tires to match. This would all be very expensive but Red Bull has shown a dogged determination to spend until they have an advantage. Money does not seem to be a limitation.

While we're on the subject, how do large capital investments like gi-normous simulators get expensed in annual resource limits? I think there are limits on numbers of team personnel and on CFD/tunnel time, but is there any limit on capital spending?

Remember RB's road-car-faster-than-an-f1-car project? It needs tires, and tires are the biggest technical challenge for that car. So might as well jump in bed with your tire supplier for the road car tires at the same time you do the F1-simulator tire deal. Ironically, Red Bull's F1 spending is driving the "faster than F1" goalposts further away.

[Big Mangalhit]

I love how this "no road tests to save money" end up with team spending crazy amounts of money to simulate a road indoors which probably will never be as fruitful as a proper readiest and way more expensive. Teams will simply spent everything they have on their budget.

Anybody knows if this testbed was already used to design the RB12 or is it only available now?

[lio007]

I love how this "no road tests to save money" end up with team spending crazy amounts of money to simulate a road indoors which probably will never be as fruitful as a proper readiest and way more expensive. Teams will simply spent everything they have on their budget.

Anybody knows if this testbed was already used to design the RB12 or is it only available now?

Marko mentioned some months ago, that they'll use is it from the beginning of 2016.

[ME4ME]

And without a monkeyseat !? in Monacco!
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CjUDzA2XIAA7nwi.jpg:large

Its most likely a package that simply sees no benefit from a monkey seat. Maybe the flows in that will see a monkey seat mostly just adding drag.

I think it's an aero balance driven decision. Since good steer-in is required in Monaco, it makes no sense to introduce addition rear downforce and thereby move the CoP backwards. According to the article here on F1t, this is something Williams is experimenting with as well (Barcelona test).

[.poz]

EDIT: looking with more attention i think it's the front wing

Any idea about the orange cable on the lower element of front suspension that can be spotted in the photo ? It was very visible form the camera car. Usually telemetry cable pass inside the suspension to protect them and for aerodynamic.

[godlameroso]

A strain gauge for the electric active flow control?

[flmkane]

Someone needs to say this so I will.

The very requirement that Red Bull should need such and advanced simulator is RIDICULOUS.

Guess what's cheaper and gives better results. TESTING!!!!

Yet testing was banned to make f1 cheaper.

But now Red Bull and other F1 teams are spending ludicrous money to get simulators of insane capability.

BRING BACK TESTING AND STOP THIS MADNESS

[NL_Fer]

The testcar is not allowed any aero, but is it allowed to simulate downforce with springs and hydraulics?

[noname]

Guess what's cheaper and gives better results. TESTING!!!!

I am not that certain.

To do track testing you need to rent the track, send the cars, parts, equipment and people there, to properly evaluate components after testing you have to ship them back, risk in case something will fail is much lower, etc. Unless the team has a track next to the factory simulator can simplify (and thus make cheaper) whole logistic behind.

On top of that simulator provides very well controlled environment. Test chambers/cells/simulators are being used everywhere, why F1 should rely solely on such an old fashioned tool as field testing?