General Honda F1 Topic

[shingles]

I for one am seeing the glass half empty so shoot me if you dont like that perspective.

Anyways as an aspiring engineer if i was designing a system in this case a PU with 4 integral components, i would have a requirement to eliminate knock on failures. The failure although unexpected wasnt catastrophic, but then to have knock on effects is just poor design to me.

The problem is you are making all of these criticism based on very LIMITED knowledge of the entire SYSTEM. Do you really think that any engineer would want a system in which a single failure causes failures everywhere else? The problem is in real life is that designs are compromises. Every engineering design is a compromise when you are producing actual product and not just putting --- on paper. Could they have designed it so there are no failures? SURE... but it might be too big, too heavy, etc. etc.

[RedNEO]

I seem to recall last year everyone wanting Honda to just take the mindset of "don't take reliability risks to avoid penalties, just introduce things asap, don't try and stretch the chance of it surviving a race".

This is EXACTLY what they are doing now. Tanabe said that the ICE was functional after the Turbo/MGU-H failure however there was evidence to suggest it had damaged the ICE and they are not interested in the risk of running that. I am 100% behind them with that decision. Their mindset last year, likely also with McLaren's input, was to save every component and they would of run the ICE with the new MGU-H.

Whoever previously stated that "a turbo failure that can cause a knock on effect to the ICE is a poor design"... I think maybe you don't understand the principles of what a turbocharger is and its relationship with the induction and exhaust systems.. 100% prevention with zero effect on the units capability is nigh on impossible, especially with the constraints of weight, materials etc placed on them.

And the 50% reliability comment is.. well laughable, there is what? 2 engines on the field versus 6 for each other manufacturer? So yes, while being statistically true during the GP's this year it's a foolish number. Let's include the whole year shall we. Through Honda's stellar running in testing, how many Renault's went bust and how often? There was a few Ferrari issues also? I'm also hearing a lot of Merc's with heat issues considering it's been one GP, Hamilton having to back off, Valteri PU running hot, Stroll needing a replacement engine as well, possible issues arising? Bahrain will be interesting. Like if you want to call the kettle black, let's call the kettle black.

I want Honda to use 10 engines if necessary, Toro Rosso have made it clear that's what they are letting them do, so just do it. James Key has said he's more excited for the STR14 and Honda are excited for the late version of the RA618 and by extension the 619 in the first fully integrated STR-Honda chassis.

Their reliability OVERALL based on this ONE race is still too hard to make solid conclusions.

Honda being forced to use new engines nearly every race is not a new thing this year, so why will it make the difference to adding performance when it’s been like this all along? Just curious.

[techman]

Honda being forced to use new engines nearly every race is not a new thing this year, so why will it make the difference to adding performance when it’s been like this all along? Just curious.

its one race so far and you are saying as if honda will be changing engines for every race. the mgu h had a knock on effect on the the ice. and they brought the reliability update to fix it. so let see after few more races. without jumping in as usual to start the blame game.

[ivanlesk]

Honda being forced to use new engines nearly every race is not a new thing this year, so why will it make the difference to adding performance when it’s been like this all along? Just curious.

its one race so far and you are saying as if honda will be changing engines for every race. the mgu h had a knock on effect on the the ice. and they brought the reliability update to fix it. so let see after few more races. without jumping in as usual to start the blame game. if i were you i will be concerned about mclaren whether they can get any closer to redbull and there 1.5 second advantage it has over mclaren

You are stating that they have developed, produced and tested and shipped to Bahrain part in less then 2 weeks?

They couldn't do it for whole last season and now they done it in this short time?

Statement that this is just first race would have some ground if Honda was reliable last few years, but this is just keeps happening. Thats why people doesn't have faith in Honda.

[McMika98]

The problem is you are making all of these criticism based on very LIMITED knowledge of the entire SYSTEM. Do you really think that any engineer would want a system in which a single failure causes failures everywhere else? The problem is in real life is that designs are compromises. Every engineering design is a compromise when you are producing actual product and not just putting --- on paper. Could they have designed it so there are no failures? SURE... but it might be too big, too heavy, etc. etc.

Pleassse everyone here is making judgement positive or negative based on very little information. Its not like we are posting aero data or suspension layout drawings.
Now i have cooler heads, my expectation was that by now Honda have a mapped FMEA analysis of all possible failures but it appears its still lacking as they could not anticipate this failure. I feel that its an MGUH issue rather than turbo.

[muramasa]

circa 1987 -
"............, Honda’s engineers took some wrong turnings over the next few seasons – the company’s policy of rotating its design groups every few years worked wonders for education but not always so well for race results...."

This is wrong. It's just as silly as claiming "Ferrari just cannot win titles because in Italy they take 3 hours for lunch" or "Renault is poor because in France they take French full course dinner for 4 hours everyday " or "HRT failed because of siesta" etc.

In European F1 teams and makers there is frequent engineers moving and reshuffles, or "rotating", that's why the likes of Newey, James Key etc have been assigned "appropriate" job (instead of what mechanics, PR, catering etc would do) from the beginning and started serving at top position at very young age. This would not happen if not for what's called "policy of rotating".

And teams keep changing engineering structure. Seems current status has been continuing forever, but Allison is in Merc for only few years, having previously serving for Ferrari for few years before that. Key is serving in STR for 5 years, previously working in Sauber for 2 years. Paddy Lowe was in Mercedes for only 4 years. Race engineers level as well, teams are constantly evolving its structure, that's why in the garages and teams is full of young staffs. And like half of those leading F1 designers and directors in 00s have all gone now. Again all because of F1's "policy of rotating".

And it's not like Goto was doing F1 in Honda just for few years, he did it for like 7 or 8 years. And those junior engineers are the same. From such phrase as "policy of rotating its design groups every few years", you'd understand like Honda was completely replacing staff as if replacing to new battery or changing to iPhone 8 from iPhone 7, but that's just plain wrong or more like utter lie. Those writers who write such stuff like that is just ignorant. It's really good example of simplified, ignorant stereotype lacking perspective and context implanting prejudice or just wrong idea in people's minds and making long lasting and widespread misinterpretations and damages. There are just so many about Japanese by Westerns, and so many about Westerns and other Asians etc by Japanese.

So what's called system evolution/progression etc for McLaren or Renault or Ferrari or Mercedes or Brackley outfit or Enstone outfit or Silverstone outfit or Brixworth or whatever gets in turn called "rotating" for Honda somehow.

What I find funny is that those who say stuffs like "Honda rotating", "Honda using F1 as test bed" etc tend to also insist Honda should poach more Westerns and change more. I mean they dont recognise they are self-contradicting. That's what happens when you are only jumping to "what they say" and buying them without thinking and confirming sources.

[Thunder]

Some OT Posts have been removed. This is the Honda Thread, not RB vs. McLaren. Also some posts have been edited to get rid of some parts blatantly targeted towards riling other People up. Stop it with these provocative posts towards other posters Teams you don't support.

[muramasa]

Pleassse everyone here is making judgement positive or negative based on very little information.

That's the very problem. You dont need to, or must not, force you to make judgement, either optimistic or pessimistic, from very little information. Just give good margin to it and make technical induction and deduction out of it that's still possible is fun and productive, but you just want to reach definitive conclusion and be given easy 1 or 0 answer because "hanging in mid-air" feels insecure and you cant stand it, and want to give verdict because it feels good. That's human propensity and weakness.

Of course MGU-H is breaking and PU is not good because Honda is poor or immature or whatever. But outright claiming like "broke -> poor design, how come knock-on etc" is superficial and childish way of looking at things, also lacking basic prudence, intelligence and respect, I'm afraid. I am intrigued by what they are doing and what difficulties they are facing and would like to know technical details as much as possible and want to enjoy and appreciate their technical journey and progress/development, not interested in giving "feel-good verdict", and I'm sure I'm not the only one, but at the same time I know I probably belong to the minority unfortunately.

Failure management or shel model or whatever those analysis are common engineering language. What makes difference is data/knowledge and empirical accumulation, they are still short of full 5 years while others have been doing for 9 or 10 years, plus they are catching up so have to be risky and aggressive rather than incremental/parametric approach, so in double or triple binds. Also this is a sport. There is nothing "challenging" about 125k rpm and 60 or 70cm shaft and securing resistance itself. What's challenging is making it relevant as a sporting application. That's the condition and context. And you dont really need to "feel" it's MGU-H. Honda said it's MGU-H altho the cause is still undisclosed, could be the same as last year (oil/water from compressor damaging bearing) or entirely different (like shaft oscillation, slimmed down shaft bit too fragile, etc). As I wrote above, give margin and dont jump to conclusion.

Regarding the fix they are bringing to Bahrain, it's nothing more than a temp patch of course, that you can deduce from other known facts like logistics (time it takes to send PU from Melbourne to Sakura, then deadline for shipping to Sakir) and physical limitations (time it takes to analyze, making judgement on whether break seal to dismantle PU or not, then analyze and find cause, and design and manufacture whatever modifications). Also looks like some are guessing they'd had new MGU-H in pipeline already or shud use STR as R&d but you can rule it out because Tanabe, Yamamoto and Asaki and previously Hasegawa have all been saying they prioritized reliability to establish secure R&D baseline, without which there can't be R&d in the first place, and such thing as new components at 2nd race is not ideal, or there cannot be anything worse than that, just too obvious. As Tanabe alluded in Melbourne, this MGU-H issue is nothing but huge blow and crisis for Honda. But I'm intrigued, as I wrote above. Hopefully they disclose some more info and will overcome it sooner.

[HPD]

You are stating that they have developed, produced and tested and shipped to Bahrain part in less then 2 weeks?
They couldn't do it for whole last season and now they done it in this short time?

We do not know how is the work of Tanabe and mainly Asaki.
These people are new and could take action or make decisions faster than Hasegawa, for example.

[techman]

Some OT Posts have been removed. This is the Honda Thread, not RB vs. McLaren. Also some posts have been edited to get rid of some parts blatantly targeted towards riling other People up. Stop it with these provocative posts towards other posters Teams you don't support.

i respectfully ask the moderators to monitor certain people coming to honda or TR thread just to provoke the honda fans or TR fans. Please dont allow this to happen. we have no choice but to respond if they continue provoking. I have no issues if the criticism is constructive but they are not. its provoking questions continuously by them

[godlameroso]

It's strange, maybe the car hitting curbs was just the last straw, perhaps it was just an accumulation of damage through the weekend. Hartley's car also had a lot of damage, but the engine made it to the end. I don't think you can place sole blame on the power unit, it was a combination of factors which is why the cause is still not known. It was also said that TR has input on the power unit tuning perhaps these are teething issues. Over the winter we got a sense that the two outfits were eagerly working together so maybe they're still working some things out. Let's see how they get on this weekend, this is a big power circuit.

[Talisman]

I don’t think the problem will recur at Bahrain purely because unlike Melbourne but similar to Barcelona the kerbs shouldn’t be so vicious. Might have to wait until the next street track to see if the problem recurs.

[techman]

I don’t think the problem will recur at Bahrain purely because unlike Melbourne but similar to Barcelona the kerbs shouldn’t be so vicious. Might have to wait until the next street track to see if the problem recurs.

yes that what i thought as well.

[Revs84]

Was just wondering today...

Many people are sure that Red Bull will take on Honda engines next year if it proves to be a better alternative than Renault.

What we do know is that Red Bull are indeed keeping a close eye on things and have gone public praising their progress. Renault are aware of this and tried to impose a May deadline on them, although Red Bull said that a final decision/confirmation will not be given before September.

The thing is this; Toro Rosso, as Red Bull's Junior team, might have been happy to take a late decision in September knowing it will compromise the package at the start of the season, but pay off further on in the season and 2019 due to being works status. However, I doubt Red Bull would. Even though they have more resources at hand, such decision is ideally taken as early as possible in order to find the best packaging solution possible with Honda if they were to switch.

So my question is, does anyone believe there's already something going on in the background between Red Bull and Honda just in case Red Bull move away from Renault's engines? Or do you think they would adapt certain things from Toro Rosso? When is the latest a team like Red Bull could start in order to have enough time to maximise a new package that involves a new engine?

For the record, I could care less if Honda partner with Red Bull or not. I've always been a person who backed the underdog and seeing Honda having a shot at a championship with TR would be a 100 times more exciting than with RB.

[etusch]

?

For the record, I could care less if Honda partner with Red Bull or not. I've always been a person who backed the underdog and seeing Honda having a shot at a championship with TR would be a 100 times more exciting than with RB.

I will prefer to see that but it need longer time. In fact it is also not matter for me. Most important thing for me to see Honda in F1 always. To see a successfull Honda comes later