- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
My impression is, that if they don't confirm till may, Renault will ditch them?rogazilla wrote: ↑07 Apr 2018, 18:26I think even if Red Bull decision is made now. They won’t tell Renault until late in the season. As soon as that decision is known by Renault you can be sure they will start to hide their pu development and probably mapping updates to red bull. There is no benefit for Red Bull to let Renault know of their decision. And that’s probably why Renault wanted to know by May. The way I see it is probably by mid season of Red Bull is assisting TR rear end that would be the indication of which direction they want to go.
There are still question marqs for us but maybe not for Redbull. Becuase they can get data from first hand. I agree with what you said but I think Redbull not need to help TR for PU Chassis adaptation. If you assumption is true they will get everything needed about engine to design their Chassis and when they started to work on 2019 chassis they will not have any time to help TR.rogazilla wrote: ↑07 Apr 2018, 18:26I think even if Red Bull decision is made now. They won’t tell Renault until late in the season. As soon as that decision is known by Renault you can be sure they will start to hide their pu development and probably mapping updates to red bull. There is no benefit for Red Bull to let Renault know of their decision. And that’s probably why Renault wanted to know by May. The way I see it is probably by mid season of Red Bull is assisting TR rear end that would be the indication of which direction they want to go.
Other way around?rogazilla wrote: ↑07 Apr 2018, 18:35Last year I believe mclaren waited to the last possible weekend to switch because sport regulation has the dead line after summer break/September? The May deadline is what Renault told RBR but I don’t think it is supported by contract or FIA. Someone can correct me on that if I am mistaken
Hartley needs more time in single-seater series and I bet is feeling pressure from Gasly. Give him time, he'll get there.
Eliminating knock on failures is not as easy as it sounds. Every solution has a cost. Design always involves compromise of competing requirements.McMika98 wrote: ↑04 Apr 2018, 22:31Anyways 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.
Yes but this is f1 and after throwing over 100 million each year for the last 4 years i expect more. Turbos arent really rocket science and MGUH isnt much of a leap into new frontier of technology.blueytoo wrote: ↑08 Apr 2018, 01:34Eliminating knock on failures is not as easy as it sounds. Every solution has a cost. Design always involves compromise of competing requirements.McMika98 wrote: ↑04 Apr 2018, 22:31Anyways 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.
Take misfuelling of diesel cars with petrol as an example. Still happens and hasn't been solved.
Don't know if any car will survive a turbo failure without engine damage.
You'd be surprised how much these engines shared with rocket science when considering the little details the engineers go into when building these PUs. Suffice to say that Honda have recently started working closely with their aircraft division to improve their turbo and other parts of the PU.