2019 Mercedes AMG Petronas Formula One Team

[GPR-A]

I don`t think flash cards could be used as an example first for being like comparing apples to oranges but I understand what you mean ...
There are many tech people in F1 - Andy Cowell is one of them - which says there`s a law of diminishing returns for PU but they don`t get into specifics (ERS, ICE or both?)

Anyway, the main question is the following: what could be the main/biggest differentiator factor this year between Merc, Ferrari and Red Bull, a factor which could give the winning team an edge from the other two teams?

First off, that comment wasn't anything against you. Hope that is clear.

In the interview where Andy Cowell talks about diminishing returns, he also talks about intelligent people finding better technical ways to enhance the performance and pushing the borders.

Red Bull is not in the championship hunt. No matter how anyone puts it, Honda doesn't have it in them to build a PU that could compete with Merc and Ferrari. They are just too far behind. Except for 2011, Red Bull is yet to start a season with a strong car. Their development is generally is more aggressive in the second part of the season, where both Merc and Ferrari would start thinking about next year's car and start planning resource reallocation.

Some people are looking at their winter testing race pace and thinking they can win races. But if they always start the race behind Merc and Ferrari, there is no way they can win races if things go normal for both. Just to give a scale of understanding, Toro Rosso, using a new Honda PU in abu dhabi last year, were 9 tenths behind Merc in Sector 2 alone in qualifying, which is all about power. Considering STR had way less downforce than Merc, if that was how poor they were, imagine Merc level of downforce on that STR and they could have been closer to 2 seconds in that sector. Whereas Hulkenberg's Renault was around half a second behind in that sector. Red Bull was 3 tenth behind Mercedes in that Sector. Theoretically, If Red Bull was running that Honda PU in that event, they would have been around 6 to 7 tenths down on Merc in Sector 2 (just a guess). That was the Spec 3 Honda PU, which had gained half a second over the course of the season. Merc and Ferrari's Spec 3 came in Spa. You can imagine the development that these two would have completed from August last year to February this year.

Honda has a mountain to climb in terms of being on par with Merc and Ferrari, which I don't think is going to happen anytime sooner. The amount of bragging RB and Honda are on about themselves, is what any new couple would do. Nothing new about that.

Ferrari's biggest challenge is to develop the car in season, which is a big question mark yet. That could be the differentiating factor between Merc and Ferrari.

[zibby43]

Source indicating Merc is bringing a new front wing to Melbourne.

https://twitter.com/smilextech/status/1 ... 95424?s=21

[djones]

I suspect everybody will be bringing a new front wing (at minimum).

[dans79]

I suspect everybody will be bringing a new front wing (at minimum).

I expect a new rear wing (to balance out the front), as well as more bargeboards updates as well.

[Phil]

What is different in this image? How did the same size evolved to be so large in capacity? Why did someone not say, we have reached the "diminishing returns" in this SD card concept, when they first reached 4GB?

https://ae01.alicdn.com/kf/HTB1UpnTSXXX ... 40x640.jpg

Because the process has shrunk, therefore the limit is related to how small the tech can become. Same thing with processor manufacturing. The ability of shrinking the process is decreasing, hence once a/the ceiling is reached; other ways will have to be found to pack more logic into the same physical space.

This however does NOT apply to Formula 1 and these Performance Units. The process isnt changing or being developed; it remains the same as a result of the rules in place. This means there will be a point of diminishing returns in which the closer you get to the potential maximum, the smaller/harder the gains will be. In your sd card example, this would be akin to regulating the process and seeing who can cram the most amount of logic into the same fixed physical space. So no, not quite the same.

[Just_a_fan]

performance is governed by the law of diminishing returns

I never understood this statement, ever. How does one know what the limit is?

What is different in this image? How did the same size evolved to be so large in capacity? Why did someone not say, we have reached the "diminishing returns" in this SD card concept, when they first reached 4GB?

https://ae01.alicdn.com/kf/HTB1UpnTSXXX ... 40x640.jpg

Size in your example is not determined by performance but by human factors i.e. being able to handle the item. The actual chip containing the memory is tiny and so dwarfed by the human interface packaging.

Or, to put it another way: your example is tripe. But hey, thanks for playing.

[wunderkind]

Source indicating Merc is bringing a new front wing to Melbourne.

https://twitter.com/smilextech/status/1 ... 95424?s=21

I think this speculation is due to Mercedes hiding the front wing and other bits (rear wing, and the floor) from public view. As another poster said, everyone brought a new front wing to Melbourne...........except Williams, perhaps.

[zibby43]

Source indicating Merc is bringing a new front wing to Melbourne.

https://twitter.com/smilextech/status/1 ... 95424?s=21

I think this speculation is due to Mercedes hiding the front wing and other bits (rear wing, and the floor) from public view. As another poster said, everyone brought a new front wing to Melbourne...........except Williams, perhaps.

He specifically says Mercedes brought this new FW forward to Melbourne; they were able to debut it 1 race earlier than they had hoped.

This journalist is FIA accredited.

Photos will help to confirm once scrutineering arrives.

[GPR-A]

performance is governed by the law of diminishing returns

I never understood this statement, ever. How does one know what the limit is?

What is different in this image? How did the same size evolved to be so large in capacity? Why did someone not say, we have reached the "diminishing returns" in this SD card concept, when they first reached 4GB?

https://ae01.alicdn.com/kf/HTB1UpnTSXXX ... 40x640.jpg

Size in your example is not determined by performance but by human factors i.e. being able to handle the item. The actual chip containing the memory is tiny and so dwarfed by the human interface packaging.

Or, to put it another way: your example is tripe. But hey, thanks for playing.

Thanks for completely losing the point that was made in my post and then ridiculing the example provided to a level of yours. Well played. Any plans of growing beyond that?

No one knows what the limits and possibilities are for any of the PU architectures of any of the manufacturer. People are limited by their ability to think beyond a certain point. Those who do so, go further and explore avenues that deliver larger performance possibilities and those who can't, simply term it as "diminished" returns.

[GPR-A]

This however does NOT apply to Formula 1 and these Performance Units. The process isnt changing or being developed; it remains the same as a result of the rules in place. This means there will be a point of diminishing returns in which the closer you get to the potential maximum, the smaller/harder the gains will be. In your sd card example, this would be akin to regulating the process and seeing who can cram the most amount of logic into the same fixed physical space. So no, not quite the same.

How does one know what the "potential maximum" within these rules? I am sure, when Renault, Ferrari and Mercedes started the development back in 2012, they all would have thought a certain target as potential maximum for the same exact rules. How did it happen that, Mercedes managed to achieve so much more within the same regulations, than Renault and Ferrari? Some folks looked at things differently and started exploring those possibilities.

Mercedes has revised their architecture for a 3rd time and exploring avenues that were not thought of earlier, within the same rules! If they get constrained by the thought process of diminishing returns, they would be unable to push beyond that.

You lost the logic of the example of SD card I gave, by trying to apply the rules in a wrong sense because there are no written rules. Don't you think, the usability and form factor of an SD card is a limitation with which those designers have to work through and enhance the capabilities? Doesn't that pose the constraints that a rule based governance of a F1 engine does to teams?

[Phil]

There are diminishing returns because of the fuel amount and the heavy regulations on fuel flow (as well as potential grey zones with additives).

The area where there are potential gaines is by thinking outside the box; i.e. designing the PU in a way that it is operating at it’s best possible (thermal) efficiency, but also small enough or packaged in a way that they can achieve aerodynamic gains, more efficient cooling, less drag etc.

In the end, it’s the entirety of the package that counts (including team, driver and operationally), not just the performance of the power units. But make no mistake, the power units are closing in on one another. Aero & chassis, “the whole package” is becoming ever as important now.

[Morteza]

[motobaleno]

according to motorsport mercedes new wing is ferrari/alfa style

https://it.motorsport.com/f1/news/merce ... e/4352255/

[Just_a_fan]

Except that it isn't a Ferrari/Alfa wing. It's their usual wing sat back so that the front edge is high. Look at the angle of the horizontal elements and tou can see the wing/nose is sat at a nose high angle.

[dans79]

according to motorsport mercedes new wing is ferrari/alfa style

https://it.motorsport.com/f1/news/merce ... e/4352255/

They have no idea what they are talking about. The wing is a slight modification of what they ran in the second week of testing.