[ 2020 ] Racing Point F1 Team - Mercedes

[Racer X]

The new Racing Point approach of "copy-then-reverse-Engineer" is very different from the traditional approach of "make-my-own-solution plus look at what competitors are doing". Will they lose their ability to perform well in a make-my-own-solution world? The 2022 (previously 2021) rules greatly limit Engineering freedom and so something near spec cars may result. Does RP even need to maintain its ability for a make-my-own-solution world?

Why are Williams thrashing around at the back of the grid with zero points due to a make-my-own-solution approach? I ask this as frustrated Williams fan.

I forget what driver said Claire Williams was just hiring people out of fear.
I wonder if they have just a staff of talented people with no synergy.
Everyone fighting everyone or maybe not fighting but perhaps not working as a collective work effort.

EDIT: Because what makes Jordan/Force India/Racing Point who they are is the people at that small Silverstone Factory.

[Macklaren]

The new Racing Point approach of "copy-then-reverse-Engineer" is very different from the traditional approach of "make-my-own-solution plus look at what competitors are doing". Will they lose their ability to perform well in a make-my-own-solution world? The 2022 (previously 2021) rules greatly limit Engineering freedom and so something near spec cars may result. Does RP even need to maintain its ability for a make-my-own-solution world?

Why are Williams thrashing around at the back of the grid with zero points due to a make-my-own-solution approach? I ask this as frustrated Williams fan.

I dont think you can adopt RP's approach without a wealthy team owner like Stroll who says "It's my team, this is what we are going to do" and has enough money to throw at people to prevent brain drain in the gap years. That is what Williams is now (finally) looking for...

[rohan]

The new Racing Point approach of "copy-then-reverse-Engineer" is very different from the traditional approach of "make-my-own-solution plus look at what competitors are doing". Will they lose their ability to perform well in a make-my-own-solution world? The 2022 (previously 2021) rules greatly limit Engineering freedom and so something near spec cars may result. Does RP even need to maintain its ability for a make-my-own-solution world?

Why are Williams thrashing around at the back of the grid with zero points due to a make-my-own-solution approach? I ask this as frustrated Williams fan.

Racing Point are cheats, Williams are not. It's as simple as that.

[JordanMugen]

The new Racing Point approach of "copy-then-reverse-Engineer" is very different from the traditional approach of "make-my-own-solution plus look at what competitors are doing".

It's bog-standard in every industry under the sun though. Be it road-going automobile, smartphone, portable cassette player, personal computer or so on. In the automobile industry for example, for every OEM part, there are sometimes 10+ pattern parts available which have the same fitment and often appearance, many times even from reputable manufacturers like Mahle or NTK or Magnetti Marelli or Continental or whoever, even when they did not supply the original part.

Article 1 of Appendix 6 of the Sporting Regulations states: "A competitor shall, in respect of the Listed Parts to be used in its cars in Formula One, only use Listed Parts which are designed by it."

Renault further cited that Racing Point had not retained: "the exclusive right to use the Listed Parts in Formula One so long as it competes in Formula One."

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/raci ... p/4832634/

When I heard "Renault lodge Racing Point protest" I thought it was about Stroll's somewhat forceful overtake on Ricciardo, little could I guess the true nature of the protest.

Renault's protest (given that FIA have already checked RP's design documentation and ownership of IP and cleared it) is almost comical IMO, how curious.

[bill shoe]

Renault's protest is clever because it narrows the argument to a very specific set of parts rather than allowing rambling philosophical arguments about overall car-copying. Renault is protesting the front and rear brake ducts on this year's Racing Point. The key points are that (1) these specific parts have no significant variation between last year's Merc and this year's Racing Point, and (2) therefore RP does not have "the exclusive right to use the Listed Parts in Formula One" as required by rules.

My brain tells me that RP has been caught red-handed by the Renault protest, but I suspect the RP brake ducts (and by extension the whole car) will not be deemed illegal in the end. What's allowed is what you get away with rather than anything dictated by words in the rules.

[dans79]

Renault is protesting the front and rear brake ducts on this year's Racing Point. The key points are that (1) these specific parts have no significant variation between last year's Merc and this year's Racing Point, and (2) therefore RP does not have "the exclusive right to use the Listed Parts in Formula One" as required by rules.

I'm sorry, but it doesn't work that way. The only way RP is going to be found in the wrong, is if Renault has some kind of proof that RP stole or was given the prints by Merc. Short of industrial espionage, or a whistle blower of some sort, that's going to be real hard to come by.

Even if they are dimensionally similar their are finer details to consider. For example how many layers of CF where used, what is the weight of the fabric, how were the layers oriented to each other, what was the modulus of the fiber etc etc.

Having performed similar exercises in the past, it is not that hard to duplicate a part when you have enough reference photos, and objects of known sizes to reference off of.

[SmallSoldier]

Renault is protesting the front and rear brake ducts on this year's Racing Point. The key points are that (1) these specific parts have no significant variation between last year's Merc and this year's Racing Point, and (2) therefore RP does not have "the exclusive right to use the Listed Parts in Formula One" as required by rules.

I'm sorry, but it doesn't work that way. The only way RP is going to be found in the wrong, is if Renault has some kind of proof that RP stole or was given the prints by Merc. Short of industrial espionage, or a whistle blower of some sort, that's going to be real hard to come by.

Even if they are dimensionally similar their are finer details to consider. For example how many layers of CF where used, what is the weight of the fabric, how were the layers oriented to each other, what was the modulus of the fiber etc etc.

Having performed similar exercises in the past, it is not that hard to duplicate a part when you have enough reference photos, and objects of known sizes to reference off of.

I don’t think Renault will need to show proof of wrong doing... What they are aiming for is for Racing Point to prove that the design is theirs.

The only challenge that I could foresee for Racing Point is on the internals... The external / body part of the drums could be copied through pictures, but internal parts, routing, wiring, etc... If the same or too close for comfort would probably be an issue.

Again, is for RP to prove that they “design them”, just as Mercedes has to prove that DAS was legal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TimW]

I guess that indeed the internals are the reason why Renault chose the brake ducts for their protest. Especially because there is also internal aero. If you want to copy performance you want the brake ducts' aerodynamic performance to be the same (blowing air through the rim etc). But if it is the same, that is a strong indicator that there was more than just pictures.

[rgimblett]

Exactly, all agree it's possible to copy the external surfaces of the 2019 Mercedes from photos etc, just take the Racing Point bodywork off and turn it upside down in the case of ducts cut them in half to see if the inside is the same.

[basti313]

I guess that indeed the internals are the reason why Renault chose the brake ducts for their protest. Especially because there is also internal aero. If you want to copy performance you want the brake ducts' aerodynamic performance to be the same (blowing air through the rim etc). But if it is the same, that is a strong indicator that there was more than just pictures.

Absolutely.
I think every other part is at some point visible from every side to copy it (engine covers, floor, etc...). But no one could ever see the inside aero of the brake ducts and that is a very defining and relevant structure.
Sounds like a very smart appeal to check if there is data transfer or not.

The big question for me is what parts Merc will provide? Merc is not stupid, so they will make a good selection. As far as I can see it this was not well defined which brake duct from which race needs to be supplied to the FIA.

[nzjrs]

I think it's inconceivable that Mercedes would do anything illegal such as supplying drawings - they have too much to lose.

Do we all agree that an exact (it's a thought experiment, just take exact as given) copy of the Mercedes brake ducts made only from photos alone would be legal?

[Raleigh]

I think Racing Point will be ok, there are some great comparison shots of the brake ducts in the car thread (Page 4) and you can tell that while the design is extremely close there are plenty of small differences in shape, details (like wiring layout) and also differences in construction such as components being titanium on the Racing Point and carbon fiber on the Mercedes.

Also checking through the W10 thread there are many images of the brakes in different states of assembly, so the knowledge of internal details is public.

[bauc]

I think it's inconceivable that Mercedes would do anything illegal such as supplying drawings - they have too much to lose.

Do we all agree that an exact (it's a thought experiment, just take exact as given) copy of the Mercedes brake ducts made only from photos alone would be legal?

From the outside yes, but if the internal details which are not visible are identical then someone has slipped this info to RP. Similar to Stepnygate, one USB made the difference ?!

[Wouter]

.
Is it a @MercedesAMGF1 W10 or a @RacingPointF1 RP20?

Matthew Somerfield @SomersF1

Front brake drums are going a little more tricky for the FIA to pin down, especially as a quick looks through my archive of 2019 shows Merc using at least 4 different drum designs alone...

[XRayF1]

I guess that indeed the internals are the reason why Renault chose the brake ducts for their protest. Especially because there is also internal aero. If you want to copy performance you want the brake ducts' aerodynamic performance to be the same (blowing air through the rim etc). But if it is the same, that is a strong indicator that there was more than just pictures.

Absolutely.
I think every other part is at some point visible from every side to copy it (engine covers, floor, etc...). But no one could ever see the inside aero of the brake ducts and that is a very defining and relevant structure.
Sounds like a very smart appeal to check if there is data transfer or not.

The big question for me is what parts Merc will provide? Merc is not stupid, so they will make a good selection. As far as I can see it this was not well defined which brake duct from which race needs to be supplied to the FIA.

While believing that the RP car is indeed legal (at least innocent until proven guilty), how can the FIA actually make Merc providing obvious details of their design?
I would immediately call 'proprietary' and be done with it.

Secondly, as Dans said, the design of a thing is not only its exterior but also its invisible interior.
Material composition, layer structure, backing temperature, duration, etc.
And even if the internals are the same, I could even then easily argue that this is best industry practice.

I just do not get it how you may actually either prove the guilt (FIA) or defend from such an allegation (RP).