Mclaren MP4-30 Honda

[Per]

Not getting the tyres to work can be down to a lot of things, including lack of power (which is in this case the most likely).

[Fede90]

Eric boullier says there are easy improvements in laptime to find just in the engine alone. The only way is up guys

So far Mclaren-Honda are under preforming. Man was expecting so much more from two big companies, with experience and know how. To see them struggle is both sad and funny.
Specially for Fernando, he left Ferrari to win titles. With MP4-30, impossible. That car is just to far behind.

but all Ferrari will do this year is 2nd and 3rd places,for someone who is 14 years in F1 that is absolutley thhe same as 17 and 19 places

I don't understand, are you talking seriously or not? I don't think is the same the 2° or 14° place for a top team/pilot

[radosav]

[The Moderator]

the ERES not working in full mode, isn't? how much that affect the lap time?

[Thefuelman]

I thought they had a major MGU-H problem that needs a full redisign and they would have to reposition it aswell.

[frosty125]

Looks like McLaren switched back to the original launch spec wing.

[GoranF1]

I thought they had a major MGU-H problem that needs a full redisign and they would have to reposition it aswell.

You are wrong,Arai said loud and clear after AUS there will be no redesign of any part of PU.

[nevill3]

Ted Kravitz on Sky F1 has said that they need a total redesign of the MGU-H and reposition as stated above because of a serious failure that destroyed one MGU-H. This will not need tokens though because it would be a reliabilty/safety modification

http://www1.skysports.com/formula1/video/

Search for Teds Notebook Malaysia @ 16:50

[CjC]

Interesting and worrying at the same time.
Mclaren and the Alonso say that 'copying' (Mercedes) will not make you win, so we can assume parts of Hondas PU are quite radical (my speculation), I hope Hondas MGU-h isn't one of the radical parts and they are redesigning the part to copy Mercedes, if you get what I mean...?

[radosav]

[Thefuelman]

I thought they had a major MGU-H problem that needs a full redisign and they would have to reposition it aswell.

You are wrong,Arai said loud and clear after AUS there will be no redesign of any part of PU.

Ted Kravitz on Sky F1 has said that they need a total redesign of the MGU-H and reposition as stated above because of a serious failure that destroyed one MGU-H. This will not need tokens though because it would be a reliabilty/safety modification

http://www1.skysports.com/formula1/video/

Search for Teds Notebook Malaysia @ 16:50

ajnšpric_pumpa this is mainly aimed at you. there is this very faux-expertise, I know better than thou attitude to this forum. Its like a load of kids just fighting to be right. Its only opinion. personally I'd take the view of someone who is there over someone stating categorically saying something is totally wrong for the sake of it.

[Thefuelman]

Interesting and worrying at the same time.
Mclaren and the Alonso say that 'copying' (Mercedes) will not make you win, so we can assume parts of Hondas PU are quite radical (my speculation), I hope Hondas MGU-h isn't one of the radical parts and they are redesigning the part to copy Mercedes, if you get what I mean...?

Yeah I agree. Its like the old V8, V10, V12 situations of the early 90's. Seems the radical soloutions just are not working all that well. That being said ferrari seem to have conquered their layout gremlins after a year. Hondas MGU-H problems seem to lie in heat soak from the ICE and Turbo from what is being said. Doesnt their MGU-H lay somewhere in between the engine and turbo? I'm not sure?
I agree It is a bit worrying because if they start major repackaging on the grounds of reliability wont that upset what they claim is a nicely balanced car and send car development back to square 1? unknow handling characteristics weight distribution and such? This all seems a little bit diconcerting considering how complex these cars are.

[Manoah2u]

Interesting and worrying at the same time.
Mclaren and the Alonso say that 'copying' (Mercedes) will not make you win, so we can assume parts of Hondas PU are quite radical (my speculation), I hope Hondas MGU-h isn't one of the radical parts and they are redesigning the part to copy Mercedes, if you get what I mean...?

Mclaren-Honda, going by their statements, indeed is having other plans than 'copying' Mercedes. All things are indeed pointing towards Honda being a busy little bee with a very complex and interesting engine 'package'.

I merely assume, that Honda's approach is based upon the idea that Mercedes's development room with their current engine might reach the roof soon, and they expect Ferrari [and perhaps Renault] to try and 'imitate' Mercedes' ideas and ultimately reach Mercedes' levels of power/driveability.

I believe Honda is taking the step a notch higher; They've investigated Mercedes' engine and instead of copying it, using the calculated data and further improve their possible philosophy: having an even more powerfull engine then Mercs, with the idea of not being restricted to the 'development roof' Mercedes might hit sooner or later [ perhaps even at the end or '15 or start of '16].

Honda probably is eyeing 2016. Fun and games seeing ferrari as competitive as they are, but it is highly unlikely they will be able to beat Merc in the WCC or Lewis on the WDC, bar a win or 2 due to weather [ this weekend ] or breakdown from Merc.

Honda seems like a busy bee sacrificing this year partially so they can develop a lot and at midseason or end season snatch a win or podium [ lets hope so ], and have an advantage in 2016. The car itself is very tight but as the engine will progress, so can the package.

Reports of them running on lower amounts or ERS-power [perhaps even zero], and a de-tuned engine ICE, paired with the statements they were running atleast on 20% fuel saving mode, you could argue they can improve by what, 30% minimum?
thats one hell of a number!

Mclaren asked for a 2-year contract for Button and Alonso. They're working to bank in results in 2016, not 2015.
2016 Mclaren - Honda on a dominant run leaving the battle for 2nd between Ferrari and Mercedes.

[F1T]

McLaren adds 2-channel S-duct in car nose - Development blog

McLaren is pushing on with aerodynamic development while Honda focuses on getting its power unit up to speed. The most notable update seen on the MP4-30 chassis at Malaysia is the addition of an S-duct in the nose cone, undoubtedly pushed by Petr Prodromou who worked on the feature with Red Bull in recent years.

Similar to the inlet on the Red Bull RB11, air is caught via a wide channel underneath the entire span of the nose cone, with the outer extremities however feeding channels to provide cockpit cooling rather than the S-duct. Different however is that on the McLaren, the duct splits in two, provided an exit on each side of the pitot tube hub fixed on the car's centreline atop the monocoque. The split channel was probably necessary due to the location of other components, but it does have a slight disadvantage in that it had an increased internal surface area, negatively influencing airflow through the channel via the boundary layer effect.

[aleks_ader]

My S duct impressions;

1st. Is possible to stall upper surface to provide more consisted airbox cooling package=>better efficacy of cetral airbox cooler with limited air intake => "better cooling". It reminds me of concept of F duct and DDRS.
http://scarbsf1.com/blog1/2013/06/25/in ... ia-f-duct/

Could this "S flow" cause disruption of coanda effect and cause the laminar flow separation on top of very "curvy" nose area?

To understand why i thinks so, there get a look on this amazing comment or go throw the whole topic: http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... 61#p165761 There some awesome CFD comments... =D>

Get back on the my point. I mean upper nose surface "must" have overall higher pressure gradient than lower one, right (wedge shape of long nose has very very strong tendencies to do that)? Despite if there is venturi channel wing support pylons underneath to reduce that effect. Anyway this S-duct concept needs to fill those basic recommendation in order to work as "fluid transfer" on top of surface.

I m wondering could be this the way how is Peter trying to find right compromise in cooling package? In order to "start" upwash toward airbox early and and provide much more controllable flow structure towards it. The overall principle could also work with conjunction of oddly positioned high mirrors. All in mind to manage the flow in&over the airbox cover.

2nd. So if i understand right there could be also underneath of nose some benefits (primary reason to put on the car in the first place). All that in order to "clean" the bonudary layer before than it goes to messy and disturbs your intentions with flow toward crucial part of the car - floor, duffuzor area.