They can intertwine but isn't that the point?mclaren111 wrote: ↑05 Feb 2022, 14:06AeroDynamic wrote: ↑05 Feb 2022, 13:49If they can then absolutely. But I don't believe the Honda ever reached the same level of efficiency-power dynamic as the Mercedes engine does, hence their disparity in qualifying modes in previous years that Mercedes could tap into last season because that ceiling of performance was there. I think last season the Honda was at its peak power capacity – or at least, peak power capacity without falling off a cliff with reliability. The Mercedes seemingly can go harder and faster without losing reliability but rather shortening its life-span.Ryar wrote: ↑05 Feb 2022, 04:06Does anyone else share the same thought that, Red Bull should plan the season to use 5 sets of PU components, instead of 3 and have strategic plan to incur penalties at the right venues. As the last season showed, there will invariably be some things that would force the hand to move in that direction. Although, RB used 4 sets, Mercedes, despite using 5 sets still were there right in it. Planning this would allow them to run the PU harder from early on. It would allow the drivers to race harder and push the competitors too.
If however, Honda come this season with an engine with that kind of parity of efficiency/power/reliability, then I expect this won't even be a consideration, it will be the thing they should and will do. The question will be reliability, as this was a hiccup in the old designs when running under the regs that allowed qualifying modes.
Sounds like a Contradiction in Terms to me... The essence of reliability is for the PU's to do the required mileage...
Thus, 3 PU's for the season... If they can't they're not reliable...
if you run it harder, does it compromise the probability that a part goes wrong in a way that renders it useless, in a manner that is very unpredictable? that is the type of reliability gremlin that gives you no security about using it the way you want to.
If however, you can use it aggressively and have a very probable and predictable window of mileage that everything runs perfectly fine, then it is reliable – it doesn't go wrong – it's just not durable beyond a certain point in either performance or reliability.
I don't think the Honda could push on the metric of power, push that envelope, without inviting very probable and unpredictable failures.
Would one buy the interpretation that they were running the engine the most aggressive possible with bulletproof reliability for 7 odd races and just simply couldn't turn it up any higher?
I'm doubtful. Normally the limit is the reliability or the regs, not the power ceiling. Hence 'Reliability upgrade' = performance upgrade.
that is a point. They may use it with careful discretion where it makes sense to? either way, its better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it.Jolle wrote: ↑05 Feb 2022, 13:58It all depends how much the field is or isn’t bunched up. Last year, with the huge gap beween the front runners and the rest, worse case would be place four after penalties, which makes it relatively painless. If there are three teams up front, it’s place six, four teams, place eight, etc etc.
It's with regret my friend, to hear this. I think we should all be able to share neutral observations and not make it a personal matter. I do commend you for taking this road with the ignore button, it is a rational reaction if one doesn't like content from another user. I wish the others would follow your example. Good luck In the new season!