2022 Oracle | Red Bull Racing F1 Team

[Juzh]

.
No way .

Lap 54, PER v VER:
https://i.imgur.com/QlpY3OL.jpeg

No way he was 25bhp under VER with those speeds.

.
It is for me also hard to read your cherry picked graphs. That one trace doesn't prove anything.
Normally with fresh Medium tires Perez would be much quicker than Sainz on his old Hards, but he wasn't!

https://en.mclarenf-1.com/2022/gp/s8993 ... s/785-825/

simply overheating and when it cooled off it went back to normal.

Yeah man, I think Horner is making it all up.

Yeh, sure. You are right.

This is so wrong! completely BS.

Oh please, he has provided several graphs, so there's no way he is cherry picking. He even provided a comparison between lap 11 and 54 (similar condition, less fuel load). He has put in a lot more effort in his analysis than just looking at sector times.
The statement 'Normally with fresh Medium tires Perez would be much quicker than Sainz on his old Hards, but he wasn't! ' is rather simplistic.
Maybe you don't understand the graphs, and don't like his conclusion, but that doesn't mean it is all just BS.

Perez' speed seemed normal in all laps after the safety car, and I don't understand how anyone can get a 30 km/h overspeed with a 30hp powerdeficit. It all just looks a bit strange to me.

As explained those are pointless graphs that can not be taken at face value without a lot of extra context involved. And 30 kmh overspeed with drs and slipstream is nothing unheard of, just remember verstappen's 50 kmh overspeed vs leclerc in bahrain. Sometimes telemetry traces are just not needed to see a problem that's otherwise confirmed by multiple sources such as interviews, mini-sector time deltas and plain old onboard footage.

More from perez:
https://racingnews365.com/perez-concern ... -different

"I think it was a sensor issue that we had," Perez told media, including RacingNews365.com.

"Throughout the race, it was working well, but then when we had the sensor issue, we lost like seven seconds in two laps, and then it was just a poor race."

When asked if the car had come back to him, Perez added: "No, it was never the same. I was losing too much time.

"I was like 10kph down on the straights."

I also checked perez' onboard and again it's easy to see he can't make any ground on sainz even with better exits out of T7-8 and T16. Sainz just drives away from him, then it takes perez until drs to start making some headway, but by that point it's way too late for any move. He's talking to his engineer multiple times about simply having not enough power to make a move. Those are things that are much more revealing about this situation as opposed to some telemetry graphs (in this particular case anyway).

On lap 8 Verstappen was able to reduce gap to Leclerc from 9 tenths down to 4.5 tenths from T16 to T17 with DRS. 9 tenths is quite a substantial gap, you get very little slipstream effect early on on the straight, so majority of those gains are made on second part of straight if you are fast enough. Still, it was enough to gain almost half a second and put leclerc out of shape in T17.

Contrast to Perez on lap 49 on fresh mediums. Perez is just 0.6s behind Sanz and gets a much better exit compared to him out of T16 and gains half a tenth immediately after the corner (gap down to 0.55s), but then sainz just powers away and before Perez hits drs Sainz is already too far and still pulling away. At the end of straight Perez was able to gain just 3 tenths despite attacking from a closer position than verstappen and even having much better exit that the car ahead of him (new tyres).

This is how much context you need to properly evaluate a power loss of 20kw and how it can subtly ruin someone's race, simply printing out some plots and traces will do you no good.

[Curbstone]

Honestly I don't see how your analysis is any better or more accurate than the graphics. You are talking about lack of context, cherry-picking, regarding the graphs. But your analysis is also missing context, and contains cherry picking.

As explained those are pointless graphs that can not be taken at face value without a lot of extra context involved. And 30 kmh overspeed with drs and slipstream is nothing unheard of, just remember verstappen's 50 kmh overspeed vs leclerc in bahrain.

That's a different circuit, different setup (plus I don't remember that ). It's better to look at the overspeed of Max vs. Leclerc in the laps prior to the overtake. I don't think that was anywhere near 30+10 kmh.

Sometimes telemetry traces are just not needed to see a problem that's otherwise confirmed by multiple sources such as interviews, mini-sector time deltas and plain old onboard footage.

Maybe not needed, but it's a bit strange that a 25 bhp of 10 kmh deficit is not visible on the telemetry.

"I was like 10kph down on the straights."[/b]

10 kph should be very well visible on the graphics I would assume, and it's odd that it's not.

I also checked perez' onboard and again it's easy to see he can't make any ground on sainz even with better exits out of T7-8 and T16. Sainz just drives away from him, then it takes perez until drs to start making some headway, but by that point it's way too late for any move. He's talking to his engineer multiple times about simply having not enough power to make a move. Those are things that are much more revealing about this situation as opposed to some telemetry graphs (in this particular case anyway).

Onboard video can be easily misinterpreted. When accelerating the guy in front always seems to 'pull away' even when the time-gap remains the same (higher speeds means greater distance per unit of time). Also, what is televised is 2D so it's very difficult to really see whether someone is really pulling away. It's better to look at the time, although I that also has a certain delay.

On lap 8 Verstappen was able to reduce gap to Leclerc from 9 tenths down to 4.5 tenths from T16 to T17 with DRS. 9 tenths is quite a substantial gap, you get very little slipstream effect early on on the straight, so majority of those gains are made on second part of straight if you are fast enough. Still, it was enough to gain almost half a second and put leclerc out of shape in T17.

You are using one lap of Max vs Charles to extract data from, and compare this to one lap of Perez vs Sainz. There's a lot of variables in that comparison, and it requires more context why these laps are comparable.
And that can also be considered cherry picking.


I'm not saying Horner an Perez are lying (I don't believe so), but I do think it's odd it doesn't really show in the telemetry, especially the "10 kmh" comment as that should have been visible.
Maybe the telemetry is faulty...

[Sieper]

I just want to add I do very much appreciate the effort to make the post with the graphs, and the interpretation done. That is what is so good about this site.

And it does seem to show Perez did not loose much speed. But I do agree that it cannot be that he did not have a problem really hindering him. Perez is not a bullshitter, that is one. And Perez, with this redbull, on fresh yellows. I expected he might have won the race. He is doing well with these new cars. The gap to max is smaller.

So yes, I believe he did have an issue. Must have been.

Edit, maybe the fresh tires just aren’t such a big differentiator here? Both Ferrari also opted to not give track position to Perez and stayed out on old whites.

Could that be? Track position too important, as we saw with Sergio?

[Wouter]

From Motorsport:

....... It put Perez in a strong position for the final 11-lap sprint to the chequered flag with the three cars ahead still running old hards, yet he was unable to find a way past Sainz despite an attempted lunge, leaving him to finish fourth.

"I was in a great spot," Perez said. "Unfortunately even with a DRS, I couldn't get close to Carlos,
the deficit on the straight-line was quite high.

"I was just pushing really hard to stay close to him on the corners. My tyres were overheating.
So as soon as I had a little opportunity, I went for it. It was too dirty offline.
After that I just couldn't get close. The deficit on the straight line was too much."

Asked if he thought he had a chance to win the race after his switch to mediums, Perez replied:
"With a normal engine, I would have had a chance."

Although Perez's pace stabilised following the initial time loss, he said the power was "never the same",
revealing he was "like 10 km/h down on the straights".

Red Bull team boss Christian Horner said Perez had got "really unlucky" with the issue, saying he "lost about 30 horse power," as a result.

"He gave it a real go when we pitted him and gave him the tyre advantage," Horner said. "Without that issue, he may even have finished second."

It was the latest power unit-related reliability setback for Red Bull in the early part of the year that has seen the team also hit trouble in Bahrain and Australia.

Perez felt it was not just bad luck that had hit Red Bull, acting as a further reminder of the work it needs to do to understand its current struggles.

"We need to keep working hard because every time we finding different issues," Perez said.

"Luckily we managed to finish the race. I think at one point, it was really close to being over.
So yeah, to be able to finish the race is good."

[Curbstone]

I just want to add I do very much appreciate the effort to make the post with the graphs, and the interpretation done. That is what is so good about this site.

And it does seem to show Perez did not loose much speed. But I do agree that it cannot be that he did not have a problem really hindering him. Perez is not a bullshitter, that is one. And Perez, with this redbull, on fresh yellows. I expected he might have won the race. He is doing well with these new cars. The gap to max is smaller.

So yes, I believe he did have an issue. Must have been.

Edit, maybe the fresh tires just aren’t such a big differentiator here? Both Ferrari also opted to not give track position to Perez and stayed out on old whites.

Could that be? Track position too important, as we saw with Sergio?

Well, Russel on his new mediums was about 7-8 tenths faster than Hamilton of his old hard, so I do think there was some tire delta. But maybe the Mercedes is not really enough of a stable platform to base such conclusions on.
Of course RB may have chosen a different ERS deployment, to correct the topspeed, but maybe a bit longer time before it is reached?
I have no idea, but there must be something.

[Alexf1]

Maybe it's got more to do with lack of torque in a low to medium rev zone which hurts accelleration out of corners but not so much top speed. Which he could've reached at a later point on the straights than others. Just a thought.

[TNTHead]

Maybe it's got more to do with lack of torque in a low to medium rev zone which hurts accelleration out of corners but not so much top speed. Which he could've reached at a later point on the straights than others. Just a thought.

If it was a cilinder sensor it probably is a knock sensor. If they had no sensor values or distorted values they have probably reverted to a more conservative setting. In that case a slightly lower power output (and worse fuel efficiency) is expected. Could well be that at some part of the torque/power curve this did hurt more than at max power.

[chrisc90]

Im shocked these sensors dont flag up as amber (heading towards danger) and red (in danger) to the engineering departments back in the garage and at HQ. I know these sensors are there to predominately to protect the car engine and components, but in surprised there is no 'heads-up' prior to the thing failing or if theres a redundant sensors, computers cross checking the data reported of each and showing a discrepancy between readings.

Whatever the sensor was that Checo had a problem with, could clearly be bypassed or another sensor used in redundancy.

[ringo]

Thanks!

Dont listen to him just because he throws out some hard to read cherry picked graphs. That one trace doesn't prove anything. Instead looking at actual time deltas it was very obvious perez was lacking power as he was losing time to sainz on every straight even with very close slipstream, while it was the opposite before that sensor had failed. Also with better tyres at the end red bull should fly past any ferrari as we've seen god knows how many times this season, instead he could barely keep up.

That's not true... How many laps do you want me to pull? Here's every single lap after SC restart:
47: https://i.imgur.com/dLhhiPX.jpeg (equal SAI, +3kph on VER)
48: https://i.imgur.com/Wm1jTWF.jpeg (+8 on SAI, +6 on VER)
49: https://i.imgur.com/l9QGoEf.jpeg (DRS from here, +20 SAI, +23 VER)
50: https://i.imgur.com/KXh8wZg.jpeg (+30 SAI, +23 VER)
51: https://i.imgur.com/2NaZrpQ.jpeg (+32 SAI, +27 VER)
52: https://i.imgur.com/3u8ESP2.jpeg (failed pass attempt, -4 SAI, -2 VER)
53: https://i.imgur.com/JHl4l4h.jpeg (no DRS from here, +6 SAI, +3 VER)
54: https://i.imgur.com/87UssFs.jpeg (+5 SAI, +1 VER)
55: https://i.imgur.com/eR6Grmm.jpeg (+4 SAI, +4 VER)
56: https://i.imgur.com/b5fpiqK.jpeg (+2 SAI, +3 VER)
57: https://i.imgur.com/StG4cAS.jpeg (+1 SAI, 0 VER)

How is this an engine with hp deficit? smh...

You are using the data incorrectly.

[Wouter]

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... udget-cap/

Larger packages [updates] are bundled in Maranello, which are only screwed on as soon as they are sure that they will bring progress.
Logic says that Red Bull used up more of their development budget early in the season.
Binotto: "They can't continue like this. At some point they will have to stop development."

Red Bull team boss Christian Horner cannot disagree. "Below the budget cap, it's hard to bring continuous updates.
Especially with rising inflation, which is brutal." Added to this are the high transport and freight costs, which put pressure on the wallet.
Horner firmly believes that Ferrari will be strong in Barcelona. "They can shine in the high-speed corners." Turns 3 and 9 are meant.

Both red cars already have the second engine of the season. Ferrari was allowed to modify the V6 turbo because of a reliability issue. The first drive units should only do their job on Friday. Ferrari only installs the new hybrid system with the third engine in the car.

[gandharva]

It all comes down on how efficient your updates are cost wise. Just because RBR added 2 upgrades already does not mean Ferrari will have a walk in the park. Ferrari already developed a new diffuser (or floor) that has only been tested but never raced. -> Waste of money.

Do repair costs for crashes also count into the budget? If yes, Ferrari might already be on the backfoot
/edit
They are included.

[Wouter]

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/red- ... /10302191/

Red Bull reveals Perez came "very close" to Miami F1 DNF

The problem was traced to a sensor fault triggering an automatic shutdown of some systems, and the team's engineers had to reprogramme things to keep him going.

But after the race, Red Bull team boss Christian Horner confessed that the sensor problem was such that it was questionable whether or not the Mexican was going to make it to the chequered flag.

"It was very close," said Horner about the risks of a DNF. "We had to move the sensors around to address the issue.

"So that's something we will work closely with HRC [Honda's engine division] on to try and understand and obviously make sure it doesn't happen in the future."

Horner explained that the problem with the sensor was on the internal combustion engine, and was costing Perez a decent chunk of lap time.

But it particularly hurt his top speed, which meant that he could not quite get the end-of-straight advantage he needed over Sainz to launch a proper challenge in the closing stages.

"He had an issue with a sensor on one of the cylinders," added Horner. "The guys managed to move the sensors around, but he was down probably 20 kilowatts in power as a result.

"Even with the advantage of the new tyre he had, he was probably half a second off what the car was capable of in straight line speed. And I think without that he would have probably even been P2."

While Perez's sensor problem is the latest in a string of reliability problems that have hit Red Bull this year, Horner doesn't think the team has too much to worry on that front.

"I don't think the car is particularly fragile," he said. "I think there's just been niggly things that you would have normally seen in pre-season testing but have only reared their head as we've got into the season," he said.

"That's been frustrating. But we're working closely with HRC and they're giving us great support. So I think we'll get those ironed out."

[Andi76]

It all comes down on how efficient your updates are cost wise. Just because RBR added 2 upgrades already does not mean Ferrari will have a walk in the park. Ferrari already developed a new diffuser (or floor) that has only been tested but never raced. -> Waste of money.

Do repair costs for crashes also count into the budget? If yes, Ferrari might already be on the backfoot
/edit
They are included.

How can testing and verifying components be a waste of money? Indeed its still the most important thing to test and verify your developements...and developing a floor, compared to Red Bulls updates - the difference is massive in terms of budget! Even Horner himself admits that.

Also Ferraris crashes probably are less expensive than Red Bulls continous reliability issues.

So - as Binotto and Horner pointed out - Ferrari definetely has a big advantage in that regard.

[organic]

https://f1-insider.com/formel-1-red-bul ... ung-44044/

Helmut Marko says Red Bull will bring new parts to Spain:

“We start there with new parts, with which we can finally reach our optimum weight. So far, we were relatively well above the required minimum weight of 798 kilograms.”

https://www.telegraaf.nl/sport/12738364 ... verstappen

Also reports a weight drop in barcelona

[napoleon1981]

It all comes down on how efficient your updates are cost wise. Just because RBR added 2 upgrades already does not mean Ferrari will have a walk in the park. Ferrari already developed a new diffuser (or floor) that has only been tested but never raced. -> Waste of money.

Do repair costs for crashes also count into the budget? If yes, Ferrari might already be on the backfoot
/edit
They are included.

How can testing and verifying components be a waste of money? Indeed its still the most important thing to test and verify your developements...and developing a floor, compared to Red Bulls updates - the difference is massive in terms of budget! Even Horner himself admits that.

Also Ferraris crashes probably are less expensive than Red Bulls continous reliability issues.

So - as Binotto and Horner pointed out - Ferrari definetely has a big advantage in that regard.

Testing and verifying a component is not a waste of money, however building a component and testing it, to then find out it was the wrong direction is not a very efficient way. The RB upgrades brought performance.

The Ferrari crashes are more expensive then the RB reliability issues. Fuel system failures are cheap. Replacing a fitting on a hydrolic line is cheap, and replacing a sensor on checos engine is cheap.