2022 Mercedes-AMG | Petronas F1 Team

[Shakeman]

It's very easy to make sweeping and flippant suggestions for Merc's current predicament but this is not how science and engineering is done in the real world. When I see phrases like 'analysis paralysis' it makes me wince, big decisions are made by analysis, analysis and more analysis until to the best of your ability you've ruled out everything and the answer is sat in front of you.

I used to be a nuclear engineer and I can remember one job had the whole section completely mystified. I worked some clever people, so clever most had personality disorders, so really really bright people! Not even the 'odd-bods' could come up with a plausible explanation for a certain result. I'm sure with enough time and money we would have found the answer, but there's always a cost cap somewhere! Science and engineering isn't easy nor are problems fixed by saying copy xyz unless you understand xyz as well as if not better than your own system. I'm sure the Merc engineers are relishing the challenge to get on top of the W13. They may even end up with far greater knowledge of the underfloor environment than they would've done which will hold them in good stead for future years as a result of these struggles.

For me this is why Formula 1 is great. The cost cap is working, it means teams can't just hack their way back to the front and it's a battle of the grey matter over the battle of the wallet. I couldn't give 2 sh!ts about the racing nowadays, this is far more interesting to see how they fix the issue/s.

[arjen.teravest]

Would it be worth it to just throw the budget cap out the window and take the penalty?

Not really an option; the last time a team were disqualified from constructors championship it resulted in Mercedes becoming very, very unhappy with the team in question (and a huge fine); that team have took ten years to recover (and are still not really back to where they were at that point)….

Disqualification would be the only real punishment available to the FIA for a flagrant breach of any of the caps; it could only be interpreted as cheating.

Both RBR and Ferrari are cheating.
One word for each:
Alpha-Tauri
Haas

I guess 3 words total.

Why is that cheating if I may ask. It is imho not that Mercedes could have bought Williams in the past for example.

They opted not to go for a sister team.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[silver]

Would it be worth it to just throw the budget cap out the window and take the penalty?

Not really an option; the last time a team were disqualified from constructors championship it resulted in Mercedes becoming very, very unhappy with the team in question (and a huge fine); that team have took ten years to recover (and are still not really back to where they were at that point)….

Disqualification would be the only real punishment available to the FIA for a flagrant breach of any of the caps; it could only be interpreted as cheating.

Both RBR and Ferrari are cheating.
One word for each:
Alpha-Tauri
Haas

I guess 3 words total.

Good luck convincing FIA with that. There was always a question mark with junior teams coming closer to the Senior teams prior to 2022 car builds like HaaS having a team in Maranello and Alpha Tauri starting to use Red bull wind tunnel. The 2022 regulations allows more options on buying parts for customer teams and there lies opportunity for closer collaboration. Its naive to term it cheating.

It's Mercedes' mistake that despite huge savings of over 300 million per year with cost cap, they didn't bother running a junior team to have a similar advantage. Their annual spending used to be around 500 million. Although Aston shares their wind tunnel, they are an aspiring team to be on their own and doesn't appear to be in any kind of arrangement which is apparent with their unique design compared to W13. Mercedes has only themselves to blame if there is some sort of cost cap advantage to be exploited within the regulatory framework between a senior and a junior team set-up.

[JordanMugen]

Both RBR and Ferrari are cheating.
One word for each:
Alpha-Tauri
Haas

I guess 3 words total.

So Mercedes didn't learn anything from Aston Martin Racing using their wind tunnel? The relationship between Mercedes GP and Aston Martin Racing is near as makes no difference the same to the Ferrari and HAAS situation, aligned teams with different ownership sharing maximum listed parts (not just the suspension, but infamously the brake ducts as well, with somehow Racing Point 'accidentally' having access to Mercedes' 2020 brake duct design when they were meant to design their own!).

As always, it is reminded that Mercedes and Alpine could have purchased their own B-team (Manor Racing were insolvent for instance) but have chosen not to. The Manor team could use the Mercedes wind tunnel and have a building on the same Brackley campus for instance. A Mercedes B-team would have provided a place to put De Vries and Vandoorne in F1, the lack thereof is thus a shame for them.

McLaren also complain about B-teams and customer cars but they are the ones who started selling their gearbox and rear suspension to Force India in the first place! McLaren also had an agreement for Prodrive to race McLaren customer cars under the Aston Martin Racing name which never eventuated on the grid. McLaren's complaint is just bizarre.

David Richards has confirmed that he has lodged an entry under the Prodrive banner with the FIA for the 2010 world championship, as revealed by Autocar.

Prodrive's entry comes 18 months after its last attempt to enter F1 was scuppered by the ban on customer chassis; the team having negotiated a deal to source cars from McLaren.

The link with McLaren is expected to remain in the form of a technical partnership, although details of the engine package are still yet to be revealed.

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/moto ... -enters-f1

[Scalexf1]

Don't be a fool, you take on board the successful concepts of others and blend it into yours.

The 4 points mentioned are transferable to any car as they are generic concepts. Obviously you need to make it work in conjunction with the rest of the car.

RB copied many subtle aspects of the Merc rear end (including suspension aspects) for the start of last year and it helped to give them the fastest car in 2021.

I remember many fools in 2009 saying the same thing as you when McLaren-Mercedes had a flawed car at the back of the grid. Back then I was saying they should copy what works which was the outwashing Brawn concept. The fools like you said you can't copy, you need to understand data, modelling, reasons for this and that [blah blah blah]... 9 races later Mclaren-Mercedes brought out the Brawn style outwashing concept and had a race winning car from day 1 of the revised B-spec car.

Merc need to take the same approach, look at what works and just do it.

Agreed. Copying always works and has been part of the sport for decades.
Some put too much mystique and complication to F1 cars. Everything can be copied. And copying saves time and resources.
A better part will be better than the part is replacing. Yes it might not be maximized if other parts are modified up stream and downstream, but there will be benefit nonethless. The team will see that something is working and then they can fine tune it to their car.
For argument stake, if ferrari sidepods were a silver bullet and merc copied it they would see an improvement over theirs; if its even 2%. Furrher development of rear wing and beam eing and turning vanes would reap more performance. Long story short copying is a major tool in F1. Mercedes can copy the ice skate, the floor and the separated nose tip over the front wing and im sure the car would improve.

It's really not that simple and I wish people would stop making it so. You might be able to copy some concepts if they work with your current flow structures, but as soon as you make larger, wholesale changes you need to start changing so much more of the car you're basically designing a new car entirely.

There are probably so many different factors that create the car concept, simply copying another idea will maybe bring a small gain, however it normally is not quite that simple.
As a guess It looks untenable for example to simply copy the RB floor and put it on the Mercedes, you only have to view the two cars from the side to understand that. The RB driver position in relation to the floor reference boxes will highlight the issue. RB have placed the driver much farther back in the car in relation to the floor front edge reference box. Hence opening up available space at the front section of the floor.
For me the cars concepts appear pretty much fixed already, there is little wiggle room until a new concept/chassis is produced next year.
It does appear though that It’s not all doom and gloom as comparing the Ferrari concept to the RB concept there are big differences, and yet both cars are competitive.
Perhaps Mercedes’ are correct to slowly understand their problems, they perhaps are less likely to make more mistakes going forward.
They are also maybe reaping a little bit more criticism than they would have encountered had they been slightly less bullish pre season regarding their 22 concept.

[basti313]

The FIA allows wedding rings, the riskiest of all jewelry! So you see the hypocrisy there.


This little knob that might as well be a wart is what all the furore is about?

I also do not know the reason for the "furore"...
Once they have to put him into a 7T MRT that is used in top clinics for neurological checks today, the little knob will anyways burn his way into freedom. They just need to fix the head properly.

[Sofa King]

That may explain why Red Bull has so many good drivers. They have more spots to offer with AT under their control.

Not really an option; the last time a team were disqualified from constructors championship it resulted in Mercedes becoming very, very unhappy with the team in question (and a huge fine); that team have took ten years to recover (and are still not really back to where they were at that point)….

Disqualification would be the only real punishment available to the FIA for a flagrant breach of any of the caps; it could only be interpreted as cheating.

Both RBR and Ferrari are cheating.
One word for each:
Alpha-Tauri
Haas

I guess 3 words total.

Good luck convincing FIA with that. There was always a question mark with junior teams coming closer to the Senior teams prior to 2022 car builds like HaaS having a team in Maranello and Alpha Tauri starting to use Red bull wind tunnel. The 2022 regulations allows more options on buying parts for customer teams and there lies opportunity for closer collaboration. Its naive to term it cheating.

It's Mercedes' mistake that despite huge savings of over 300 million per year with cost cap, they didn't bother running a junior team to have a similar advantage. Their annual spending used to be around 500 million. Although Aston shares their wind tunnel, they are an aspiring team to be on their own and doesn't appear to be in any kind of arrangement which is apparent with their unique design compared to W13. Mercedes has only themselves to blame if there is some sort of cost cap advantage to be exploited within the regulatory framework between a senior and a junior team set-up.

[Jambier]

The FIA allows wedding rings, the riskiest of all jewelry! So you see the hypocrisy there.


This little knob that might as well be a wart is what all the furore is about?

https://d3cm515ijfiu6w.cloudfront.net/w ... 00x630.jpg

I don't understand at all this story about jewelry.
Of course, you can have like a necklace on top of your driving suit, but then for all that is under clothes/helmet, I don't see the problem.

Maybe it is a bit dangerous for the driver itself, but as long as it causes no danger to other, why should it be banned ?

[P34]

The FIA allows wedding rings, the riskiest of all jewelry! So you see the hypocrisy there.

This little knob that might as well be a wart is what all the furore is about?

In case of a big shunt you want to have someones head, neck or body going tru a MRI scan asap, impossible if you wear jewelry there…. (mentioned by a dutch reporter, no credits here).

[astracrazy]

I think sometimes people forget F1 sets the standard and the benchmark for junior formula. Drivers should be setting an example by following the rules given to them - if they don't like them they don't have to take part.

Lewis is a 7 time world champion and should know better for the example and image this is giving. The fact he is a 7 time champion doesn't exempt him from rules he doesn't want to follow. We don't always like rules or procedures we have to follow, especially in the work place but that's life.

It is for his own safety and for the potential medical procedures that may be needed in the event of a serious accident (the fact that this piercing by his own admission isn't easily removeable only highlights the issue here).

Remove the piercing, follow the rules like everyone else and get on with helping your team get back on top.

[basti313]

The FIA allows wedding rings, the riskiest of all jewelry! So you see the hypocrisy there.


This little knob that might as well be a wart is what all the furore is about?

https://d3cm515ijfiu6w.cloudfront.net/w ... 00x630.jpg

I don't understand at all this story about jewelry.
Of course, you can have like a necklace on top of your driving suit, but then for all that is under clothes/helmet, I don't see the problem.

Maybe it is a bit dangerous for the driver itself, but as long as it causes no danger to other, why should it be banned ?

Because of junior series. They could of course allow them whatever they want, but how do you control the other series then?
As mentioned before....in a modern MRT for the brain, the small nose plug goes burning and then flying if they do not cut it off before going into the MRT. Which means they need the right tools...they are available for rings on the fingers, not necessarily for these plugs as plugs are commonly removable...

Long story short...at least everything needs to be removable. The current argument of something being not removable is just bull$hit as this is the worst you can have in any way.

[Spoutnik]

[De Jokke]

I'm sorry but I have to laugh at this.
They barely brought updates and they are already over their budget. If that's the case, they might as well quit F1, amateurish, no other word for it.

[AA_2019]

Agreed. Copying always works and has been part of the sport for decades.
Some put too much mystique and complication to F1 cars. Everything can be copied. And copying saves time and resources.
A better part will be better than the part is replacing. Yes it might not be maximized if other parts are modified up stream and downstream, but there will be benefit nonethless. The team will see that something is working and then they can fine tune it to their car.
For argument stake, if ferrari sidepods were a silver bullet and merc copied it they would see an improvement over theirs; if its even 2%. Furrher development of rear wing and beam eing and turning vanes would reap more performance. Long story short copying is a major tool in F1. Mercedes can copy the ice skate, the floor and the separated nose tip over the front wing and im sure the car would improve.

There are probably so many different factors that create the car concept, simply copying another idea will maybe bring a small gain, however it normally is not quite that simple.
As a guess It looks untenable for example to simply copy the RB floor and put it on the Mercedes, you only have to view the two cars from the side to understand that. The RB driver position in relation to the floor reference boxes will highlight the issue. RB have placed the driver much farther back in the car in relation to the floor front edge reference box. Hence opening up available space at the front section of the floor.
For me the cars concepts appear pretty much fixed already, there is little wiggle room until a new concept/chassis is produced next year.
It does appear though that It’s not all doom and gloom as comparing the Ferrari concept to the RB concept there are big differences, and yet both cars are competitive.
Perhaps Mercedes’ are correct to slowly understand their problems, they perhaps are less likely to make more mistakes going forward.
They are also maybe reaping a little bit more criticism than they would have encountered had they been slightly less bullish pre season regarding their 22 concept.

Take one example, the tunnel like contours in the RB, and reshape the Merc floor just for that.

When the car bottoms the tunnel like contours ensure there is still some airflow and prevents complete stall or at least changes the stall point which would reduce the high frequency of Merc's porpoising problems.

Yes it would reduce peak theoretical downforce, but we're after more usable downforce.

[Stu]

Sounds easy, doesn’t it?

However, the height of the floor tunnels may have an impact elsewhere, such as the location of the cooling package, tunnel entry, front wing, rear wing, beam wing; it all works together. And that is with them maintaining the small side-pod concept, which may also no longer work as they would like afterwards.