2022 Aston Martin | Aramco | Cognizant F1 Team

[101FlyingDutchman]

So we take this as typical Marko waffle or something more serious?



To claim that you actually have evidence is pretty strong wording; I’m sure Fallows could not have done this in only a month. I think it’s only a matter of time before we get another Lawrence Stroll prepared statement video

If the claim would have came from anyone other than Marko, I would have gave it more credit… But he is known for this kind of inflammatory comments.

I’d be surprised he would make it without any evidence. He’s opening himself up for a libel/slander court case if he didn’t have anything to back it up with

[SmallSoldier]

So we take this as typical Marko waffle or something more serious?



To claim that you actually have evidence is pretty strong wording; I’m sure Fallows could not have done this in only a month. I think it’s only a matter of time before we get another Lawrence Stroll prepared statement video

If the claim would have came from anyone other than Marko, I would have gave it more credit… But he is known for this kind of inflammatory comments.

I’d be surprised he would make it without any evidence. He’s opening himself up for a libel/slander court case if he didn’t have anything to back it up with

His wording was careful, he isn’t accusing anyone directly… He is saying that they have evidence of downloaded information, he isn’t saying by whom, he isn’t saying what exactly was downloaded… It is one of those comments made to create headlines, but he is not outright accusing anyone.

I found Lance’s comments even more interesting, coming out and saying that this “design” was on the wind tunnel way during winter, trying to imply that they were working on it before they saw the RBR… It has been way too quick to get a full car on the track by just copying it, I’m sure they had a similar concept already and they have refined it and copied some of the details, I would be very surprised if you could go from looking at a car to getting one on track in such a short span of time (it’s very impressive) without having a similar concept beforehand… The question remains, will it work?

[wesley123]

Problem of the ‘November’ claim is that the sidepod includes profiling that was introduced after the first test.

[101FlyingDutchman]

If the claim would have came from anyone other than Marko, I would have gave it more credit… But he is known for this kind of inflammatory comments.

I’d be surprised he would make it without any evidence. He’s opening himself up for a libel/slander court case if he didn’t have anything to back it up with

His wording was careful, he isn’t accusing anyone directly… He is saying that they have evidence of downloaded information, he isn’t saying by whom, he isn’t saying what exactly was downloaded… It is one of those comments made to create headlines, but he is not outright accusing anyone.

I found Lance’s comments even more interesting, coming out and saying that this “design” was on the wind tunnel way during winter, trying to imply that they were working on it before they saw the RBR… It has been way too quick to get a full car on the track by just copying it, I’m sure they had a similar concept already and they have refined it and copied some of the details, I would be very surprised if you could go from looking at a car to getting one on track in such a short span of time (it’s very impressive) without having a similar concept beforehand… The question remains, will it work?

Lance was also careful with his words. He only said the concept was in the windtunnel. Which I would have thought every team did do over the last 24 months. What’s intriguing is the level of detail that’s strikingly similar

[wesley123]

So we take this as typical Marko waffle or something more serious?



To claim that you actually have evidence is pretty strong wording; I’m sure Fallows could not have done this in only a month. I think it’s only a matter of time before we get another Lawrence Stroll prepared statement video

The question that comes to mind is why Red Bull didn’t make any note on this downloaded data to the FIA

[Giando]

Problem of the ‘November’ claim is that the sidepod includes profiling that was introduced after the first test.

I don't see it as a problem at all... what about Ferrari copying the double splitter of Aston Martin after its presentation, in a few weeks, then?

I guess it makes sense for AM engineers to look at the evolutions of RB, test them in CFD and then quickly adapt the updates, that profiling is not such a fundamental change in those sidepods layout and they had plenty of time to do that

[SmallSoldier]

I’d be surprised he would make it without any evidence. He’s opening himself up for a libel/slander court case if he didn’t have anything to back it up with

His wording was careful, he isn’t accusing anyone directly… He is saying that they have evidence of downloaded information, he isn’t saying by whom, he isn’t saying what exactly was downloaded… It is one of those comments made to create headlines, but he is not outright accusing anyone.

I found Lance’s comments even more interesting, coming out and saying that this “design” was on the wind tunnel way during winter, trying to imply that they were working on it before they saw the RBR… It has been way too quick to get a full car on the track by just copying it, I’m sure they had a similar concept already and they have refined it and copied some of the details, I would be very surprised if you could go from looking at a car to getting one on track in such a short span of time (it’s very impressive) without having a similar concept beforehand… The question remains, will it work?

Lance was also careful with his words. He only said the concept was in the windtunnel. Which I would have thought every team did do over the last 24 months. What’s intriguing is the level of detail that’s strikingly similar

FIA has came out saying that the concept was in the Wind Tunnel as far as last November… If we really think about it, there are 3 main philosophies from the cars, the rules were to an extent restrictive, so it wouldn’t be that surprising that the “concept” was already in the wind tunnel for them… If they had a similar concept already, refining it using cues from the RB18 isn’t an stretch… They have 2 cars at the track right now, just from a production perspective, they had to have a jump start.

[101FlyingDutchman]

His wording was careful, he isn’t accusing anyone directly… He is saying that they have evidence of downloaded information, he isn’t saying by whom, he isn’t saying what exactly was downloaded… It is one of those comments made to create headlines, but he is not outright accusing anyone.

I found Lance’s comments even more interesting, coming out and saying that this “design” was on the wind tunnel way during winter, trying to imply that they were working on it before they saw the RBR… It has been way too quick to get a full car on the track by just copying it, I’m sure they had a similar concept already and they have refined it and copied some of the details, I would be very surprised if you could go from looking at a car to getting one on track in such a short span of time (it’s very impressive) without having a similar concept beforehand… The question remains, will it work?

I said the exact same thing earlier today.
Lance was also careful with his words. He only said the concept was in the windtunnel. Which I would have thought every team did do over the last 24 months. What’s intriguing is the level of detail that’s strikingly similar

FIA has came out saying that the concept was in the Wind Tunnel as far as last November… If we really think about it, there are 3 main philosophies from the cars, the rules were to an extent restrictive, so it wouldn’t be that surprising that the “concept” was already in the wind tunnel for them… If they had a similar concept already, refining it using cues from the RB18 isn’t an stretch… They have 2 cars at the track right now, just from a production perspective, they had to have a jump start.

I said the exact same thing earlier today. Totally agreed

[continuum16]

So we take this as typical Marko waffle or something more serious?



To claim that you actually have evidence is pretty strong wording; I’m sure Fallows could not have done this in only a month. I think it’s only a matter of time before we get another Lawrence Stroll prepared statement video

The question that comes to mind is why Red Bull didn’t make any note on this downloaded data to the FIA

Agreed; seems like the kind of thing that might be pertinent in an investigation. Also seems like the kind of thing you would use to lodge a protest and/or put in an official team statement if you were Red Bull. I would have expected more action than simply teasing people with green red bull cans . I wouldn't be surprised to see any official action held until after the race, based on how the RP20 saga played out, but yeah the lack of action seems to misalign with Marko's comments (shock).

[senja]

Great post.

This was copied first by Ferrari, then Red Bull, now even Mercedes.
Point is, everyone copies. Newey copied S-duct and coanda.

[continuum16]

Great post.

This was copied first by Ferrari, then Red Bull, now even Mercedes.
Point is, everyone copies. Newey copied S-duct and coanda.

With all due respect, yes there are certain concepts which everyone, even Newey copy from other cars. But I think there is a difference in scope between attaching a winglet which can be probably easily bonded on to your existing design in a couple of days, and replicating an entire floor, sidepod, and engine cover which is replicated in places down to even the location of the screws, from another team...

[JordanMugen]

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... ull-kopie/

My guess is that the overall "wide sidepod" concept was what they had in the tunnel, and then all the smaller bits like the double 'bargeboard', the dip, the mirrors, the floor edge were then incorporated

What a joke, so plan for next year is to dump some random carbon fiber waste into the wind tunnel in November, so you can then copy whatever is fastest, claim you dreamt it up and get away Scot free

They are allowed to copy details or ideas as long as they don't use blueprints/CAD files of the original, 3D scans of the original or software that is able to generate drawings or CAD files from photographs of the original. It is all listed in the regulations, which were amended after the pink Mercedes episode.

[JordanMugen]

I found Lance’s comments even more interesting, coming out and saying that this “design” was on the wind tunnel way during winter, trying to imply that they were working on it before they saw the RBR… It has been way too quick to get a full car on the track by just copying it, I’m sure they had a similar concept already and they have refined it and copied some of the details, I would be very surprised if you could go from looking at a car to getting one on track in such a short span of time (it’s very impressive) without having a similar concept beforehand… The question remains, will it work?

Why did Aston Martin design and build the car with the undercut at all if they already had a downwashing sidepod car in the wind tunnel as well? Did the car with the full undercut really produce better numbers than the car with the downwashing sidepods at that point?

If so, how did Alpine, AlphaTauri and Red Bull end up deciding that downwashing sidepods were better when Aston Martin had both concepts and decided the undercut sidepods was the one to go with?!

[matteosc]

Problem of the ‘November’ claim is that the sidepod includes profiling that was introduced after the first test.

I don't see it as a problem at all... what about Ferrari copying the double splitter of Aston Martin after its presentation, in a few weeks, then?

I guess it makes sense for AM engineers to look at the evolutions of RB, test them in CFD and then quickly adapt the updates, that profiling is not such a fundamental change in those sidepods layout and they had plenty of time to do that

Ferrari copied a solution which was presented and shown already and also it was a very small detail. Aston Martin was (allegedly) working on a solution very similar to Red Bull since November, before car presentations. If it was close to the original car that they presented it would be understandable, but why would they completely change philosophy after one quarter of the season? And on top of that, planning since November? It does not make much sense to me.

[SmallSoldier]

I found Lance’s comments even more interesting, coming out and saying that this “design” was on the wind tunnel way during winter, trying to imply that they were working on it before they saw the RBR… It has been way too quick to get a full car on the track by just copying it, I’m sure they had a similar concept already and they have refined it and copied some of the details, I would be very surprised if you could go from looking at a car to getting one on track in such a short span of time (it’s very impressive) without having a similar concept beforehand… The question remains, will it work?

Why did Aston Martin design and build the car with the undercut at all if they already had a downwashing sidepod car in the wind tunnel as well? Did the car with the full undercut really produce better numbers than the car with the downwashing sidepods at that point?

If so, how did Alpine, AlphaTauri and Red Bull end up deciding that downwashing sidepods were better when Aston Martin had both concepts and decided the undercut sidepods was the one to go with?!

That’s a question that unluckily no one but Aston Martin can answer and I don’t think it’s an easy one to even speculate on… Yes, Alpine, AT and RBR went with downwashing sidepods, but Ferrari went in a different direction and is performing on par with RB and better than the other two… If what we have seeing from Mercedes in FP2 is a sign of a decent amount of pace improvement, their concept which is very from either Ferrari and RBR could also bring decent lap times… At that stage, their calculations may have showed more promise and they decided to go with that version, which if not for the porpoising may have been one that showed them promise.

Once they saw Red Bull going for the other concept and how well it was performing, it is not strange that decided to change directions… They even stated during the launch of the AMR22 that they design it with the idea of changing concepts rapidly and early in the season based on the performance of other teams.