2023 Mercedes-AMG | Petronas F1 Team

[CHT]

Its purely observation on my part, not a criticism.

Lewis is obviously there for a championship, plain and simple. That doesn't seem compatible with George's view, especially with all the negotiating over a position that doesn't really matter right now without a hope of being in contention for the championship, drivers that is.

And whats going to happen if they are in contention for a WDC ? are they just going to keep on arguing over the radio throughout ? Is nothing agreed within race strategy meetings prior ? Whom do they favour if it's close between them and with chance of potentially beating a close competitor, or two ?

Doesn't really work, does it. They can't have it all ways in the face of such demanding opposition from other teams, some decisions need to be prioritised within Maison MB.

Toto is a team owner and businessman. Lewis is a valuable asset even if he retires from F1. ie. provided he doesn't join Ferrari and Merc can continue to use Lewis as their brand ambassador

[Spoutnik]

[ringo]

Yep. This is mercedes main issue.
The architecture of the chassis is just not good and cannot be changed in season.
The T shaped Chassis should go for 2024.
The rear end could also be pushrod if there is need for anymore space under the diffuser.

[Luscion]

[Farnborough]

Yep. This is mercedes main issue.
The architecture of the chassis is just not good and cannot be changed in season.
The T shaped Chassis should go for 2024.
The rear end could also be pushrod if there is need for anymore space under the diffuser.

Presumably that's important to their customers too, in that AMR & WILL are using this rear end ? So, designs need to be telegraphed quite early for them to incorporate, unless they run in lag to MB.

[ringo]

Indeed.
I am wondering about an actual benefit of the pushrod in the back. Dynamically it doesnt seem to have much. Aerowise is also marginal.
And this is relative to the new regs. Years ago pullrod was a superior layout for cog and upper surface aero and packaging.
It seems now that with ground effect the push rod style with all the parts located at the top of the gearbox allows for more space for more parts to manage the ground control. The redbull suspension is still a mystery to most.
The pullrod at the front has marginal aero advantage. It benefits the sidepod inlets and the flow structures on the flanks of the monocoque.
Saying all this i hope Mercedes got out their 3d scanners to copy the rb19. Scanning should be legal once the scan isnt used directly to design the car. The hard point dimensions should be okay to mimic.

Anyhow here is more of Newey's comments on the zero pod.

https://www.racefans.net/2023/09/27/n ... oncept/

[chrisc90]

Indeed.
I am wondering about an actual benefit of the pushrod in the back. Dynamically it doesnt seem to have much. Aerowise is also marginal.
And this is relative to the new regs. Years ago pullrod was a superior layout for cog and upper surface aero and packaging.
It seems now that with ground effect the push rod style with all the parts located at the top of the gearbox allows for more space for more parts to manage the ground control. The redbull suspension is still a mystery to most.
The pullrod at the front has marginal aero advantage. It benefits the sidepod inlets and the flow structures on the flanks of the monocoque.
Saying all this i hope Mercedes got out their 3d scanners to copy the rb19. Scanning should be legal once the scan isnt used directly to design the car. The hard point dimensions should be okay to mimic.

Anyhow here is more of Newey's comments on the zero pod.

https://www.racefans.net/2023/09/27/n ... oncept/

Errrr, So it should be a case of 'Here's all your answers to the exam. You have 6months to memorise them, then we going to take the answers away from you then your on your own from there'
Im sorry but that doesnt make much sense as you learn from the competitors design to build your own car. Therefore the use of 3D tooling to copy another car should be considered against the rules - and rightfully so.

[ringo]

Well copying has always been done in F1. Even indirectly by hiring engineers from other teams. Peter Podromou is with Mclaren and it's no coincidence that they have come close to redbull with a redbull concept. Peter understands the culture and philosophies behind the rbr engineer design process.
3d scanning is just a means of data collection just like gps and other means competiting teams use to understand their competitors.
Parts cannot be developed from 3d scans but this does not stop teams from 3d scanning. They may not be able to use the renders directlt for prototyping, but I would not be surprised if lidar scans are done during a grid walk, cars coming into pit, parc ferme or post race. It's just how this data is used determines if cheating was done. A few points and dimenions wont hurt anyone.

[Just_a_fan]

Indeed.
I am wondering about an actual benefit of the pushrod in the back. Dynamically it doesnt seem to have much. Aerowise is also marginal.
And this is relative to the new regs. Years ago pullrod was a superior layout for cog and upper surface aero and packaging.
It seems now that with ground effect the push rod style with all the parts located at the top of the gearbox allows for more space for more parts to manage the ground control. The redbull suspension is still a mystery to most.
The pullrod at the front has marginal aero advantage. It benefits the sidepod inlets and the flow structures on the flanks of the monocoque.
Saying all this i hope Mercedes got out their 3d scanners to copy the rb19. Scanning should be legal once the scan isnt used directly to design the car. The hard point dimensions should be okay to mimic.

Anyhow here is more of Newey's comments on the zero pod.

https://www.racefans.net/2023/09/27/n ... oncept/

Errrr, So it should be a case of 'Here's all your answers to the exam. You have 6months to memorise them, then we going to take the answers away from you then your on your own from there'
Im sorry but that doesnt make much sense as you learn from the competitors design to build your own car. Therefore the use of 3D tooling to copy another car should be considered against the rules - and rightfully so.

One doesn't need to 3d scan anything - simple observation and a knowledge of the dimensional rules in the area concerned are enough.

And every team copies the leading team in one way or another. Even RBR.

[chrisc90]

Unlikely thats ever going to be accurate just looking an knowing we have this volume to play with in the legality box. There will be SOME idea, but its never going to be as accurate as scanning a image or car and being able to run that through some CFD to understand how the airflow flows around it.

Unsure what RBR have to do with this discussion to be fair.

[CHT]

The MP4-18 was a good experience for Adrian Newey and he knows very well that when a car has fundamental issues it will be difficult to recover. I think Merc is putting too much emphasis on the engine to win and dominate the sport, and their failure to run zero pod design is a big setback.

[Just_a_fan]

The MP4-18 was a good experience for Adrian Newey and he knows very well that when a car has fundamental issues it will be difficult to recover. I think Merc is putting too much emphasis on the engine to win and dominate the sport, and their failure to run zero pod design is a big setback.

Or Mercedes put an idea through their then-current design tools and got an incorrect answer out. On paper, the zero-pods "slammed floor" approach was great. Sadly, real air didn't agree with the simulated air and the concept of the "slammed floor" didn't work.

Newey's gut was more likely just a result of years of experience designing cars that included the old flat bottomed cars - active suspension was used by Williams on the FW14B and FW15C specifically to control the aero platform (no nasty aero-surprises). That will have sat in the back of Newey's mind until it popped up and said "Hi!" with these regs. And he will have used that to guide the design team.

Edit: I'm reminded of the FW14B and the issues that the drivers had with it. Neither was keen (Mansell having suffered active suspension failures before) but Mansell did trust the team when they said "it will stick" (even though the feedback was "wrong") and he won the title. Patrese, however, never could get on with the active suspension and just lost time because of it. Sound familiar?

[Just_a_fan]

Unlikely thats ever going to be accurate just looking an knowing we have this volume to play with in the legality box. There will be SOME idea, but its never going to be as accurate as scanning a image or car and being able to run that through some CFD to understand how the airflow flows around it.

Unsure what RBR have to do with this discussion to be fair.

Every team looks at what others are doing and assesses whether that new detail will work on their car - especially if the new part appears to give a boost on the originating car. You don't need a 3d scan to work out the details of a new "thing" on another car. Indeed, an exact copy of another car's detail might be a bad thing in your car's CFD because your car won't present the same air flow to that part as the original car does. So taking the idea and making it fit is what is done.

The reference to RBR is because they have done this too, over the years. They've done it this year too - I seem to remember a diffuser corner detail that was copied by Red Bull, likewise the corner of the rear wing. They're miles ahead of the competition but they're still taking onboard details from others if they prove beneficial.

[ringo]

Referencing RBR is valid i agree. They are the target for next year and their guru opened up about the failure of the zero pod.
Another feature that stands out is how simple the w14 floor edge is and diffuser.
They are missing many tricks. The team is not known for hyper detailing like RBR but i think they got good at details after the shake up midway the hybrid area with the reintroduction of barge boards. After the brain drain its like the team took a few steps backward with their engineering detail.
Ferrari has more floor details at the moment and should be a force to be reckoned with next year when they switch to redbulls concept.
I am feeling doubtful over mercs return to the front unless some rbr suspension and aero guys are brought into the fold.

[Zynerji]

Merc lost lots of talent to other teams in the last 3 years. It will take some poaching to catch up.