2026 Aston Martin Aramco Formula One Team

[Sidhartha.techie]

Reports of problems whit the PU during filming day.

Where, please provide sources ?

[Badger]

Honda had more PROBLEMS than expected during Hungary's filming day

The engine should provide 30HP more, but they DID NOT reach that figure

!!!!️ Honda trusts to solve those "small problems" before Zandvoort, although it is not ruled out that it will initially deliver slightly less than the expected 30 hp.

[KimiRai]

Reports of problems whit the PU during filming day.

Where, please provide sources ?

AutoRacer journalist Piergiuseppe Donadoni during livestream. He said the latest rumours say Honda had small issues during the filming day and they didn't reach 30hp with the new spec. Honda hopes to fix those small issues (whatever those are) for Zandvoort, but it could be slightly below expectations.

[TyreSlip]

I am going to ignore the rumour as Shintaro Orihara said the Honda engine met its performance targets. If it did not, then that would be a complete breach of trust.

I do not think Honda is going to repeat the mistakes of 2015 by lying.

[diffuser]

I am going to ignore the rumour as Shintaro Orihara said the Honda engine met its performance targets. If it did not, then that would be a complete breach of trust.

I do not think Honda is going to repeat the mistakes of 2015 by lying.

Since we don't know what the targets were, it's impossible for him to have lied. We don't know if the performance targets were high, low or indifferent. In a round about way, he said "wait for the race to find out".

[SSJ4]

Completely forgot it’s a sprint weekend as well. Wonder if they’ll be able to run the new engine all weekend

[Ashwinv16]

Honda had more PROBLEMS than expected during Hungary's filming day

The engine should provide 30HP more, but they DID NOT reach that figure

!!!!️ Honda trusts to solve those "small problems" before Zandvoort, although it is not ruled out that it will initially deliver slightly less than the expected 30 hp.

This is somewhat True but the issue was that the Engine was supposed to gain 60hp but they could only get 30hp out of it on filming day on track. In Superclipping or clipping they got 60hp back so were able to charge the car, just at the top end the power drops.

[zoroastar]

this is pretty decent

[ispano6]

It does look like some live parameters that are given to a ml algorithm can heavily influence the deployment during a lap. It doesn’t have to be learning during race, but outcomes still depends on which parameters you use. Based on the responses by drivers it doesn’t look like fixed precaculated maps.

Again, the algorithm determines when to use what map, it doesn't create new maps on the fly for the driver to use. It doesn't change maps for the driver either. The algorithm tells trackside personnel whether or not to deviate from the pre-designated run plan, which consists of the usage of different maps for changing parameters and variables during the race. The algorithm can't create a new map and upload it to the car. It can't automatically change maps during deployment without driver input. The drivers don't like when the algorithm tells the trackside personnel, that then relay which mode to use, when it seems counter-intuitive to the driver to use a map that deviates from the established runplan. I think you're mixing up maps and runplan. you can change the runplan, you can't create new maps.

The driver chooses MAP. During a race Alonso and Stroll predominant use MAPs 4, 6 and 7. That doesn't mean much cause the MAP aren't the same from track to track. MAPs are track specific. They use another MAP for Qualifying.

Isn't that what I said?

[ispano6]

This is somewhat True but the issue was that the Engine was supposed to gain 60hp but they could only get 30hp out of it on filming day on track. In Superclipping or clipping they got 60hp back so were able to charge the car, just at the top end the power drops.

Why should anyone believe these numbers? Orihara specifically stated they used the film day for shakedown and checks. It was never for outright performance for the get go. The whole focus up until Zaandvoort has always been reliability. The internal targets were met on the dyno. They know what their combustion is capable of and are doing reliability checks for integration, including gearbox. HondaF1 officially published the video of Orihara after the filming day shakedown. There is no reason to doubt them.

So many keep wanting to spew bad news(Italian rumormill) about Honda but fail to realize this is a package with multiple partners involved working to improve their speed of combustion and the efficiacy of the lubrication system changes. These require the cooperation of AMR (gearbox), Aramco and Valvoline. Think about it for a second, would Honda bring an engine and risk breaking their powertrain on their only run day? Data collection and reliability checks are far more important. You have a development driver on the track attempting to not make a fool of himself trying to collect data for the team. The stability of the combustion at the highest RPM range needs to be validated but not overdone. To throw out numbers like 30HP and 60HP is just plain BS. It's a filming day, there's no proper tires or race driver.

[diffuser]

Again, the algorithm determines when to use what map, it doesn't create new maps on the fly for the driver to use. It doesn't change maps for the driver either. The algorithm tells trackside personnel whether or not to deviate from the pre-designated run plan, which consists of the usage of different maps for changing parameters and variables during the race. The algorithm can't create a new map and upload it to the car. It can't automatically change maps during deployment without driver input. The drivers don't like when the algorithm tells the trackside personnel, that then relay which mode to use, when it seems counter-intuitive to the driver to use a map that deviates from the established runplan. I think you're mixing up maps and runplan. you can change the runplan, you can't create new maps.

The driver chooses MAP. During a race Alonso and Stroll predominant use MAPs 4, 6 and 7. That doesn't mean much cause the MAP aren't the same from track to track. MAPs are track specific. They use another MAP for Qualifying.

Isn't that what I said?

You said "Again, the algorithm determines when to use what map, it doesn't create new maps on the fly for the driver to use."


I think the MAPs are just the output of testing in the simulator. They come up with the fastest way around the track by finding the best places to deploy and recharge around the track. This factors in the deployment and recharge limitations and builds a MAP from that. Then they do the same thing for different scenarios and build separate MAPs for each scenario, including special maps for qualifying.

The algorithms is the programming that use the maps as input along with other real-time data like battery level, throttle demand, brake demand, etc. The algorithms are the same for all the maps. The behavior of the PU/ICE change depending on all those inputs.

That's the way I see it.

They actually call maps "RACE" on the radio, like race 4 or race 7, etc.
The different shapes, like Shape 5, I THINK are diff settings"
New this year is they don't start the race in "Race 1", So they have a specific race setting for the first lap of the race. They generally change to Race 1 near the end of the first lap. That might change with the new ICE. When Alonso complained about not having power out turn 13, they asked him to switch to race 4.

[Waz]

The scenario where at "300 km/h → ECU detects coasting → automatically selects neutral → charges battery" is not allowed by the rules. Neutral can only be selected by the driver. The ECU might be allowed to charge the battery in neutral above 50kph though.

Article C9.8.3 says:

Each individual gear change must be separately initiated by the driver.
A shift to gearbox neutral is specifically allowed as a multiple-change exception, but it must be “following a request from the driver.”
Automatic gear changes are classified as a driver aid and are not permitted.

C5.2.12 prohibits MGU-K use until 50 km/h

Also, you would hit the shifter to come out of neutral and that normally sticks you in 1st gear.

Interesting, so it's allowed as part of a driver initiated action, such as downshifting. But say this rule is open to interpretation and some teams consider disengaging the drivetrain in a way that the gears don't change but the PU power goes mainly to the MGUK with some clever engineering. Again, not saying Honda is doing this neutral rev limit, but the reason why you wouldn't shift from 7th to 8th would still be to keep the RPMs highest as possible for when you do start clipping/regen. What we're calling neutral could just be 7th gear coasting but the drivetrain itself avoids as much engine braking as possible and instead charges the battery via the MGUK. I suppose this aspect could also be manually set by the driver to use that map or mode to avoid automatic driver aids. If we here can conceive of such a use case I imagine the PU/gearbox software engineera have considered it as well.

As for when 8th gear is used, like another mentioned it's possible it is reserved for overtake mode. There's a lot of talk about algorithms but it seems like a misuse of the word or actual concept as it applied as if it is constantly changing while the driver is on the track and under changing conditions and scenarios. It could be considered a driver aid if the map is designed specifically for the circuit. So I'm thinking the driver has to choose a map that changes the operation but is otherwise consistent regardless of the track layout. I also think the FIA would have to heavily monitor the map usage and how the driver is instructed to use said map. It may be other teams that call it out before the FIA notices too.

What you are talking about in a long winded way is just the clutch. It would noticeable immediately when the revs change, because it wouldn't be legal to coast like that with clutch engaged and still fuel the engine automatically so the revs don't drop.

[mzso]

I am going to ignore the rumour as Shintaro Orihara said the Honda engine met its performance targets. If it did not, then that would be a complete breach of trust.

I do not think Honda is going to repeat the mistakes of 2015 by lying.

Since we don't know what the targets were, it's impossible for him to have lied. We don't know if the performance targets were high, low or indifferent. In a round about way, he said "wait for the race to find out".

He's the Honda spokesperson. It's part of his duty to present a rosy view.
The fact that it's unknowable to us doesn't mean he couldn't have lied.
We do need to wait for the race to see good evidence though.

This is somewhat True but the issue was that the Engine was supposed to gain 60hp but they could only get 30hp out of it on filming day on track. In Superclipping or clipping they got 60hp back so were able to charge the car, just at the top end the power drops.

These numbers seem made up.

[Rodak]

I am going to ignore the rumour as Shintaro Orihara said the Honda engine met its performance targets. If it did not, then that would be a complete breach of trust.

I do not think Honda is going to repeat the mistakes of 2015 by lying.

Since we don't know what the targets were, it's impossible for him to have lied. We don't know if the performance targets were high, low or indifferent. In a round about way, he said "wait for the race to find out".

How does that make any sense? Of course he could have lied, you just wouldn't know it. Please note I'm not suggesting he did lie, just commenting on the strange logic of the above statement.

[diffuser]

I am going to ignore the rumour as Shintaro Orihara said the Honda engine met its performance targets. If it did not, then that would be a complete breach of trust.

I do not think Honda is going to repeat the mistakes of 2015 by lying.

Since we don't know what the targets were, it's impossible for him to have lied. We don't know if the performance targets were high, low or indifferent. In a round about way, he said "wait for the race to find out".

How does that make any sense? Of course he could have lied, you just wouldn't know it. Please note I'm not suggesting he did lie, just commenting on the strange logic of the above statement.

I was just suggesting you would NOT be able to know if he lied. It's hard to make an accusation when you don't know the answer. Guess I could have worded it better.