Mercedes AMG F1 W03 (pre-launch speculation)

[spadeflush]

is it possible to watch tomorrows test on internet?

Not sure about the video feed. Autosport will be covering all tests this year.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/97317

Also, like last year there might be a few more websites having live commentary and data feed. JET has described a few above.

Edit:Sky's gonna show the tests? Hope video links wud be available for ppl like me [-o< (who cant access SKY)

[Mr.S]

@mr S

The Mercedes started with a SWB side blown exhaust concept. It was a meter out from the diffuser, and was the least effective of all concepts.
Only when they switched to the red bull style mid season could you say that it was of mediocre benefit.
They pulled out on Renault but couldn't make much in roads on the top 3.
Why?
The car was not designed for this concept.

I'd hazard a guess that of you took EBDs off all the cars last year, and set them up with periscope exhausts...we would see the Mercedes claw back more than any car ahead of it.
Let's see the long runs, and wether Mercedes will again be all over the place on the timings. If we see consistency with a bit of pace it will warm the cocles of my heart.

I am not denying that. I think definitely with EBD ban Mercedes have least to loosen. The field will tighten up,but by how much??? I see RBR having a solid 0.5s gap atleast.

In general even without the EBD RBR had a much better car,Mercedes with their fat & bulky sidepods have no chance. Every portion of the car in RBR was aerodynamically maximized.

I dont buy what Newey is selling. I dont. Without EBD RB5 was the fastest car in the 2nd half of the season & I am inclined to think Brawn got more out of their DD than what RBR did.

Comparing Brawn & present Mercedes is ridiculous. A lot has changed. The field will even out. I am not saying that Mercedes wont make progress but that does not mean they will be naturally near RBR.

Look at ferrari,huge nose,fantastically sculpted side-pods,Push-rod front suspension & they talk about hiding inlets & speakers & stuff. Even Force India have a very sexy sidepod with a huge undercut

[Mr.S]

S, JET - I think let's just leave things at that and talk after tomorrow's times are out

I don't remember lap and sector times ever being released from testing though - I just remember the fastest time being released after testing sessions. How do you propose to catch the sector and stint times JET?

After that happens then we can at least do some maths on the stint timings - be it by standard deviation or however you propose.

All Lap times are known. From Williams feed last year you could see the LAP TIMES. Maybe even some sectors too

[retpog55]

....and no doubt others will have closed up on the Mercedes DRS.

[raymondu999]

S, JET - I think let's just leave things at that and talk after tomorrow's times are out

I don't remember lap and sector times ever being released from testing though - I just remember the fastest time being released after testing sessions. How do you propose to catch the sector and stint times JET?

After that happens then we can at least do some maths on the stint timings - be it by standard deviation or however you propose.

All Lap times are known. From Williams feed last year you could see the LAP TIMES. Maybe even some sectors too

Yes, but say you wanted all the lap times - do you have to follow the times live and record the times; or is it available somewhere afterwards?

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Let's see what Mercedes have then.

But we have seen the other teams designs, and there is no real genuine innovation.
Of course it's early days, but this is a big opportunity for Mercedes to make inroads into the gap.
Who knows how big the difference will be, but I think we will all be surprised if Mercedes are the quickest team.
They could however make a substantial gain and remain 4th, I expect that.

[Mr.S]

S, JET - I think let's just leave things at that and talk after tomorrow's times are out

I don't remember lap and sector times ever being released from testing though - I just remember the fastest time being released after testing sessions. How do you propose to catch the sector and stint times JET?

After that happens then we can at least do some maths on the stint timings - be it by standard deviation or however you propose.

All Lap times are known. From Williams feed last year you could see the LAP TIMES. Maybe even some sectors too

Yes, but say you wanted all the lap times - do you have to follow the times live and record the times; or is it available somewhere afterwards?

You have to follow. They show the last laps after every lap. Like the timings & the best of all drivers accross all days.


After a full day only the best timings will remain & not the last one's which keep changing after every lap

[tjaeger]

WOW. Must say 105 pages of speculation, w/o any word, leak, sketch, picture is quite something for the W03 blog. Interresting speculation as every year. thanks to all.

Has anyone noticed that for most recent 2012 car launches, a lot of the MGP W01 and W02 designed features are used? Or are very similar?
- McLaren 2011 - second air box intake, was first fielded on the W01 and this year used on the Ferrari 2012.
- The basic nose design (or front end) of the W02 seems to have a lot of visual simularities with the 2012 Ferrari, Sauber, CT-1.....etc., etc.
- The 2012 cars sidepods, layout and design appear to have some visual matches to the W02 as well.

Could it be that Merc did do quite a good job in 2010 and 2011, considering the car design, BUT did not get it on the road because they missed the big trends and differentiators like the EBD, F-Duct?

[pocketmoon]

Mercedes AMG have confirmed on Twitter that the new car will not be "launched" before 21st. So we will see it first in Barcelona in two weeks time.

[MercAMGF1Fans]

Oh thanks all-seeing-eye.

I guess Neweys word isn't enough to go by on this.

We designed the RB7, last year's car, around that exhaust position and were probably the only people to do so, so we've lost more than other people through that

And why

RB7 was designed around the exhaust, this year knowing that the exhaust position from last year would be taken away, we've had to go back and look at how we developed the car through the last one and two years with the side exit exhaust and try and, if you like, make sure that the routes we had taken that were only suitable for that exhaust position we now had to re-evaluate. Probably one of the key things there is the rear ride height. The exhaust allowed us to run a high rear ride height, it's much more difficult without that to sustain a high rear height so we have to go back down and have to redevelop the car around that lower ride height.

Basically its trump card has been taken away, and made redundant. No more steep rake, no more tricks.
Theyll be ahead but from this I bet not by much if anything at all.
This all bodes very well for the opposition.

=D> =D> =D> NICE!

[King Six]

Still, people have to remember Red Bull's performance in 2010 and Silverstone 2011. If it wasn't for the pit stop blunder they would have won at Silverstone too. It does however give McLaren and Ferrari and the rest a huge chance to catch up.

[mith]

It's way too early to say which car will be fast and which not. But please, remember, RB5 was the best car without DDD and of course it had conventional exhaust back in 2009. There was no magic trick to it's performance. The whole design was simply the most efficient, refined - call it however you want. It showed also later in the season, when the had they Silverstone massive update (with DDD, new nose and probably many more things I don't remember). I recall Newey claiming, their DDD was not so efficient, because of the lack of space on the rear to incorporate it properly. But still it was enough to make RB5 the fastest car of the second part of the season. So all this talk about EBD as their key asset might be just smoke and mirrors and thus I believe this car will be once again fighting for the both titles.

[raymondu999]

Yes, their 2009 DDD was tiny - basically a slit and that was it. Here's a pic of when they first raced it, which was in Monaco:


Did they gain a lot from the EBD? Undoubtedly. Whether or not they gained the MOST from it is debatable, and nobody really knows. But we cannot argue with the fact that the lineage of the car; tracing back to its roots in the RB5, has a solid base car with aero that is fundamentally sound in the first place.

[gato azul]

May I assume we are talking about the shocks? The shocks are responding to load applied to the wheels. There is no requirement restricting this response of the shocks.

Not in particular, but I´m sure, they are affected by changes in temperature as well, and not only by changing wheel loads.
Otherwise, why would people feel compelled to write whole articles on this very subject?
TEMPERATURE EFFECTS ON THE DAMPER

How about springs?
According to this graphic, spring rate will change between 3-5% if the temperature raises from ~20 - ~150°C, while load remains constant.

Increase in temperature will affect the elastic modulus and the elastic limit of most spring materials. The decreasing elastic modulus of spring alloys as temperature is increased is shown in the chart above. This change is completely reversible. Also, the rate of the spring will be changed in proportion to the modulus.

But hey, what do they know, it´s just the society of spring manufacturers.
http://www.spring-makers-resource.net/h ... rings.html

Down-force affects the chassis and the chassis affects the suspension. There is no simple yes or no, sorry.

Interesting statement, did you not just spend the last 20+ pages arguing, that the suspension should be only affected by the wheel? So how, can this be legal then, according to your understanding.

Now for my challenge:

'You CAN NOT state a form of movement that does not effect the load on the wheels. This is the validity test of your interpretation of this 10.1.2.'

Brian

I think, I just did, but you apparently did not liked it, because it does not fit into your paradigm about how the world/FIA rules should be read.

Now let me ask, some final questions:
What is that for a twisted logic, that because you can´t find a current situation, which would apply (and I just did), then this §§ in the rules is redundant, and does not need to be in the rules?
Does it crossed your mind, that rules are perhaps written, to exclude any undesired future developments, that can´t be foreseen at the time, that the rules where written?
You may did not like my example about the possible usage of permanent magnets to affect magnetorheological fluids in suspension components, and dismiss it as "non existent" [just because it is not listed in the latest PENSKE catalog], but who says, that there is not already research going on into this direction?

from:

Self-powered and sensing control system based on MR damper: presentation and application

.......However, these systems require external stable power supply, which may be not possible or assured in some extreme events, such as earthquakes and typhoons. To solve this problem, Chen et al. [5] have developed the permanent magnet MR damper, and successfully
applied it to a cable vibration control system.

This technology is may is not used in automotive application just yet, because it is easier to do it by other means, but who says, that a team could not pick up on this research and turn it into a F1 suspension system in the future?

And finally, if the FIA is as "hell bend" as you like, to make us believe, to exclude these "inertia sensing systems", why is it then, that they change the wording of § 10.1.

ARTICLE 10 : SUSPENSION AND STEERING SYSTEMS
10.1 Sprung suspension :
Cars must be fitted with sprung suspension. The springing medium must not consist solely of bolts located
through flexible bushes or mountings.
There must be movement of the wheels to give suspension travel in excess of any flexibility in the
attachments.
The suspension system must be so arranged that its response is consistent at all times and results only from changes in vertical load applied to the wheels save only for movement permitted by inherent and fixed
physical properties.

into, your beloved § 10.1.2

ARTICLE 10 : SUSPENSION AND STEERING SYSTEMS
10.1 Sprung suspension :
10.1.1 Cars must be fitted with sprung suspension.
10.1.2 The suspension system must be so arranged that its response results only from changes in load applied to the wheels.

and if you keep in mind what DaveW had to tell us:

I think you are referring to "g-sensitive" dampers. The "crude mass" controlling damper ports and restrained by a spring forms a mechanical accelerometer. The spring is normally preloaded to set the acceleration at which the control activates.

They have been used since 1997 (to my knowledge), and have continued to be used (sporadically) to the present day. Mostly they are used for pitch control. Roll control was also tried initially but was not desperately successful largely, I suspect, because they were prone to change the lateral balance of the car.

Perhaps 1997 was the year, when the wording of the rules, changed to the current version.
Why would the FIA go to all the trouble, to change the wording of this rule, when they feel that these devices are illegal? - as you like to imply.
Makes you wonder doesn´t it?

Perhaps, you want to consider, if it is beneficial for your credibility and the forum in general, to do a little bit more listening and less talking for the foreseeable future.
After a while, you may be able to understand a thing or two, about the subjects, you like to talk about so much.
This is, if you have not driven people like DaveW and others away, with your annoying arguing, bickering and abrasive comments in general in the meantime.

Have a nice time Brian & enjoy the forum, it is always a pleasure talking to you.

[Raptor22]

Amen Gato,

could not have said it better myself.