They might neuter ERS, too

[beelsebob]

by anyones logic 100kg/hr shouldn't mean 28gr/sec, because one has the measurement done or calculated for a period 3600 times greater than the other

that is what I tried to argue in the fuelgate thread a while back, and people wouldn't understand the difference, but today we somehow have a clarification to that fuel rule which specifies the minimum time period where the flow must not exceed the amount mentioned in the regulation, so no - not all flows that are 100kg/hr great will also meet the 27,7gr/s measurement, but all 27,7gr/sec flows will meet the 100kg/hr one

Congratulations, you don't understand how rates, and their units of measurement work. Go and read up on some basic maths.

[heidenreich27]

ERS is blocking overtaking, sad truth

[Rybo]

So please excuse my ignorance, but is the "Mercs running slowly" on the formation lap in actuality them accelerating then coasting to build up charge in the batteries of the MGU-K? Do these F1 cars operate in a limited way like roadgoing hybrids in that respect? By building up a maximum charge, does that help them with their off the line acceleration?

Does Merc use the K to power/prespool the H in a way that wasn't foreseen?

It's really just the same as Vettel used to do. Slow down at the worst possible time for your rivals and then catch them off guard and jet off into the distance. It's not so much charge or tempatures, but just backing up the pack to try to build a gap.

[henra]

I dunno. None of it makes sense to my simple mind.

Hmmm, It probably makes sense in its own way.
I guess FIA received serious indications that Renault and possibly even also Ferrari might leave F1 rather short term if they are so helpless behind and don't see a chance to catch up probably even next year (which in the current rule set I would take almost as a given - they don't seem to have much of a clue what to do).
Looking at Merc's mighty mid range speed acceleration and top speed together with their DF Level, the 100HP (maybe it's just 80 - 90) doesn't seem completely unrealistic to me although I doubt it's all ERS. If I would have to make a guess I would have attributed almost half of it to ICE + Turbo.

FIA went too courageous with the new regs and is now getting scared of the results of their own decision.
The bad and somewhat unfair thing about is that it penalises a Team/manufacturer that simply did the best Job.
On the other Hand I can understand that they are now worried that Renault and possibly even Ferrari might kiss F1 goodbye end of the year.
Lesson to be learned: Make one step at a time. Too big changes bear the risk of significant consequences.

[RicME85]

should unfreeze the regs rather than penalise IMO

[henra]

should unfreeze the regs rather than penalise IMO

Could be a possibility, I'm just only half confident Renault and Ferrari would know what to do then and even if they had a clue if this could be implemented in a reasonable time. My Impression is that it would not.

[Just_a_fan]

So please excuse my ignorance, but is the "Mercs running slowly" on the formation lap in actuality them accelerating then coasting to build up charge in the batteries of the MGU-K? Do these F1 cars operate in a limited way like roadgoing hybrids in that respect? By building up a maximum charge, does that help them with their off the line acceleration?

Does Merc use the K to power/prespool the H in a way that wasn't foreseen?

It's really just the same as Vettel used to do. Slow down at the worst possible time for your rivals and then catch them off guard and jet off into the distance. It's not so much charge or tempatures, but just backing up the pack to try to build a gap.

Not on the formation lap it's not. He has to stop at the grid and wait for everyone else to form up.

[basti313]

should unfreeze the regs rather than penalise IMO

Could be a possibility, I'm just only half confident Renault and Ferrari would know what to do then and even if they had a clue if this could be implemented in a reasonable time. My Impression is that it would not.

I think they know what to do: They need a bigger turbo to get more power from MGU H. So they will be able to catch up with the power deficit from MGU H. But a bigger turbo means a big redesign of the current engine...that costs a lot of money.
Would be easier and cheaper if the FIA reduces the amount of power which can be distributed by the MGU H. And it will lead to the same result.

[CBeck113]

@WilliamsF1 & Holms86: Not quite, since what you're naming are maximums - limits - and therefore naturally a boundary. The FiA did not specify under which condition this stipulation must be met, and left too much room for interpretation (once again). As a team you have to exploit every loophole you can find, or you don't win.

And yes, 100kg/hr is not equal to 27.7 g/s, and 27.7g/s will always be 100kg/h. Why? In saying 100kg/h, the sample is at each hour, while when saying 27.7g/s, the sample is every second.

[Bredd]

Tbh I'm just fed up at this bullsh*t. Mercedes have done a better job all round why neuter their car to spice things up? Where else in life do you get punished for doing two good of a job. The second point I have is that the hybrid ERS part is where innovation is supposed to be driven in order to be applicable to road car technology. Why stifle that when this was the whole point of the engine change. Lastly these cars are slow enough, why are the FIA attempting to slow them down further with the bans to FRIC and this ERS power. Ludicrous.

[MOWOG]

I can understand that they are now worried that Renault and possibly even Ferrari might kiss F1 goodbye end of the year.

I'm not worried in the slightest. In fact, I hope is DOES happen. The only way to break Bernie's death grip (some legal types might say (mort main) is to drive the value of FOM to zero.

Let it crash and burn.The rulers have already f*cked thing up about as much as they. Let the series die and let a new series based on racing rather than greed arise in its place.



You might be able to tell that I am more than fed up with the clusterf*ck that is today's Formula One.

[Cam]

Tbh I'm just fed up at this bullsh*t. Mercedes have done a better job all round why neuter their car to spice things up? Where else in life do you get punished for doing two good of a job.

Actually, almost everywhere. Welcome to life.

The tall poppy syndrome (TPS) is a pejorative term primarily used in the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and other Anglosphere nations to describe a social phenomenon in which people of genuine merit are resented, attacked, cut down, or criticised because their talents or achievements elevate them above or distinguish them from their peers.

You can throw Professional Jealousy in there too, for good measure.

This is nothing new for F1. It's new for Mercedes fans as this is the first time in 50 years they've been in front. Stings, don't it? Welcome to F1.

[donskar]

Lemme see here . . .

Bernie believes himself to be all powerful and above the law (any law).

German courts are trying to prove Bernie wrong.

Mercedes is a German company. . .

Nah . . . Couldn't be.

[Pierce89]

@WilliamsF1 & Holms86: Not quite, since what you're naming are maximums - limits - and therefore naturally a boundary. The FiA did not specify under which condition this stipulation must be met, and left too much room for interpretation (once again). As a team you have to exploit every loophole you can find, or you don't win.

And yes, 100kg/hr is not equal to 27.7 g/s, and 27.7g/s will always be 100kg/h. Why? In saying 100kg/h, the sample is at each hour, while when saying 27.7g/s, the sample is every second.

How can people come to a "technical" site, and not understand the concept of a rate. 100kg/h is absolutely equal to 27.7g/s by the mathematical definition of a rate.

[dvstwig]

@WilliamsF1 & Holms86: Not quite, since what you're naming are maximums - limits - and therefore naturally a boundary. The FiA did not specify under which condition this stipulation must be met, and left too much room for interpretation (once again). As a team you have to exploit every loophole you can find, or you don't win.

And yes, 100kg/hr is not equal to 27.7 g/s, and 27.7g/s will always be 100kg/h. Why? In saying 100kg/h, the sample is at each hour, while when saying 27.7g/s, the sample is every second.

What!?

By that logic, I could travel 200km/h in a 60km/h zone, so long as I only travel 60km during the hour...

Then, if the police pull me over when I'm doing 200, I could just say "but officer, if you sampled my speed at the beginning of this hour, I was only doing 60km/h, and at the end of this hour, I'll only be doing 60km/h"

Maybe we should start having speed limits posted as metres per second?