- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
Honda motorsport boss Yasuhisa Arai has claimed that it is unfair the engine maker is receiving all criticism and has rebuked doubts that the Japanese firm could make enough of a step forward over the next winter to become competitive.
Not sure if I agree with you here bhall.bhall II wrote:You don't have to do things differently in order to win; you have to do things better. If the ultimate driving force behind a project is constrained in order to build something unique, you run the risk of going down the same blind alleys that others may have discovered and subsequently dismissed as the wrong way to go.ESPN wrote:"It's a long way to go for us and we have started now quite far behind, but I have so much trust and confidence in this team," Alonso said. "We have a talented team of engineers inside McLaren and we have seen the progress inside McLaren and we saw the progress in the last few weeks. To beat Mercedes you need to do something special and not to copy them or follow them because then you will be behind all the time."
In other words, you might inadvertently "copy" the wrong solution.
Why would "the proud japanese who want to do everything on their own" use a second rate engune design from some with a mediocre track record? I am pretty sure the engine is a honda design through and through.Based on my assumption that Honda's power unit is actually PURE's ostensibly aborted power unit, these sorts of problems are likely to continue for quite a while, because the design wasn't born in-house. Not only does that restrict future development to solutions that are compatible with a foundation the company did not build, it means no one at Honda, aside from Gilles Simon and anyone else who followed him from PURE, has experience with the PU from its most nascent stages. They're learning about it as they go along.
Adrian Newey's flexible bodywork borrowed heavily from designs that originated elsewhere, and I don't know that anyone can say Red Bull struggled because of it...Andres125sx wrote:When you copy someone´s solution, you inevitably are some steps back.
[...]
Likewise for the recent blown diffusers...Racecar Engineering, Ferrari F2007 Secrets wrote:"The front floor is attached to the chassis via a mechanical hinge system at its most rearward point. The most forward support is a body with one compression spring and one tension spring inside which can be adjusted according to the amount of mass that is fitted to the front floor. There is also a skirt that seals the floor to the chassis, which is made out of rubber and Kevlar to help flexibility and reduce friction in the system."
[...]
Stepney also explains the dynamic behaviour of the car, and the advantages the flexing floor gives: "From around 160-180km/h (100-112mph) the car is about 7-8mm lower at the leading edge of the floor, which multiplies up to nearly 19-20mm lower front wing height. The benefits in terms of ground effects and efficiency would be gained all around, with components like turning vanes and front wings at a reduced height relative to the ground."
What track record? It never ran.PlatinumZealot wrote:Why would "the proud japanese who want to do everything on their own" use a second rate engune design from some with a mediocre track record?
Gilles Simon now works at Honda.Autosport wrote:Formula 1's engine makers wants reassurances that engine specialist Gilles Simon, who currently works with the FIA, will not take secret information with him to new employer PURE.
Simon will join Craig Pollock's PURE operation next month, and his move has caused concern among engine makers who are privately unhappy that the information he has on their future plans and designs could be advantageous to his new employers.
Renault's engine chief Rob White, who is the representative of the engine makers on the Formula 1 Commission, said on Friday in Budapest that the situation of Simon moving so quickly to a competitor was not ideal.
"First reactions are fairly predictable and understandable from my part," explained White. "On a personal and professional level, we've had good relations with Gilles for a long time in his present - for a couple more days – job, and in his previous job at Ferrari.
"Of course, it's of concern to all of us that in this close relationship with Gilles and the FIA over the past year, 18 months, that we've given unprecedented access to Gilles – we certainly have at Renault and I believe all of the engine companies have done so, particularly in respect of the state of progress in our respective engine development programmes alongside the rules package.
"And so, of course, we would be most concerned to be reassured that information to which Gilles has had access to in those very privileged circumstances as a representative of the FIA is not used in his new capacity as an employee of a competitor."
White added that there was a degree of trust that needed to be given to representatives of the governing body, that could not be handed to them if there was the possibility of them working for a rival.
"It's a very complicated sport," he said. "In order that the technical and sporting regulations can be administered successfully, then we require the governing body to have good people and they probably require to have access to the teams, and therefore there's an obvious risk that needs to be managed, if the same people can crop up in a different shirt very shortly afterwards."
Nothing to do with Japanese culture on that front. A key element I suspected and Wazari seems to confirm, was that Honda only started pouring significant resources into the project halfway 2013. Know that they did manage to create a testing PU for a filming day late into the 2014 season, which is quite impressive. If you have 4 years to develop a testing mule is feasible, but not with the short timespan Honda had.ajnšpric_pumpa wrote:So far Mclaren has been anything but impatient whit Honda.....and i think by "their way" @Wazari means is the fact that Honda didn't put their V6 Hybrid in a mule car on time(or at all) like Mercedes and Ferrari did,which was obviously a big mistake but a part of Japanese culture.
Tesla is an example, but also consider why they did it. How can they sell more cars and make more profit? If electric cars become more standard, they need the infrastructure, charging points, to get the market off the ground. They can't do that on their own so if they can encourage the market by not threatening competitors with lawsuits it will benefit them.Andres125sx wrote: When you copy someone´s solution, you inevitably are some steps back.
http://motorsport.nextgen-auto.com/Hond ... 92811.htmlWazari wrote:I have been viewing this forum for a while and find it an interesting forum with some meaningful and interesting posts. I have a love-hate relationship with F1; love the racing but hate the politics and governing of F1. This is my experience of the relationship between McLaren and Honda. I have spent 40 years in the automotive racing arena with Toyo-Kogyo (Mazda), Honda Racing from 1983 to 1993 and then on to Toyota Racing. I was born and raised in Japan and have spent over 75% of my time working in Japan with the rest in the US and Europe. The relationship back then with Williams and McLaren were difficult at best and I imagine not much has changed today. How can you suddenly change cultural habits and methods. You don't. My nephew currently works for Honda Racing and although he is tight-lipped about his work, I can sense nothing has changed with regards to the working between Honda and McLaren.
The Japanese and British corporate culture is very different. I was a senior engineer and later a cost analysis engineer for Honda. I found McLaren to be more demanding and quick to lay blame more so than Williams. They wanted things now and they of all people should know that R and D doesn't happen that way. The Japanese are very proud and sometimes that is good and bad. Good in that they are determined to win "their way" and eventually they will succeed. Bad in that "their way" may not be the most efficient way to success. This energy recovery plus turbo electric boost technology is beyond my knowledge base. It seems very complex and Mercedes seems to have found the right blend in terms of power and reliability. I am confident Honda will get there. I know there are four basic tuning trims right now and they have been running at level 2 for the last two races. They are down about 90 HP in that trim in my opinion. I am told that level 4 trim should be equal or slightly higher than Mercedes' estimated output. Of course this is all hearsay and speculation.
I apologize for digressing but bottom line is that in my opinion only, both Honda and McLaren are both to blame for their frustration and lack of good communication. I think Arai-san will still be at head of the helm throughout the 2016 season and McLaren Honda will make big strides in terms of performance after the summer break. Gambare Alonso and Button-san!
#aerogollumturbof1 wrote: YOU SHALL NOT......STALLLLL!!!
EVs are a huge market in development, Tesla doesn´t need to encourage anyone to make it interesting. But it may be some marketing interest here too, and probably what you say is another good point, but not the main reason to free their patents I thinkJef Patat wrote:Tesla is an example, but also consider why they did it. How can they sell more cars and make more profit? If electric cars become more standard, they need the infrastructure, charging points, to get the market off the ground. They can't do that on their own so if they can encourage the market by not threatening competitors with lawsuits it will benefit them.Andres125sx wrote: When you copy someone´s solution, you inevitably are some steps back.
Because this is a completely diferent field wich is not comparable. Here there´s no development, once you get a medication it will be sold for many years, probably decades, so here patents are worthJef Patat wrote:In other areas that is not the case, if you own a patent for medication, you own the market. Others cannot copy, they cannot come to the same solution, they have to find something else with the same result.
Too radical or not, only time will tell. If they win WDC next season, or in 2017, all of us will praise that radical approach as a winner strategyJef Patat wrote:Personally I'm a strong believer of the thought they chose to go (too) radical. Merc, Fer, Ren I think cannot afford to go radical.
Old speculation at best that he is at Honda. No mention of him anywhere, which would be quite unusual.bhall II wrote:Adrian Newey's flexible bodywork borrowed heavily from designs that originated elsewhere, and I don't know that anyone can say Red Bull struggled because of it...Andres125sx wrote:When you copy someone´s solution, you inevitably are some steps back.
[...]
Likewise for the recent blown diffusers...Racecar Engineering, Ferrari F2007 Secrets wrote:"The front floor is attached to the chassis via a mechanical hinge system at its most rearward point. The most forward support is a body with one compression spring and one tension spring inside which can be adjusted according to the amount of mass that is fitted to the front floor. There is also a skirt that seals the floor to the chassis, which is made out of rubber and Kevlar to help flexibility and reduce friction in the system."
[...]
Stepney also explains the dynamic behaviour of the car, and the advantages the flexing floor gives: "From around 160-180km/h (100-112mph) the car is about 7-8mm lower at the leading edge of the floor, which multiplies up to nearly 19-20mm lower front wing height. The benefits in terms of ground effects and efficiency would be gained all around, with components like turning vanes and front wings at a reduced height relative to the ground."
http://i.imgur.com/fVIFi0O.jpg
What track record? It never ran.PlatinumZealot wrote:Why would "the proud japanese who want to do everything on their own" use a second rate engune design from some with a mediocre track record?
Even so...
Gilles Simon now works at Honda.Autosport wrote:Formula 1's engine makers wants reassurances that engine specialist Gilles Simon, who currently works with the FIA, will not take secret information with him to new employer PURE.
Simon will join Craig Pollock's PURE operation next month, and his move has caused concern among engine makers who are privately unhappy that the information he has on their future plans and designs could be advantageous to his new employers.
Renault's engine chief Rob White, who is the representative of the engine makers on the Formula 1 Commission, said on Friday in Budapest that the situation of Simon moving so quickly to a competitor was not ideal.
"First reactions are fairly predictable and understandable from my part," explained White. "On a personal and professional level, we've had good relations with Gilles for a long time in his present - for a couple more days – job, and in his previous job at Ferrari.
"Of course, it's of concern to all of us that in this close relationship with Gilles and the FIA over the past year, 18 months, that we've given unprecedented access to Gilles – we certainly have at Renault and I believe all of the engine companies have done so, particularly in respect of the state of progress in our respective engine development programmes alongside the rules package.
"And so, of course, we would be most concerned to be reassured that information to which Gilles has had access to in those very privileged circumstances as a representative of the FIA is not used in his new capacity as an employee of a competitor."
White added that there was a degree of trust that needed to be given to representatives of the governing body, that could not be handed to them if there was the possibility of them working for a rival.
"It's a very complicated sport," he said. "In order that the technical and sporting regulations can be administered successfully, then we require the governing body to have good people and they probably require to have access to the teams, and therefore there's an obvious risk that needs to be managed, if the same people can crop up in a different shirt very shortly afterwards."