Welcome to the *NEW* F1!

[Conceptual]

I think you should not overestimate the impact an ecu has. It does not determine how an engine performs. It only controls ignition to some extend. The results also tell me the difference is neglitable. BMW wouldv got pole without kubicas error. Ferrari wouldv gotten pole and a 1-2 finish if these *&^%$(*^&$&^($ would learn you use those damn tyres over a single lap. Williams and red bull and Honda and Toyota seemed to have upped their game since 2007. Hel, even Renault doesnt seem to have much bad effects. Add to that most complaints (about performance deficit) go towards aerodynamics i think the ecu from mclaren should not be a problem. Thats coming from somebody who doesnt hold mclarens ethics in the highest regard, to put it mildly. Another factor would be if the cu would relaly cause much deficit, i think most other teamboses would cry to the moon and back and persuade dictator bernie to get someone else to provide these boxes. Damn i saw force indias small pitbox and thought:ïf it wasnt for bernie, mclaren would be cramped in that space.""

P_O_L,

If you would simply clean up your posts, use some correct punctuation and not try to type as fast as your brain is complaining, you might have some relevant points.

Until then, I won't give myself a headache trying to figure out what the hell you are trying to say.

Chris

[mcdenife]

Conceptual wrote:

I wonder how many of the non-factory teams will be using the Merc engine in 2009? Since the Renault/Toyota/Ferrari customer teams cannot compete with the Mercedes engine when it comes to the SECU integration...

I think you either misunderstand what an ECU is or exactly what a (any) 3rd party ECU supplier actually delivers if you think SECU will integrate easier with a Merc engine. The point is SECU will not integrate any easier with a merc engine if its ECU was previously supplied by say Magneti Marelli. The ease/difficulty the teams are facing is in their familiarity with it, ie moving from whatever ECU the had before to SECU. So Merc engine or not those teams which were previously supplied by MES will have it easier with SECU than those who weren't. Similarly if the supplier was Magnetti, those teams previously using it would have an advantage. I am quite certain SECU would have been supplied with API's so the teams can customize as they wish and within regulations. Everything else would be standard. This being the case, MES will support the standard aspect of the SECU and NOT the customization. No software supplier I know supports code(API or otherwise)written by someone else regardless of who supplied the API. If this were not the case the US's DOD, for example, would need to write every single piece of software/Application itself for every single one of its requirements, regardless of sensitivity.
Mclaren's advantage is in their familarity with this ECU and the API rather than that it integrates easier with the Merc engine.
Even magnelli wont know how Ferrari's ECU worked when they supplied them.

[joseff]

Agree with mcdenife, SECU advantage lies with McLaren, not with the Merc motors.

[mcdenife]

And another thing, not even MES would know what customization Mclaren team have made to SECU.

[Conceptual]

And another thing, not even MES would know what customization Mclaren team have made to SECU.

Theoretically, I'm sure that is what McLaren want you to believe, but when the MES team is literally in the same building as the McLaren race team, you are gonna have a few water cooler chats...

And about the Merc engines...

I am NOT saying that the SECU works better with the Merc engine per se, just that it is much easier to get tech support from MES if you are using a Merc engine, simply because they already know that engine well, and you as the customer don't have to worry about giving a direct competitor inside information about your engine that may lead to a disadvantage.

If Williams needs help with the SECU and contact MES, they have to give SOME info on the Toyota engine to MES so they can actually solve some problems. Where as if Williams ran Mercedes engines and had those problems, they dont need to compromise ANY inside info about their engine, simply because MES already has that same info from the McLaren team.

I am just beating a horse on this I know. It just disgusts me that the FIA would be so idiotic to choose MES as a supplier when they are owned by a competitor in the series.

Anyways,

No more about the SECU from me, I think my final point has been made on this subject.

Thanks,

Chris

[mcdenife]

Theoretically, I'm sure that is what McLaren want you to believe, but when the MES team is literally in the same building as the McLaren race team, you are gonna have a few water cooler chats...

You are still missing the point. Mclaren dont need to hide the fact that MES may be doing their customization if indeed that is the case. And it would be perfectly OK. But I cant see why they would do that because all it would take would be for Team B to poach one of MES' programmers to understand how Mclaren (the team) are using SECU.

If Williams needs help with the SECU and contact MES, they have to give SOME info on the Toyota engine to MES so they can actually solve some problems. Where as if Williams ran Mercedes engines and had those problems, they dont need to compromise ANY inside info about their engine, simply because MES already has that same info from the McLaren team.

Absolutely not!!! not even if it was with an interface giving an unexpected output/result.
If some Java API eg. JDBC, is giving unexpected results, I will go to sun or Oracle, say, without giving them any info on whats in my database or what/how I use it.

It just disgusts me that the FIA would be so idiotic to choose MES as a supplier when they are owned by a competitor in the series.

The same applies to any previous supplier of an F1 team. Because thats like saying Microsoft is privy to all sensitive military information because they supply and support office software or databases to the military

[Spencifer_Murphy]

All I was pointing out is the fact that the development split between aero/chassis/electronics HEAVILY favor the McLaren team since they had to devote ZERO time to making the SECU work in their car...

That's a good point - I didn't think about that. But I guess it can also be argued that with the switch to bridgestone tyres in 2006, the majority of teams had to invest more time in making their cars use the tyres properly than the Ferrari team did. You see what I mean about the swings and roundabouts? I don't condone it, I just see it as a sort of "nessecary evil" which isn't of too much concequence.

It simply comes down to the fact that the FIA made a VERY VERY VERY poor choice of manufacturer for this ECU by not going to an impartial third party like Magneti Marelli that has no vested interest in the outcome of the season. They also don't have the conflict of interest inherent with proprietary information, since MM doesnt own and operate a F1 team.

This I do agree with 100%, I'd have much rather seen Magneti Marelli work on the ECU. Purely because after the politics of 2007 we all want to see racing, and having chosen Mclaren Technologies as the manufactuer for the SECU I could just see yes more politics polluting our sport. Again one could argue (but please note, I wouldn't) that Magnetti Marelli made ECU's for Ferrari & Renault before hence they'd have an advantage.

Like I said I don't believe that myself, but there you go - you can't please all of the people all of the time.

[donskar]

I replied to the following yesterday, but somehow my note was lost:

I think you should not overestimate the impact an ecu has. It does not determine how an engine performs. It only controls ignition to some extend.

This is totally, completely, utterly untrue. The Engine Control Unit does just that -- it controls the engine: conrolling ignition timing (advance/retard), engine fuel mixture, engine rev limiter, variable valve timing (if so equipped) and much more.

I do not know whether McLaren has an advantage because of their involvement with the design of the ECU, but it is only common sense to feel a little uncomfortable about one competitor designing and supplying a major component to its competitors. The fact that McLaren's ethics were called into doubt last season should only make any sensible person a little more uneasy. It just feels wrong.

Could there be nefarious possibilities here? Remember the Benneton code of several years back that hid certain illegal functions?

Again, I do NOT think McLaren have taken positive steps to do anything illegal or unfair, but it just does not make sense to have them involved in the ECU design. Is this situation not broadly parallel to having Ferrari supply engines to all competitors rather than just a couple? How would that look?

[mcdenife]

Donskar wrote:

Is this situation not broadly parallel to having Ferrari supply engines to all competitors rather than just a couple? How would that look?

No, its broadly similar to Ferrari supplying the basic engine block, without the valve train etc, to all competitors.

[Conceptual]

Donskar wrote:

Is this situation not broadly parallel to having Ferrari supply engines to all competitors rather than just a couple? How would that look?

No, its broadly similar to Ferrari supplying the basic engine block, without the valve train etc, to all competitors.

Not really, since you can SEE inside the block. Maybe more akin to supplying a short-block with the heads and oil pan welded on, with hidden internals completely beyond the control of the user.

Its like Windows Vista! LoL

Chris

[millerjam]

I suppose it'd never a good thing when one equipment supplier is also sort of a competitor. I have to agree on the FIA giving the contract to McLaren Electronics wasn't probably the smartest thing to do, mostly from a political standpoint especially with all that went on last season, although it was a bit late to change their decision.

Anything like this is always going to cause problems because no matter who you choose, they're going to have links with some team, or car manufacturer or systems supplier and I don't think anyone comes out of it with a sense of fairness. People keep on going back to the tyre issue last year with Bridgestone, which I definitely agree with. The FIA should have looked outside of the manufacturers who were already there i.e. Bridgestone and Michelin.

As for the danger of data transfer from other teams, whilst ironically is also a thorny issue with McLaren, I think anyone that knows about working with confidentiality agreements would testify that there isn't much scope for passing info on, i.e. you get into a lot of trouble...as McLaren found out last year

Ultimately I think if the FIA want to introduce these sort of constraints on the teams (i.e standard parts) than they have to provide the solution themselves or look outside of the industry (by that I mean the motorsport industry and to a lesser extent the auto industry). I don't see why Bosch or Siemens/Continental for example couldn't have been given the contract.

It's going to be really interesting to see how this pans out but I still can't see it being the deciding factor, as Kimi Raikkonen will attest by being stuck behind a Honda for how ever many laps because he couldn't get close enough to pass due to aero...

[P_O_L]

I replied to the following yesterday, but somehow my note was lost:

I think you should not overestimate the impact an ecu has. It does not determine how an engine performs. It only controls ignition to some extend.

This is totally, completely, utterly untrue. The Engine Control Unit does just that -- it controls the engine: conrolling ignition timing (advance/retard), engine fuel mixture, engine rev limiter, variable valve timing (if so equipped) and much more.

I do not know whether McLaren has an advantage because of their involvement with the design of the ECU, but it is only common sense to feel a little uncomfortable about one competitor designing and supplying a major component to its competitors. The fact that McLaren's ethics were called into doubt last season should only make any sensible person a little more uneasy. It just feels wrong.

Could there be nefarious possibilities here? Remember the Benneton code of several years back that hid certain illegal functions?

Again, I do NOT think McLaren have taken positive steps to do anything illegal or unfair, but it just does not make sense to have them involved in the ECU design. Is this situation not broadly parallel to having Ferrari supply engines to all competitors rather than just a couple? How would that look?

It only controls the ignition and some basic functions like mixture. It doesnt control anything about what amterial the valves are, how the coolingpump works or how much the crankshaft weighs.

Really, if it was such a hot issue, many teamowners wouldv vocaled their unhapiness and i doubt the fia wouldv used mes much longer.

ANd the box of benetton youre referring to was investigated by an undependant british company wich found some old structures about launchcontrol wich werent used anymore or could not be used quickly enough for the fia to say benetton: you cheat. In the end, benetton was cleared. End of story.

[Conceptual]

I replied to the following yesterday, but somehow my note was lost:

I think you should not overestimate the impact an ecu has. It does not determine how an engine performs. It only controls ignition to some extend.

This is totally, completely, utterly untrue. The Engine Control Unit does just that -- it controls the engine: conrolling ignition timing (advance/retard), engine fuel mixture, engine rev limiter, variable valve timing (if so equipped) and much more.

I do not know whether McLaren has an advantage because of their involvement with the design of the ECU, but it is only common sense to feel a little uncomfortable about one competitor designing and supplying a major component to its competitors. The fact that McLaren's ethics were called into doubt last season should only make any sensible person a little more uneasy. It just feels wrong.

Could there be nefarious possibilities here? Remember the Benneton code of several years back that hid certain illegal functions?

Again, I do NOT think McLaren have taken positive steps to do anything illegal or unfair, but it just does not make sense to have them involved in the ECU design. Is this situation not broadly parallel to having Ferrari supply engines to all competitors rather than just a couple? How would that look?

It only controls the ignition and some basic functions like mixture. It doesnt control anything about what amterial the valves are, how the coolingpump works or how much the crankshaft weighs.

Really, if it was such a hot issue, many teamowners wouldv vocaled their unhapiness and i doubt the fia wouldv used mes much longer.

ANd the box of benetton youre referring to was investigated by an undependant british company wich found some old structures about launchcontrol wich werent used anymore or could not be used quickly enough for the fia to say benetton: you cheat. In the end, benetton was cleared. End of story.

P_O_L,

Where have you been? EVERY TEAM is on record complaining about the SECU. It looks like your memory is very selective on what you remember from reading. I suggest taking off those rose colored glasses before trying any more autodidacting.

Chris

[P_O_L]

Ah, well care to back that up with some quotes? All i read was tech bosses saying it would take time to make it all work okay but never went so far that they demanded diffenet ECU'S!! In fact i remember sam michael from williams say it wasnt such a big deal.

[mcdenife]

Agree with P_O_L on this. AFAIK Complaints from the teams have only been about the time it will take to make it work but that otherwise (according to Renault and Williams) is not such a big deal. Ferrari's beef is more or less the same, ie that Mclaren have already done their integrations and can concentrate on optimising their car whereas they have to optimise SECU and their car but that otherwise it was no big deal.