Ferrari Power Unit Hardware & Software

[Sieper]

I don't know If this is allowed (and if not please feel free to delete and apologies for posting then) but OK, lets say the dual battery system is an integral part of the whole PU and so also the two customer teams have them. By rule I then also have to give them the same (software) capabilities, but If I were to do something that is according to the letter of the rule not strictly legal (but at this moment it is not being measured sufficiently enough) then I would not offer that option to the customer teams as well (nobody will know about that as it is not being measured). For one, if suddenly customers teams also really dominate it will give even more friction with the other teams (also the midfield) and secondly, the more people know the more the danger of it leaking out.

So even if Ferrari has lost power (which is indeed an unknown) and even if the customer teams have not (which is also an unknown, there could still be a feasible explanation for that.

[Phil]

I don't know how many of you in here speak German, but given most of this new intel regarding the 2nd sensor came from AMuS, I think it's important that the article is understood in its entirety rather than just small snippets without the proper context.

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... r-vorteil/

Translation of all relevant points (best-effort):

• GPS data (from Renault) reveal that Ferrari is lacking that performance gain that they had since Singapore.
• This performance increase that others registered has been visible since Austria, visible at around 2/3rd of a long straight. At the end of the straight, they usually end up at the same speed.
• In Austria, Germany, Hungary, Spa and Monza, Ferrari gained around 0.3 to 0.5 on the straights (vs. Mercedes)
• Ferrari claimed this had to do with efficient aero and smart electric deployment. Mercedes and Renault were convinced they were entirely PU related.
• The FIA looked into the matter at various points and claimed that everything that Ferrari was doing was 'legal'.
• Since Singapore, the advantage Ferrari has on the straights is gone, according to GPS data claims Cyril Abiteboul.
• Sochi was quite illustrative as Vettel lacked that advantage he seemed to have in Spa when he pulled out of the slipstream
• AMuS is hearing from "FIA circles" that the FIA have implemented a new sensor at all Ferrari engined teams. With that, they are better equipped to measure what they want [in other words, implying the FIA perhaps wasn't measuring everything prior to this change]
• According to Renault, the competitors of Ferrari have been actively pursuing this case and apparently could prove that with the old implemented method the full energy flow could not be accurately assessed.
• Thus the 'method' of how they measure needed to be changed, resulting in this new 2nd sensor being fitted.
• Again, AMuS says that this is naturally a lot of speculation and there is no evidence that proves that this 2nd sensor (if true) is the reason why Ferrari is lacking this performance advantage since Singapore.
• The article goes on to suggest that since Singapore, Ferrari is not only missing performance on the straights, but in the corners too. Abiteboul suggests though that if Ferrari do have less power, then it might be forcing them to run less wing which would impact them in the corners too.

So if the sources of AMuS are correct, then this new 2nd sensor is simply a new, refined method of better assessing the energy flow to what they were previously measuring.

[saviour stivala]

FERRARI customers Haas and Sauber gets the same power train including software, fuel, oil and FERRARI factory Engine technicians and most probably the same make ES.

[aral]

"Abiteboul suggests though that if Ferrari do have less power, then it might be forcing them to run less wing"

Well in Russia, Ferrari were running far more wing than Mercedes , so had more drag.

[MtthsMlw]

FERRARI customers Haas and Sauber gets the same power train including software, fuel, oil and FERRARI factory Engine technicians and most probably the same make ES.

No, Ferrari uses different fuel I don't know about the oil though.

[bonjon1979]

I don't know how many of you in here speak German, but given most of this new intel regarding the 2nd sensor came from AMuS, I think it's important that the article is understood in its entirety rather than just small snippets without the proper context.

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... r-vorteil/

Translation of all relevant points (best-effort):

• GPS data (from Renault) reveal that Ferrari is lacking that performance gain that they had since Singapore.
• This performance increase that others registered has been visible since Austria, visible at around 2/3rd of a long straight. At the end of the straight, they usually end up at the same speed.
• In Austria, Germany, Hungary, Spa and Monza, Ferrari gained around 0.3 to 0.5 on the straights (vs. Mercedes)
• Ferrari claimed this had to do with efficient aero and smart electric deployment. Mercedes and Renault were convinced they were entirely PU related.
• The FIA looked into the matter at various points and claimed that everything that Ferrari was doing was 'legal'.
• Since Singapore, the advantage Ferrari has on the straights is gone, according to GPS data claims Cyril Abiteboul.
• Sochi was quite illustrative as Vettel lacked that advantage he seemed to have in Spa when he pulled out of the slipstream
• AMuS is hearing from "FIA circles" that the FIA have implemented a new sensor at all Ferrari engined teams. With that, they are better equipped to measure what they want [in other words, implying the FIA perhaps wasn't measuring everything prior to this change]
• According to Renault, the competitors of Ferrari have been actively pursuing this case and apparently could prove that with the old implemented method the full energy flow could not be accurately assessed.
• Thus the 'method' of how they measure needed to be changed, resulting in this new 2nd sensor being fitted.
• Again, AMuS says that this is naturally a lot of speculation and there is no evidence that proves that this 2nd sensor (if true) is the reason why Ferrari is lacking this performance advantage since Singapore.
• The article goes on to suggest that since Singapore, Ferrari is not only missing performance on the straights, but in the corners too. Abiteboul suggests though that if Ferrari do have less power, then it might be forcing them to run less wing which would impact them in the corners too.

So if the sources of AMuS are correct, then this new 2nd sensor is simply a new, refined method of better assessing the energy flow to what they were previously measuring.

It would be crucial to know exactly when this new sensor was fitted.

[Phil]

It would be crucial to know exactly when this new sensor was fitted.

I agree. There's an interview on AMuS with Michael Schmid where he goes into it a bit more (although there isn't more information than in the above article):

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... land-2018/

Apparently, according to Michael Schmid, the FIA is not saying when this new sensor was fitted and obviously, Ferrari won't say either.

[saviour stivala]

I don't know how many of you in here speak German, but given most of this new intel regarding the 2nd sensor came from AMuS, I think it's important that the article is understood in its entirety rather than just small snippets without the proper context.

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... r-vorteil/

Translation of all relevant points (best-effort):

• GPS data (from Renault) reveal that Ferrari is lacking that performance gain that they had since Singapore.
• This performance increase that others registered has been visible since Austria, visible at around 2/3rd of a long straight. At the end of the straight, they usually end up at the same speed.
• In Austria, Germany, Hungary, Spa and Monza, Ferrari gained around 0.3 to 0.5 on the straights (vs. Mercedes)
• Ferrari claimed this had to do with efficient aero and smart electric deployment. Mercedes and Renault were convinced they were entirely PU related.
• The FIA looked into the matter at various points and claimed that everything that Ferrari was doing was 'legal'.
• Since Singapore, the advantage Ferrari has on the straights is gone, according to GPS data claims Cyril Abiteboul.
• Sochi was quite illustrative as Vettel lacked that advantage he seemed to have in Spa when he pulled out of the slipstream
• AMuS is hearing from "FIA circles" that the FIA have implemented a new sensor at all Ferrari engined teams. With that, they are better equipped to measure what they want [in other words, implying the FIA perhaps wasn't measuring everything prior to this change]
• According to Renault, the competitors of Ferrari have been actively pursuing this case and apparently could prove that with the old implemented method the full energy flow could not be accurately assessed.
• Thus the 'method' of how they measure needed to be changed, resulting in this new 2nd sensor being fitted.
• Again, AMuS says that this is naturally a lot of speculation and there is no evidence that proves that this 2nd sensor (if true) is the reason why Ferrari is lacking this performance advantage since Singapore.
• The article goes on to suggest that since Singapore, Ferrari is not only missing performance on the straights, but in the corners too. Abiteboul suggests though that if Ferrari do have less power, then it might be forcing them to run less wing which would impact them in the corners too.

So if the sources of AMuS are correct, then this new 2nd sensor is simply a new, refined method of better assessing the energy flow to what they were previously measuring.

"If the soueces (GPS data claimed by Cyril Abitaboul) is correct". When the FERRARI advantage was first sniffed AMuS speculations and opinion fomenting as to where exactly the advantage was coming from tried their best to give the impression that the GPS data was theirs, but now it belongs to Abitaboul. In turn as is usual many of their followers sort of laid claim to this newly discovered knowledge. While some others will swear it is a fact. All this while FERRARI never officially claimed a power advantage.

[saviour stivala]

FERRARI customers Haas and Sauber gets the same power train including software, fuel, oil and FERRARI factory Engine technicians and most probably the same make ES.

No, Ferrari uses different fuel I don't know about the oil though.

-FERRARI customers Sauber and Haas are supplied with the same hardware, software, fuel and oil.

[saviour stivala]

"Abiteboul suggests though that if Ferrari do have less power, then it might be forcing them to run less wing"

Well in Russia, Ferrari were running far more wing than Mercedes , so had more drag.

Yes, FERRARI were running far more wing than mercedes, but that is not what some would like to hear. what AMus cliamed Abitaboul said is more like what some would like the hear.

[dren]

"Abiteboul suggests though that if Ferrari do have less power, then it might be forcing them to run less wing"

Well in Russia, Ferrari were running far more wing than Mercedes , so had more drag.

They had balance issues with the low DF rear wing so reverted to the other so I wouldn't base power on wing choice at Sochi.

[subcritical71]

No, Ferrari uses different fuel I don't know about the oil though.

And I'm thinking this could be the cause of the apparent loss of power of the Ferrari. It was reported in late August that the power increase could be a least partially attributed to the new Ferrari team specific fuel spec. It was mentioned at the time, again by AMuS, that "A molecular additive is so rare & difficult to produce that only Ferrari can use it, not the customer teams."

This is just my thoughts, but could the rarity mean that Shell have run out of the additive and need more before they can produce more batches? Have Ferrari thrown in the towel this year and are having Shell merely stock up on the additive so they have more available for next years championship?

[Big Tea]

No, Ferrari uses different fuel I don't know about the oil though.

And I'm thinking this could be the cause of the apparent loss of power of the Ferrari. It was reported in late August that the power increase could be a least partially attributed to the new Ferrari team specific fuel spec. It was mentioned at the time, again by AMuS, that "A molecular additive is so rare & difficult to produce that only Ferrari can use it, not the customer teams."

This is just my thoughts, but could the rarity mean that Shell have run out of the additive and need more before they can produce more batches? Have Ferrari thrown in the towel this year and are having Shell merely stock up on the additive so they have more available for next years championship?

There is even the possibility that said additive has knock on damage to the engine and they have decided not to push it any further as the title has seemingly slipped away. Also the possibility that they want to keep it a secret and maybe not expose it to public scrutiny, and keep their powder dry for next year.

[Phil]

I can't help feeling that the drop in power might be because they really pushed the engine in it's first few races on power hungry tracks to keep in the fight. Now they have to conserve them a little bit more to get to the end without any penalties.

There is even the possibility that said additive has knock on damage to the engine and they have decided not to push it any further as the title has seemingly slipped away.

This, I don't buy. Neither do I, that they supposedly "overstrained" the engine and now need to play it safe to get to the end of the year. To "conserve" is always best done, when from a position of strength. You lead the race, you can manage your stints better, as you only need to cover from behind. Same applies to leading a championship. When you have a lead, you can manage the gap [in points].

In other words, you only get to conserve when you're in a strong position. By driving with less power, you are giving your competitors a free pass to manage their usage as well. From a championship perspective, this is the time when Ferrari should be throwing the book performance wise to regain strength. If an engine blows, it blows. They won't lose a position anyway, as their championship position is likely cemented anyway. There is no benefit in already throwing in the towel to get to the end of the season with the allocated engines, especially since Ferrari are virtually guaranteed to finish runnerups in the championship anyway [WCC], given where RedBull is.

The best way to conserve your engines, your tires, is always from the lead. E.g. Make sure you qualify on pole, lead the race into T1 and then dictate the pace. Not starting on pole and trying to win the race from a lower position is where you are likely risking more engine wear.

If anyone is conserving anything, it's Mercedes/Lewis since they do not want take an engine penalty and they have a healthy lead in the championship that they can manage accordingly.

[Big Tea]

I can't help feeling that the drop in power might be because they really pushed the engine in it's first few races on power hungry tracks to keep in the fight. Now they have to conserve them a little bit more to get to the end without any penalties.

There is even the possibility that said additive has knock on damage to the engine and they have decided not to push it any further as the title has seemingly slipped away.

This, I don't buy. Neither do I, that they supposedly "overstrained" the engine and now need to play it safe to get to the end of the year. To "conserve" is always best done, when from a position of strength. You lead the race, you can manage your stints better, as you only need to cover from behind. Same applies to leading a championship. When you have a lead, you can manage the gap [in points].

In other words, you only get to conserve when you're in a strong position. By driving with less power, you are giving your competitors a free pass to manage their usage as well. From a championship perspective, this is the time when Ferrari should be throwing the book performance wise to regain strength. If an engine blows, it blows. They won't lose a position anyway, as their championship position is likely cemented anyway. There is no benefit in already throwing in the towel to get to the end of the season with the allocated engines, especially since Ferrari are virtually guaranteed to finish runnerups in the championship anyway [WCC], given where RedBull is.

The best way to conserve your engines, your tires, is always from the lead. E.g. Make sure you qualify on pole, lead the race into T1 and then dictate the pace. Not starting on pole and trying to win the race from a lower position is where you are likely risking more engine wear.

If anyone is conserving anything, it's Mercedes/Lewis since they do not want take an engine penalty and they have a healthy lead in the championship that they can manage accordingly.

I intended to imply that the chance had gone and it was 'wasted' rather than not using it to conserve the engine.
If a few % gain v a chance of killing the engine can get you back in contention it is worth a risk, if there is little to no chance, why risk it