General Honda F1 Topic

[Zynerji]

Reference? I think this is nonsense. I have not heard of used PUs being taken away.

I'm sure other's here can give more specific, but I'm rather sure we have seen it every time that a team takes a 4th engine, as they can only keep 3 in the pool.

I never heard of a rule on "pool". Only that 3 PU components can be deployed, any further brings grid penalties.

I believe it was done to prevent a team from taking several new engines during a weekend and loading their stock.
Only keep 3 in the pool, and carry-over grid penalties were put in place to prevent it after one team did it a few years ago IIRC.

[henry]

So, you can use an old engine after taking a fresh one for a race. If you take a 4th engine, the oldest one is kicked from the pool.

Reference? I think this is nonsense. I have not heard of used PUs being taken away.

I'm sure other's here can give more specific, but I'm rather sure we have seen it every time that a team takes a 4th engine, as they can only keep 3 in the pool.

The relevant section in the Sporting Regulations is 23.3

23.3 a)
Unless he drives for more than one team (see 23.3(c) below), and subject to the additions described below, each driver may use no more than 3 engines (ICE), 3 motor generator units‐heat (MGU‐H), 3 turbochargers (TC), 2 energy stores (ES), 2 control electronics (CE) and 2 motor generator units‐kinetic (MGU‐K) during a Championship season.

With the consent of (and at the sole discretion of) the FIA, the numbers above will be increased by one for any driver using a power unit provided by a new power unit manufacturer (as defined in Appendix 9) taking part in their first Championship season.

b) Should a driver use more than the numbers set in a) above of any one of the elements during a Championship season, a grid place penalty will be imposed upon him at the first Event during which each additional element is used. Penalties will be applied according to the following table and will be cumulative :
The first time an additional element is used Ten grid place penalty.
The next times an additional element is used Five grid place penalty.
If a driver incurs a penalty exceeding 15 grid places he will be required to start the race from the back of the starting grid.
Any of the six elements will be deemed to have been used once the car’s timing transponder has shown that it has left the pit lane.
During any single Event, if a driver introduces more than one of the same power unit element which is subject to penalties, only the last element fitted may be used at subsequent Events without further penalty.

The section in bold is the only restriction on the elements in the pool. That is you cannot add multiple elements to the pool during an event, only one, the last one may be carried forward.

[mzso]

The section in bold is the only restriction on the elements in the pool. That is you cannot add multiple elements to the pool during an event, only one, the last one may be carried forward.

Thanks. So this reinforces limitations to PU elements added to the pool over a single weekend.
But there's no such restriction as described by Zynerji. Drivers can have as many PUs as there are races.
Curiously this also means that that manufactuers could test multiple PUs over a weekend and whichever they have in last and start the race with will be added to their pool. Could be used to test multiple development branches and then use what works best. Especially useful when there's to be a penalty anyway.

[henry]

The section in bold is the only restriction on the elements in the pool. That is you cannot add multiple elements to the pool during an event, only one, the last one may be carried forward.

Thanks. So this reinforces limitations to PU elements added to the pool over a single weekend.
But there's no such restriction as described by Zynerji. Drivers can have as many PUs as there are races.
Curiously this also means that that manufactuers could test multiple PUs over a weekend and whichever they have in last and start the race with will be added to their pool. Could be used to test multiple development branches and then use what works best. Especially useful when there's to be a penalty anyway.

I think a driver could end the season with 24 ICEs, 3 plus 1 with a penalty in the first race and 20 with penalties in the rest of the season. I think the scenario you paint is restricted by the “only carry over the LAST used” requirement. So if you had 3 configurations to test it might take 2 races with penalties to get the best into the pool.

[subcritical71]

The section in bold is the only restriction on the elements in the pool. That is you cannot add multiple elements to the pool during an event, only one, the last one may be carried forward.

Thanks. So this reinforces limitations to PU elements added to the pool over a single weekend.
But there's no such restriction as described by Zynerji. Drivers can have as many PUs as there are races.
Curiously this also means that that manufactuers could test multiple PUs over a weekend and whichever they have in last and start the race with will be added to their pool. Could be used to test multiple development branches and then use what works best. Especially useful when there's to be a penalty anyway.

Don't forget that the engine manufacturers must make available to all teams the same spec engines. Of course, it probably wouldn't be hard for them to get the other teams to waive the test mule role in the hopes of getting a better PU faster.

[Capharol]

The section in bold is the only restriction on the elements in the pool. That is you cannot add multiple elements to the pool during an event, only one, the last one may be carried forward.

Thanks. So this reinforces limitations to PU elements added to the pool over a single weekend.
But there's no such restriction as described by Zynerji. Drivers can have as many PUs as there are races.
Curiously this also means that that manufactuers could test multiple PUs over a weekend and whichever they have in last and start the race with will be added to their pool. Could be used to test multiple development branches and then use what works best. Especially useful when there's to be a penalty anyway.

Don't forget that the engine manufacturers must make available to all teams the same spec engines. Of course, it probably wouldn't be hard for them to get the other teams to waive the test mule role in the hopes of getting a better PU faster.

where does it say all teams (RB & TR) need the same spec engine?

[subcritical71]

Thanks. So this reinforces limitations to PU elements added to the pool over a single weekend.
But there's no such restriction as described by Zynerji. Drivers can have as many PUs as there are races.
Curiously this also means that that manufactuers could test multiple PUs over a weekend and whichever they have in last and start the race with will be added to their pool. Could be used to test multiple development branches and then use what works best. Especially useful when there's to be a penalty anyway.

Don't forget that the engine manufacturers must make available to all teams the same spec engines. Of course, it probably wouldn't be hard for them to get the other teams to waive the test mule role in the hopes of getting a better PU faster.

where does it say all teams (RB & TR) need the same spec engine?

Unfortunately these requirements were put out as Technical Directives. As the TD’s are not made public it is hard to debate one way or the other with absolute certainty of their contents and wording. Here is one article from last year that mentions it with quoted content. https://www.racefans.net/2018/02/23/fia ... mpetitive/

[Capharol]

Don't forget that the engine manufacturers must make available to all teams the same spec engines. Of course, it probably wouldn't be hard for them to get the other teams to waive the test mule role in the hopes of getting a better PU faster.

where does it say all teams (RB & TR) need the same spec engine?

Unfortunately these requirements were put out as Technical Directives. As the TD’s are not made public it is hard to debate one way or the other with absolute certainty of their contents and wording. Here is one article from last year that mentions it with quoted content. https://www.racefans.net/2018/02/23/fia ... mpetitive/

ok thanks for that one but is it possible to guarantee that all teams have the same spec or are the possibillites to get around that (if an engine broke down, or they need to replace it due to a crash)
because that would mean if a TR crashes and the engine needs to be replaced they could change some aspects of that engine.
So who can tell it's the same one as RB uses (i think they are able to let it looks like it)

and that will mean Haas has the same engine as Ferrari, or Racing Point has the same as Mercedes, and the gap between those teams can't be only aero package

[SmallSoldier]

where does it say all teams (RB & TR) need the same spec engine?

Unfortunately these requirements were put out as Technical Directives. As the TD’s are not made public it is hard to debate one way or the other with absolute certainty of their contents and wording. Here is one article from last year that mentions it with quoted content. https://www.racefans.net/2018/02/23/fia ... mpetitive/

ok thanks for that one but is it possible to guarantee that all teams have the same spec or are the possibillites to get around that (if an engine broke down, or they need to replace it due to a crash)
because that would mean if a TR crashes and the engine needs to be replaced they could change some aspects of that engine.
So who can tell it's the same one as RB uses (i think they are able to let it looks like it)

and that will mean Haas has the same engine as Ferrari, or Racing Point has the same as Mercedes, and the gap between those teams can't be only aero package

The latest spec “has to be made available” to all teams, that doesn’t mean that all teams need to use it... Meaning that Red Bull can stay in spec 2.0 and STR could be in spec 7.0 for example.

What the rules are trying to avoid is a situation in which let’s say that Haas is fighting with Ferrari for the Championship and Ferrari brings and upgraded engine only for themselves, gaining an unfair advantage.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[subcritical71]

If the PU is homologated, which it needs to be in order to participate in ‘the event’, then it must be available to all customer teams. The administrative part of this is done by way of engine dossier that is submitted by the PU manufacturer for the teams.

I reread your question and maybe I didn’t make my statement clear enough, but as SmallSoldier mentioned it’s not that the teams have to all run the same spec, but the same spec must be available to be used by all teams simultaneously.

It was a few years ago that there were grumblings of the manufacturers only giving their works teams upgrades ‘to ensure the upgrade worked’ before rolling it out to others. Obviously this was a great excuse to keep the works teams ahead on engine developments.

[Capharol]

ok thanks now i understand, then i was still right in thinking TR can use a spec 3 to test and RB a spec 2

[etusch]

McLaren Racing losses rise after Honda split

https://www.racefans.net/2019/04/25/mcl ... nda-split/

[yener]

So because of the improved reliability, they can run the engine "higher" trough the weekend which give them around 10KW /13HP more power. Heard on f1tvpro

[etusch]

10 hp is still good number and being available for whole race is better

[yener]

in FP3 the sound of Gasly's car was really different compared to Max's yesterday. Is that the new PU?