[ 2020 ] Racing Point F1 Team - Mercedes

[Zynerji]

Maybe we could talk about the actual team instead of conspiracy theories that are best, dubious.

Photographic evidence of a 99% perfect copy, that, on the surface, looks like it does not comply with the regulations, is not "conspiracy theories".

It's going to be looked at for protest in Australia is my guess. It's way too similar for it NOT to be in the nit-picky world of F1.

[bill shoe]

Racing point- aka- 'off the back of a lorry...'

The full quote is
"I know for a fact that Racing point received 4 Chassis from Mercedes last November. Wheeled them in to the back door. Let’s bear in mind, that they test in the same wind tunnel on the weekends. Who knows what information is shared..."
The bargeboard area is 'Exactly' the same... so how can the TP quote ' Our design from scratch'... i can smell the BS from here... The only good thing is Merc technically cant 'give them' a 2021 car- they will need to actual design that themselves - unless of course they are getting knock-off from that design too.

Interesting rumor, couple comments-

1. November is way too late to influence RP's decision on whether or not to copy the W10 for 2020 season. RP would have to make that decision and commit to it by ~late-summer 2019.
2. Having said that, once the 2019 season is over (November), is it legal for Mercedes to sell the full intellectual property of the W10 to RP, including drawings and example cars? Is it possible such a sale was already completed during summer 2019 to take effect first day after 2019 season?
3. If RP owns the IP, can they copy the design to various simulations/models (structural, CFD, wind tunnel, kinematics, etc.), determine from those simulations & models that they like the performance of the car, and therefore go forward with that design based on their own analysis?
4. If RP approves a design path based on IP that they own combined with their own engineering analysis, does that path become their own design?

If we're asking these questions, then I'm still thinking the overall problem is the stagnant nature of F1 design as constrained by the rules. Seems like Senna's death was a turning point for the sport, and I'm not sure why.

The rules had always been a method to constrain speed to (relatively) safe levels. But after Senna's death, the rules have embodied a very palpable fear of the cars' appearance changing over time-- The rules have actively enforced a certain appearance to the cars beyond any regard for speed or safety.

[PowerandtheGlory]

Racing point- aka- 'off the back of a lorry...'

The full quote is
"I know for a fact that Racing point received 4 Chassis from Mercedes last November. Wheeled them in to the back door. Let’s bear in mind, that they test in the same wind tunnel on the weekends. Who knows what information is shared..."
The bargeboard area is 'Exactly' the same... so how can the TP quote ' Our design from scratch'... i can smell the BS from here... The only good thing is Merc technically cant 'give them' a 2021 car- they will need to actual design that themselves - unless of course they are getting knock-off from that design too.

Interesting rumor, couple comments-

1. November is way too late to influence RP's decision on whether or not to copy the W10 for 2020 season. RP would have to make that decision and commit to it by ~late-summer 2019.
2. Having said that, once the 2019 season is over (November), is it legal for Mercedes to sell the full intellectual property of the W10 to RP, including drawings and example cars? Is it possible such a sale was already completed during summer 2019 to take effect first day after 2019 season?
3. If RP owns the IP, can they copy the design to various simulations/models (structural, CFD, wind tunnel, kinematics, etc.), determine from those simulations & models that they like the performance of the car, and therefore go forward with that design based on their own analysis?
4. If RP approves a design path based on IP that they own combined with their own engineering analysis, does that path become their own design?

If we're asking these questions, then I'm still thinking the overall problem is the stagnant nature of F1 design as constrained by the rules. Seems like Senna's death was a turning point for the sport, and I'm not sure why.

The rules had always been a method to constrain speed to (relatively) safe levels. But after Senna's death, the rules have embodied a very palpable fear of the cars' appearance changing over time-- The rules have actively enforced a certain appearance to the cars beyond any regard for speed or safety.

I agree that the cockpit shape and high sides (and now the Halo) are all bi-products of the sport doing something to react to fatalities (senna, JulesB, Henry Surtees, Justin Wilson) but the trend for design and the convergence of designs cannot all be attributed to regulations. Its no surprise that when teams produce cars there is a general similarity at to what works best. This is because the technology used allows for so much' honing' to be done at the factory instead of at the racetrack. We know that Simulators & wind tunnels are in use 365 days a year.. so there is very little chance of a team going rogue and going completely off piste' i remember the Virgin/Marussia proudly claimed to be non- wind tunnel and more a work of pure CAD- but this didnt really catch on. f1 is a resources game and by having a dedicated R&D team working at the factory (who probably never see a race weekend) you will have designs that all look similiar because they've done hours and hours in a tunnel or sim first.
Id love to Ban Simulators in season - ive voiced this before - get designers doing their thinking at the race weekend instead of watching a computer crunch numbers.. Give teams more tyres so the drivers arent afraid of flat spotting or wrecking a set - or ending up short- get drivers attacking the races more- instead of a endurance style wear management game. I think the cars look good now- im not sure about next year yet - but i dont want too much freedom because we'll see 'Winglets' Sprout up from everywhere on the car. I would be happy to see active aero and make cars prettier. What suggestions would you have on what to change?

[izzy]

Interesting rumor, couple comments-

1. November is way too late to influence RP's decision on whether or not to copy the W10 for 2020 season. RP would have to make that decision and commit to it by ~late-summer 2019.
2. Having said that, once the 2019 season is over (November), is it legal for Mercedes to sell the full intellectual property of the W10 to RP, including drawings and example cars? Is it possible such a sale was already completed during summer 2019 to take effect first day after 2019 season?
3. If RP owns the IP, can they copy the design to various simulations/models (structural, CFD, wind tunnel, kinematics, etc.), determine from those simulations & models that they like the performance of the car, and therefore go forward with that design based on their own analysis?
4. If RP approves a design path based on IP that they own combined with their own engineering analysis, does that path become their own design?

If we're asking these questions, then I'm still thinking the overall problem is the stagnant nature of F1 design as constrained by the rules. Seems like Senna's death was a turning point for the sport, and I'm not sure why.

The rules had always been a method to constrain speed to (relatively) safe levels. But after Senna's death, the rules have embodied a very palpable fear of the cars' appearance changing over time-- The rules have actively enforced a certain appearance to the cars beyond any regard for speed or safety.

i give 0 credibility to the rumour. Why would there be 4 chassis? Anyway if Mercedes wanted to help they'd just email the drawings wouldn't they. Some people complaining are using photos to compare and at the same time saying they couldn't do it from photos!

I don't think it has anything to do with safety either really. For safety they could easily just make the crash tests more severe and leave it up to teams how to pass them. It's about "close racing" and how to improve the show by dumbing it down, limiting excellence, and how to get an American team in by making it cheap, before doing the redistribution. Now a proper F1 team with 500 staff has walked through the same door and omg they're fast

But a lot of it is simply doing a low rake concept in a top wind tunnel, that gives great data, with a lot of good engineers. They started with a great concept of course, but i bet the car that runs in Melbourne will be faster than the W10 was

[PowerandtheGlory]

Interesting rumor, couple comments-

1. November is way too late to influence RP's decision on whether or not to copy the W10 for 2020 season. RP would have to make that decision and commit to it by ~late-summer 2019.
2. Having said that, once the 2019 season is over (November), is it legal for Mercedes to sell the full intellectual property of the W10 to RP, including drawings and example cars? Is it possible such a sale was already completed during summer 2019 to take effect first day after 2019 season?
3. If RP owns the IP, can they copy the design to various simulations/models (structural, CFD, wind tunnel, kinematics, etc.), determine from those simulations & models that they like the performance of the car, and therefore go forward with that design based on their own analysis?
4. If RP approves a design path based on IP that they own combined with their own engineering analysis, does that path become their own design?

If we're asking these questions, then I'm still thinking the overall problem is the stagnant nature of F1 design as constrained by the rules. Seems like Senna's death was a turning point for the sport, and I'm not sure why.

The rules had always been a method to constrain speed to (relatively) safe levels. But after Senna's death, the rules have embodied a very palpable fear of the cars' appearance changing over time-- The rules have actively enforced a certain appearance to the cars beyond any regard for speed or safety.

i give 0 credibility to the rumour. Why would there be 4 chassis? Anyway if Mercedes wanted to help they'd just email the drawings wouldn't they. Some people complaining are using photos to compare and at the same time saying they couldn't do it from photos!

I don't think it has anything to do with safety either really. For safety they could easily just make the crash tests more severe and leave it up to teams how to pass them. It's about "close racing" and how to improve the show by dumbing it down, limiting excellence, and how to get an American team in by making it cheap, before doing the redistribution. Now a proper F1 team with 500 staff has walked through the same door and omg they're fast

But a lot of it is simply doing a low rake concept in a top wind tunnel, that gives great data, with a lot of good engineers. They started with a great concept of course, but i bet the car that runs in Melbourne will be faster than the W10 was

There’s no doubt it will be quicker purely because they will have last year’s Merc Car with this year’s engine..(+20bhp)

I know its far fetched- but even a neutral watching f1- or a new fan perhaps- would ask themselves why is that car so similar to the other one- and is that allowed?
Why dont all teans just copy last years title winning car- tyen we can have all cars looking like clones, just with different engines?
Then eventually it will be just 2 engines... aaaaaaaaannnnnnnnddddd then you have indycar. Meh’

[NAPI10]

Interesting rumor, couple comments-

1. November is way too late to influence RP's decision on whether or not to copy the W10 for 2020 season. RP would have to make that decision and commit to it by ~late-summer 2019.
2. Having said that, once the 2019 season is over (November), is it legal for Mercedes to sell the full intellectual property of the W10 to RP, including drawings and example cars? Is it possible such a sale was already completed during summer 2019 to take effect first day after 2019 season?
3. If RP owns the IP, can they copy the design to various simulations/models (structural, CFD, wind tunnel, kinematics, etc.), determine from those simulations & models that they like the performance of the car, and therefore go forward with that design based on their own analysis?
4. If RP approves a design path based on IP that they own combined with their own engineering analysis, does that path become their own design?

If we're asking these questions, then I'm still thinking the overall problem is the stagnant nature of F1 design as constrained by the rules. Seems like Senna's death was a turning point for the sport, and I'm not sure why.

The rules had always been a method to constrain speed to (relatively) safe levels. But after Senna's death, the rules have embodied a very palpable fear of the cars' appearance changing over time-- The rules have actively enforced a certain appearance to the cars beyond any regard for speed or safety.

i give 0 credibility to the rumour. Why would there be 4 chassis? Anyway if Mercedes wanted to help they'd just email the drawings wouldn't they. Some people complaining are using photos to compare and at the same time saying they couldn't do it from photos!

I don't think it has anything to do with safety either really. For safety they could easily just make the crash tests more severe and leave it up to teams how to pass them. It's about "close racing" and how to improve the show by dumbing it down, limiting excellence, and how to get an American team in by making it cheap, before doing the redistribution. Now a proper F1 team with 500 staff has walked through the same door and omg they're fast

But a lot of it is simply doing a low rake concept in a top wind tunnel, that gives great data, with a lot of good engineers. They started with a great concept of course, but i bet the car that runs in Melbourne will be faster than the W10 was

There’s no doubt it will be quicker purely because they will have last year’s Merc Car with this year’s engine..(+20bhp)

I know its far fetched- but even a neutral watching f1- or a new fan perhaps- would ask themselves why is that car so similar to the other one- and is that allowed?
Why dont all teans just copy last years title winning car- tyen we can have all cars looking like clones, just with different engines?
Then eventually it will be just 2 engines... aaaaaaaaannnnnnnnddddd then you have indycar. Meh’

If this approach help mid-field cars to start challenging ‘Top 3’; what’s wrong with it?
All we want is close racing & improved show across field.

[izzy]

There’s no doubt it will be quicker purely because they will have last year’s Merc Car with this year’s engine..(+20bhp)

I know its far fetched- but even a neutral watching f1- or a new fan perhaps- would ask themselves why is that car so similar to the other one- and is that allowed?
Why dont all teans just copy last years title winning car- tyen we can have all cars looking like clones, just with different engines?
Then eventually it will be just 2 engines... aaaaaaaaannnnnnnnddddd then you have indycar. Meh’

the aero will be quicker, tho i agree really, my point is just that it's FIA and Liberty's fault not Racing Point's. RP will have started with the W10 concept, to help switching from high rake to low rake, then developed from there. W10 has been a huge lesson in low rake F1 aero. They have an update due for Melbourne apparently so by then they'll have 'designed' it.

so RP have just done what F1 introduced for Haas, but done it with a full F1 team instead of only 200 staff. So there's no point pointing fingers at Lawrence afaic. I can understand Cyril as i said, but he could've gone low rake too or done whatever within the rules. It seems obvious that RP made the first aero model from their own powertrain coordinates plus photos, looked at the beautiful flows with their awesome vorticity, and then developed from there on their own. F1 allows all the Mercedes bits and using the same wind tunnel, voila!

[PowerandtheGlory]

i give 0 credibility to the rumour. Why would there be 4 chassis? Anyway if Mercedes wanted to help they'd just email the drawings wouldn't they. Some people complaining are using photos to compare and at the same time saying they couldn't do it from photos!

I don't think it has anything to do with safety either really. For safety they could easily just make the crash tests more severe and leave it up to teams how to pass them. It's about "close racing" and how to improve the show by dumbing it down, limiting excellence, and how to get an American team in by making it cheap, before doing the redistribution. Now a proper F1 team with 500 staff has walked through the same door and omg they're fast

But a lot of it is simply doing a low rake concept in a top wind tunnel, that gives great data, with a lot of good engineers. They started with a great concept of course, but i bet the car that runs in Melbourne will be faster than the W10 was

There’s no doubt it will be quicker purely because they will have last year’s Merc Car with this year’s engine..(+20bhp)

I know its far fetched- but even a neutral watching f1- or a new fan perhaps- would ask themselves why is that car so similar to the other one- and is that allowed?
Why dont all teans just copy last years title winning car- tyen we can have all cars looking like clones, just with different engines?
Then eventually it will be just 2 engines... aaaaaaaaannnnnnnnddddd then you have indycar. Meh’

If this approach help mid-field cars to start challenging ‘Top 3’; what’s wrong with it?
All we want is close racing & improved show across field.

They arent really challenging the top 3 at all... and you can bet your house, mother and cat and dog - if and when a supplier team starts getting to racy compares to the Works team will start to offer less parts- less assistance - its all playing into the top teams hands - they will eventually control the way the sport is run - and imagine if Ferrari suddenly stopped supplying parts- HAAS would cease. Racing point without Merc help would go backwards.. So its all artificial.. So overall its super bad.... Imagine is RB and Alpha tauri were 1st fastest and 2nd fastest teams they could effectively engineer a race result- because they are both same parent company... that's a fake sport.

[dren]

RP verified during the first test that it can copy a concept and have success with it. They'll show up with a W11 copy tomorrow and lead the field.

[PowerandtheGlory]

There’s no doubt it will be quicker purely because they will have last year’s Merc Car with this year’s engine..(+20bhp)

I know its far fetched- but even a neutral watching f1- or a new fan perhaps- would ask themselves why is that car so similar to the other one- and is that allowed?
Why dont all teans just copy last years title winning car- tyen we can have all cars looking like clones, just with different engines?
Then eventually it will be just 2 engines... aaaaaaaaannnnnnnnddddd then you have indycar. Meh’

the aero will be quicker, tho i agree really, my point is just that it's FIA and Liberty's fault not Racing Point's. RP will have started with the W10 concept, to help switching from high rake to low rake, then developed from there. W10 has been a huge lesson in low rake F1 aero. They have an update due for Melbourne apparently so by then they'll have 'designed' it.

so RP have just done what F1 introduced for Haas, but done it with a full F1 team instead of only 200 staff. So there's no point pointing fingers at Lawrence afaic. I can understand Cyril as i said, but he could've gone low rake too or done whatever within the rules. It seems obvious that RP made the first aero model from their own powertrain coordinates plus photos, looked at the beautiful flows with their awesome vorticity, and then developed from there on their own. F1 allows all the Mercedes bits and using the same wind tunnel, voila!

Im not blaming Lawrence. at the end of the day if it was my money i wouldn't waste it when i could ask my Golf buddy to borrow his car keys for a little while....
That last whole section about 'just going low rake", taking photos and somehow coming up with something 100% similar" that would take a top team ages to get right- that is whole design change, even if you were building a replica..
No RP have had a knee-up or two- here and there... so now RP jump from wherever they were last year in the title to maybe 3rd or 4th this year.. Nobody without a rule change can find that amount of time by normal means. They haven't all of a sudden just built from scratch the 4th fastest car themselves.. they have had a lot of help and it will grate on a lot of people... it makes a mockery of the having a "reset' on the f1 rules. Why not just give everyone last year's fastest car and start next year all on the same footing. But that isnt f1..!!!

[PlatinumZealot]

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery! Mercedes has been very quiet in this saga.

[nzjrs]

Mercedes has been very quiet in this saga.

A very good point!

[PowerandtheGlory]

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery! Mercedes has been very quiet in this saga.

They are streets ahead... Predict they lap everyone in melbourne if the race has no safety cars... RP can have the scraps off their table...

[langedweil]

Anyway if Mercedes wanted to help they'd just email the drawings wouldn't they.

I'd say they'd WeTransfer'ed them, as email would hit the max. mailsize limit.

[Xero]

2. Having said that, once the 2019 season is over (November), is it legal for Mercedes to sell the full intellectual property of the W10 to RP, including drawings and example cars? Is it possible such a sale was already completed during summer 2019 to take effect first day after 2019 season?

There's nothing in the rules as far as I'm aware that prohibit the exchange of design schematics/blueprints. The rules regarding customer parts relate to purchasing completed components. We saw this used with Toro Rosso in the early days having a near exact copy of the Red Bull, but as they grew up they became more independent.

The car looks fairly quick out of the gate, that's almost to be expected. I'm sure they have a pretty good understanding of how the aero works in theory, but understanding it's behaviour in different conditions could see them struggle in certain races. The development race will almost certainly affect them, but they'll be banking on a strong start to get points on the board early so they can finish the season with some decent prize money.

What makes this whole thing most surprising to me is Racing Point were seemingly looking to push on as a team. Anything they achieve this season will be clouded with criticism and a lack of credibility by a large portion of the fan-base. That can't be good for sponsorship. On the other hand, rebranding the team next season with a brand new formula they may be able to quickly shake that stigma off. They'll have nowhere to hide next season, nothing to reference or copy. Good luck to them.