The topic was combustion chamber heat loss and if radiation is significant.
The topic was combustion chamber heat loss and if radiation is significant.
From first year of come back they have ability supply 2 team with 12 ice.lio007 wrote: ↑09 Feb 2020, 17:12Good overview on Honda's reliability improvements:
(you can clearly see the increase in components when they opted for the split turbo in 2017, but from then on, they made some good steps)
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EQLZ7p5X0AA ... name=large
“for strategic development proposes” so Honda is supplying power units to two teams (four cars). Does the rules allow the use of different specification of any one of the six power unit components by any of one of the four cars?ME4ME wrote: ↑09 Feb 2020, 18:30Helmut Marko has hinted that they initially plan with a penalty-free season at Red Bull. But consider Alpha Tauri; even if they'll use an additional set of elements compared to Red Bull for strategic developmental purposes, that will be a major reduction in penalties over the last two years. Maybe sufficienty so that it can make the difference in the final WCC standings.
I think the 'magic word' is available to, not must all run the same spec.Sieper wrote: ↑11 Feb 2020, 14:18I believe so, the rule shave been sharpened (two season's ago if I remember correctly) in so far that IF you have an engine technically or by software capable of something then all teams that use that engine must be allowed to have the same/full benefits. So what is not allowed is depriving customer teams of potential benefit. That was the spirit of the rule.
If you have a newer spec capable of more /other new things then allowing the customer team to already use/try that is not outlawed. Although you could see guinea pig testing as not allowing the customer team the full benefit of the dependable main team engine.
I believe the rule is more (current real customer teams) to protect McLaren from being shafted by Renault and Williams (maybe even racing point) by Mercedes. All other customer teams are more junior teams who won't complain anyway. Now, not complaining does not make it rule adherence. But in the spirit of what the rule was aimed at I don't think it will be an issue even if allowing teams to try out the newer engine (more power etc.) would be against the rule.
Very well with the spirits of the rules that. If an upgraded PU is available and is used, me thinks that will be regarded as a new specification PU to the one it replaces.stevesingo wrote: ↑12 Feb 2020, 10:12And of course, with the strings of both teams being pulled by the same person (Helmut Marko), if an upgraded PU is "available" for both which has risk in it's use, the junior team can "choose" to take that risk without the accusation that the senior team has used the junior team as an R&D vehicle.
Yeah, well look at RB in their last year with Renault; the spec-3 had more power, but was not reliable enough for Renault (didnt use it) where RB took any HP available .. even it would blow.Big Tea wrote: ↑11 Feb 2020, 19:10I think the 'magic word' is available to, not must all run the same spec.Sieper wrote: ↑11 Feb 2020, 14:18I believe so, the rule shave been sharpened (two season's ago if I remember correctly) in so far that IF you have an engine technically or by software capable of something then all teams that use that engine must be allowed to have the same/full benefits. So what is not allowed is depriving customer teams of potential benefit. That was the spirit of the rule.
If you have a newer spec capable of more /other new things then allowing the customer team to already use/try that is not outlawed. Although you could see guinea pig testing as not allowing the customer team the full benefit of the dependable main team engine.
I believe the rule is more (current real customer teams) to protect McLaren from being shafted by Renault and Williams (maybe even racing point) by Mercedes. All other customer teams are more junior teams who won't complain anyway. Now, not complaining does not make it rule adherence. But in the spirit of what the rule was aimed at I don't think it will be an issue even if allowing teams to try out the newer engine (more power etc.) would be against the rule.