A nice video talking about the organisational spec/design philosophy!
Red Bull had the least amount of CFD from July-December 2021, FYI.Holm86 wrote: ↑09 Mar 2022, 11:14I'll believe it when I see it. People have a tendency to say "they came with a b-spec car for the second test a couple years ago, so they could do that again" and then that's just what people want to see.
But they completely disregard the fact that Mercedes this time have to develop their car under a budget cap, and with the least amount of CFD runs of any team.
But unlike Red Bull's fake car launch, the Mercedes did actually work and did do 3 whole days of testing. It's a real car even if they don't end up using it for the season.Stu wrote: ↑09 Mar 2022, 14:28But if they do come with something revolutionary, the previous launch will be just another ‘not car launch’, and half of the forum will feel compelled to pile-on and give Mercedes as much of a kicking as the other half did with Red Bull (after their livery launch).Just_a_fan wrote: ↑09 Mar 2022, 11:16After the let downs of the early "not car" launches etc., and testing behind semi-closed doors, this is the first time I've been excited this season. Hoping the revised W13 is a proper revision and not just tweaks to bits and bobs.NathanOlder wrote: ↑09 Mar 2022, 10:06
Really looking forward to tomorrow now. Got the day off work, will be watching all day. Lets see some silver monster.
Batten down the hatches!!!
Thank you for the pics. No, what you're showing is a change in the fuel tank shape. The cockpit is off limits but they can step in toward the fuel tank. The cockpit wall thickness isn't that great anyway, you'd be hitting drivers' elbows if it weren't a spec dimension.
This.I'm with you on the 'I'll believe it when I see it' but the cost cap and limitations in number of CFD runs doesn't rule out a dramatic change in a perverse it might mean a dramatic change is more likely.
As a former engineer who worked in a cash and resource strapped organisation it did teach us to think outside the box a lot and get creative and I've seen brilliant engineers come up with great ideas in a mature project that just takes it in a completely different direction.
You misremember, when prodded and asked multiple times about if he (the TD) saw anything interesting on any other car, he essentially said if I MUST pick one, I'd go with the RBR sidepod but we have our own philosophy and we don't have time to be deviating from that.Just_a_fan wrote: ↑09 Mar 2022, 17:35I had a fun thought - what if the changes to the Mercedes are actually not very small sidepods but actually a ramped type like those on the Red Bull. I remember one of the Merc team being quoted as saying that the Red Bull's side pods would be interesting for the guys back at the factory, almost as if they might consider it. Maybe they've actually independently come up with a similar, but perhaps more extreme, approach.
The mods shouldn't have killed the speculation thread so soon!
That wasn't the real car, it was a mule - discussed on RedditHoffman900 wrote: ↑09 Mar 2022, 17:53I thought it was interesting they had their Barcelona test car (or at least one with the same body work) at Harvard a couple weeks ago. You’d think they would be at the factory working on it…
This.I'm with you on the 'I'll believe it when I see it' but the cost cap and limitations in number of CFD runs doesn't rule out a dramatic change in a perverse it might mean a dramatic change is more likely.
As a former engineer who worked in a cash and resource strapped organisation it did teach us to think outside the box a lot and get creative and I've seen brilliant engineers come up with great ideas in a mature project that just takes it in a completely different direction.
I’d rather have less money / time with smarter / more talented engineers than try to iterate myself to a solution with a less talented group. I’ve said this all along, you cannot unlearn what you know and talent always wins. I’ve seen this play out again and again in other racing series, and even in spec series from amateur to pro, the same people / teams are at the front.
I’d argue these rule sets even favor a Mercedes or RedBull because they’ll always be more efficient with their time than a team who may have more wind tunnel time / cfd time but are struggling with correlation issues or were super far off the mark to begin with. We could have a billion dollars with every tool at our disposal, hire all the regular forum posters, and we’d be lucky to design a mid pack amateur field Formula Atlantic.
mantikos wrote: ↑09 Mar 2022, 18:13You misremember, when prodded and asked multiple times about if he (the TD) saw anything interesting on any other car, he essentially said if I MUST pick one, I'd go with the RBR sidepod but we have our own philosophy and we don't have time to be deviating from that.Just_a_fan wrote: ↑09 Mar 2022, 17:35I had a fun thought - what if the changes to the Mercedes are actually not very small sidepods but actually a ramped type like those on the Red Bull. I remember one of the Merc team being quoted as saying that the Red Bull's side pods would be interesting for the guys back at the factory, almost as if they might consider it. Maybe they've actually independently come up with a similar, but perhaps more extreme, approach.
The mods shouldn't have killed the speculation thread so soon!
“The most visually different [thing] I think are the sidepods that Red Bull Racing have come up with,” Mercedes technical director Mike Elliott said on a video released on the official Formula 1 YouTube channel.
“[It] looks interesting, so we’ll go and have a think about that.”
Only at weekends when they're all on it!
There is also the deadline concentrator.Hoffman900 wrote: ↑09 Mar 2022, 17:53I thought it was interesting they had their Barcelona test car (or at least one with the same body work) at Harvard a couple weeks ago. You’d think they would be at the factory working on it…
This.I'm with you on the 'I'll believe it when I see it' but the cost cap and limitations in number of CFD runs doesn't rule out a dramatic change in a perverse it might mean a dramatic change is more likely.
As a former engineer who worked in a cash and resource strapped organisation it did teach us to think outside the box a lot and get creative and I've seen brilliant engineers come up with great ideas in a mature project that just takes it in a completely different direction.
I’d rather have less money / time with smarter / more talented engineers than try to iterate myself to a solution with a less talented group. I’ve said this all along, you cannot unlearn what you know and talent always wins. I’ve seen this play out again and again in other racing series, and even in spec series from amateur to pro, the same people / teams are at the front.
I’d argue these rule sets even favor a Mercedes or RedBull because they’ll always be more efficient with their time than a team who may have more wind tunnel time / cfd time but are struggling with correlation issues or were super far off the mark to begin with. We could have a billion dollars with every tool at our disposal, hire all the regular forum posters, and we’d be lucky to design a mid pack amateur field Formula Atlantic.