That's up to the technical team to pinpoint and refine. The problem may not lie with one particular component, it could be the entire package not working as efficiently as it can - so the team will introduce tweaks over the course of the season to MAXIMISE the potential of the car.Originally posted by Gazelle:If you cant, how can you pin point exactly where is the problem from the begining of the season. As far as I can remember, when MP18 was introduced the expectation was high and it is only when MP18 couldnt make it to race then people start to talk about the fundamental problem.
Hey dude it is always easy to talk about thing which have already been said done and proven. However that doesnt really make you a very knowledgable person as far as F1 is concern.
You missed his point, it's only one lap out of many over a long testing day, when the conditions happen to be just right.Originally posted by Gazelle:Did Mp18 only do one lap at barcelone? Get your fact right dude. dont try to rewrite history to suit your arguement just because you are MR. "Moderator"
If there is no major rule change for 2007 the only major shift for Mclaren will be the tyres. As such do you really think the Mclaren will be starting everything from Scratch? If so do you have any reason to believe that having 2 new drivers for next season will be better than having JPM and kimi? If so why?Originally posted by Kuali Baba:They'll be dealing with new cars. Any information the drivers retain from the previous cars will be irrelevant when they're starting from scratch.
I think you miss the point. The reason MP18 didnt make it to race was not because it was a slow car. Actually with its tight aero package it was suppose to be super fast car. The reason why it didnt make it to the track is because it was too fragile and it have major cooling problem with the engine.Originally posted by Kuali Baba:You missed his point, it's only one lap out of many over a long testing day, when the conditions happen to be just right.
When you say the TEAM, does it include the drivers contribution such as feedback and their ability to push any new development to the limit?Originally posted by Kuali Baba:That's up to the technical team to pinpoint and refine. The problem may not lie with one particular component, it could be the entire package not working as efficiently as it can - so the team will introduce tweaks over the course of the season to MAXIMISE the potential of the car.
What you claim to know doesn't impress me either.
The Sauber C21, Williams FW26 and McLaren MP4-19 were all twin-keeled chassis - a gamble to gain underbody aerodynamic efficiency. They couldn't keep the teams in the positions they fought for in the previous seasons without serious re-working.Originally posted by Gazelle:How would you actually draw a line to say which design was fundamentally flawed when the FW26 was actually one of the fastest car among the top team?
I said the technical team - the one that's redesigning and modifying the components in the factory, based on the feedback from the race engineers, who in turn get feedback from the drivers at tests and races.Originally posted by Gazelle:When you say the TEAM, does it include the drivers contribution such as feedback and their ability to push any new development to the limit?
Am I right to say the driver is still part of the equation?Originally posted by Kuali Baba:I said the technical team - the one that's redesigning and modifying the components in the factory, based on the feedback from the race engineers, who in turn get feedback from the drivers at tests and races.
Of course they'll be. They'll be working with new tyres with different characteristics. They have to develop a new package in tandem with that. (Note that I say the car and the tyre are developed in tandem, not one being dependent on the other).Originally posted by Gazelle:If there is no major rule change for 2007 the only major shift for Mclaren will be the tyres. As such do you really think the Mclaren will be starting everything from Scratch? If so do you have any reason to believe that having 2 new drivers for next season will be better than having JPM and kimi? If so why?
Right, but this isn't what you were looking for with your original question.Originally posted by Gazelle:Am I right to say the driver is still part of the equation?
In order for a driver to provide accurate feedback, dont you think that the drivers must first find out where exactly is the limit of the car in different setup and fuel load.Originally posted by Kuali Baba:Partially correct - it's the driver's feedback, to be specific.
But going back to your original question, any driver will tell you he has too much understeer/ oversteer/ whatever if he's not happy with the car, no matter how many seasons he's been with the same team.
Duh...that's what they do during free practice (and even the 3rd part of qualifying).Originally posted by Gazelle:In order for a driver to provide accurate feedback, dont you think that the drivers must first find out where exactly is the limit of the car in different setup and fuel load.
The thing about being oversteer or understeer can sometime be abit gray area.
E.g. if you go too deep into a corner then apply the brakes, you'll induce oversteer because the car is already turning as you hit the brakes. OTOH if you fail to slow the car before turning in then you'll get understeer.
Going back to my original argument, i still believe that it is to a team's advantage to avoid changing both drivers at the same time.
Do we expect to see a completely new design like the MP17 to MP18, or do we expect to see mclaren continue the evolution of the pointed nose design for MP22? Honestly nobody knows hence what you are saying are just pure speculation based on no facts.Originally posted by Kuali Baba:Of course they'll be. They'll be working with new tyres with different characteristics. They have to develop a new package in tandem with that. (Note that I say the car and the tyre are developed in tandem, not one being dependent on the other).
And I said a change in the entire driver line-up won't be necessarily good or bad. It's depends on who gets the seats. So far it's good news - Alonso is a consistently quick driver, so chances that he'll bomb like Montoya this season are slim. He knows how a fast, complete car should drive, having been in a front-running car.
Not really, as far as setup is concern, not every driver prefer a neutral setup. Take Kimi for example, he is known to prefer a understeery car while Montoya prefer a oversteery car.Originally posted by Kuali Baba:Duh...that's what they do during free practice (and even the 3rd part of qualifying).
You're second point isn't relevant, because you're talking about understeer/oversteer due to driver errors. For set-up purposes the drivers explore the limits of aheasion, and seek a car that's close to neutral when pushed (give or take the driver's preferences for braking and mild oversteer).
I think it's not going to cause much trouble in the long run once the new line-up settles down.
As far as twin-keel design is concern, at that TIME it was supposed to be the next big thing until teams come out with V-keel and no-keel design.Originally posted by Gedanken:Looks like KB has things well-covered here. Just a few extra points.
First, the FW26 had the walrus nose as well as the twin-keel, and that consitituted a second flaw. While the idea of using the nose design to direct flow further back worked, the car was sensitive to both pitch and crosswind and it never went as fast as it really could until Williams finally bit the bullet and reverted back to a more conventional nose. That the car managed to perform as it did is attributed to the P84 engine which, like its predecessors was one of, if not the most powerful engine on the grid, which goes back to what I said about a good engine being able to make up for a lot, although not necessarily everything.
This illustrates the nature of a fundamental flaw. You not only have to look at how acute the problem is, you also have to look at how chronic it is. As Willaims illustrated, they knew the walrus nose had potential, but it also brought along problems that couldn't be quickly fixed, forcing them to drop the idea entirely. The problem was so close to the central design concept that they couldn't get rid of the problem without getting rid of the concept.
Whether or not it was supposed to be the next big thing or not is irrelevant. If it causes problems, everybody using it won't make the problem go away, will it? Saying that it was the big thing is like trying to pass off "but all the other kids do it" as an excuse to the teacher.Originally posted by Gazelle:As far as twin-keel design is concern, at that TIME it was supposed to be the next big thing until teams come out with V-keel and no-keel design.
If you ask an aero engineers to comment on the aero efficency of the championship winning cars 20 years ago, they will definitely going to tell you that many of those cars are "fundamentally flawed" in aero design.
Ged, I would prefer that you deal with one topic at a time. There is a whole bunch of questions which i have posted for you.
please deal with it one at a time instead of jumping and tripping all over.
So far, I have never heard of anybody saying that the FW26 is fundamentally flawed design. Would appreciate if you could explain why and how you come out with this conclusion. Are you a engineers or some kinda of aero dynamic expert? or is it because FW26 couldnt win the WCC and it is consider as fundamentally flawed? Or are you simply just quoting something out of the sky?Originally posted by Gedanken:Whether or not it was supposed to be the next big thing or not is irrelevant. If it causes problems, everybody using it won't make the problem go away, will it? Saying that it was the big thing is like trying to pass off "but all the other kids do it" as an excuse to the teacher.
KB's done a good job of fielding answers to your questions, and I don't disagree with what he's said, so you can take that as my implicit answer instead of me repeating what he's said. Like I've done before, if i've got anything to add or disagree with, I'll do so.
Hey, don't take it from me. In a formula1.com interview, Sam Michael said in 2005: "We headed in the wrong direction with the FW26 and its front end, and it really took us 12 months to recover from that".Originally posted by Gazelle:So far, I have never heard of anybody saying that the FW26 is fundamentally flawed design. Would appreciate if you could explain why and how you come out with this conclusion. Are you a engineers or some kinda of aero dynamic expert? or is it because FW26 couldnt win the WCC and it is consider as fundamentally flawed? Or are you simply just quoting something out of the sky?
If the twin keep concept is indeed a fundamentally flawed, why would Mclaren and Willaims choose to use them after Arrows and Sauber?
Was that consider as the FW26 is fundamentally flawed and not a design flaw with the front end?Originally posted by Gedanken:Hey, don't take it from me. In a formula1.com interview, Sam Michael said in 2005: "We headed in the wrong direction with the FW26 and its front end, and it really took us 12 months to recover from that".
You haven't heard it because you haven't been paying attention, not because it's untrue.
A case of the pot calling the kettle black. You have been putting forth plenty of speculation in this forum as well.Originally posted by Gazelle:Do we expect to see a completely new design like the MP17 to MP18, or do we expect to see mclaren continue the evolution of the pointed nose design for MP22? Honestly nobody knows hence what you are saying are just pure speculation based on no facts.
As far as who is a quicker driver nobody can tell unless they are put through the test with similar cars and setting. To say that changing the entire driver line-up wont necessarily good or bad is as good as saying nothing.
So far alonso's team mate is still not confirmed but speculation is that it wil be Lewis Hamilton. what I am saying is tht if the would to lost both Kimi and Montoya at the same time, and replaces to 2 new drivers, Mclaren team will suffer a temperary setup in development.
Get your eyes or sleep patterns checked please - I mentioned "give or take the driver's preference for late braking or oversteering tendencies". And that neutral sweet spot around which the personal adjustments are made has to be determined first.Originally posted by Gazelle:Not really, as far as setup is concern, not every driver prefer a neutral setup. Take Kimi for example, he is known to prefer a understeery car while Montoya prefer a oversteery car.
Contrary to what you are saying, it is a known fact that certain drivers are better at working with engineer in development and setup. DC and Alex Wurz are example of drivers who are good in this area while others are just so-so but damn good race drivers.
Nobody is talking about longterm problem on the drivers line-up, what i have mentioned is that if you are fighting for championship, a short-term problem from the beginning of the season will be enough to knock you off the race and this is just one of the string of challenges which mclaren has to deal with next season. And that is why this thread is call Mclaren heading for trouble NEXT year, Not next 10 years.