Discussion:
My thoughts on McLaren.
(too old to reply)
~misfit~
2018-03-08 07:18:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Another bad day at testing for McLaren, Alonso having to stop on track with
oil leaking after ~40 laps at 11am and them not getting the car back out
until after 5pm with a new ICE. Apparently a 'simple' ICE change should take
around 3 hours...

With the latest testing issues I think that McLaren have, over the last few
years, put aero and chassis design on a pedestal to too great an extent,
forcing every other part of car design to conform to what the aero team
want. In previous seasons it's meant that they've made Honda look bad as
they have had to work around very strict aero constraints and so far this
year, with a proven PU in the back they're still seeing failures mainly due
to 'packaging'. It's as if the aero guys own the damn company and can do
whatever they want with every other facet of the car coming a distant second
(or third etc.)

McLaren *are* good at aero. I commented several days ago that the car looks
fast, that rear suspension is the talk of the pit lane and half of the teams
have adopted slots in the front wing hangers for 2018 after McLaren
pioneered them last year. However it's no use being great at *one aspect* of
building a Formula 1 car. Having great aero is no good if it's at the
expense of packaging the PU and hence reliability.

Just some of my thoughts after day 2 of the second week of testing...
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
Edmund
2018-03-08 08:10:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
Another bad day at testing for McLaren, Alonso having to stop on track
with oil leaking after ~40 laps at 11am and them not getting the car
back out until after 5pm with a new ICE. Apparently a 'simple' ICE
change should take around 3 hours...
Maybe the mechanics need some practice oh wait..... :-)
Post by ~misfit~
With the latest testing issues I think that McLaren have, over the last
few years, put aero and chassis design on a pedestal to too great an
extent, forcing every other part of car design to conform to what the
aero team want. In previous seasons it's meant that they've made Honda
look bad as they have had to work around very strict aero constraints
and so far this year, with a proven PU in the back they're still seeing
failures mainly due to 'packaging'. It's as if the aero guys own the
damn company and can do whatever they want with every other facet of the
car coming a distant second (or third etc.)
McLaren *are* good at aero. I commented several days ago that the car
looks fast, that rear suspension is the talk of the pit lane and half of
the teams have adopted slots in the front wing hangers for 2018 after
McLaren pioneered them last year. However it's no use being great at
*one aspect* of building a Formula 1 car. Having great aero is no good
if it's at the expense of packaging the PU and hence reliability.
Just some of my thoughts after day 2 of the second week of testing...
Lets wait and see.
Any guesses about after how many laps the cars breaks down again?

Edmund
bra
2018-03-08 15:10:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thursday, March 8, 2018 at 12:10:24 AM UTC-8, Edmund wrote:

Apparently a 'simple' ICE change should take around 3 hours...
Post by Edmund
Maybe the mechanics need some practice oh wait..... :-)
In 2000 I watched Audi swap an entire engine/tranny in less than 4 minutes.

Are McLaren mechanics on an hourly rate?
Edmund
2018-03-08 15:13:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bra
Apparently a 'simple' ICE change should take around 3 hours...
Post by Edmund
Maybe the mechanics need some practice oh wait..... :-)
In 2000 I watched Audi swap an entire engine/tranny in less than 4 minutes.
Are McLaren mechanics on an hourly rate?
That must be it!

Edmund
m***@gmail.com
2018-03-08 17:39:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bra
Apparently a 'simple' ICE change should take around 3 hours...
Post by Edmund
Maybe the mechanics need some practice oh wait..... :-)
In 2000 I watched Audi swap an entire engine/tranny in less than 4 minutes.
Can't be. I know that mechanics in a top race team can do things beyond mere mortals, but that figure is impossible. They disconnected all the wiring, the cables, the fuel lines, dropped the motor and the transmission, put in a new one, tightened everything up properly and then reconnected everything in four minutes? I can't see it.

I don't doubt, though, that it takes a lot longer to change a contemporary F1 power unit than it took to change a Ford V8 in the early 90s.
Post by bra
Are McLaren mechanics on an hourly rate?
bra
2018-03-08 17:46:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
In 2000 I watched Audi swap an entire engine/tranny in less than 4 minutes.
Can't be. I know that mechanics in a top race team can do things beyond mere mortals, but that figure is impossible.
Sorry, mega but the Audi team did this swap TWICE in the 2000 Le Mans.
Watch and enjoy.

m***@gmail.com
2018-03-08 19:34:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bra
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
In 2000 I watched Audi swap an entire engine/tranny in less than 4 minutes.
Can't be. I know that mechanics in a top race team can do things beyond mere mortals, but that figure is impossible.
Sorry, mega but the Audi team did this swap TWICE in the 2000 Le Mans.
Watch and enjoy. http://youtu.be/sKjVQbYcTiY
It's impressive, but they didn't change an engine. Very good work, and a clever design.
Alan Baker
2018-03-08 19:38:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
In 2000 I watched Audi swap an entire engine/tranny in less than 4 minutes.
Can't be. I know that mechanics in a top race team can do things beyond mere mortals, but that figure is impossible.
Sorry, mega but the Audi team did this swap TWICE in the 2000 Le Mans.
Watch and enjoy. http://youtu.be/sKjVQbYcTiY
It's impressive, but they didn't change an engine. Very good work, and a clever design.
True. But there's nothing so special about an engine that would make it
take much longer; just a few more lines to disconnect.
m***@gmail.com
2018-03-08 20:05:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alan Baker
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
In 2000 I watched Audi swap an entire engine/tranny in less than 4 minutes.
Can't be. I know that mechanics in a top race team can do things beyond mere mortals, but that figure is impossible.
Sorry, mega but the Audi team did this swap TWICE in the 2000 Le Mans.
Watch and enjoy. http://youtu.be/sKjVQbYcTiY
It's impressive, but they didn't change an engine. Very good work, and a clever design.
True. But there's nothing so special about an engine that would make it
take much longer; just a few more lines to disconnect.
Including the fuel lines. I'd think there'd be a lot more concern about the integrity and strength of those. And the connections to the radiators, which would be high pressure and would have to be bled or allowed to cool down. I think an engine must be quite a different proposition.

Look... I'm not an engineer. I protested that video as sort for bra's claim because there was no engine change, but it's still an impressive piece of design and very good work by the mechanics.

There must be a lot more connections now - electrical and mechanical. And all the coolers that are involved and which are mounted in the side pods, not as part of the engine assembly.
Alan Baker
2018-03-08 20:21:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by Alan Baker
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
In 2000 I watched Audi swap an entire engine/tranny in less than 4 minutes.
Can't be. I know that mechanics in a top race team can do things beyond mere mortals, but that figure is impossible.
Sorry, mega but the Audi team did this swap TWICE in the 2000 Le Mans.
Watch and enjoy. http://youtu.be/sKjVQbYcTiY
It's impressive, but they didn't change an engine. Very good work, and a clever design.
True. But there's nothing so special about an engine that would make it
take much longer; just a few more lines to disconnect.
Including the fuel lines. I'd think there'd be a lot more concern about the integrity and strength of those. And the connections to the radiators, which would be high pressure and would have to be bled or allowed to cool down. I think an engine must be quite a different proposition.
The brake lines are extremely high pressure and to change out the rear
end, those have to be disconnected. By comparison, the fuel and coolant
lines are chump change.

<https://www.staubli.com/en/connectors/market-solutions/motorsports/>
Post by m***@gmail.com
Look... I'm not an engineer. I protested that video as sort for bra's claim because there was no engine change, but it's still an impressive piece of design and very good work by the mechanics.
There must be a lot more connections now - electrical and mechanical. And all the coolers that are involved and which are mounted in the side pods, not as part of the engine assembly.
The electrical connections can be gathered into perhaps two or even one
mil spec connector, and I've already dealt with the fluid lines.

Honestly: it doesn't change things very much.
News
2018-03-08 20:32:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alan Baker
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by Alan Baker
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
In 2000 I watched Audi swap an entire engine/tranny in less than 4 minutes.
Can't be. I know that mechanics in a top race team can do things
beyond mere mortals, but that figure is impossible.
Sorry, mega but the Audi team did this swap TWICE in the 2000 Le Mans.
Watch and enjoy.  http://youtu.be/sKjVQbYcTiY
It's impressive, but they didn't change an engine. Very good work,
and a clever design.
True. But there's nothing so special about an engine that would make it
take much longer; just a few more lines to disconnect.
Including the fuel lines. I'd think there'd be a lot more concern
about the integrity and strength of those. And the connections to the
radiators, which would be high pressure and would have to be bled or
allowed to cool down. I think an engine must be quite a different
proposition.
The brake lines are extremely high pressure and to change out the rear
end, those have to be disconnected. By comparison, the fuel and coolant
lines are chump change.
<https://www.staubli.com/en/connectors/market-solutions/motorsports/>
HP brake line connectors must be compact, dry-break, and bleedless, even
tougher.
Alan Baker
2018-03-08 20:37:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by News
Post by Alan Baker
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by Alan Baker
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
In 2000 I watched Audi swap an entire engine/tranny in less than 4 minutes.
Can't be. I know that mechanics in a top race team can do things
beyond mere mortals, but that figure is impossible.
Sorry, mega but the Audi team did this swap TWICE in the 2000 Le Mans.
Watch and enjoy.  http://youtu.be/sKjVQbYcTiY
It's impressive, but they didn't change an engine. Very good work,
and a clever design.
True. But there's nothing so special about an engine that would make it
take much longer; just a few more lines to disconnect.
Including the fuel lines. I'd think there'd be a lot more concern
about the integrity and strength of those. And the connections to the
radiators, which would be high pressure and would have to be bled or
allowed to cool down. I think an engine must be quite a different
proposition.
The brake lines are extremely high pressure and to change out the rear
end, those have to be disconnected. By comparison, the fuel and
coolant lines are chump change.
<https://www.staubli.com/en/connectors/market-solutions/motorsports/>
HP brake line connectors must be compact, dry-break, and bleedless, even
tougher.
Not tough at all. That is PRECISELY what Staubli makes:

'These high pressure quick couplings are designed for the most demanding
on-board applications, combining resistance with bayonet locking,
compactness and lightness. Completely non-spill SPH BA connectors give
you a guaranteed seal on connection and disconnection. Air does not
penetrate, and there is no need to bleed the circuits.'

<https://www.staubli.com/en/connectors/quick-couplings/hydraulic/clean-break-motorsports-sphba/>

You just by them off the shelf:

<https://www.pegasusautoracing.com/group.asp?GroupID=STAUBLI>

Not cheap for a club racer: peanuts for a WEC or F1 team.
News
2018-03-08 20:53:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alan Baker
Post by News
Post by Alan Baker
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by Alan Baker
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
In 2000 I watched Audi swap an entire engine/tranny in less than 4 minutes.
Can't be. I know that mechanics in a top race team can do things
beyond mere mortals, but that figure is impossible.
Sorry, mega but the Audi team did this swap TWICE in the 2000 Le Mans.
Watch and enjoy.  http://youtu.be/sKjVQbYcTiY
It's impressive, but they didn't change an engine. Very good work,
and a clever design.
True. But there's nothing so special about an engine that would make it
take much longer; just a few more lines to disconnect.
Including the fuel lines. I'd think there'd be a lot more concern
about the integrity and strength of those. And the connections to
the radiators, which would be high pressure and would have to be
bled or allowed to cool down. I think an engine must be quite a
different proposition.
The brake lines are extremely high pressure and to change out the
rear end, those have to be disconnected. By comparison, the fuel and
coolant lines are chump change.
<https://www.staubli.com/en/connectors/market-solutions/motorsports/>
HP brake line connectors must be compact, dry-break, and bleedless,
even tougher.
'These high pressure quick couplings are designed for the most demanding
on-board applications, combining resistance with bayonet locking,
compactness and lightness. Completely non-spill SPH BA connectors give
you a guaranteed seal on connection and disconnection. Air does not
penetrate, and there is no need to bleed the circuits.'
<https://www.staubli.com/en/connectors/quick-couplings/hydraulic/clean-break-motorsports-sphba/>
<https://www.pegasusautoracing.com/group.asp?GroupID=STAUBLI>
Not cheap for a club racer: peanuts for a WEC or F1 team.
"Not cheap" is the inevitable result of "even tougher"
Alan Baker
2018-03-08 20:56:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by News
Post by Alan Baker
Post by News
Post by Alan Baker
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by Alan Baker
Post by m***@gmail.com
On Thursday, March 8, 2018 at 9:40:00 AM UTC-8,
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
In 2000 I watched Audi swap an entire engine/tranny in less
than 4 minutes.
Can't be. I know that mechanics in a top race team can do
things beyond mere mortals, but that figure is impossible.
Sorry, mega but the Audi team did this swap TWICE in the 2000 Le Mans.
Watch and enjoy.  http://youtu.be/sKjVQbYcTiY
It's impressive, but they didn't change an engine. Very good
work, and a clever design.
True. But there's nothing so special about an engine that would make it
take much longer; just a few more lines to disconnect.
Including the fuel lines. I'd think there'd be a lot more concern
about the integrity and strength of those. And the connections to
the radiators, which would be high pressure and would have to be
bled or allowed to cool down. I think an engine must be quite a
different proposition.
The brake lines are extremely high pressure and to change out the
rear end, those have to be disconnected. By comparison, the fuel and
coolant lines are chump change.
<https://www.staubli.com/en/connectors/market-solutions/motorsports/>
HP brake line connectors must be compact, dry-break, and bleedless,
even tougher.
'These high pressure quick couplings are designed for the most
demanding on-board applications, combining resistance with bayonet
locking, compactness and lightness. Completely non-spill SPH BA
connectors give you a guaranteed seal on connection and disconnection.
Air does not penetrate, and there is no need to bleed the circuits.'
<https://www.staubli.com/en/connectors/quick-couplings/hydraulic/clean-break-motorsports-sphba/>
<https://www.pegasusautoracing.com/group.asp?GroupID=STAUBLI>
Not cheap for a club racer: peanuts for a WEC or F1 team.
"Not cheap" is the inevitable result of "even tougher"
"Not cheap" is (in this case) "it would added about $600 to the cost of
my car that I just can't justify".

F1 uses them all over the place.
News
2018-03-08 21:07:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alan Baker
Post by News
Post by Alan Baker
Post by News
Post by Alan Baker
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by Alan Baker
Post by m***@gmail.com
On Thursday, March 8, 2018 at 9:40:00 AM UTC-8,
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
In 2000 I watched Audi swap an entire engine/tranny in less
than 4 minutes.
Can't be. I know that mechanics in a top race team can do
things beyond mere mortals, but that figure is impossible.
Sorry, mega but the Audi team did this swap TWICE in the 2000 Le Mans.
Watch and enjoy.  http://youtu.be/sKjVQbYcTiY
It's impressive, but they didn't change an engine. Very good
work, and a clever design.
True. But there's nothing so special about an engine that would make it
take much longer; just a few more lines to disconnect.
Including the fuel lines. I'd think there'd be a lot more concern
about the integrity and strength of those. And the connections to
the radiators, which would be high pressure and would have to be
bled or allowed to cool down. I think an engine must be quite a
different proposition.
The brake lines are extremely high pressure and to change out the
rear end, those have to be disconnected. By comparison, the fuel
and coolant lines are chump change.
<https://www.staubli.com/en/connectors/market-solutions/motorsports/>
HP brake line connectors must be compact, dry-break, and bleedless,
even tougher.
'These high pressure quick couplings are designed for the most
demanding on-board applications, combining resistance with bayonet
locking, compactness and lightness. Completely non-spill SPH BA
connectors give you a guaranteed seal on connection and
disconnection. Air does not penetrate, and there is no need to bleed
the circuits.'
<https://www.staubli.com/en/connectors/quick-couplings/hydraulic/clean-break-motorsports-sphba/>
<https://www.pegasusautoracing.com/group.asp?GroupID=STAUBLI>
Not cheap for a club racer: peanuts for a WEC or F1 team.
"Not cheap" is the inevitable result of "even tougher"
"Not cheap" is (in this case) "it would added about $600 to the cost of
my car that I just can't justify".
The mass market effects of "not cheap," illustrated.
Post by Alan Baker
F1 uses them all over the place.
Money is meaningless in F1, WEC, etc., so, 'not cheap' is meaningless in
F1, as you point out.
Alan Baker
2018-03-08 21:09:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by News
Post by Alan Baker
Post by News
Post by Alan Baker
Post by News
Post by Alan Baker
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by Alan Baker
Post by m***@gmail.com
On Thursday, March 8, 2018 at 9:40:00 AM UTC-8,
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
In 2000 I watched Audi swap an entire engine/tranny in less
than 4 minutes.
Can't be. I know that mechanics in a top race team can do
things beyond mere mortals, but that figure is impossible.
Sorry, mega but the Audi team did this swap TWICE in the 2000 Le Mans.
Watch and enjoy.  http://youtu.be/sKjVQbYcTiY
It's impressive, but they didn't change an engine. Very good
work, and a clever design.
True. But there's nothing so special about an engine that would make it
take much longer; just a few more lines to disconnect.
Including the fuel lines. I'd think there'd be a lot more concern
about the integrity and strength of those. And the connections to
the radiators, which would be high pressure and would have to be
bled or allowed to cool down. I think an engine must be quite a
different proposition.
The brake lines are extremely high pressure and to change out the
rear end, those have to be disconnected. By comparison, the fuel
and coolant lines are chump change.
<https://www.staubli.com/en/connectors/market-solutions/motorsports/>
HP brake line connectors must be compact, dry-break, and bleedless,
even tougher.
'These high pressure quick couplings are designed for the most
demanding on-board applications, combining resistance with bayonet
locking, compactness and lightness. Completely non-spill SPH BA
connectors give you a guaranteed seal on connection and
disconnection. Air does not penetrate, and there is no need to bleed
the circuits.'
<https://www.staubli.com/en/connectors/quick-couplings/hydraulic/clean-break-motorsports-sphba/>
<https://www.pegasusautoracing.com/group.asp?GroupID=STAUBLI>
Not cheap for a club racer: peanuts for a WEC or F1 team.
"Not cheap" is the inevitable result of "even tougher"
"Not cheap" is (in this case) "it would added about $600 to the cost
of my car that I just can't justify".
The mass market effects of "not cheap," illustrated.
Exactly: it's a mass market issue, not an "even tougher" issue.

The engineering of these parts is not that tough, nor is their
manufacture, but when you're only selling into a very small market, the
price is going to be higher.
Post by News
Post by Alan Baker
F1 uses them all over the place.
Money is meaningless in F1, WEC, etc., so, 'not cheap' is meaningless in
F1, as you point out.
News
2018-03-08 21:18:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alan Baker
Post by News
Post by Alan Baker
Post by News
Post by Alan Baker
Post by News
Post by Alan Baker
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by Alan Baker
Post by m***@gmail.com
On Thursday, March 8, 2018 at 9:40:00 AM UTC-8,
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
In 2000 I watched Audi swap an entire engine/tranny in less
than 4 minutes.
Can't be. I know that mechanics in a top race team can do
things beyond mere mortals, but that figure is impossible.
Sorry, mega but the Audi team did this swap TWICE in the 2000 Le Mans.
Watch and enjoy.  http://youtu.be/sKjVQbYcTiY
It's impressive, but they didn't change an engine. Very good
work, and a clever design.
True. But there's nothing so special about an engine that would make it
take much longer; just a few more lines to disconnect.
Including the fuel lines. I'd think there'd be a lot more
concern about the integrity and strength of those. And the
connections to the radiators, which would be high pressure and
would have to be bled or allowed to cool down. I think an engine
must be quite a different proposition.
The brake lines are extremely high pressure and to change out the
rear end, those have to be disconnected. By comparison, the fuel
and coolant lines are chump change.
<https://www.staubli.com/en/connectors/market-solutions/motorsports/>
HP brake line connectors must be compact, dry-break, and
bleedless, even tougher.
'These high pressure quick couplings are designed for the most
demanding on-board applications, combining resistance with bayonet
locking, compactness and lightness. Completely non-spill SPH BA
connectors give you a guaranteed seal on connection and
disconnection. Air does not penetrate, and there is no need to
bleed the circuits.'
<https://www.staubli.com/en/connectors/quick-couplings/hydraulic/clean-break-motorsports-sphba/>
<https://www.pegasusautoracing.com/group.asp?GroupID=STAUBLI>
Not cheap for a club racer: peanuts for a WEC or F1 team.
"Not cheap" is the inevitable result of "even tougher"
"Not cheap" is (in this case) "it would added about $600 to the cost
of my car that I just can't justify".
The mass market effects of "not cheap," illustrated.
Exactly: it's a mass market issue, not an "even tougher" issue.
The engineering of these parts is not that tough, nor is their
manufacture, but when you're only selling into a very small market, the
price is going to be higher.
You underestimate. Precision and performance are not easily designed,
engineered, or cheaply manufactured on a cookie cutter assembly line.

If that were not so, mass market quick-connect fittings would suffice.
Post by Alan Baker
Post by News
Post by Alan Baker
F1 uses them all over the place.
Money is meaningless in F1, WEC, etc., so, 'not cheap' is meaningless
in F1, as you point out.
Alan Baker
2018-03-08 21:21:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by News
Post by Alan Baker
Post by News
Post by Alan Baker
Post by News
Post by Alan Baker
Post by News
Post by Alan Baker
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by Alan Baker
Post by m***@gmail.com
On Thursday, March 8, 2018 at 9:40:00 AM UTC-8,
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
In 2000 I watched Audi swap an entire engine/tranny in
less than 4 minutes.
Can't be. I know that mechanics in a top race team can do
things beyond mere mortals, but that figure is impossible.
Sorry, mega but the Audi team did this swap TWICE in the
2000 Le Mans.
Watch and enjoy.  http://youtu.be/sKjVQbYcTiY
It's impressive, but they didn't change an engine. Very good
work, and a clever design.
True. But there's nothing so special about an engine that would make it
take much longer; just a few more lines to disconnect.
Including the fuel lines. I'd think there'd be a lot more
concern about the integrity and strength of those. And the
connections to the radiators, which would be high pressure and
would have to be bled or allowed to cool down. I think an
engine must be quite a different proposition.
The brake lines are extremely high pressure and to change out
the rear end, those have to be disconnected. By comparison, the
fuel and coolant lines are chump change.
<https://www.staubli.com/en/connectors/market-solutions/motorsports/>
HP brake line connectors must be compact, dry-break, and
bleedless, even tougher.
'These high pressure quick couplings are designed for the most
demanding on-board applications, combining resistance with bayonet
locking, compactness and lightness. Completely non-spill SPH BA
connectors give you a guaranteed seal on connection and
disconnection. Air does not penetrate, and there is no need to
bleed the circuits.'
<https://www.staubli.com/en/connectors/quick-couplings/hydraulic/clean-break-motorsports-sphba/>
<https://www.pegasusautoracing.com/group.asp?GroupID=STAUBLI>
Not cheap for a club racer: peanuts for a WEC or F1 team.
"Not cheap" is the inevitable result of "even tougher"
"Not cheap" is (in this case) "it would added about $600 to the cost
of my car that I just can't justify".
The mass market effects of "not cheap," illustrated.
Exactly: it's a mass market issue, not an "even tougher" issue.
The engineering of these parts is not that tough, nor is their
manufacture, but when you're only selling into a very small market,
the price is going to be higher.
You underestimate. Precision and performance are not easily designed,
engineered, or cheaply manufactured on a cookie cutter assembly line.
If that were not so, mass market quick-connect fittings would suffice.
No. I understand very well.
Alister
2018-03-08 22:24:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alan Baker
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by Alan Baker
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
In 2000 I watched Audi swap an entire engine/tranny in less than 4 minutes.
Can't be. I know that mechanics in a top race team can do things
beyond mere mortals, but that figure is impossible.
Sorry, mega but the Audi team did this swap TWICE in the 2000 Le
Mans. Watch and enjoy. http://youtu.be/sKjVQbYcTiY
It's impressive, but they didn't change an engine. Very good work,
and a clever design.
True. But there's nothing so special about an engine that would make
it take much longer; just a few more lines to disconnect.
Including the fuel lines. I'd think there'd be a lot more concern about
the integrity and strength of those. And the connections to the
radiators, which would be high pressure and would have to be bled or
allowed to cool down. I think an engine must be quite a different
proposition.
The brake lines are extremely high pressure and to change out the rear
end, those have to be disconnected. By comparison, the fuel and coolant
lines are chump change.
<https://www.staubli.com/en/connectors/market-solutions/motorsports/>
Post by m***@gmail.com
Look... I'm not an engineer. I protested that video as sort for bra's
claim because there was no engine change, but it's still an impressive
piece of design and very good work by the mechanics.
There must be a lot more connections now - electrical and mechanical.
And all the coolers that are involved and which are mounted in the side
pods, not as part of the engine assembly.
The electrical connections can be gathered into perhaps two or even one
mil spec connector, and I've already dealt with the fluid lines.
Honestly: it doesn't change things very much.
there are a lot more things to disconnect & reconnect if it is the engine
& gearbox being swapped rather than a whole sub assembly.

Potentially a sub assembly like this could have as few as 2 bolts (check
how many bolts hold a jet engine to an airliner!) & a couple of quick
connect connectors for fuel lines & electrical

for a discrete engine/gearbox there is, as others have stated the cooling
system, possibly the oil system (dry sump & external tank?) and also the
drive shafts
no to mention that the cooling system would need to be refilled.

I though 3 hrs sounded quite long but 5 min would certainly be pushing
things unless it had been specifically designed for a quick change (like
the rear of that Audi undoubtedly was) .
--
No animal should ever jump on the dining room furniture unless
absolutely certain he can hold his own in conversation.
-- Fran Lebowitz
Alan Baker
2018-03-08 22:50:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alister
Post by Alan Baker
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by Alan Baker
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
In 2000 I watched Audi swap an entire engine/tranny in less than 4 minutes.
Can't be. I know that mechanics in a top race team can do things
beyond mere mortals, but that figure is impossible.
Sorry, mega but the Audi team did this swap TWICE in the 2000 Le
Mans. Watch and enjoy. http://youtu.be/sKjVQbYcTiY
It's impressive, but they didn't change an engine. Very good work,
and a clever design.
True. But there's nothing so special about an engine that would make
it take much longer; just a few more lines to disconnect.
Including the fuel lines. I'd think there'd be a lot more concern about
the integrity and strength of those. And the connections to the
radiators, which would be high pressure and would have to be bled or
allowed to cool down. I think an engine must be quite a different
proposition.
The brake lines are extremely high pressure and to change out the rear
end, those have to be disconnected. By comparison, the fuel and coolant
lines are chump change.
<https://www.staubli.com/en/connectors/market-solutions/motorsports/>
Post by m***@gmail.com
Look... I'm not an engineer. I protested that video as sort for bra's
claim because there was no engine change, but it's still an impressive
piece of design and very good work by the mechanics.
There must be a lot more connections now - electrical and mechanical.
And all the coolers that are involved and which are mounted in the side
pods, not as part of the engine assembly.
The electrical connections can be gathered into perhaps two or even one
mil spec connector, and I've already dealt with the fluid lines.
Honestly: it doesn't change things very much.
there are a lot more things to disconnect & reconnect if it is the engine
& gearbox being swapped rather than a whole sub assembly.
Potentially a sub assembly like this could have as few as 2 bolts (check
how many bolts hold a jet engine to an airliner!) & a couple of quick
connect connectors for fuel lines & electrical
No. The rear end sub assembly absolute minimum for bolts would be three.
Think about all the axes of the loads imposed and you'll see why.
Post by Alister
for a discrete engine/gearbox there is, as others have stated the cooling
system, possibly the oil system (dry sump & external tank?) and also the
drive shafts
no to mention that the cooling system would need to be refilled.
No. I'm talking about adding the engine to the rear end subsystem. The
dry sump system's oil tank is almost always included within that more
inclusive set, but even if it's not, it's only a couple more quick,
no-leak connectors.
Post by Alister
I though 3 hrs sounded quite long but 5 min would certainly be pushing
things unless it had been specifically designed for a quick change (like
the rear of that Audi undoubtedly was) .
Agreed that 3 hours sounds long, but the packaging of an F1 is
necessarily very tight (for best aerodynamics if nothing else). That's
going to slow things up considerably.
~misfit~
2018-03-09 00:41:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alister
Post by Alan Baker
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by Alan Baker
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
In 2000 I watched Audi swap an entire engine/tranny in less than 4 minutes.
Can't be. I know that mechanics in a top race team can do things
beyond mere mortals, but that figure is impossible.
Sorry, mega but the Audi team did this swap TWICE in the 2000 Le
Mans. Watch and enjoy.
http://youtu.be/sKjVQbYcTiY
It's impressive, but they didn't change an engine. Very good work,
and a clever design.
True. But there's nothing so special about an engine that would
make it take much longer; just a few more lines to disconnect.
Including the fuel lines. I'd think there'd be a lot more concern
about the integrity and strength of those. And the connections to
the radiators, which would be high pressure and would have to be
bled or allowed to cool down. I think an engine must be quite a
different proposition.
The brake lines are extremely high pressure and to change out the
rear end, those have to be disconnected. By comparison, the fuel and
coolant lines are chump change.
<https://www.staubli.com/en/connectors/market-solutions/motorsports/>
Post by m***@gmail.com
Look... I'm not an engineer. I protested that video as sort for
bra's claim because there was no engine change, but it's still an
impressive piece of design and very good work by the mechanics.
There must be a lot more connections now - electrical and
mechanical. And all the coolers that are involved and which are
mounted in the side pods, not as part of the engine assembly.
The electrical connections can be gathered into perhaps two or even
one mil spec connector, and I've already dealt with the fluid lines.
Honestly: it doesn't change things very much.
there are a lot more things to disconnect & reconnect if it is the
engine & gearbox being swapped rather than a whole sub assembly.
Potentially a sub assembly like this could have as few as 2 bolts
(check how many bolts hold a jet engine to an airliner!) & a couple
of quick connect connectors for fuel lines & electrical
for a discrete engine/gearbox there is, as others have stated the
cooling system, possibly the oil system (dry sump & external tank?)
and also the drive shafts
no to mention that the cooling system would need to be refilled.
I though 3 hrs sounded quite long but 5 min would certainly be pushing
things unless it had been specifically designed for a quick change
(like the rear of that Audi undoubtedly was) .
Three hours does seem like a long time but consider that the ICE is part of
the chassis and that the whole gearbox and rear suspension hangs off the
back of it... Also they are so tightly packaged around the ICE (especially
McLaren) with ERS cables, exhaust systems and turbo, coolant, oil and fuel
lines etc. not to mention the bodywork. Then there's the fact that, because
it takes a while, everything is triple-checked by different mechanics to
make sure that a fastener wasn't left loose which adds significantly to the
time.

Endurance cars (where margins are often measured in laps) are specifically
designed for complete PU change *in-race* if needed, something that has
never been possible in F1 where gaps are sometimes measured in hundredths of
a second. So because there's never a need for super-quick PU changes in
season in F1 if anything they've gone the other way and the PU is at the
very centre of the rear of the car.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
m***@gmail.com
2018-03-09 10:50:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alan Baker
Post by m***@gmail.com
Look... I'm not an engineer. I protested that video as sort for bra's claim because there was no engine change, but it's still an impressive piece of design and very good work by the mechanics.
There must be a lot more connections now - electrical and mechanical. And all the coolers that are involved and which are mounted in the side pods, not as part of the engine assembly.
The electrical connections can be gathered into perhaps two or even one
mil spec connector, and I've already dealt with the fluid lines.
Honestly: it doesn't change things very much.
Then how come teams with lots of money haven't gone this route? Merc, for example, could have a whole rear end prepped and ready to go so that instead of having to work an all nighter (as they had to last year), they could just swop a while back end assembly.

OK... part of it will rules around gearbox usage. But even back in 2000, F1 teams did not go this route. So are there some disadvantages to it as well?
Alan Baker
2018-03-09 18:56:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by Alan Baker
Post by m***@gmail.com
Look... I'm not an engineer. I protested that video as sort for bra's claim because there was no engine change, but it's still an impressive piece of design and very good work by the mechanics.
There must be a lot more connections now - electrical and mechanical. And all the coolers that are involved and which are mounted in the side pods, not as part of the engine assembly.
The electrical connections can be gathered into perhaps two or even one
mil spec connector, and I've already dealt with the fluid lines.
Honestly: it doesn't change things very much.
Then how come teams with lots of money haven't gone this route? Merc, for example, could have a whole rear end prepped and ready to go so that instead of having to work an all nighter (as they had to last year), they could just swop a while back end assembly.
OK... part of it will rules around gearbox usage. But even back in 2000, F1 teams did not go this route. So are there some disadvantages to it as well?
1. The rules may disallow it.

2. Even the teams with lots of money have lots of things to spend it on.
They may simply feel that the benefit is not worth the cost. Audi
realized that the cost could bring them a win in a 24 hour (or even 12
hour) endurance race that would otherwise be a loss.
bra
2018-03-10 16:22:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
Look... I'm not an engineer. I protested that video as sort for bra's claim because there was no engine change, but it's still an impressive piece of design and very good work by the mechanics.
My mis-reading, sorry. I read that Audi had the whole gearbox in an OVEN, at a steady working temperature to match the engine etc. Anyone else recall this?
News
2018-03-10 17:18:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bra
Post by m***@gmail.com
Look... I'm not an engineer. I protested that video as sort for bra's claim because there was no engine change, but it's still an impressive piece of design and very good work by the mechanics.
My mis-reading, sorry. I read that Audi had the whole gearbox in an OVEN, at a steady working temperature to match the engine etc. Anyone else recall this?
Tolerances so tight, temperatures must be matched to mate. Believable.
m***@gmail.com
2018-03-10 20:13:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bra
Post by m***@gmail.com
Look... I'm not an engineer. I protested that video as sort for bra's claim because there was no engine change, but it's still an impressive piece of design and very good work by the mechanics.
My mis-reading, sorry. I read that Audi had the whole gearbox in an OVEN, at a steady working temperature to match the engine etc. Anyone else recall this?
It'd cool down a lot in 4 minutes. And it would mean they'd had to have the whole subassembly in there. How hot are we talking? The mechanics still have to work with the thing.
bra
2018-03-11 20:07:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
My mis-reading, sorry. I read that Audi had the whole gearbox in an OVEN, at a steady working temperature to match the engine etc. Anyone else recall this?
It'd cool down a lot in 4 minutes. And it would mean they'd had to have the whole subassembly in there. How hot are we talking? The mechanics still have to work with the thing.
See the post by "747Heavy" in this thread about pre-heating:
https://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9362
m***@gmail.com
2018-03-12 05:30:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bra
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
My mis-reading, sorry. I read that Audi had the whole gearbox in an OVEN, at a steady working temperature to match the engine etc. Anyone else recall this?
It'd cool down a lot in 4 minutes. And it would mean they'd had to have the whole subassembly in there. How hot are we talking? The mechanics still have to work with the thing.
https://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9362
Well, what are the temperatures? If something inside the gearbox has to be X degrees, using an oven to keep it warm must mean that is X+ degrees on the outside, the bit the mechanics have to handle.

More likely they are just passing pre-heated fluids through it. Or they built the thing knowing that it wouldn't have to last a race distance anyways so who needs best practice?
Alan Baker
2018-03-08 19:26:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by bra
Apparently a 'simple' ICE change should take around 3 hours...
Post by Edmund
Maybe the mechanics need some practice oh wait..... :-)
In 2000 I watched Audi swap an entire engine/tranny in less than 4 minutes.
Can't be. I know that mechanics in a top race team can do things
It can and was done. The entire rear end of the car was swapped.
Post by m***@gmail.com
beyond mere mortals, but that figure is impossible. They disconnected
all the wiring, the cables, the fuel lines, dropped the motor and the
transmission, put in a new one, tightened everything up properly and
then reconnected everything in four minutes? I can't see it.
All the wiring was done with milspec connectors with perhaps one or two
locations to undo. Similarly, they make dry-break connectors for lines
carrying fluids that work even at the pressures of brake lines.

But don't take my word for it, there's a video of them doing it:

http://youtu.be/sKjVQbYcTiY

They could do it so quickly that at LeMans (before they banned it), they
did it AS A PRECAUTION.
Post by m***@gmail.com
I don't doubt, though, that it takes a lot longer to change a
contemporary F1 power unit than it took to change a Ford V8 in the
early 90s.
Post by bra
Are McLaren mechanics on an hourly rate?
Alan Baker
2018-03-08 19:21:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bra
Apparently a 'simple' ICE change should take around 3 hours...
Post by Edmund
Maybe the mechanics need some practice oh wait..... :-)
In 2000 I watched Audi swap an entire engine/tranny in less than 4 minutes.
In a car designed for allowing that.
Post by bra
Are McLaren mechanics on an hourly rate?
m***@gmail.com
2018-03-08 19:38:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alan Baker
Post by bra
Apparently a 'simple' ICE change should take around 3 hours...
Post by Edmund
Maybe the mechanics need some practice oh wait..... :-)
In 2000 I watched Audi swap an entire engine/tranny in less than 4 minutes.
In a car designed for allowing that.
And it's not worth doing in an F1 car. In a 24 hour endurance race, yes, but in F1 that would cost nearly 2 laps - race over.
Alan Baker
2018-03-08 19:38:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by Alan Baker
Post by bra
Apparently a 'simple' ICE change should take around 3 hours...
Post by Edmund
Maybe the mechanics need some practice oh wait..... :-)
In 2000 I watched Audi swap an entire engine/tranny in less than 4 minutes.
In a car designed for allowing that.
And it's not worth doing in an F1 car. In a 24 hour endurance race, yes, but in F1 that would cost nearly 2 laps - race over.
Obviously.
~misfit~
2018-03-09 00:25:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bra
Apparently a 'simple' ICE change should take around 3 hours...
Post by Edmund
Maybe the mechanics need some practice oh wait..... :-)
In 2000 I watched Audi swap an entire engine/tranny in less than 4 minutes.
Are McLaren mechanics on an hourly rate?
Boullier mentioned to Sky that, unlike the endurance racing series in which
it's fairly common to change an ICE quickly, an F1 car "isn't* designed for
fast ICE swaps. The available room under the bodywork is completely
different.

So apples and oranges really.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
m***@gmail.com
2018-03-08 09:08:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
Another bad day at testing for McLaren, Alonso having to stop on track with
oil leaking after ~40 laps at 11am and them not getting the car back out
until after 5pm with a new ICE. Apparently a 'simple' ICE change should take
around 3 hours...
With the latest testing issues I think that McLaren have, over the last few
years, put aero and chassis design on a pedestal to too great an extent,
forcing every other part of car design to conform to what the aero team
want. In previous seasons it's meant that they've made Honda look bad as
they have had to work around very strict aero constraints and so far this
year, with a proven PU in the back they're still seeing failures mainly due
to 'packaging'. It's as if the aero guys own the damn company and can do
whatever they want with every other facet of the car coming a distant second
(or third etc.)
Well, McLaren have already said they had to change their design to accomodate the Renault PU. With Honda they had some say on layout, with Renault they got told what the layout is.

So I think they've just been guilty of going very aggressive on aero. Which is maybe understandable because that's what they can control, and because with 3 teams using the same PU, aero becomes a differentiatior.

Some would say that it's better to have a fast but unreliable car, because it's easier to work on the reliability. This was a recurring theme with Lotus: The 25, the 33 and the 72 were all immediately fast but also fragile. Once Lotus got them running reliably they retained their speed and were irresistible.

In slightly more recent memory there was the Williams in 1991. It was very unreliable early on, and the team struggled with setting it up and with the automatic transmission. But Prost and Senna had both spotted it's potential in pre-season testing. Senna won the first four races but kept on warning McLaren that the Williams was going to be a threat. And he was right! When Williams got the gremlins out of that car, it started going very quickly and Senna saw his early lead start to shrink.

So a car may be fragile early on and then start doing well. We will see.
Post by ~misfit~
McLaren *are* good at aero. I commented several days ago that the car looks
fast, that rear suspension is the talk of the pit lane and half of the teams
have adopted slots in the front wing hangers for 2018 after McLaren
pioneered them last year. However it's no use being great at *one aspect* of
building a Formula 1 car. Having great aero is no good if it's at the
expense of packaging the PU and hence reliability.
Yes. And that was the reason that McLaren went for the Honda deal initially. They understood that Brawn's concept of a well integrated car was something they could never have whilst Merc were designing PUs for Merc and telling all the customers that this is the way it is. So if they had a bespoke PU, they could strive for that integration again.

Ironically, this is what they have now abandoned. They are back in take it or leave it territory.

Double ironically, the Honda PU is now showing signs of improving in terms of performance and in terms of reliability.

The triple irony will come if RBR switch to Honda and start beating McLaren.
iracema1
2018-03-08 15:30:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
Another bad day at testing for McLaren, Alonso having to stop on track with
oil leaking after ~40 laps at 11am and them not getting the car back out
until after 5pm with a new ICE. Apparently a 'simple' ICE change should take
around 3 hours...
With the latest testing issues I think that McLaren have, over the last few
years, put aero and chassis design on a pedestal to too great an extent,
forcing every other part of car design to conform to what the aero team
want. In previous seasons it's meant that they've made Honda look bad as
they have had to work around very strict aero constraints and so far this
year, with a proven PU in the back they're still seeing failures mainly due
to 'packaging'. It's as if the aero guys own the damn company and can do
whatever they want with every other facet of the car coming a distant second
(or third etc.)
McLaren *are* good at aero. I commented several days ago that the car looks
fast, that rear suspension is the talk of the pit lane and half of the teams
have adopted slots in the front wing hangers for 2018 after McLaren
pioneered them last year. However it's no use being great at *one aspect* of
building a Formula 1 car. Having great aero is no good if it's at the
expense of packaging the PU and hence reliability.
Just some of my thoughts after day 2 of the second week of testing...
--
Shaun.
"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
Your thoughts are very insightful and shed significant light on what could be (potentially) the basis of their problems. It surely pains me to see one of F1's greatest drivers, as well as his promising young teammate, suffer through multiple seasons with an noncompetitive car. It is damaging to the brand as well. I remember when we used to blame all of the problems on Ron Dennis......
~misfit~
2018-03-09 00:56:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by iracema1
Post by ~misfit~
Another bad day at testing for McLaren, Alonso having to stop on
track with oil leaking after ~40 laps at 11am and them not getting
the car back out until after 5pm with a new ICE. Apparently a
'simple' ICE change should take around 3 hours...
With the latest testing issues I think that McLaren have, over the
last few years, put aero and chassis design on a pedestal to too
great an extent, forcing every other part of car design to conform
to what the aero team want. In previous seasons it's meant that
they've made Honda look bad as they have had to work around very
strict aero constraints and so far this year, with a proven PU in
the back they're still seeing failures mainly due to 'packaging'.
It's as if the aero guys own the damn company and can do whatever
they want with every other facet of the car coming a distant second
(or third etc.)
McLaren *are* good at aero. I commented several days ago that the
car looks fast, that rear suspension is the talk of the pit lane and
half of the teams have adopted slots in the front wing hangers for
2018 after McLaren pioneered them last year. However it's no use
being great at *one aspect* of building a Formula 1 car. Having
great aero is no good if it's at the expense of packaging the PU and
hence reliability.
Just some of my thoughts after day 2 of the second week of testing...
--
Shaun.
Your thoughts are very insightful and shed significant light on what
could be (potentially) the basis of their problems. It surely pains
me to see one of F1's greatest drivers, as well as his promising
young teammate, suffer through multiple seasons with an
noncompetitive car. It is damaging to the brand as well. I remember
when we used to blame all of the problems on Ron Dennis......
Thanks. Yes it's not nice to watch, especially as I have a soft-sot for
McLaren. It really makes me wonder how one department involved in building a
fast race car (aero) could ever have got so important that the car and the
team as a whole suffers because other (just as importat) departments can't
do their jobs properly.

The root cause of this must be in upper management. To my mind aero is the
*last* thing you work on after you've got the car reliable and got the power
train sorted (albeit with an eye on aero during the design stage). McLaren
have been putting the cart before the horse for (at least) the last four
years and don't seem to be learning from their mistakes.

Perhaps...
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
Alan Baker
2018-03-09 01:01:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
Post by iracema1
Post by ~misfit~
Another bad day at testing for McLaren, Alonso having to stop on
track with oil leaking after ~40 laps at 11am and them not getting
the car back out until after 5pm with a new ICE. Apparently a
'simple' ICE change should take around 3 hours...
With the latest testing issues I think that McLaren have, over the
last few years, put aero and chassis design on a pedestal to too
great an extent, forcing every other part of car design to conform
to what the aero team want. In previous seasons it's meant that
they've made Honda look bad as they have had to work around very
strict aero constraints and so far this year, with a proven PU in
the back they're still seeing failures mainly due to 'packaging'.
It's as if the aero guys own the damn company and can do whatever
they want with every other facet of the car coming a distant second
(or third etc.)
McLaren *are* good at aero. I commented several days ago that the
car looks fast, that rear suspension is the talk of the pit lane and
half of the teams have adopted slots in the front wing hangers for
2018 after McLaren pioneered them last year. However it's no use
being great at *one aspect* of building a Formula 1 car. Having
great aero is no good if it's at the expense of packaging the PU and
hence reliability.
Just some of my thoughts after day 2 of the second week of testing...
--
Shaun.
Your thoughts are very insightful and shed significant light on what
could be (potentially) the basis of their problems. It surely pains
me to see one of F1's greatest drivers, as well as his promising
young teammate, suffer through multiple seasons with an
noncompetitive car. It is damaging to the brand as well. I remember
when we used to blame all of the problems on Ron Dennis......
Thanks. Yes it's not nice to watch, especially as I have a soft-sot for
McLaren. It really makes me wonder how one department involved in building a
fast race car (aero) could ever have got so important that the car and the
team as a whole suffers because other (just as importat) departments can't
do their jobs properly.
The root cause of this must be in upper management. To my mind aero is the
*last* thing you work on after you've got the car reliable and got the power
train sorted (albeit with an eye on aero during the design stage). McLaren
have been putting the cart before the horse for (at least) the last four
years and don't seem to be learning from their mistakes.
Perhaps...
Have you read Adrian Newey's book?
Sir Tim
2018-03-09 08:07:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alan Baker
Post by ~misfit~
Post by iracema1
Post by ~misfit~
Another bad day at testing for McLaren, Alonso having to stop on
track with oil leaking after ~40 laps at 11am and them not getting
the car back out until after 5pm with a new ICE. Apparently a
'simple' ICE change should take around 3 hours...
With the latest testing issues I think that McLaren have, over the
last few years, put aero and chassis design on a pedestal to too
great an extent, forcing every other part of car design to conform
to what the aero team want. In previous seasons it's meant that
they've made Honda look bad as they have had to work around very
strict aero constraints and so far this year, with a proven PU in
the back they're still seeing failures mainly due to 'packaging'.
It's as if the aero guys own the damn company and can do whatever
they want with every other facet of the car coming a distant second
(or third etc.)
McLaren *are* good at aero. I commented several days ago that the
car looks fast, that rear suspension is the talk of the pit lane and
half of the teams have adopted slots in the front wing hangers for
2018 after McLaren pioneered them last year. However it's no use
being great at *one aspect* of building a Formula 1 car. Having
great aero is no good if it's at the expense of packaging the PU and
hence reliability.
Just some of my thoughts after day 2 of the second week of testing...
--
Shaun.
Your thoughts are very insightful and shed significant light on what
could be (potentially) the basis of their problems. It surely pains
me to see one of F1's greatest drivers, as well as his promising
young teammate, suffer through multiple seasons with an
noncompetitive car. It is damaging to the brand as well. I remember
when we used to blame all of the problems on Ron Dennis......
Thanks. Yes it's not nice to watch, especially as I have a soft-sot for
McLaren. It really makes me wonder how one department involved in building a
fast race car (aero) could ever have got so important that the car and the
team as a whole suffers because other (just as importat) departments can't
do their jobs properly.
The root cause of this must be in upper management. To my mind aero is the
*last* thing you work on after you've got the car reliable and got the power
train sorted (albeit with an eye on aero during the design stage). McLaren
have been putting the cart before the horse for (at least) the last four
years and don't seem to be learning from their mistakes.
Perhaps...
Have you read Adrian Newey's book?
I wondered that. Newey’s minute, almost obsessional attention to even the
smallest aerodynamic detail is made very clear.
--
Sir Tim
Alan Baker
2018-03-09 08:38:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sir Tim
Post by Alan Baker
Post by ~misfit~
Post by iracema1
Post by ~misfit~
Another bad day at testing for McLaren, Alonso having to stop on
track with oil leaking after ~40 laps at 11am and them not getting
the car back out until after 5pm with a new ICE. Apparently a
'simple' ICE change should take around 3 hours...
With the latest testing issues I think that McLaren have, over the
last few years, put aero and chassis design on a pedestal to too
great an extent, forcing every other part of car design to conform
to what the aero team want. In previous seasons it's meant that
they've made Honda look bad as they have had to work around very
strict aero constraints and so far this year, with a proven PU in
the back they're still seeing failures mainly due to 'packaging'.
It's as if the aero guys own the damn company and can do whatever
they want with every other facet of the car coming a distant second
(or third etc.)
McLaren *are* good at aero. I commented several days ago that the
car looks fast, that rear suspension is the talk of the pit lane and
half of the teams have adopted slots in the front wing hangers for
2018 after McLaren pioneered them last year. However it's no use
being great at *one aspect* of building a Formula 1 car. Having
great aero is no good if it's at the expense of packaging the PU and
hence reliability.
Just some of my thoughts after day 2 of the second week of testing...
--
Shaun.
Your thoughts are very insightful and shed significant light on what
could be (potentially) the basis of their problems. It surely pains
me to see one of F1's greatest drivers, as well as his promising
young teammate, suffer through multiple seasons with an
noncompetitive car. It is damaging to the brand as well. I remember
when we used to blame all of the problems on Ron Dennis......
Thanks. Yes it's not nice to watch, especially as I have a soft-sot for
McLaren. It really makes me wonder how one department involved in building a
fast race car (aero) could ever have got so important that the car and the
team as a whole suffers because other (just as importat) departments can't
do their jobs properly.
The root cause of this must be in upper management. To my mind aero is the
*last* thing you work on after you've got the car reliable and got the power
train sorted (albeit with an eye on aero during the design stage). McLaren
have been putting the cart before the horse for (at least) the last four
years and don't seem to be learning from their mistakes.
Perhaps...
Have you read Adrian Newey's book?
I wondered that. Newey’s minute, almost obsessional attention to even the
smallest aerodynamic detail is made very clear.
And the fact that as the years rolled on, it was the aerodynamics that
came first with the power train and everything else needing to serve the
aerodynamic package.
~misfit~
2018-03-10 01:34:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
Post by ~misfit~
Post by iracema1
Post by ~misfit~
Another bad day at testing for McLaren, Alonso having to stop on
track with oil leaking after ~40 laps at 11am and them not getting
the car back out until after 5pm with a new ICE. Apparently a
'simple' ICE change should take around 3 hours...
With the latest testing issues I think that McLaren have, over the
last few years, put aero and chassis design on a pedestal to too
great an extent, forcing every other part of car design to conform
to what the aero team want. In previous seasons it's meant that
they've made Honda look bad as they have had to work around very
strict aero constraints and so far this year, with a proven PU in
the back they're still seeing failures mainly due to 'packaging'.
It's as if the aero guys own the damn company and can do whatever
they want with every other facet of the car coming a distant
second (or third etc.)
McLaren *are* good at aero. I commented several days ago that the
car looks fast, that rear suspension is the talk of the pit lane
and half of the teams have adopted slots in the front wing
hangers for 2018 after McLaren pioneered them last year. However
it's no use being great at *one aspect* of building a Formula 1
car. Having great aero is no good if it's at the expense of
packaging the PU and hence reliability.
Just some of my thoughts after day 2 of the second week of
testing... --
Shaun.
Your thoughts are very insightful and shed significant light on
what could be (potentially) the basis of their problems. It
surely pains me to see one of F1's greatest drivers, as well as
his promising young teammate, suffer through multiple seasons with
an noncompetitive car. It is damaging to the brand as well. I
remember when we used to blame all of the problems on Ron
Dennis......
Thanks. Yes it's not nice to watch, especially as I have a soft-sot
for McLaren. It really makes me wonder how one department involved
in building a fast race car (aero) could ever have got so important
that the car and the team as a whole suffers because other (just as
importat) departments can't do their jobs properly.
The root cause of this must be in upper management. To my mind aero
is the *last* thing you work on after you've got the car reliable
and got the power train sorted (albeit with an eye on aero during
the design stage). McLaren have been putting the cart before the
horse for (at least) the last four years and don't seem to be
learning from their mistakes.
Perhaps...
Have you read Adrian Newey's book?
I wondered that. Newey's minute, almost obsessional attention to even
the smallest aerodynamic detail is made very clear.
I haven't read Neweys book yet no.

However to expand on my initial comments (as it seems they're being
misinterpreted) I said:

"To my mind aero is the *last* thing you work on after you've got the car
reliable and got the power train sorted (albeit with an eye on aero during
the design stage)."

Note the part in parenthises? I'm not saying design a working car in a cube
*then* let the aero guys at it. I'm saying let them have a hand in the
design stage sure but then prove the car is reliable with everything like
cooling and packaging taken care of (with margin for error) then let the
aero team fine-tune the result.

Instead it seems like packaging and cooling etc. is taking too much of a
back seat to aero at McLaren to the point that the car isn't reliable. It's
as if the rest of the team are told "this is the shape of the car - get it
to work" - the old 'size zero' concept - and that the PU / packaging /
cooling guys are scared to say 'it's not going to work we need more room'. I
think that this has been the case for a few years now and seems to be
continuing into the new Renault era.

Just my opinion of course.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
~misfit~
2018-03-11 09:11:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Once upon a time on usenet ~misfit~ wrote:
[snipped]
Post by ~misfit~
Instead it seems like packaging and cooling etc. is taking too much
of a back seat to aero at McLaren to the point that the car isn't
reliable.
[snipped]
Post by ~misfit~
Just my opinion of course.
Apparently not just /my/ opinion.

In an interview with Sky sport for their 'F1 Report' last night (NZ time),
when asked his opinion on McLaren German Michael Schmidt from Auto Motor und
Sport said "I think that the aerodynamicists had too much to say on the
overall concept of the car".
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
DumbedDownUSA
2018-03-09 06:42:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
Thanks. Yes it's not nice to watch, especially as I have a soft-sot
for McLaren. It really makes me wonder how one department involved in
building a fast race car (aero) could ever have got so important that
the car and the team as a whole suffers because other (just as
importat) departments can't do their jobs properly.
The root cause of this must be in upper management. To my mind aero
is the last thing you work on after you've got the car reliable and
got the power train sorted (albeit with an eye on aero during the
design stage).
Can't be done.
--
Moderate! STOP thinking about my penis.
m***@gmail.com
2018-03-09 10:46:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
The root cause of this must be in upper management. To my mind aero is the
*last* thing you work on after you've got the car reliable and got the power
train sorted (albeit with an eye on aero during the design stage). McLaren
have been putting the cart before the horse for (at least) the last four
years and don't seem to be learning from their mistakes.
I disagree. The double diffuser episode showed how difficult it is to change the fundamental aero package once the car is built. Think of this year's McLaren with the aerodynamically clever rear suspension. It is not impossible to do that mid season, but would be more difficult because of the number of components that would have to be redesigned, manufactured, changed (in the case of the gearbox casing, only when permitted to do so). And then they still would not have been able to properly evaluate the benefits of the design.

You can tweak some aspects of the aero during the season, but also it is the case that some things are best built in from the start.

I do think, though, that we can start entertaining thoughts about McLaren and QC and/or process management. They are having a difficult time in testing again (Alonso stopped out on the track again today), Honda can't be blamed, and other teams with the same PU have a lot more laps (and faster lap times). And Torro Rosso have had a pretty untroubled time of it. Hmmmm...
larkim
2018-03-08 16:16:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
Another bad day at testing for McLaren, Alonso having to stop on track with
oil leaking after ~40 laps at 11am and them not getting the car back out
until after 5pm with a new ICE. Apparently a 'simple' ICE change should take
around 3 hours...
With the latest testing issues I think that McLaren have, over the last few
years, put aero and chassis design on a pedestal to too great an extent,
forcing every other part of car design to conform to what the aero team
want. In previous seasons it's meant that they've made Honda look bad as
they have had to work around very strict aero constraints and so far this
year, with a proven PU in the back they're still seeing failures mainly due
to 'packaging'. It's as if the aero guys own the damn company and can do
whatever they want with every other facet of the car coming a distant second
(or third etc.)
McLaren *are* good at aero. I commented several days ago that the car looks
fast, that rear suspension is the talk of the pit lane and half of the teams
have adopted slots in the front wing hangers for 2018 after McLaren
pioneered them last year. However it's no use being great at *one aspect* of
building a Formula 1 car. Having great aero is no good if it's at the
expense of packaging the PU and hence reliability.
Just some of my thoughts after day 2 of the second week of testing...
--
Shaun.
"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
Seems to be going better today, though still not quite at the mileage of
the most reliable teams.

Best part of 2secs off Vettel's fastest time though. Who's sandbagging?
~misfit~
2018-03-09 00:29:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by larkim
Post by ~misfit~
Another bad day at testing for McLaren, Alonso having to stop on
track with oil leaking after ~40 laps at 11am and them not getting
the car back out until after 5pm with a new ICE. Apparently a
'simple' ICE change should take around 3 hours...
With the latest testing issues I think that McLaren have, over the
last few years, put aero and chassis design on a pedestal to too
great an extent, forcing every other part of car design to conform
to what the aero team want. In previous seasons it's meant that
they've made Honda look bad as they have had to work around very
strict aero constraints and so far this year, with a proven PU in
the back they're still seeing failures mainly due to 'packaging'.
It's as if the aero guys own the damn company and can do whatever
they want with every other facet of the car coming a distant second
(or third etc.)
McLaren *are* good at aero. I commented several days ago that the
car looks fast, that rear suspension is the talk of the pit lane and
half of the teams have adopted slots in the front wing hangers for
2018 after McLaren pioneered them last year. However it's no use
being great at *one aspect* of building a Formula 1 car. Having
great aero is no good if it's at the expense of packaging the PU and
hence reliability.
Just some of my thoughts after day 2 of the second week of testing...
--
Shaun.
"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief
has a cozy little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
Seems to be going better today, though still not quite at the mileage
of the most reliable teams.
Best part of 2secs off Vettel's fastest time though. Who's
sandbagging?
It's been mentioned by team bosses this last week that sandbagging in F1 is
a thing of the past due to such limited testing and that it would serve
nobody now. That seemingly large differences in times are usually due to
fuel load, tyre slection or simply differing 'programmes' that various teams
may be running.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
m***@gmail.com
2018-03-10 20:16:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
McLaren *are* good at aero. I commented several days ago that the car looks
fast, that rear suspension is the talk of the pit lane and half of the teams
have adopted slots in the front wing hangers for 2018 after McLaren
pioneered them last year. However it's no use being great at *one aspect* of
building a Formula 1 car. Having great aero is no good if it's at the
expense of packaging the PU and hence reliability.
Just some of my thoughts after day 2 of the second week of testing...
--
Shaun.
"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
Boullier's been saying that they didn't do a good job of preparing that car. By which I assume he means the assembly, including installing the PU, and the manufacture of some parts (though one assumes they buy in the wheel nuts).

It was a long time ago, granted, but there was a time when McLaren were famous for having cars that worked right out of the box. They wouldn't be first to start testing in the year, but when they did start, the car was immediately fast and reliable.
Loading...