Alfa Romeo technical director Jan Monchaux has confirmed that the team will bring updates to Imola, but are now turning their attention to the 2022 sporting regulations.
Quite early giving up, don't they? This of course begs a question, what's the point of participating, if year after year teams stop racing, some sooner than others, and revert their presence on the grid into development of the next season car, during ongoing (presumably) racing season? Flashing colours around circuit is enough..?
If they would run development as parallel activities to full support of current season, I would understand it, but this doesn't sounds to be a case here. The team is obviously giving up on racing in 2021, and I think this is only begging, as almost all will follow, and we may end up with actually two or three teams remaining in the game. Funny way to run the sport.
Are you new to the sport? Seems to happen every year.
But in all seriousness, it seems to be more lip service. I think it really means the majority of the money will be spent on a new car made to the 2022 regulations while only small developments will be made on the current car. Maybe 80/20 split...
And in particular the new regulations, and the seeming increase in the practice of freezing certain areas of development, it is key for all teams to ensure they start off the new era with a car that is thoroughly thought out. A bit like the car version of the hybrid era engines.... Mercedes clearly put a lot of time development, resources,and time into ensuring they got the at the time new engine absolutely spot on. It didnt happen by throwing something together at the last moment and crossing their fingers.
I believe this sort of development process is now going to show itself in the new chassis. Of course the other aspect is with future budget caps, which will at best reduce development. Getting this process into the system this year and minimising expense on what is going to be obsolete by the end of the year makes sense. Invest the money and resources in the future
* I started life with nothing, and still have most of it left
“Good drivers have dead flies on the side windows!” (Walter Röhrl)
* I married Miss Right. Just didn't know her first name was Always
Yes, yes, but...I came to see 20 cars racing with pedal resting on the floor for full season, and if we have to plot any strategy, as we should, it should be racing one, rather economics based. If I recall, that was a point I was trying to make.
How long I watch F1 is secondary issue. Question rather is, whether we should accept what we see without any sign of resistance.
Regarding MB's engine - from recollection, claims were made, they actually started with hybrid development in 2010, if not before (on road cars), and also had their hand on assisting FiA to write racing specs. Knowledge base was not exactly shared with rivals. Tokens - brain fade moment - in 2014 were last blow, and surely helped to make competition impotent for years. Surely a stunt of this kind should not be repeated again in any form or shape.
Bendy rear wings are being tested by FIA now. Hamilton claimed that it gave the Red Bull’s at 0.3 second advantage. So does this mean we will be seeing them slower down the straights now?
Probably won’t notice a big difference at Monaco and Azerbaijan, but after that will the Red Bull’s really be competitive with the Mercedes?
You can make carbon parts bend anistropic so they flex under load in one direction and not the other. Build it in a way to bend backwards when the air hits it at high speed, but not when inertia carries it forwards under braking.
Hmmm..... I saw the video without the reference line on it and could not really tell any difference..... with the reference line it is clear to see thaat Red Bull have done something pretty smart that is strong enough to pass a 50KG weight deflection test but deflect in real life when it is beneficial.
* I started life with nothing, and still have most of it left
“Good drivers have dead flies on the side windows!” (Walter Röhrl)
* I married Miss Right. Just didn't know her first name was Always
Could be heat induced. Only when the wind friction build up?
It could be electronically controlled (like the magnorhetic shock fluids). But that would be illegal *ahem*.
But after watching a couple times it appears to be the floor flexing or something where the wing attaches. The whole structure seems to move downward.
Everso Biggyballies wrote: ↑2 years ago
Hmmm..... I saw the video without the reference line on it and could not really tell any difference..... with the reference line it is clear to see thaat Red Bull have done something pretty smart that is strong enough to pass a 50KG weight deflection test but deflect in real life when it is beneficial.
Well, they clearly designed the wing to it does not bend until there is at least 51 KG of weigh on itt. So, do you simply just increase the weight being used for the test and give them credit for a clever cheat? Is a cheat that bypasses the measurements not worthy of a penalty?
The actual rule is that you cannot have movable aerodynamic parts. From the video provided, it is clear that the rear wing is moving, and rather deliberately and to their advantage. So this is clearly a cheat, the results are measurable, and there is clear evidence that it occurred. Should FIA penalize them for this cheat? Did they use it in all four races or just the last one?
Everso Biggyballies wrote: ↑2 years ago
Hmmm..... I saw the video without the reference line on it and could not really tell any difference..... with the reference line it is clear to see thaat Red Bull have done something pretty smart that is strong enough to pass a 50KG weight deflection test but deflect in real life when it is beneficial.
Well, they clearly designed the wing to it does not bend until there is at least 51 KG of weigh on itt. So, do you simply just increase the weight being used for the test and give them credit for a clever cheat? Is a cheat that bypasses the measurements not worthy of a penalty?
No it isn't, because the rules say you have to pass the test and it passes the test ergo it's not cheating it's clever. I dont get why people think clever problem solving is cheating, just because it is used to gain an advantage over the opposition. Isn't that the whole point of constructing your own car in F1 is about? If we'd outlaw clever thinking we might as well order 20 Dallaras, put stickers on them and call it a day..