View Single Post
Old 10 May 2014, 10:44 (Ref:3404426)   #3604
MyNameIsNigel
Veteran
 
MyNameIsNigel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Switzerland
Lake Geneva Area
Posts: 2,132
MyNameIsNigel has a real shot at the podium!MyNameIsNigel has a real shot at the podium!MyNameIsNigel has a real shot at the podium!MyNameIsNigel has a real shot at the podium!
Quote:
Originally Posted by MyNameIsNigel View Post
The lap time gain of 1.4 s/lap @LM in favour of a 6 MJ petrol LMP1-H (i.e. Porsche / Toyota) compared to a 2 MJ diesel LMP1-H (i.e. Audi) therefore "amounts" to approx. 4 MJ/lap of petrol fuel allocation.
The "4 MJ/lap" figure I am quoting is actually incorrect as it assumes that we are talking about the same ERS class and same fuel class, which isn't the case. So forget about that "4 MJ/lap" number

However, we "know" now, based on the numbers given by the ACO-FIA in their presentation of May 2nd, that the expected impact on lap time @LM of the reduction in fuel flow allocation, within a given ERS class, is of the order of 0.350 s/MJ in the case of petrol.

In that respect, the fuel allocation for the 6 MJ petrol should theoretically be reduced by approximately 5.7 MJ/lap to put it on the same level as the 2 MJ petrol, i.e. to cancel that 2 s/lap gain (= 2/0.350).

Now, we further know that the ACO-FIA assume that the difference in fuel allocation between the 6 MJ petrol and the 2 MJ petrol, i.e. 7.5 MJ/lap (=147.0-139.5), is supposed to lead to a 2 s/lap difference at LM between the two ERS options.

In other words, there is currently a (approx.) 1.8 MJ/lap (=7.5-5.7) additional fuel allowance in favour of the 6 MJ petrol (compared to the 2 MJ petrol) that artificially leads that lap time gain of 2 seconds between the two ERS options.

This is the concrete and practical impact of the "ERS incentive".

The question now is whether or not this "ERS incentive" was already reflected in the Appendix B figures that had previously been quoted by the ACO-FIA in previous iterations of the said Appendix B.

Let us look at the relevant numbers:
Draft V04 of the Regulations (August 2012):
Fuel allocation for the 2 MJ petrol: 143.5 MJ/lap
Fuel allocation for the 6 MJ petrol: 134.5 MJ/lap
Difference: 9.0 MJ/lap

Draft V05 of the Regulations (November 2012):
Fuel allocation for the 2 MJ petrol: 146 MJ/lap
Fuel allocation for the 6 MJ petrol: 137 MJ/lap
Difference: 9.0 MJ/lap

Draft V07 of the Regulations (June 2013):
Fuel allocation for the 2 MJ petrol: 146.3 MJ/lap
Fuel allocation for the 6 MJ petrol: 137.2 MJ/lap
Difference: 9.1 MJ/lap

Draft V08 of the Regulations (October 2013):
Fuel allocation for the 2 MJ petrol: 146.3 MJ/lap
Fuel allocation for the 6 MJ petrol: 137.2 MJ/lap
Difference: 9.1 MJ/lap

"Final" Regulations (December 2013):
Fuel allocation for the 2 MJ petrol: 146.3 MJ/lap
Fuel allocation for the 6 MJ petrol: 137.2 MJ/lap
Difference: 9.1 MJ/lap

Endurance Committee Decision No. 14-D0010-LMP1 (April 2014):
Fuel allocation for the 2 MJ petrol: 147.0 MJ/lap
Fuel allocation for the 6 MJ petrol: 139.5 MJ/lap
Difference: 7.5 MJ/lap

Interesting, isn't it ?

This objectively demonstrates that the "ERS incentive" that was publicly announced in December 2013 only was NOT taken into account in the fuel allocations indicated in Appendix B prior to that date.

Who has ALL reasons to be objectively frustrated by this late change ?

Who have being playing tricks all this time ?
MyNameIsNigel is offline  
__________________
In order to finish first, first you have to finish
Quote