[Team] Mercedes: Will they ever dominate again?

[Casper]

Originally Posted by Tourer

I think that it would be quite easy to join something of an anti-Lewis pile on just now (similar to the pile ons on other drivers, even race officials at times) but I'm more like your approach V8 Fireworks - we haven't really seen much of Lewis in a lower-midfield car, certainly not in recent years and that makes it interesting to see how he does.

Lewis is a class driver, no question about it - personally I've never once believed the "GOAT" suggestions or even the "head & shoulders better" suggestions about him but he's definitely in the elite class of drivers, with maybe 3-4 others, possibly a couple more than that if we factor in car capabilities and the like. How the team turn the car around, what Lewis can do with it (particularly in comparison to George) and as a result, what impact the team can have on the front of the field is go0ing to be at least an interesting sidebar this year and may end up being a big part of the story of this year's championships.

We've seen Lewis a bit flat in his outlook in the past, sometimes during races but he has always found a way to get past that - just seems to be the way that he processes some challenges.

The year is shaping up pretty well overall. Feels like it'll be a while before Mercedes actually dominates again though, if they ever do, which in all honesty is a good thing for the sport and was bound to happen at some stage.

Most championships are won in the best car, for anything else to happen would be an anomaly. Whoever had been in the Mercedes in it's dominant years would have had a better run than any other driver simply because it was the best car.

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by Casper

Most championships are won in the best car, for anything else to happen would be an anomaly. Whoever had been in the Mercedes in it's dominant years would have had a better run than any other driver simply because it was the best car.

Yep - all that needed to be done was beat one team mate, which Lewis managed to do (other than 2016 of course).

[Skam85]

George and Lewis feels a bit like Daniel and Seb from 2014

[bathurst77]

The Merc looked good in the first test week this year, when it had sidepods. Should they go back to that shape?

[Akrapovic]

I don't think the side pods has much to do with Mercs issues.

The porpoising is hampering their car more than others, even if it doesn't look more violent than other cars. They've broken the diffuser numerous times, and both drivers are lifting much earlier than others (even other Mercedes powered cars) to control the porpoising before they begin braking. It _appears_ as though they need to stabilise the car before braking more than everyone else. This is also killing top speed and overtaking ability as they brake earlier than everyone.

[crmalcolm]

I have been reading two theories regarding the Mercedes approach, that are interesting and (if true) reveal a lack of desperation within the team.

The first is that Mercedes have not rushed any upgrades, because they want to fully understand the problem(s) before they go about fixing. The thought being that if they notice an improvement, it would be difficult at this stage to know if it was because of an upgrade or a circuit influence.

The second is that they have deliberately made changes that increase the problem(s). It might sound counter-intuitive, but the thought is that if they can deliberately induce the problem in a controlled manner, they will better understand the causes and scale of effects.

If either (or both) are true, it would suggest that they are more focused on understanding rather than fixing at this stage.

A smart approach - or a result of the cost cap meaning that you only get so much opportunity to fix a problem, so you need to make sure the fix works?

[VIVA GT]

I am sure that Mercedes will systematically work through this and once they do understand it, will rectify the problem and suddenly find a whole chunk of pace. (They do seem to totally believe in their current concept and consider this an an 'annoying little issue'.)
On a side note, I was surprised to see how the Ferrari was affected with the same problem during last weekends in-car shots from LeClerc. His helmet was bobbing up and down like a buoy in a rough sea at times (and no rude comments please!)

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

I don't think the side pods has much to do with Mercs issues.

The porpoising is hampering their car more than others, even if it doesn't look more violent than other cars. They've broken the diffuser numerous times, and both drivers are lifting much earlier than others (even other Mercedes powered cars) to control the porpoising before they begin braking. It _appears_ as though they need to stabilise the car before braking more than everyone else. This is also killing top speed and overtaking ability as they brake earlier than everyone.

The side pods play an important role in influencing the airflow over and around the car, as well as the upper edge of the floor. This in turn influences the airflow on the underside of the floor. These two articles in The Race, give a good insight into the issues with regard to Mercedes' lack of side pods, in comparison to Ferrari and Red Bull.

https://the-race.com/formula-1/huge-...aris-theories/

https://the-race.com/formula-1/gary-...mercedes-flaw/

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

On a side note, I was surprised to see how the Ferrari was affected with the same problem during last weekends in-car shots from LeClerc. His helmet was bobbing up and down like a buoy in a rough sea at times (and no rude comments please!)

Mattia Binotto has noted that - “I don’t know why the others are not as quick as we are with porpoising. But it’s true that we are still suffering with it. We put some actions on the car to try to mitigate it, but it’s not yet addressed and solved. But it’s always a compromise between trying to solve it and giving up some performance, while maybe in the meantime you have to have some porpoising to get the best out of your car.”

For some reason though - the Mercedes drivers are having to lift earlier before a corner to settle the car, compared to the Ferrari drivers who seem to be able to enter a corner [braking zone] at full speed.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

The side pods play an important role in influencing the airflow over and around the car, as well as the upper edge of the floor. This in turn influences the airflow on the underside of the floor. These two articles in The Race, give a good insight into the issues with regard to Mercedes' lack of side pods, in comparison to Ferrari and Red Bull.

https://the-race.com/formula-1/huge-...aris-theories/

https://the-race.com/formula-1/gary-...mercedes-flaw/

I'm aware. I'm just saying what the more technical pundits have been saying. Given Mercedes have a baseline of both larger and micro side pods, if those were the issue, then they'd have looked at rolling back the change. We also know they've been testing a lot of these in the simulators, as the drivers (race and the various reserves) have been tweeting/instagramming about it.

Also, as referenced by Ferrari, we're seeing a wide range of solutions for the side pods, and yet Mercedes appear to be the team struggling the most with porpoising. The various sided solutions are not having a huge difference on the porpoising - which is what you'd expect, as this is not an unknown phenomenon in ground effect cars. In Mercedes case, it isn't that the car is bouncing more than others - it's that the car can't cope with the level of bouncing it's doing. The drivers cannot attack braking zones and the car has regularly shed parts.

[S griffin]

Hamilton does seem to have let his head drop a little bit, while Russell, who is no doubt delighted he has a half decent car, even if it's not the race winner he hoped for, has been inspired. However I wouldn't write Lewis off yet, there's still a long way to go

[Casper]

When I first saw the porpoising the health issues was the first thing I thought of. Alan Jones retired from F1 quoting health issues caused by the cars at the time having no suspension movement and the impacts affecting the driver's health and he wanted nothing to do with it. It must be causing some sort of concussive effect on the drivers and the Mercedes would have to the worst car of those that have the problem.

[steve_r]

Hamilton will be getting pelters on Twitter and social media for being outperformed by Russell. Looking at the horrendous onboard footage, it's a wonder that either of them are able to drive the cargo for an hour and a half. Perhaps George is adapting to it better?

Mercedes have been constantly brilliant for years on end, and I would not write them off just yet. The noise from Mercedes about this issue is not exactly encouraging though, is it?

It does feel a bit like the beginning of McLarens demise, when they went from top of the tree, to then starting to bring in more and more radical car designs that simply didn't work. Probably the 2 situations are not comparable in practice - but that is what is in the back of my mind.

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by Casper

When I first saw the porpoising the health issues was the first thing I thought of. Alan Jones retired from F1 quoting health issues caused by the cars at the time having no suspension movement and the impacts affecting the driver's health and he wanted nothing to do with it. It must be causing some sort of concussive effect on the drivers and the Mercedes would have to the worst car of those that have the problem.

Admittedly George Russel has mentioned suffering back & chest pains being caused by the porpoising but I think the cars are different animals now compared to Alan Jones' days. Back then to try and resolve the situation the cars ran extremely stiff suspension but movement was still available from the high tyre sidewalls which possibly compounded the situation.
I'm only basing my thoughts on what has been said publicly by Mercedes, but they do appear (to me) to be quietly confident that their fundamental design is superior to anything else out there, but a the moment there are unable to unleash the advantages of that due to this irritating bouncing. Obviously Mercedes are not unique in suffering the problem, but it clearly has a bigger detrimental effect on their car which does go towards convincing me that if/once they can stabilise the ride-height of the car it should be a flyer!
(Obviously, I know nothing, but it is interesting to see how the mighty Mercedes can struggle, and should be similarly interesting to see what happens next/eventually).

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Casper

When I first saw the porpoising the health issues was the first thing I thought of. Alan Jones retired from F1 quoting health issues caused by the cars at the time having no suspension movement and the impacts affecting the driver's health and he wanted nothing to do with it. It must be causing some sort of concussive effect on the drivers and the Mercedes would have to the worst car of those that have the problem.

When Alan Jones was driving, the cars were stiffly sprung to get round the ban on sliding skirts that came in in 1980, so a hydraulic system and fixed skirts were used. Once the car had left the pits and was out on the track, the car's ride height was lowered than was legally allowed. The skirts could then operate at this lower height but the cars were very stiffly sprung, so the skirts would remain in contact with the track, sealing the car to the surface. These were eventually banned in at the end of 1982.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Casper

It must be causing some sort of concussive effect on the drivers and the Mercedes would have to the worst car of those that have the problem.

this is a very interesting concern...certainly not a concern that can be or should be easily dismissed.

i would have to think that even though the cars are significantly different to those of the past, the issue of repetitive head trauma, even its just an accumulation of relatively minor bumps and bangs (a very medical terms i know) is of significant concern?

i would have to think that this has been an issue brought up at least internally within the team or the drivers and their doctors?

bit of a what would Sid Watkins think about it situation?

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

this is a very interesting concern...certainly not a concern that can be or should be easily dismissed.

i would have to think that even though the cars are significantly different to those of the past, the issue of repetitive head trauma, even its just an accumulation of relatively minor bumps and bangs (a very medical terms i know) is of significant concern?

i would have to think that this has been an issue brought up at least internally within the team or the drivers and their doctors?

bit of a what would Sid Watkins think about it situation?

There is current regulations for accelerometers to be attached to the survival cell as well as "in ear" versions for the drivers (I assume teams create earpieces that include both the radio, plus the accelerometers). There is a warning light that is triggered when a specific acceleration threshold has been passed (i.e. crash). So they are currently concerned about singular/instantaneous high G events and the effect upon the drivers. But I wonder if they should look at a limit on an accumulation over time of lower level G events (such as pounding down the long straight lap after lap)

Given they have accelerometers on both the chassis and driver, and I assume those are data logging during the race, they should have some data to look at from the teams that are having porpoising issues. You have the issue of it being bad, but the drivers being reluctant to speak up. Kudos to George for calling out that the current situation (effects to the drivers body) can't be sustained. I believe that there very well may be a cumulative effect. I also suspect there may be little actual data to be used to set limits for this?

Maybe other industries or even military studies might provide starting points on what is safe and what is not. If you ignore the potential for physical injury just due to the continuous hammering, there might be safety concerns about loss of visual acuity due to the oscillations not to mention just pure old fashion "fatigue" of dealing with this for a race duration.

Richard

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

You have the issue of it being bad, but the drivers being reluctant to speak up.

Sorry typo in above. I meant to say that drivers being reluctant to speak up might be a possibility vs. an absolute.

Richard

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

Sorry typo in above. I meant to say that drivers being reluctant to speak up might be a possibility vs. an absolute.

Richard

Apart from Russell, have any other drivers spoken up?

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Apart from Russell, have any other drivers spoken up?

I think Leclerc made some comments over a month ago that it might bring some physical challenges. But I think Russell has been the only one to really call it out as having a real impact on him. And given when it's at it's worst, it is in the Mercedes, so it would be George and Lewis who are probably having the worst time of it. If you have to lift on long straights to get it under control, then it has to be bad.

Richard

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

There is current regulations for accelerometers to be attached to the survival cell as well as "in ear" versions for the drivers (I assume teams create earpieces that include both the radio, plus the accelerometers). There is a warning light that is triggered when a specific acceleration threshold has been passed (i.e. crash). So they are currently concerned about singular/instantaneous high G events and the effect upon the drivers. But I wonder if they should look at a limit on an accumulation over time of lower level G events (such as pounding down the long straight lap after lap)

thats some very cool tech. did not now they were able to monitor it like this.

wondering how long it will be before my airpods have an accelerometer built into them!

[Casper]

My mention of Alan Jones was simply to point out that drivers health issues are not new and he had the nous to get out because of it. Athletes have a record of ignoring any mention of concussion if they can avoid it and it has been suggested by some observers that Russel is speaking for himself and also some drivers who are all members of the GPDA in his role as director of that organisation.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

thats some very cool tech. did not now they were able to monitor it like this.

Yes, this technology has been used for a few years now mainly because they can log the data at point of impact on the driver. When you see G force data a driver is subjected to in a major crash/impact the in ear accelerometers are the major source of those figures as well as the chassis accelerometers.

[VIVA GT]

Just a question about the accelerometers that the drivers 'wear'. Are they fully three-dimensional? Meaning do they measure movement in all directions, or are they mainly there to measure the severe deceleration that may occur during a sudden stop experienced during a crash?
What I'm trying to ask is do they measure the up & down bouncing?

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

Just a question about the accelerometers that the drivers 'wear'. Are they fully three-dimensional? Meaning do they measure movement in all directions, or are they mainly there to measure the severe deceleration that may occur during a sudden stop experienced during a crash?
What I'm trying to ask is do they measure the up & down bouncing?

The system (which includes more than the accelerometers) measures all directions of head movement including - 'the exact forces on the head to a given displacement, the elongation of the neck, how it engages with the headrests, how the headrests perform and what we need to do to produce the next generation cockpit environment.'

From the makers of the in-ear device - 'The three spring-riders are mounted at different orientations to respond to motion in three directions: forwards-backwards, left-right and up-down.' and 'For head impacts in Formula One the measurements peak at 400g across all three axes'