[Team] Ferrari: in F1

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Kempi

Just checked during the session: onboard views are blacked out on F1TV when the car is in the pits. Exception currently: Magnussen's car. The feed is live but the view is obscured by some kind of device.

Speculation - have Haas received an update that allows them to use the same feature Ferrari have benefited from recently, but only if they can keep up the Camera diversion?

[F1Guy]

Ferrari sporting a new sponsor (on engine cover) and livery in Japan.




A new sponsor, or a cryptic message?

[F1Guy]

An interesting article in German (auto-motor-und-sport.de) on where (or why) Ferrari's power boost has disappeared to since the Italian GP. The FiA has asked Ferrari to fit additional sensors to monitor the Ferrari ERS since Singapore. Coincidence or other, Ferrari have not had the "boost" since Singapore.

"GPS data from Singapore & Sochi shows Ferrari doesn't deploy that exceptional power "boost" on the straights anymore. According to our information FIA fitted a 2nd sensor to monitor battery energy output. Is there a connection?"


https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/...power-vorteil/

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by F1Guy

A new sponsor, or a cryptic message?

Neither - it is a Philip Morris brand/initiative.

https://www.missionwinnow.com/faq

[S griffin]

It looks good though

[F1Guy]

Peter Windsor and Craig Scarborough talk Ferrari engine / ERS.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q1g...ature=youtu.be


Legal, illegal or a grey area?

Seems like Ferrari have lost their advantage on PU over the last couple of rounds. And the FiA may have something to do with it.

[F1Guy]

Maurizio Arrivabene is not happy about information on the second sensor being leaked to the public.


Maurizio Arrivabene: "We agreed with the request from the FIA to work together with them and to facilitate their work we added a second sensor. But it doesn’t change in any case the performance of our car.

"Despite that I think it’s strange that everybody knows about the second sensor. I said that our battery layout is quite complex but it’s also an intellectual property of Ferrari.

"I hope that as everybody knows about the second sensor in future everybody they are not going to be informed about our projects. That could be a serious matter."

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by F1Guy

Peter Windsor and Craig Scarborough talk Ferrari engine / ERS.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q1g...ature=youtu.be

Legal, illegal or a grey area?

Seems like Ferrari have lost their advantage on PU over the last couple of rounds. And the FiA may have something to do with it.

Thanks for that - good video and interesting to listen to.

A couple of points I noted:

Everything Ferrari have done has been legal. This is outlined by Scarbs at 4:50 when he says 'All we can assume is that Ferrari are doing something legally' (with the stress on legally).

'How they're doing it, nobody knows'.

At 7:40, FIA are quoted as saying 'we can see nothing illegal'.

So what does that video tell us - well in Scarbs' opinion - Ferrari have been perfectly legal all season, but they may not have interpreted the rules in the manner that was intended. Therefore, having been requested to modify their PU by the FIA, they have obliged.

Any talk of Illegal is ludicrous though.

[F1Guy]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Any talk of Illegal is ludicrous though.

That's only just your own opinion, and you are making an assumption based on someone who is simply also assuming that the Ferrari ERS is legal, or.. to use his own words, 'questionably legal'.

[Akrapovic]

Tech expert: It's legal

FIA: We see nothing illegal

Forum member: IS IT ILLEGALZ?

[F1Guy]

One of the more mainstream sites running a story now, THIS on motorsports.com just 15 minutes ago.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Thanks for that - good video and interesting to listen to.

A couple of points I noted:

Everything Ferrari have done has been legal. This is outlined by Scarbs at 4:50 when he says 'All we can assume is that Ferrari are doing something legally' (with the stress on legally).

'How they're doing it, nobody knows'.

At 7:40, FIA are quoted as saying 'we can see nothing illegal'.

So what does that video tell us - well in Scarbs' opinion - Ferrari have been perfectly legal all season, but they may not have interpreted the rules in the manner that was intended. Therefore, having been requested to modify their PU by the FIA, they have obliged.

Any talk of Illegal is ludicrous though.

For a start he has no idea if Ferrari have fielded an entirely legal car at all times, all he can do is sift through publicly available information and spout what he thinks is the best response to a question. It is unlikely he has any greater insight to what Ferrari has been doing either illegally or legally that the rest of the world and is just another unqualified commentator on all levels. At least a few other commentators have the technical expertise or have worked on F1 teams in the past to give their comments at least a modicum of respectability.

[EffectiveSprinkles]

If Ferrari did something illegally they would be disqualified. Simple as that.

[broadrun96]

Originally Posted by EffectiveSprinkles

If Ferrari did something illegally they would be disqualified. Simple as that.

How dare you bring logic to an F1 forum when it comes to Ferrari good sir, that is NOT allowed here.

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by EffectiveSprinkles

If Ferrari did something illegally they would be disqualified. Simple as that.

I'm not sticking up for F1 Guy here, but I think the important couple of words you are missing here are were caught in place of the word did.
In fact, I think to make it even more fairer, the word Ferrari should be replaced with any teams...

(I know the sentences wouldn't be grammatically correct then, but I'm sure you see my point).

[EffectiveSprinkles]

I have him on ignore.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Neither - it is a Philip Morris brand/initiative.

https://www.missionwinnow.com/faq

ciggys....now with the power of technology and science!

pretty thinly veiled advertising imo...thought that was #illegal!

thanks for the link...their FAQ page is quite amusing.

If This Is Not Advertising, What Is It? What’s The Point? Why Would You Do This?

The point is that we’ve learned from the past, and now we are using innovative science and technology to transform our business. We simply want to show the world what we are doing and how, with full transparency. We want to show people the change that is happening with PMI right now, a change that research, technology and innovation has made possible.

Why Is Philip Morris International Using Mission Winnow Branding And Not Marlboro Or IQOS Branding?

Simply because this is not about advertising or promoting any PMI product or brand. Mission Winnow is a campaign to demonstrate our commitment to continuous innovation and development of new solutions that can expedite positive change for society.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

pretty thinly veiled advertising imo...thought that was #illegal!

Haha. This is just PMI pushing the boundaries with respect to what is allowed. Just like in racing you have to work around the edges of what is allowable and what is not to find that competitive advantage. Find that loophole and exploit it! Or... maybe both Ferrari and their corporate sponsors are both blatant cheaters!!!

On the serious side...

Originally Posted by EffectiveSprinkles

If Ferrari did something illegally they would be disqualified. Simple as that.

I would agree with this, or at least say something more "negative" would happen to them. But I suspect what is going on is not quite black and white. So there may be something creative going on, but also not exactly illegal (or not quite "black enough" on the spectrum from white to black to deem illegal). But it likely something that the rule makers didn't exactly account for in the rules, but also don't like and have said... please don't do that, or better yet... be very careful about how you do this (as maybe there is room for abuse if not monitored... hence the additional monitoring/sensors!) I am mostly repeating what was said in the Scarbs video that was posted earlier in which his commentary seems very believable to me. All in all, I think Ferrari is being creative, which I like.

Richard

[EffectiveSprinkles]

And punished for it. This is F1 after all.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by EffectiveSprinkles

And punished for it. This is F1 after all.

Punished for creativity! If that is what you mean, then yes, that is F1. Be creative, but just not too creative!

Richard

[Casper]

Unfortunately F1 finds it self between a rock and a hard place. If it allows unfettered engineering cleverness to proliferate then the cars will become quicker & quicker and the actual racing spectacle will gradually worsen as lap times decrease but not many people grasp that concept. This path also means that the series costs will go through the roof, not good.If they don't allow unfettered innovation which was what F1 basically was and I for one would love the series becomes just another rule book writing exercise and it eventually becomes a spec series and sad to say it is almost there already. This will contain costs to some extent and make the series more viable for new entrants.

The only real freedoms available on the car is aero which is slowly killing any spectacle that might have been possible. The cars stick like glue, do not get out of shape at all and generally look all the same from the front of the field to the back when braking and cornering. If they were a bit more slippy slidey and the driver actually had to manually control them we would have unpredictable racing which would be good for the sport. Of course to do that would introduce a type of racing that fans who have started following the series since aero has been the controlling factor may not like cars that actually need to have some opposite lock applied to them.

No engineer likes uncertainty and that is the reason the cars have over the years become so stable and uninteresting. The series really has become an engineering wa*nkfest and I doubt it will ever be anything else because you can't put the genie back in the bottle so to speak.

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

Punished for creativity! If that is what you mean, then yes, that is F1. Be creative, but just not too creative!

Richard

Of course. Fan car = banned. Can't be too clever.

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by Casper

The series really has become an engineering wa*nkfest and I doubt it will ever be anything else because you can't put the genie back in the bottle so to speak.

That's mean. The teams be it with active suspension, carbon monocoques or the like are doing their best. The cars sliding as you say in the 1971 British Grand Prix had all adopted the state-of-the-art design of using the engine as a stressed member, plus they had adopted wings for downforce, and they were all running on the state of the art of Dunlop racing tyres, which in a decade had grown much, much wider albeit the state of the art compounds were still too hard to enable slicks to be effective!!


https://www.stuckey.com.au/News-and-...-of-Race-Tyres


It is up to the regulator to take the initiative to clean up the current areas of aerodynamic freedom (bargeboards, wheels, "brake ducts") and restrict them.

Sadly it is political NOT engineering driven, that the top teams refuse to vote to give up their advantage and start afresh with new aerodynamic regulations. [That is put to a vote is absurd by the way. All political stuff not engineering stuff.]

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by Casper

Of course to do that would introduce a type of racing that fans who have started following the series since aero has been the controlling factor may not like cars that actually need to have some opposite lock applied to them.

Horrible attitude. Engineers like to watch cars in the 1971 British Grand Prix drifting through the turns as much as anyone BUT their job is to make a competitive car. That means it needs aero performance as close to the top team as you can achieve.

Is a political and regulatory issue to reduce downforce. Not an engineering one, they are simply using the free areas (bargeboard, front wing) to maximum effect. They have no choice but to copy from the best, unless they want to come stone last.

So CLEAN UP the free areas !!!! Restrict the number of elements !!! Entirely a regulatory issue.

[EffectiveSprinkles]

Yeah, restricting aero works so well. That's why they tried it in 2009 and 2014 and everybody loved it.