Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

Formula 1

Old 23rd Mar 2018, 16:30
  #6381 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Farnham, Surrey
Posts: 1,256
Originally Posted by Super VC-10 View Post
AIUI, teams can use any of their three engines whenever they want to. Introducing a fourth brings the penalty on first use, but not thereafter.
They can, but they generally prefer to save the "brand new" ones for race days, so I'm not sure they'd want to start running engine 2 as a practice engine. But you're right - they could choose to do so.

So if we assume they change engines for race 8 and race 15 that would mean new engines for Australia, France and Singapore. That's going to complicate things because you'd normally look to get the best benefit from new engines on the "power" circuits like Monza, Spa or Montreal. Singapore isn't a "power" circuit and nor is Le Castellet AFAIK. So we may see some chopping and changing between engines to get the best advantage from the younger ones.

Just another element of the strategy (in this case the championship strategy rather than the race strategy).

PDR
PDR1 is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2018, 06:48
  #6382 (permalink)  
Resident insomniac
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 75
Posts: 1,859
Needed more overtakes in the later laps.
G-CPTN is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2018, 06:58
  #6383 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: avro country
Age: 68
Posts: 174
Probably more concerned with conserving the engine.
Linedog is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2018, 07:33
  #6384 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 64
Posts: 2,749
Originally Posted by Linedog View Post
Probably more concerned with conserving the engine.
I wonder if Lewis (and Mercedes) may regret his pushing the engine so hard during the last third of the race. His sudden reduction in pace suggests they may have seen something they didn't like...
tdracer is online now  
Old 25th Mar 2018, 07:46
  #6385 (permalink)  
TWT
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: troposphere
Posts: 715
tdracer, I was listening to commentary by Mark Webber.

He first noticed that LH, when following Vettel, was taking an offset line in order to get more cool air into the engine. Apparently, the Merc is more susceptible to overheating than some other cars. Warm air exiting Vettel's car seemed to be affecting his engine. That meant he couldn't get close enough to attempt a pass, and it may have transpired that LH then backed off towards the end to conserve the engine as any passing moves were off the table.
TWT is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2018, 07:56
  #6386 (permalink)  
Resident insomniac
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 75
Posts: 1,859
Toto and Ted have confirmed that Mercedes took their eye off the ball and could have countered Seb's victory if they had thought he constituted a threat.

Oh! - did we miss the dolly birds on the grid?
Were the children an effective substitute?

Methinks we can do away with them . . .
G-CPTN is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2018, 11:07
  #6387 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,509
Another track where the lead drivers say it is very difficult to over take. The commentators were struggling to suggest where Max, or Lewis, or any of the leading contenders who have similar performance, could chance a dirty dive. In terms of a race, at the front, it wasn't. It might be a spectacle for the city, but is it a race for the spectators?
RAT 5 is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2018, 11:30
  #6388 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: norway
Posts: 69
Is it possible that cars on the track under VSC are restricted to a slower speed than cars exiting the pits at the pit speed limit?
pineridge is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2018, 11:35
  #6389 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: South Oxfordshire
Posts: 607
According to an article on the internet I was reading earlier, a pit stop made during the VSC period at this track can be 10 seconds quicker than a pit stop made during normal racing, as VSC minimum time rule doesn't if the car makes a pitstop.
Blues&twos is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2018, 12:10
  #6390 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: UK
Posts: 1,777
Originally Posted by Blues&twos View Post
According to an article on the internet I was reading earlier, a pit stop made during the VSC period at this track can be 10 seconds quicker than a pit stop made during normal racing, as VSC minimum time rule doesn't if the car makes a pitstop.
They mean the time lost to other drivers not stopping is 10 seconds less during a VSC?
LlamaFarmer is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2018, 12:25
  #6391 (permalink)  
Resident insomniac
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 75
Posts: 1,859
Originally Posted by LlamaFarmer View Post
They mean the time lost to other drivers not stopping is 10 seconds less during a VSC?
Vettel was in the lead, as he hadn't stopped, whereas Hamilton had.

At normal racing speeds, a pitstop will take (say) 23 seconds.
Before the pitstop, Hamilton was closer to Vettel than 23 seconds, so it would be expected that Vettel would come out behind Hamilton (and Raikkonen), however, during Vettel's pitstop, Hamilton (and the other cars) were travelling at a slower speed than normal.

Vettel's pitstop took the same time as usual, but Hamilton hadn't travelled as far as he would have at normal racing speed.
G-CPTN is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2018, 12:30
  #6392 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Farnham, Surrey
Posts: 1,256
Originally Posted by tdracer View Post
I wonder if Lewis (and Mercedes) may regret his pushing the engine so hard during the last third of the race. His sudden reduction in pace suggests they may have seen something they didn't like...
According to my contact on the inside:

It wasn't so much seeing something they didn't like as staying within known limits. For each engine they have a temperature limit below which they can run indefinitely, and above this they have a range of limits each pf which has a "budget" before it risks affecting engine life. If they stay within those budgets it shouldn't be a problem. But the higher bands may only have budgets of 5-10 laps, which is what Lewis was being reminded of when he got the radio call saying "strat 14 is available, but it is not a sustainable mode".

When Lewis decided to back off and take the 2nd he immediately focused on "be kind to the engine" drill, which needed a sub-mode that slightly backed off the boost pressure, increased the oil flow and ran as rich as he could within the available fuel. I think it may also retard the ignition a touch. This wasn't so much to immediately cool the engine as to give it a more progressive cooling phase (simmering) before final shutdown as a sudden switch-off from very high power takes a lot of life out of the engine.

And in case anyone suspects: the "quali mode" (aka "party mode") can't EVER be used to overtake when stuck in dirty air behind another car - to enter quali mode the car must be below even normal running temps because it puts a lot of heat into the engine (and especially the turbo) extremely quickly. Even in clear air they can only do two successive laps in that mode before needing a cool-down lap. Behind another car with an engine already nudging the limits it would roast the engine within a few seconds.

Of course if the rules would stop defining variable intake shuttering for cooling things (including the brakes) as "variable aerodynamic devices" (and therefore banning them) it might be possible for cars to open up the cooling when following or at very high demands and just take it as a drag/power trade. It would also stop the brakes over-cooling during VSCs and behind safety cars. The original ban was intended for the front and rear wings because of fears that a variable wing actuator might fail on the straight and the first time the driver finds out about it being when they have minimal downforce into the next corner, tent-pegging the car into the wall. That fear doesn't apply to cooling ducts.

On the "it's not fair that you can pass through the pits under a VSC" thing well it may be true and perhaps they need to look at that. But even though I'm a Lewis fan I would point out that Lewis (like pretty well all the other drivers) has also benefited from free/discounted pit stops under real/virtual safety cars in the past.

Mercedes have found another weak spot in their systems - in this case it seems like the VSC-window prediction algorithm in their strategy model is wrong, so it wouldn't surprise me if the strategy software team have already gone back into the office to do a design walk-through to find the problem. It will be a very complex algorithm because it has to account for where all the cars might be at the specific time a VSC might be called if it is going to provide definitive "you need a gap of x seconds to guarantee you're safe" indications. It looked pretty clear that, when he was in the front, Lewis would not have had much problem opening the gap by another 3-5 seconds had he been advised it was needed.

Mistakes are things you learn from!

PDR
PDR1 is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2018, 12:32
  #6393 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,509
And yet you are not supposed/allowed to overtake under VSC, and yet Vettel did so. Given that it is a track where overtaking on track is so difficult it might be expected that an under-cut or over-cut pit stop might achieve what driver ability can not. Here, we saw what might be deemed a further ludicrous overtake in the pits. Some might deem it very clever, but is it motor racing?
RAT 5 is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2018, 12:41
  #6394 (permalink)  
Resident insomniac
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 75
Posts: 1,859
Vettel did not overtake Hamilton - he was already in front.
G-CPTN is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2018, 12:44
  #6395 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Farnham, Surrey
Posts: 1,256
Originally Posted by G-CPTN View Post
Vettel's pitstop took the same time as usual, but Hamilton hadn't travelled as far as he would have at normal racing speed.
Also as soon as you enter the pit lane under the VSC your target times at the next waypoint are cancelled. You can drive as fast as you like up to the pit lane speed limit sign, then you are limited to pit lane speed (50mph IIRC, but it varies on some tracks) until you pass the pit lane exit line and then you can drive as fast as you like until you get to the next waypoint - at this time you will then get a new target time for the NEXT waypoint. So it is often faster to go into the pits and change tyres than it is to simply stay on the track. I wonder if it's legal to just do a pit-lane drive through (no pit stop) under the VSC?

Actually, thinking about it there is another restriction. After passing through the pits you can drive as fast as you like to the next waypoint BUT the track is still under double-waved-yellow conditions, so you come out behind another car you can't overtake it even though you don't have a target time and he does. This is what happened with Verstappen/Alonso, and is why Verstappen had to give the place back.

If they realised what was happening early enough I suppose it might just have been possible for the pit wall to tell Hamilton to floor-it down the straight to ensure Vettel came out of the pits behind him and then brake to stay within his demanded sector time. But someone would need to have recognised it and explained it to Lewis in a big hurry, and there would be a big risk of Lewis being accused of braking the "no 'brake testing' a following car under the SC/VSC" rule.

PDR
PDR1 is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2018, 12:50
  #6396 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Farnham, Surrey
Posts: 1,256
Originally Posted by RAT 5 View Post
And yet you are not supposed/allowed to overtake under VSC, and yet Vettel did so. Given that it is a track where overtaking on track is so difficult it might be expected that an under-cut or over-cut pit stop might achieve what driver ability can not. Here, we saw what might be deemed a further ludicrous overtake in the pits. Some might deem it very clever, but is it motor racing?
Vettel didn't overtake. Lewis took his pit-stop first, and was behind Vettel when the VSC happened. After his stop Lewis was putting in faster lap times than Seb, showing that the decision to stop was correct. He had the pace to easily close the gap by a further 3-5 seconds in the 7(?) laps before the VSC, but he was working to the required gap which the pit wall (and the strategy software)
said was needed. It was wrong. Them's the breaks!

As I said previously, even as a Lewis fan I have to remember that Lewis has benefited from the same situation in the past, so there isn't really grounds for complaint.

PDR
PDR1 is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2018, 13:07
  #6397 (permalink)  
Resident insomniac
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 75
Posts: 1,859
Originally Posted by PDR1 View Post
He had the pace to easily close the gap by a further 3-5 seconds in the 7(?) laps before the VSC, but he was working to the required gap which the pit wall (and the strategy software) said was needed. It was wrong.
To have closed on Vettel after Hamilton's pitstop was possible - had Mercedes known that there was a VSC about to happen.
This was recognised by Toto (after the event) and proven by Ted's analysis of Hamilton's lap times - but it was not considered essential (!) as Vettel had to stop at some stage - losing Vettel the '23 seconds' of a pitstop at normal racing speeds.

Melbourne is a relatively high fuel consumption circuit, so unnecessary speed is best kept to a minimum, and travelling close behind another car with similar performance is detrimental to fuel and tyres.
It is (normally) better to let things take their course and simply await the next pitstop.

Only if Vettel had pulled out a lead of more than '23 seconds' was there a need for Hamilton to reduce that gap. Unfortunately the VSC altered the calculations of the required gap.
G-CPTN is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2018, 16:02
  #6398 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,509
Gentlemen: my mistake; I misunderstood. Perhaps what I meant was that under normal racing conditions Hamilton would have overtaken Vettel, but due to VSC he was not allowed to do so. i.e. the leader of the race was affected by VSC.
If you're saying it is swings & roundabouts and all abide by the rules, then so be it, or do the rules need reviewing/tweaking? I hadn't seen this before, quite so blatant, but you suggest it was not the first time.
I guess life's not fair after all.
RAT 5 is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2018, 16:04
  #6399 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Farnham, Surrey
Posts: 1,256
Yes and no. You will have heard Lewis ask "was he in my pitstop window?" - this is the crux of it.

If he pitted first and takes the undercut he needs to close to the point where he will remain in front when the other car pits. This is a "window" with a maximum of the normal pit-stop duration (around 22 secs in Melbourne) and a minimum of the best advantage that can be gained from SC/VSC. This lower bound isn't a fixed number - it depends on the gaps between the cars AND where each cars is (with respect to the pit lane entry) at the moment the SC/VSC is declared. So the strategy system continually calculates the lower bound of his pit-stop window, the team subtract a margin of another couple of seconds and make that the target gap.

The team thought they had done this - they thought Vettel was outside Hamilton's pit-stop window and that's what they told him. But it turns out that they weren't - the predicted figure was wrong by nearly 5 seconds. Which is actually rather remarkable for a team that would normally be expected to have such things sewn-up.

PDR
PDR1 is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2018, 16:42
  #6400 (permalink)  
Resident insomniac
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 75
Posts: 1,859
Originally Posted by PDR1 View Post
the strategy system continually calculates the lower bound of his pit-stop window, the team subtract a margin of another couple of seconds and make that the target gap.

The team thought they had done this - they thought Vettel was outside Hamilton's pit-stop window and that's what they told him. But it turns out that they weren't - the predicted figure was wrong by nearly 5 seconds. Which is actually rather remarkable for a team that would normally be expected to have such things sewn-up.
Toto was quick to own up to their calculation mistake.

I'm not certain that there was much that could be done once the VSC was declared - other than what PDR1 suggested:-
Originally Posted by PDR1
If they realised what was happening early enough I suppose it might just have been possible for the pit wall to tell Hamilton to floor-it down the straight to ensure Vettel came out of the pits behind him and then brake to stay within his demanded sector time. But someone would need to have recognised it and explained it to Lewis in a big hurry, and there would be a big risk of Lewis being accused of breaking the "no 'brake testing' a following car under the SC/VSC" rule.
G-CPTN is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.