Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Formula 1′s Leading Team Has a Big Secret

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 253 posts

Re: Formula 1′s Leading Team Has a Big Secret

#131

Post by Arjuna »

brey wrote: post #7

In an environment where innovation has been strictly regulated against (better engine management software? NOPE. better foil design? NOPE), the fine art of sticking to the letter of the law but totally bending the spirit of it is naturally where the bleeding edge of F1 design is going to lie.

"the fine art of sticking to the letter of the law but totally bending the spirit of it"

This is spot-on.

One of the best examples in recent memory was the so-called "F Duct" that was featured on McLaren Racing's MP4-25 car in 2010.

For those that are not aware, FIA sporting regulations strictly prohibit the driver from controlling the aerodynamic characteristics of the machine, for example, via electronic controls on the steering wheel or levers in the cockpit.

However, McLaren came up with a system that allowed the driver to block an air flow duct with the driver's leg. This permitted air to be channeled in an "on demand" fashion, such that the rear wing would stall and result in reduced drag. This allowed the car to achieve an advantage in the straights.

Re: Formula 1′s Leading Team Has a Big Secret

#132

Post by graycat »

An old remark was, without rules, auto racing would soon become about as exciting as watching the jets land at JFK.

Another point is, mostly sports are sold as drama, that is, about human characters the audience can identify with, characters taking on challenges. So, see lots of pictures of the drivers, that is, the characters in the drama, and commentary about the characters, but next to nothing on the engineering of the cars. So, what's the bore/stroke ratio, max piston speed, max RPMs, number of valves per cylinder, valve spring design (last I heard, they don't use metal springs and use compressed gas instead), intake boost design and pressures, intercooler design, fuel injection design, fuel chemistry, clutch design, transmission design, suspension design, etc.? Don't hear much about those details!

So, it's not sold as a competition or lesson in engineering or the old "improve the breed" but as human drama.

So, have rules to deemphasize the engineering and just let the drama show. On with the show!

Re: Formula 1′s Leading Team Has a Big Secret

#133

Post by ecuzzillo »

ye wrote: post #16
TillE wrote: post #14

The smeary tone of this article is really quite obvious and unpleasant, and I don't think qualifying it as a "conspiracy theory" makes up for that. For example the claim that "Christian Horner isn’t saying much", when in fact he's flatly denied any kind of rule breaking.

When one guy leads by 30+ seconds, while everyone else fights for fractions of a second, either there's a major breakthrough or somebody is cheating.

Rosberg was losing 1.7 seconds a lap because of rubber in his front wing, and he started the race on tyres that has done two runs in qualifying. It is the general consensus that Red Bull do have a performance advantage, but it's nowhere near 2 seconds.

Re: Formula 1′s Leading Team Has a Big Secret

#134

Post by GVIrish »

eaurouge wrote: post #85

Or maybe their technical team is just better. Adrian Newey[1] has designed some very fast cars - at Williams, McLaren and now at Red Bull. Michael Schumacher managed to win seven championships in his career, but he was often racing against a (much) more superior Newey-designed car. F1 was fun in those days. With Vettel, arguably the most talented driver to drive a Newey designed car since Senna, it's no surprise Red…

Eh, I wouldn't say Schumacher won against vastly superior Adrian Newey cars. Once Ferrari hit their stride in the Schumacher years they often beat McLaren by being far more reliable and robust. They also built up their advantage with their Bridgestone partnership to a level that made them dominant. So dominant in fact, that it led to a spec tire.

Adrian Newey designs in the past ran on the ragged edge of fragility in order to make the cars as fast as possible. But that resulted in many costly DNF's that cost McLaren at least one championship. Now the Red Bull cars are still blazing fast but they're also very reliable.

I'm pretty sure Red Bull is cheating with traction control through their KERS system but I'm also sure they'd be winning races without it.

Re: Formula 1′s Leading Team Has a Big Secret

#135

Post by geargrinder »

ams6110 wrote: post #123
geargrinder wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NASCAR and F1 take opposite approaches to regulating technology. F1 defines an envelope and you can do anything within that envelope. NASCAR defines specs and anything on either side of that spec is treated as a violation. I much prefer F1's approach because it challenges engineers to innovate within parameters, just like the real world. NASCAR is trying to make everything even on the technology side and the result i…

NASCAR is trying to eliminate technical advantage so that the competition is entirely about which driver and crew is best. I don't see anything wrong with that.

There is nothing wrong with it. I just prefer the technological competition that is so much a part of F1.

Re: Formula 1′s Leading Team Has a Big Secret

#136

Post by superbeefy »

scott_s wrote: post #110
antimagic wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The America's Cup has very strict design restrictions. For example, in the latest edition, they weren't expecting catamarans to be able to foil because they had disallowed moving parts on the control surfaces. The Kiwis realised that you could actually move the entire control surface to get the desired control. It was awkward, which is why they had so much trouble actually controlling the foiling. Anyway, yes, there…

That surprises me - I would have thought they would have disallowed the catamaran entirely. It's a radically different design. Are the restrictions for safety, or to cap some kind of performance?

The winner of the Americas Cup determines the rules for the next one. In this year's Ellison wanted catamarans. Here is some more info on the some of the rules http://www.cupinfo.com/en/ac34-americas-cup-2013-ac72-class-...

Re: Formula 1′s Leading Team Has a Big Secret

#137

Post by hencq »

ams6110 wrote: post #123
geargrinder wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NASCAR and F1 take opposite approaches to regulating technology. F1 defines an envelope and you can do anything within that envelope. NASCAR defines specs and anything on either side of that spec is treated as a violation. I much prefer F1's approach because it challenges engineers to innovate within parameters, just like the real world. NASCAR is trying to make everything even on the technology side and the result i…

NASCAR is trying to eliminate technical advantage so that the competition is entirely about which driver and crew is best. I don't see anything wrong with that.

I don't think there's anything wrong with that. It's just a different philosophy. Personally I like the ability for engineers to innovate in F1 more, but of course that varies from person to person.

Re: Formula 1′s Leading Team Has a Big Secret

#139

Post by hencq »

beat wrote: post #127
zonkey wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't it be even more of an engineering battle if the drivers were replaced with computers?

A lot of NASCAR fans argue that F1 is just that - driving skill has been replaced by technology. I think that's nonsense. Better cars are an advantage, but ultimately, it's the driver's nerve and imagination that wins. I'd choose a lesser car with a greater driver any day.

Completely agree. On Top Gear they have a segment where they have a celebrity drive a 'reasonably priced car'. They had to create a separate scoreboard for F1 drivers, because they are all so much faster than anybody else.
Post reply on HN