The 2014 Season F1 Thread

Yves Geza said:
He's a good engineer with a lot of understanding of Formula 1 ... You want to bet our cars on that V max? :naughty::runaway:
Click to expand...
err ... no :p . My gambling limit is a pint of beer, and I like my car. Plus, the chap who made the shell (it's a rather special one, of only three made) said if I wanted another to the same spec I would be looking at upward of £20k. Or for a few k more, he'd make me one in carbon fibre. Way beyond what I can afford to replace, anyway. :eek:
 
The current cars had a higher Vmax in Melbourne than last years cars..
 
Will red bull ignore the fuel sensor in Malaysia to re inforce a point or will they comply and show respect to the FIA
History or common sense it will be interesting
 
fuzzyedges said:
Will red bull ignore the fuel sensor in Malaysia to re inforce a point or will they comply and show respect to the FIA
History or common sense it will be interesting
Click to expand...
If they have any sense, they will comply with the FIA/race stewards in Malaysia.
 
IF they had any sense, they would have complied with the FIA in Australia!
 
2014 FORMULA 1 PETRONAS MALAYSIA GRAND PRIX


02_Malaysia_E_72DPI.jpg



Kuala Lumpur
Race Date: 30 Mar 2014
Circuit Name: Sepang International Circuit
First Grand Prix: 1999
Number of Laps: 56
Circuit Length: 5.543 km
Race Distance: 310.408 km
Lap Record: 1:34.223 - JP Montoya (2004)

UK Times
Fri 28 March 2014
Practice 1 02:00 - 03:30
Practice 2 06:00 - 07:30
Sat 29 March 2014
Practice 3 05:00 - 06:00
Qualifying 08:00
Sun 30 March 2014
Race 09:00

Previous Winners
2013 Sebastian Vettel Red Bull Kuala Lumpur
2012 Fernando Alonso Ferrari Kuala Lumpur
2011 Sebastian Vettel Red Bull Kuala Lumpur
2010 Sebastian Vettel Red Bull Kuala Lumpur
2009 Jenson Button Brawn GP Kuala Lumpur
2008 Kimi Raikkonen Ferrari Kuala Lumpur
2007 Fernando Alonso McLaren Kuala Lumpur
2006 Giancarlo Fisichella Renault Kuala Lumpur
2005 Fernando Alonso Renault Kuala Lumpur
2004 Michael Schumacher Ferrari Kuala Lumpur
2003 Kimi Raikkonen McLaren Kuala Lumpur
2002 Ralf Schumacher Williams Kuala Lumpur
2001 Michael Schumacher Ferrari Kuala Lumpur
2000 Michael Schumacher Ferrari Kuala Lumpur
1999 Eddie Irvine Ferrari Kuala Lumpur


Button on board 2013
[youtube]

Start onboard 2013 Raikonnen
[youtube]

Multi21 dicing onboard
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNKfko1UJw8[/youtube]




73 consecutive races now without a mechanical failure for Alonso.
Nico Rosberg only needs one more win to equal his father’s tally.
Rosberg’s win was the 100th for a Mercedes-powered car in Formula One and Hamilton’s pole was the 100th for Mercedes power as well.
Pending the appeal, the disqualification of Ricciardo, will give Button his 50th podium.
Daniil Kvyat finished tenth and was promoted to ninth behind team mate Jean-Eric Vergne. By doing so he became the youngest ever F1 point-scorer, 25 days younger than previous holder, Sebastian Vettel. Among the youngest point scorers are Perez, Massa, Amon, Nico Rosberg, Buemi, Button, and Algesuari.


zzipL3g.png
 
Last edited:
The Malaysia race could be very interesting with the tail happy cars and the extra heat/humidity.
 
KevC said:
2014 FORMULA 1 PETRONAS MALAYSIA GRAND PRIX


02_Malaysia_E_72DPI.jpg


"...........
zzipL3g.png
Click to expand...

"Pilots", dearie me!

The rest of the info was good to read though, thanks for posting.
 
Pilots?
Oh the Allianz text.

I'm hoping they'll do a 2014 version soon. They're a bit late this year.
 
Last edited:
Doesn't "piloti" translate from Italian to English as either "pilots" or "drivers"? Mark Webber had to pilot his cars a few times, although the levelof control he had at those times is debatable!
 
Nod said:
Doesn't "piloti" translate from Italian to English as either "pilots" or "drivers"? Mark Webber had to pilot his cars a few times, although the levelof control he had at those times is debatable!
Click to expand...

Dunno, but I do know that in Spanish the word for pilot (piloto) is used instead of the word for driver (conductor).
 
"pilote automobile" is French for racing driver, F1 drivers are commonly referred to as "pilotes de F1"
 
Last edited:
GeeJay57 said:
If they have any sense, they will comply with the FIA/race stewards in Malaysia.
Click to expand...

But they are confident they will win the appeal (there are a few people that think they will as well) so why should they comply if the sensor (in their opinion ) is not reading correctly
It will be interesting to see
 
fuzzyedges said:
But they are confident they will win the appeal (there are a few people that think they will as well) so why should they comply if the sensor (in their opinion ) is not reading correctly
It will be interesting to see
Click to expand...

Why use the sensor? Because it's the official measuring device that all teams must use unless given permission by the FIA officials to do otherwise. Maybe Red Bull should use their own watch to decide when to start the race or perhaps their own timing system to determine DRS operation.

Of course they are confident they will win the appeal. Christian Horner is never short of confidence. My own view FWIW is that they will lose the appeal, but we will have to wait and see.

If Red Bull do not comply with the fuel flow regulations in Malaysia and then lose the appeal from Melbourne, I would expect some heavy duty penalties.
 
have
GeeJay57 said:
If Red Bull do not comply with the fuel flow regulations in Malaysia and then lose the appeal from Melbourne, I would expect some heavy duty penalties.
Click to expand...
Exactly this is what it hinges on
The two regs stated are sporting regs 3.2 and technical regs 5 1.4
The technical directives are not part of it They are only how the FIA would like the regs interpreted So the warnings from charlie are irrelevant in the court of law FIA style
The regs are practically black and white there is no thing as spirit of in there
5 1.4 is the hinge No car shall exceeded the required fuel mass flow of 100kg/h.
They didnt use another sensor they used there own telemitry and they placed the offical sensor where they should have placed it
3.2 says it is the duty of the team to ensure compliance with the Technical Regulations throughout the Event.
If they proove 5 1.4 then 3.2 goes away
Simply if they can proove that they didnt use more than 100kg/hr then they have complied to the rules
The rules do not seem to say irrespective of what the offical sensor says it is correct just that this is the offical way of measurement unless they give permission to use another type of sensor

My own view FWIW There has been a lot of mumblings from all the teams and outside F1 in other motor sports about the accuracy of the sensors. It seems Red Bull has taken a sledge to the problem What ever the outcome it will be a mess for F1
The perseption will be that either Red Bull have been trying to cheat or the FIA are trying to impose inaccurate sensors on the teams giving advantages to those that have a more favourable sensor
Mercedes may have helped Red Bull by saying they reduced there flow rate which cost them 0.5sec a lap Thats a lot of time
I would think Mercedes would have a very accurate and very expensive measurement system but still had to turn down the flow and I am sure with their moral standings they would not be exceeding the flow rate / cheating
This is not all out racing to a formula if its not the same for all this is the fastest slow man wins with the wooky sensor
Red Bull could maybe have found a better way to solve this problem. F1 is facing a crisis I expect the extra audiance it has gained in the last 2 years is slowly deserting and moving on to the next fad plus a few of the hard core fans I hope to be prooved wrong
Bernie will get out just before the fan is turned on and the sh1t hits it
 
Last edited:
"They only have to prove that they didn't exceed 100kg/h"...

From what I am reading, Red Bull are choosing/have chosen to use their own model based method for determining fuel flow rate in preference to the direct measurement from the Gill ultrasound fuel flow transducer. Based on my own professional experience in fuel flow measurement, I think they have a challenge on their hands. As I mentioned earlier, they are gambling on differences in calibration certificates and/or methods. Their experts versus the FIA and the engineers from Gill. I will not share my thoughts on the merits or demerits of using ultrasound as a measuring principle for fluid flow.

When I first heard that the FIA were going to use a flowmeter to arbitrate on fuel flow, I expected issues like this but not straight away. With only 100kg of fuel allowed on board and Grand Prix duration of 90 minutes or so, I don't really see the point of the flowmeter or the 100kg/h flow limit, except for trying to limit maximum power. If the latter is the aim, then an air restrictor would be easier to apply and police.

If they must restrict fuel flow rate, it would be much simpler to introduce a standard orifice plate and limit supply pressure.

I guess we will all just have to wait and see how it pans out..
 
[quote="GeeJay57, post: 6173057, member: 68834 With only 100kg of fuel allowed on board and Grand Prix duration of 90 minutes or so, I don't really see the point of the flowmeter or the 100kg/h flow limit, except for trying to limit maximum power.
What they were trying to eliminate was an endurance race of saving fuel with the last ten laps all out racing, looking at melbourne I dont see much change from last year or other years 10 laps at the start fighting for position 10 laps from the end fighting for position the rest in general maintaining postion
Its the change from racing to entertainment that seems to be out of sync The more they try to make it artifically exciting the worse it seems to get
As you say there are easier and simpler methods of fuel restriction but easier and simple arnt by words in the FIA
 
GeeJay57 said:
With only 100kg of fuel allowed on board and Grand Prix duration of 90 minutes or so, I don't really see the point of the flowmeter or the 100kg/h flow limit ...
Click to expand...

Qualifying perhaps? And mechanical longevity issues.
 
fuzzyedges said:
What they were trying to eliminate was an endurance race of saving fuel with the last ten laps all out racing, looking at melbourne I dont see much change from last year or other years 10 laps at the start fighting for position 10 laps from the end fighting for position the rest in general maintaining position.
Its the change from racing to entertainment that seems to be out of sync. The more they try to make it artifically exciting the worse it seems to get.
As you say there are easier and simpler methods of fuel restriction but easier and simple aren't bye words in the FIA
Click to expand...

Agreed..

As for qually and mechanical longevity/reliability..

The teams know how many engines are allowed for the season, so it should be up to them to find the right balance between performance, fuel consumption and reliability. The fuel flow meter is an added complication that doesn't contribute much IMHO. If the teams think they can wind the wick up in qually and still have a race car at the end; that's fine with me, bring it on! We don't need Charlie et al dabbling too much.
 
Red Bull trying to influence the appeal by threatening to leave F1 if dosnt change or am I reading that wrong
Mateschitz said Red Bull's future in F1 was more "to do with sportsmanship and political influence" than finance.
I reckon thats a bit rich from Red Bull
It should read "to do with us having our own way and influencing events our way "
 
But they don't use Ferrari engines any more...
 
Mateschitz dumps all the blame on renault
Mateschitz was asked by APA if Red Bull sees any alternatives to working with the French marque.
"Probably just to make an engine ourselves," he answered.
Well good luck with that
Mindst Cosworth is out there somewhere
 
fuzzyedges said:
Mateschitz dumps all the blame on renault
Mateschitz was asked by APA if Red Bull sees any alternatives to working with the French marque.
"Probably just to make an engine ourselves," he answered.
Well good luck with that
Mindst Cosworth is out there somewhere
Click to expand...

He has quite an apt name ;).

Though it probably should be Dr Moreschitz, the amount he talks...
 
Anyone dare make a podium prediction for Sunday's race ahead of qualifying?

I'm going for Hamilton in 1st, Rosberg 2nd, and Button in 3rd......I really want to stick Massa in there too.
 
Slimbert said:
Anyone dare make a podium prediction for Sunday's race ahead of qualifying?

I'm going for Hamilton in 1st, Rosberg 2nd, and Button in 3rd......I really want to stick Massa in there too.
Click to expand...
Rosbergs turn to dnf
So I reckon Vettal Hamilton Ricardo
Which would probably mean Hamilton magnussen massa
 
no matter what they do to F1 it will still be the second most boring televised sport after snooker in my opinion....not that my opinion matters :coat:
 
Horner reckons the other teams are buying dozens of the FIA approved sensors to find the best one (that will be the one that lets them go over 100 while the fia think they arnt) its getting a bit pathetic
 
He's just ponessed off that he didn't think of that first!
 
Now ecclestone has heard the F1 cars he dosnt think the sound is too bad So much for him making a noise about it
Will agree with him that tv noise is terrible
Now bernie has spoken maybe someone will improve the tv audio

I see red bull have spent money on sensors to find a good one for sepang
The Times newspaper reports that, after Daniel Ricciardo's disqualification in Melbourne, Red Bull spent over $130,000 on five brand new FIA-mandated Gill sensors for the Sepang race.
Good job there is no budget cap
 
Bernie was also wishing "he could get it up" when talking to Ted Kravitz on Sky....don't know if meant the noise though.
 
Barso said:
Bernie was also wishing "he could get it up" when talking to Ted Kravitz on Sky....don't know if meant the noise though.
Click to expand...

The slightly crazy promoter from Sepang, or where ever it was, certainly seemed to think Bernie meant in the none volume way ;)
 
Wonder if ferrari will be better in sepang than Australia
(and this is a turn up for the books the fia doing ferrari)
After the FIA enable flag for the mug-k unit to work, at the start of the australian race, was not present all ferrari engined cars had no kers for 33 secs at start and Kimi also had a defective fia signal for his drs
The mystery is how come Ferrari are so quiet about it ??? or has red bull caused enough trouble without someone else pointing the finger at the FIA

(regs 8-3-2 lockout period for start of race cars must reach 100k (60mph)before mgu-k can be enabled)
 
Last edited:
Jimmy_Lemon said:
The slightly crazy promoter from Sepang, or where ever it was, certainly seemed to think Bernie meant in the none volume way ;)
Click to expand...

He was from the Singapore promotions, he mentioned trying to negotiate a smaller fee due to the less noise the cars make.....good luck to him.
 
Barso said:
He was from the Singapore promotions, he mentioned trying to negotiate a smaller fee due to the less noise the cars make.....good luck to him.
Click to expand...
It is the mention of smaller fees that makes the noise of the cars a lot louder to Bernie
 
I noticed during FP1 that the ambient noise and car noise seemed louder than OZ at different parts of the track, this was when Edwards managed to shut up for more than 2 seconds though. We need a mute button on the red button for the commentators.
 
GeeJay57 said:
"They only have to prove that they didn't exceed 100kg/h"...

If they must restrict fuel flow rate, it would be much simpler to introduce a standard orifice plate and limit supply pressure.
Click to expand...
Ive just found out why they dont/cant use an oriface plate
The regs state max flow =100kg/hour at, and above, 10500rpm with this maximum reducing as the rpm decreases in line with the formula outlined in 5.1.5.
This means a very complicated oriface plate
The flow rate reg is there to stop teams exploring excessive turbo boost, which means it stops weird race stratigies where cars are at varying speeds
Imagine team player B going flat flat out to gain positions with no hope of saving fuel or finishing and blocking till team player A wins It happens now but imagine what it woud be like with a car that was super faster than the rest
 
The "Blower" Bentleys were blindingly fast in their day but rather unreliable as a result so were used as bait to encourage the competition to overextend themselves, leaving the Speed Sixes a clear run. Of course, that was over a 24 hour race rather than 2 hours max!
 
Nice to see Christian Horner saying the weather would give everyone a level playing field, from the man who refused to turn down his fuel flow in accordance with FIA instructions after other teams did just that. :)
Looking at the qualifying performance, it seems they are just down on power on the other challengers, didn't seem much wrong with the package, so no wonder they want that little extra.
Mercedes and Mclaren said conformign to fia instruction cost them about 1/2 sec a lap in australia, Ferrari say more (but that may be ferrari spin for an slightly uncompetitive car?)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top