F1 2022 Season
- Thread starter pauldyson1uk
- Start date
Minimum stops for Monaco definately. The rest of the season? Should be a choice. No to refuelling from me as well.
Maybe im out on my own on this, in the thread but i think ballast would have a huge change to F1. If max had to carry an additional 65kg of weight as championship leader, he wouldnt have been sleep-driving himself to consecutive victories.
However on the flipside. RedBull utterly nailed the rule changes and produced their best car since vettel years at RedBull. It really is on Mercedes and Ferrari shoulder to produce a car next season that can challenge.
Will be interesting to see if RedBull lose the straight line speed advantage next season, i dont doubt that Ferrari and Mercedes will have Shell and Petronas working overtime to get their fuel addatives sorted out. Optimise ERS deployment. Add to that weight reduction, making their cars less draggy (RB have set the template).
However probably more important than anything, nail the suspension setup.
It certainly does, as Mercedes know very well. Spending hundreds of millions more than other teams before the budget caps came in
That was very boring race.
It has to be said, strategies this year from all teams except Red Bull have been mostly poor, it's like they get different set of 10 different compounds every weekend and not the same tires they have used for 20 races now. Also I don't get how they don't learn anything from 3 full practice sessions before every race.
Russel learned mid race and insisted that he can go on medium-soft strategy from that point and yet his pit crew didn't agree with it for some reason.
It has to be said, strategies this year from all teams except Red Bull have been mostly poor, it's like they get different set of 10 different compounds every weekend and not the same tires they have used for 20 races now. Also I don't get how they don't learn anything from 3 full practice sessions before every race.
Russel learned mid race and insisted that he can go on medium-soft strategy from that point and yet his pit crew didn't agree with it for some reason.
The top three teams were evenly matched coming into the budget cap dry run in 2020, more ten's of million difference rather than the conjecture of 'hundreds of millions more'.
https://www.essentiallysports.com/f...f1-teams-including-mercedes-red-bull-ferrari/
| F1 Teams | Budget Between 2015 & 2019 | ||||
| 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | |
| Mercedes | $527.6M | $352M | $352.1M | $400M | $484M |
| Ferrari | $474.7M | $483.3M | $295.3M | $410M | $463M |
| Red Bull | $532.5M | $286.2M | $284M | $310M | $445M |
| McLaren | $528.3M | $246.4M | $240.8M | $220M | $269M |
| Alpine (Renault/Lotus) | $149.8M | 199.8M | $195.4M | $190M | $272M |
| Aston Martin (Racing Point/Force India) | $147.3M | $119.2M | $117M | $120M | $188M |
| AlphaTauri (Toro Rosso) | $156.1M | $132.8M | $130.6M | $150M | $138M |
| Alfa Romeo (Sauber) | $117.2M | $126M | $123.8M | $135M | $132M |
| Williams | $217.7M | $139.6M | $136.3M | $150M | $141M |
| Haas | NA |
Everyone played it safe bar Ricciardo yesterday. To your point above, they learn as much as they can but they never run a car at full weight with fuel until the race, so they'll rely a lot on data from previous races to help there. However the variables of weather, track temperature, and track condition will always impact strategy to some point where they can't guarantee an absolute strategy.
Pirelli should probably go a bit more aggressive on compound choices next year to open up a variety of strategy choices.
Yet even they managed to comply with the rules.
How do you know that. Based on what actual data because I was not aware that teams published their spend.
What percentage of the car development budget was their over spend? That would be a more relevant metric.
How many other teams made this "mistake"?
Dodgiest team on the grid.
Extra weight would, bring all the cars closer, but also add extra wear and tear , costing the top teams more in the long run, came see any team wanting it really.
Next season, hopefully we will see a few teams in it, Red Bull, Ferrari and Mercedes.
It seems that Red Bull learns from somewhere wher others don't then.
I don't see how after all practice session Mercedes drivers come out and say "hards are shit", despite their team choosing hards to be used in more than half of the race. How exactly did they decide hards are good option if they didn't do any testing before?
I guess I would just draw a clear distinction between something said on a broadcast during a race versus someone talking about it on a panel. I agree with his take of course - Lewis was absolutely robbed - but I can also understand why Verstappen would be annoyed that this is being brought up out of nowhere in the middle of a race for everyone to hear. Again, I would say that if Ted had done this after a race or in some other medium that would be entirely fair - but I personally don't think Verstappen is being overly precious here if that makes sense.
Based on what they want to be true.
Damn, now Verstappen has two asterisk titles.
Verstappen, Horner, and the rest of Red Bull are perfectly within their rights to refuse any interviews with Sky, like Fergie with the BBC for years.
However, given that Sky have paid an awful lot for broadcasting rights, those refusals should be fined every time, just like Fergie was. Then at least it becomes principle as well as pettiness.
However, given that Sky have paid an awful lot for broadcasting rights, those refusals should be fined every time, just like Fergie was. Then at least it becomes principle as well as pettiness.
Based on last two sentence it's not worth responding but i still will.
The loudest rumor is that they didn't included Newey's salary since he is in top 3 earners but the contract they have with Newey makes him outsourced partner and couldn't be excluded. They had this type of contract with him for years and if that is right they will surely change it this season. So the additional cost that pushed them from way below cost cap to over it didn't come out of development budget since it was accounting error and not overspend.
People fail to understand that a lot of things are excluded from the budget and team like Mercedes with all the additional costs for drivers salary, top 3 earners, marketing budget and others things that are excluded still spend a lot more than a team like Haas.
So narative that Red Bull gained some sort of big advantage by going 400k pounds over all other teams which spend the same is very naive since it's not the case.
Their first submission as I said was 5 mil below, many teams probably left themselves even more leeway and some others probably went much more to the limit and the money spend which is included in the cost cap from team to team varied in the millions. Not even mentioning costs that are excluded.
And you say that 400k significantly impacted results in those circumstances...
Yes in the end they were over and have to pay big fine and are heavily impacted from reduction of wind tunnel testing but those punishment have much bigger negative impact that the money overspend could have positive impact. To be fair like all punishments should have.
Not even any anecdotal evidence.
Red Bull has such an advantage that it doesn't need to learn, the car will be faster than the field so they'll be able to make any tyre strategy work.
Hards were probably chosen to go longer for Mercedes, on the chance that the Mediums would drop off for Red Bull. This was their only chance to win the race, they wouldn't have been able to match the strategy and pace of Red Bull. So the strategy they played was to go longer on both compounds, and the harder compounds have particularly worked well for Mercedes this year and from their data then would suggest that going to medium again wouldn't work for tyre life and also they would need to stop again to put on a different regulatory compound. Quickest route to the finish was a one stop yesterday.
What disrupted that strategy was that Red Bull were very good on tyre wear in this race, and made the medium last (only one driver, Norris, went longer on mediums in a race this year than Red Bull in Mexico). I don't think Hamilton could have improved from 2nd, but the gamble Mercedes should have made was to put Russell on a more aggressive strategy to put pressure on Perez. However to try an insinuate that the race was lost by Mercedes due to strategy, and not because of the speed differential to Red Bull, is a bit disingenuous.
Re: yesterdays race. All the teams lost practise sessions worth of data because they had to run pirelli 2023 tyres in a blind test. FP1 & FP2 i think that was.
So that left FP3, which is too late to be doing hugh fuel sim runs with what is the least preferable of the 3 compounds for the weekend.
Mercedes gambled and lost. Bad strategy call. It happens.
So that left FP3, which is too late to be doing hugh fuel sim runs with what is the least preferable of the 3 compounds for the weekend.
Mercedes gambled and lost. Bad strategy call. It happens.
It was FP2 and they had an additional 30 minutes on the session to cover the test that Pirelli wanted. There was no lost session time due to the 2023 tyre test.
Ok i didnt really pay attention to the FPs. So even less excuses for them.
Mercedes have just become scared of challenging red bull on track for some reason. I think they're embarrased by the straight line speed deficit.
Why on earth they didn't listen to Russell, he said lets go long and put the softs on at the end. "oh the tyres won't last"
For some reason the level of wear on the tyres was catching everybody by surprise. What I don't get though is why when it was obvious they were wrong - they wouldn't roll the dice and see what happened.
With the pace Ricciardo showed on the softs, surely it was worth a gamble to say Russell go chase down Perez on some softs? meh.
Why on earth they didn't listen to Russell, he said lets go long and put the softs on at the end. "oh the tyres won't last"
For some reason the level of wear on the tyres was catching everybody by surprise. What I don't get though is why when it was obvious they were wrong - they wouldn't roll the dice and see what happened.
With the pace Ricciardo showed on the softs, surely it was worth a gamble to say Russell go chase down Perez on some softs? meh.
RB did their learning in the multiple years their car was slower than Mercedes and Ferrari, and they've carried those learnings into the years where their car matches or exceeds their rivals. Mercedes are now in the opposite situation where for a significant period of time they didn't have to make quick or bold strategy calls due to the monster of a car they developed, now they've slipped on the development their inability to make a decisive pit call is showing, although I'm sure they'll learn (or make a car so quick they don't have too).
The problem as Mercedes saw it was that even with DRS and a tow they wouldnt have been able to overtake on track a RedBull that is faster in the straights than any other car.Mercedes have just become scared of challenging red bull on track for some reason. I think they're embarrased by the straight line speed deficit.
Why on earth they didn't listen to Russell, he said lets go long and put the softs on at the end. "oh the tyres won't last"
For some reason the level of wear on the tyres was catching everybody by surprise. What I don't get though is why when it was obvious they were wrong - they wouldn't roll the dice and see what happened.
With the pace Ricciardo showed on the softs, surely it was worth a gamble to say Russell go chase down Perez on some softs? meh.
Brundle thought they made a mistake, we all did. How do you go from telling hamilton target +6, so extend the stint on MED, to then suddenly bringing him in?
Unless they thought the delta between SOFTs and MED was so negliable that hamilton and russell would have destroyed their softs trying to close down a 24sec gap after a pitstop.
Regardless it shows the progress they habe made, towards the end of the season with a car that has a fatal flaw that cant be fixed.
Anyone think it wierd that Ferrari had such power issues with their turbocharger and mgu-h at altitude?
I guess smarter people must have figured out how their turbocharger works from the problems they had at mexico.
I cant recall if Ferrari are the exception to the rule for MGU-H layout that everyone copied from Mercedes. Or was it Alpine?
Regardless thats a big flaw at altitude. Will need fixing for mexico next year.
I guess smarter people must have figured out how their turbocharger works from the problems they had at mexico.
I cant recall if Ferrari are the exception to the rule for MGU-H layout that everyone copied from Mercedes. Or was it Alpine?
Regardless thats a big flaw at altitude. Will need fixing for mexico next year.
The UK based teams have to publicly publish their spend. Companies House rules.
Tyre advantage is king though. Look at the way Ricciardo carved his way through the pack with fresh tyres. Mclaren aren't great in a straight line usually and Norris was stuck in the DRS train most of the race.
The way he rocked up and overtook them was like a different formula. Overtaking is usually about getting a better exit from a corner due to more grip, and then being able to brake later to block pass them.
I have no doubt that Russell would have managed to get passed IF he caught up. It's just sad they didn't even try.
Really feel for Alonso.
Listening to ALO's radio asking for code fixes was so painful. Even more considering all the efforts made in the first stint.
But then again, It can't be a mistake to put the hards on when you already had the RIC info with softs.
I watched last 6 races with ALO's onboard paired with general live coverage and right when OCO was lapped and got up to a 10 sec gap, they urged ALO to put a code in urgently. No problems reported until that point and then all of a sudden it all goes down the drain.
I noticed this in other races where ALO had deployment issues it was always after a new SOC available or a higher top speed mode. How convenient.
Feels like it's no longer priority number one by Alpine to fix his car. And if Ocon is ahead of Alonso in the standings, that doesn't look too bad for Alpine either. But it's sad that Alonso is gone like this.
Otmar is dismissing this as yet another case of Fernando’s bad luck.
Also Szafnauer has been very antagonistic to Alonso right from the start, basically blaming him for everything. There has been many instances whereby he was deflecting any blame for the failures but one stood out for me. In Spain when the team sent Alonso out late in Q1 and his RE was hurrying him to quickly start his lap even though there was a bit of time left on the clock, which resulted in a ruined lap since he got too close to Lando, Alonso said in the post qualy interview that there was a miscommunication with the team. But Szafnauer somehow saw the need to publicly point his finger at Alonso and said the driver should have asked exactly how much time was left on the clock, which was a really ridiculous thing to pin on the driver in that kind of situation
Perhaps Szafnauer thinks that he has to exert his authority on the team, including the drivers. By all accounts, Alonso is well loved by the engineers, so maybe Szafnauer who has little experience dealing with a top driver, sees the need to stamp his authority to maintain his standing within the team.
Could you imagine the season we would have had, if alonso had been in the RedBull alongside max? That would have been box office.
or if redbull had not cheated last season and there could have been a fair fight with ferrari and merc
The battle of 2 egotistical maniacs.Listening to ALO's radio asking for code fixes was so painful. Even more considering all the efforts made in the first stint.
But then again, It can't be a mistake to put the hards on when you already had the RIC info with softs.
I watched last 6 races with ALO's onboard paired with general live coverage and right when OCO was lapped and got up to a 10 sec gap, they urged ALO to put a code in urgently. No problems reported until that point and then all of a sudden it all goes down the drain.
I noticed this in other races where ALO had deployment issues it was always after a new SOC available or a higher top speed mode. How convenient.
Feels like it's no longer priority number one by Alpine to fix his car. And if Ocon is ahead of Alonso in the standings, that doesn't look too bad for Alpine either. But it's sad that Alonso is gone like this.
Otmar is dismissing this as yet another case of Fernando’s bad luck.
Also Szafnauer has been very antagonistic to Alonso right from the start, basically blaming him for everything. There has been many instances whereby he was deflecting any blame for the failures but one stood out for me. In Spain when the team sent Alonso out late in Q1 and his RE was hurrying him to quickly start his lap even though there was a bit of time left on the clock, which resulted in a ruined lap since he got too close to Lando, Alonso said in the post qualy interview that there was a miscommunication with the team. But Szafnauer somehow saw the need to publicly point his finger at Alonso and said the driver should have asked exactly how much time was left on the clock, which was a really ridiculous thing to pin on the driver in that kind of situation
Perhaps Szafnauer thinks that he has to exert his authority on the team, including the drivers. By all accounts, Alonso is well loved by the engineers, so maybe Szafnauer who has little experience dealing with a top driver, sees the need to stamp his authority to maintain his standing within the team.
I very much doubt they'd sabotage Alonso anyway considering how many points they keep throwing away. They shouldn't even be in a fight with Mclaren at this stage, but somehow it's still alive.
They wouldn’t need to purposely sabotage Alonso. Their car is that unreliable.
It’s not really up to them though? They’re just making whatever FIA wants. They’ve mentioned plenty of times that they could make a tire that last the entire race if needed, but that would just make the race even more boring and you’ll see some winners being a full lap ahead of everyone else.
What’s the extra weight going to do when everyone will still be on the same weight?
They literally made that rule to ensure that the taller/heavier drivers aren’t at a disadvantage.
Thats like saying Manchester City and PSG nailed FFP
I think they're pushing the engines too hard. Their straight line speed is probably 2nd best on the grid, it seems like they're going for performance > reliability.
Ballast is added to the car depending on championship standings for top 6 for example. Thats completely seperate to the minimum weight of the car.
French engineering for you. Prost had loads of issues when he drove for renault back in the day.
I'm not on about the construction of the tyre, I'm on about the compound choices they select for the race. They could select C1-C3 for this race but choose C2-C4, thus giving the possibilities of more stops in the race and varying strategic tyre choices for the teams.