Ferrari Mailing List: Re: F1 SPOILER

[LS (lashdeep]

My summary-Regardless of the penalty and Alonso's position, Renault
failed. Their effort wasn't good enough.

Phew!!! I need to go back into lurker mode...


--- Dennis Liu <BigHeadDennis [at] earthlink.net> wrote:

> Lashdeep, you've devolved this away from the original discussion point.
> 
> Clearly, teams aren't building engines that will last if started fifth,
> but
> won't last if started 10th.  That's just silly too.
> 
> 
> You originally said that the whole issue (of what would have happened if
> Alonso wasn't penalized 5 starting positions) has been rendered MOOT by
> virtue of the fact that the Renault motor blew up.
> 
> My response was, you cannot extrapolate that, because you don't know if
> the
> motor would have blown up if Alonso wasn't required to push that much
> harder
> to make up those positions.
> 
> We'll never know whether the engine would have blown up if Alonso
> started
> fifth and just cruised around behind Schumacher.  Tolerances are so dear
> in
> F1 that the engine may very well have NOT expired.
> 
> So a claim that the penalty is irrelevant is incorrect, because you
> can't
> predict what would have happened if it wasn't imposed.  That's all I'm
> saying.
> 
> (ok, enough, I know.  Back to work.  I'm outta here!)
> 
> 
> Vty,
> 
> --Dennis
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: LS [mailto:lashdeep [at] yahoo.com] 
> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 11:54 AM
> To: BigHeadDennis [at] earthlink.net
> Cc: The FerrariList
> Subject: Re: [Ferrari] F1 SPOILER
> 
> Renault's job as a competitor is to build a tool that can withstand any
> and
> every challenge that Alonso is presented with during a particular race. 
> 
> Not taking into account all possibilites (starting 10th instead of 5th)
> is
> not understanding your requirements.
> 
> "their
> > best guess and compromise"
> 
> Their best didn't cut it. Good luck to them next time...hopefully they
> will
> have it figured out.
> 
> LS
> 
> 
> --- Dennis Liu <BigHeadDennis [at] earthlink.net> wrote:
> 
> > Lashdeep wrote:
> > 
> > >The Renault engine should be able to endure any level of effort and
> > abuse,
> > despite any setback or penalty. It wasn't.
> > 
> > -------------
> > 
> > Now that's just plain silly.  :-)
> > 
> > Racing equipment has a finite life, especially in F1.  Teams build 
> > everything to extremely close tolerances, essentially following Colin 
> > Chapman's dictum that the perfect racing car is the one that falls 
> > apart after it crosses the finish line - if it lasts any longer, then 
> > it was built too well/strong/heavy.  Weight is the enemy, so engineers
> 
> > build things to last just long enough (and be safe enough too, of 
> > course).
> > 
> > Want more power but displacement is limited, fuel type is limited, 
> > aspiration is atmospheric?  Add more revs.  But that cuts into 
> > reliability.
> > So you build the engine just long enough to last for qualifying, and 
> > you swap it out for another one that lasts just long enough for the
> race.
> > Wait,
> > there is a 2-race rule?  Ok, you build the engine just long enough to 
> > last for TWO races, including qualifying.  But if you have to abuse 
> > it, run it to the ragged edge, it may not last as long as you want.
> > 
> > Renault built its engine to a certain spec limit.  That spec limit was
> 
> > their best guess and compromise - it has to last 2 races, but must 
> > also produce as much horsepower as possible.  If it ABSOLUTELY must 
> > last two races, then you opt for lower rev limits and lose power.  If 
> > you grant your driver more power for a goodly portion of a race, then 
> > you cut into whatever safety margin you had built in, and run a much 
> > higher risk of blowing the thing up.
> > 
> > Every team has the ability to build a completely bulletproof motor 
> > that will last two races.  Heck, last an entire season.  But it would 
> > be dead last.
> > 
> > How fast do you want to go?  Well, how long do you want to dance on 
> > the edge of the knife?
> > 
> > Renault and Alonso had to dance on the edge longer because they had to
> 
> > start from 10th and push like hell to catch up to Schumacher.  That 
> > ate into their safety margin.  If they had started 5th, they would not
> 
> > have had to push as hard.
> > 
> > Vty,
> > 
> > --Dennis
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: LS [mailto:lashdeep [at] yahoo.com]
> > Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 11:08 AM
> > To: BigHeadDennis [at] earthlink.net
> > Cc: The FerrariList
> > Subject: Re: [Ferrari] F1 SPOILER
> > 
> > Too much theorizing here guys...his motor blew.  It wasn't up to 
> > Alonso's effort and Renault needs to work on that if a championship is
> 
> > important.
> > 
> > Strategy (rev limits, cruise mode, qual mode) is pointless if your 
> > equipment isn't designed to entertain all of the possible strategic 
> > options when necessary.
> > 
> > The Renault engine should be able to endure any level of effort and 
> > abuse, despite any setback or penalty. It wasn't.
> > 
> > I remember the same discussion with the tires at Indy a few years ago.
> > Michelin failed and all of the teams paid the price. Here Alonso is 
> > paying the price for an equipment failure. They need to step their 
> > game up because in racing, there are situations that present 
> > themselves that cannot be planned for or strategized around.
> > 
> > LS
> > 
> > 
> > --- Dennis Liu <BigHeadDennis [at] earthlink.net> wrote:
> > 
> > > Yeah, that's my point exactly, Lashdeep - it's too difficult to say,
> 
> > > which is why one shouldn't use the excuse, "it doesn't matter 'cause
> 
> > > his engine blew up anyway!".
> > > 
> > > Typically with race motors, if you cut rev usage by a few hundred 
> > > revs, you can DOUBLE the life of the motor.  A few laps at the 
> > > absolute limit of the motor can cause it to expire in a very short 
> > > time, while those same laps at 99% can cause the motor to last 
> > > another
> > 
> > > race entirely.  If Alonso had been higher up on the race grid, and 
> > > managed to get himself behind Schumacher, he would not need to pass 
> > > him.  Remember, even if he finishes immediately behind Schumacher 
> > > for every race between Monza and Brazil, he still wins the
> championship!
> > > Heck, even if he finished third or fourth behind Michael in 1st or 
> > > 2nd, it's not the end of the world -- much better than blowing up 
> > > your
> > 
> > > engine trying to make it into the points!  Alonso had a great start 
> > > yesterday, and he's always really good on starts.  So he could have 
> > > just hit "cruise mode", and saved the engine - indeed, he wouldn't 
> > > even have to be right on Schumacher's bumper, he would only have to 
> > > keep challengers from passing him.
> > > 
> > > Vty,
> > > 
> > > --Dennis
> > > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: LS [mailto:lashdeep [at] yahoo.com]
> > > Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 9:16 AM
> > > To: BigHeadDennis [at] earthlink.net
> > > Cc: 'The FerrariList'
> > > Subject: RE: [Ferrari] F1 SPOILER
> > > 
> > > "Which would mean he
> > > wouldn't have been as hard on the engine, so it may not have blown 
> > > up
> > > - remember, drivers can and often do turn down the wick and go into 
> > > "cruise"
> > > mode.
> > > "
> > > 
> > > Understood, maybe it would lasted another 3 laps? It's difficult to 
> 
=== message truncated ===


www.exhaust.tv

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com