Summer Tech Time 2023

It’s a Techtime special as Trumpets is joined by Matthew Somerfield, technical editor at Motorsport.Com as they get out the F1 microscope to have some fun on the summer break. From regulation rumors to clarifying convergence, from unwound updates to perfectly timed development packages, no front brake duct goes unblanked in this, the latest episode of Missed Apex Podcast.

Please consider supporting us on patreon. We exist only because of our patron support:

Missed Apex F1 is creating Podcasts

Or use our Tip Jar to support our 2022  advertising campaign and help us grow the podcast 

Spanners Ready Spanners���� (@SpannersReady)

spanners@missedapex.net

Matt Trumpets mattpt55 (@mattpt55)

Matthew Somerfield: https://twitter.com/SomersF1 

Missed Apex Missed Apex Podcast (@MissedApexF1)

feedback@missedapex.net

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

**Missed Apex Podcast: Tech Time with Matthew Somerfield**

* **Topic 1: DRS and Qualifying Rumors**

- Rumors of FIA eliminating DRS and qualifying to hinder Red Bull's dominance.
- DRS as a tactical advantage for overtaking, but currently seen as artificial.
- Suggestion to implement DRS as a limited resource, allowing teams to use it strategically during a race weekend.
- DRS could also be tied to qualifying position, giving an advantage to drivers starting further back on the grid.

* **Topic 2: Red Bull's Aerodynamic Advantage**

- Red Bull's success attributed to their unique approach to rear wing and beam wing setup.
- They run a solo beam wing, generating less downforce and drag, which amplifies the effect of DRS.
- This approach allows them to balance downforce and drag more effectively.
- Williams has also adopted this strategy, showing improved track performance.
- Other teams are catching on, but their overall car design and development strategies differ.

* **Topic 3: Development Trends and Resource Allocation**

- Teams focus on specific areas for development based on their understanding of the regulations and their car's strengths and weaknesses.
- Red Bull excelled in optimizing the floor and side pods, while other teams explored different avenues.
- Iterative updates are common, particularly for front and rear wings, to adapt to different circuit requirements.
- Calendar changes have impacted development schedules, limiting opportunities for teams to test and implement upgrades.
- Teams now aim for one or two major update packages during the season due to cost cap and resource restrictions.
- Sprint races further complicate development as they eliminate a free practice session for testing new components.

* **Topic 4: McLaren's Development Approach**

- McLaren's lack of a suitable rear wing for the Belgian Grand Prix highlights their development challenges.
- Teams face difficulties in balancing development and production timelines, especially with the cost cap and limited resources.
- The shift in the Spanish Grand Prix to a later date in the season has affected development schedules.
- Teams must consider flyaway races and the associated costs when planning their upgrade packages.

* **Topic 5: The Future of Active Aero and DRS**

- Active aero regulations for 2026 may incorporate DRS as a layered system.
- DRS will likely remain a part of Formula One, but its implementation may evolve.

* **Overall Conclusion**

- Red Bull's dominance is likely to continue unless major regulation changes occur or other teams make significant progress in their development.
- The midfield battles have provided entertaining racing despite the front-running advantage.
- Formula One's circular nature means that design concepts often resurface and become potent again.
- Teams are honing in on specific development areas to extract the most performance from their cars.
- The cost cap and resource restrictions have influenced development strategies and timelines. **Navigating the Technical Nuances of Formula One: A Deep Dive into Car Development and Regulation Controversies**

* **Spanners Ready Podcast:** A candid discussion about the ever-evolving landscape of Formula One racing, hosted by Matt Trumpets and Matthew Somerfield.

* **Regulation Rumors and Convergence:** The podcast delves into the complexities of Formula One regulations, addressing rumors and clarifying the concept of convergence.

* **Unwound Updates and Perfectly Timed Development Packages:** The hosts analyze the strategies employed by teams in bringing timely updates to their cars, highlighting the significance of well-executed development packages.

* **Red Bull's Drip-Feeding Approach:** A focus on Red Bull's unique strategy of introducing gradual updates throughout the season, maximizing their allocation of CFD and wind tunnel time.

* **Clever Interpretation of Radiator and Duct Work Regulations:** Somerfield sheds light on Red Bull's ingenious interpretation of the regulations, allowing them to invest heavily in improving their side pod design without exceeding the allotted wind tunnel and CFD time.

* **Spotting Hints of Next Season's Developments in Current Updates:** The hosts discuss the challenges of identifying hints of next season's car developments in current updates, emphasizing the difficulties teams face in balancing resource allocation between the current and upcoming seasons.

* **Diverging Development Paths and the Tree of Design:** Somerfield introduces the concept of a "development tree," illustrating how teams adopt and adapt design concepts from one another, leading to a variety of design variants within a single overall concept.

* **McLaren's "Wide Pods" and Aston Martin's Undercut Focus:** The podcast examines the design philosophies of McLaren and Aston Martin, highlighting the differences in their approaches to side pod design and undercut optimization.

* **McLaren's Calculated Gamble and the Cost of Race-Specific Developments:** The hosts analyze McLaren's decision to focus on a major development update for Austria and Silverstone, questioning the potential long-term consequences of sacrificing updates for other tracks.

* **The Balancing Act of Iterative Design and the Risk of Missteps:** Somerfield emphasizes the challenges of iterative design, acknowledging the possibility of missteps that can disrupt the overall performance of a car.

* **Aston Martin's Development Strategy and the Flexible Front Wing Controversy:** The podcast addresses Aston Martin's recent performance struggles, exploring the potential impact of the rumored flexible front wing issue and the challenges of interpreting wind tunnel data.

* **McLaren's New Wind Tunnel and the Potential for Gains:** Somerfield discusses McLaren's investment in a new wind tunnel, highlighting the potential advantages it offers in terms of logistical efficiency and long-term performance improvements.

* **The Significance of McLaren's Decision to Delay Using the New Wind Tunnel:** The hosts question McLaren's decision not to use their new wind tunnel for the current car, emphasizing the importance of validation and correlation in wind tunnel data.

* **The Risk of Mathematical Tools and Wind Tunnel Discrepancies:** Somerfield raises concerns about the potential for mathematical tools and wind tunnel discrepancies, acknowledging the challenges of translating wind tunnel data into real-world performance.

* **McLaren's Potential for Further Gains and the Impact of Resource Allocation:** The podcast discusses McLaren's potential for further improvements, considering the impact of resource allocation and the iterative nature of car development.

* **The Importance of Interpreting Regulations Differently:** Somerfield stresses the significance of interpreting regulations differently from competitors, highlighting the potential for gaining advantages through creative interpretations.

* **The Aston Martin FlexiWing Controversy and the Role of Technical Directives:** The hosts address the ongoing FlexiWing controversy surrounding Aston Martin, emphasizing the lack of a technical directive and the challenges of defining flexibility parameters.

* **Aston Martin's Front Wing Pivots and the Balancing Act of Performance and Compliance:** Somerfield explains the technical aspects of the front wing pivots, highlighting the delicate balance between performance and compliance with regulations.

* **The FIA's Monitoring of Onboard Data and the Crackdown on Excessive Flexibility:** The podcast discusses the FIA's efforts to monitor onboard data and address excessive flexibility in wings, aiming to prevent teams from gaining unfair advantages.

* **Aston Martin's Reversion to an Old Undercut Specification:** The hosts analyze Aston Martin's decision to revert to an older undercut specification at Spa, suggesting that it may be an attempt to address flow structure issues caused by changes to the front wing.

* **Other Teams Walking Back Developments and the Challenges of Floor Design:** Somerfield mentions other teams that have walked back developments, particularly in the area of floor design, emphasizing the challenges of balancing performance with ride height changes and variations. **Summary of Missed Apex Podcast Episode: Tech Time Special**

* **Mercedes:**
* Chassis and setup optimized for ZeroPods, limiting performance.
* Performance varies based on circuit characteristics and weekend format.
* Car lacks responsiveness and aerodynamic efficiency in certain corners.
* Significant changes expected for next season, with this year serving as a transitional phase.


* **Ferrari:**
* Team in a transition phase, experiencing a cycle of leadership changes and tactical inefficiencies.
* Recent technical brain drain may hinder progress in the short term.
* New hires expected, but subject to gardening leave restrictions.
* FIA regulations on personnel movement seen as an obstacle to rapid improvement.


* **Alpine:**
* Complaint to FIA regarding power unit deficit met with skepticism.
* Team's aerodynamic development praised, with other teams copying their solutions.
* Power unit deficit estimated to cost the team approximately 30 horsepower.
* Team has made progress on the chassis and aero side, but engine issues remain a limiting factor.
* Recent management changes may exacerbate existing problems.


* **Williams:**
* Team punching above its weight given its resource limitations.
* Focus on creating a benign and quick car for high-speed circuits.
* Alex Albon's performance in the car has been exceptional.
* Long-term project with limited prospects for immediate improvement. # Missed Apex Podcast: Tech Time with Matthew Somerfield

**Introduction**

- Matt Trumpets and Matthew Somerfield, technical editor at Motorsport.com, join forces for a special Tech Time episode of the Missed Apex Podcast.
- They dive deep into the world of Formula One, exploring various topics during the summer break.

**Regulation Rumors and Convergence**

- Discussions about potential regulation changes for 2026 and beyond are heating up.
- The focus is on convergence, aiming to reduce the performance gap between teams and create closer racing.
- Somerfield emphasizes the importance of striking a balance between convergence and preserving the uniqueness of each team's design approach.

**Unwound Updates and Development Packages**

- Somerfield explains the concept of "unwound" updates, where teams introduce small modifications to their cars throughout the season.
- These updates are aimed at improving performance incrementally, rather than making major overhauls.
- Perfectly timed development packages can make a significant difference in a team's competitiveness.

**Front Brake Duct Innovations**

- Somerfield highlights the importance of front brake duct design in Formula One.
- Teams are constantly innovating to optimize airflow and cooling for the brakes.
- The shape and size of the brake ducts can have a noticeable impact on a car's performance.

**Insights and Perspectives**

- Somerfield provides valuable insights into the technical aspects of Formula One, offering a deeper understanding of the sport.
- He emphasizes the significance of understanding the regulations and how teams interpret them to gain an advantage.
- Somerfield also stresses the importance of considering the limitations and constraints that teams face when designing and developing their cars.

**Overall Message**

- The episode offers a comprehensive exploration of the technical side of Formula One, delving into various aspects that contribute to a team's success.
- Somerfield's expertise provides a unique perspective, helping listeners gain a deeper appreciation for the complexities and intricacies of the sport.

[00:00.000 -> 00:03.800] Looking for a fun way to win up to 25 times your money this football season?
[00:03.800 -> 00:09.000] Test your skills on Prize Picks, the most exciting way to play daily fantasy sports.
[00:09.000 -> 00:15.600] Just select two or more players, pick more or less on their projection for a wide variety of statistics, and place your entry.
[00:15.600 -> 00:25.680] It's as easy as that. If you have the skills, you can turn $10 into $250 with just a few taps. Easy gameplay, quick withdrawals,
[00:25.680 -> 00:28.480] and an enormous selection of players and stat options
[00:28.480 -> 00:30.680] are what make PrizePix the number one
[00:30.680 -> 00:32.480] daily fantasy sports app.
[00:32.480 -> 00:33.960] Ready to test your skills?
[00:33.960 -> 00:36.040] Join the PrizePix community of more than
[00:36.040 -> 00:39.400] seven million football fans who have already signed up.
[00:39.400 -> 00:42.400] Right now, PrizePix will match your first deposit
[00:42.400 -> 00:44.320] up to $100.
[00:44.320 -> 00:45.120] Just visit prizepix.com slash get100 and use code get100. price picks will match your first deposit up to $100 just visit price
[00:45.120 -> 00:51.400] picks comm slash get 100 and use code get 100 that's code get 100 at price
[00:51.400 -> 00:57.440] picks comm slash get 100 for a first deposit matchup to $100 prize picks
[00:57.440 -> 01:01.520] daily fantasy sports made easy
[01:06.800 -> 01:20.920] You are listening to Missed Apex Podcast. We live F1.
[01:20.920 -> 01:23.440] Welcome to Tech Time with Summers F1.
[01:23.440 -> 01:25.960] I am your host Matt Trumpets, and we have none
[01:25.960 -> 01:31.720] other than that story denizen of the tech, the Matthew Summerfield, technical editor
[01:31.720 -> 01:37.200] at Motorsport.com, who has surfaced long enough to spout some F1 wisdom our way.
[01:37.200 -> 01:41.920] But before we get started, I have to remind you that we are an independent podcast produced
[01:41.920 -> 01:45.040] in the podcasting shed with the kind permission of our better halves,
[01:45.040 -> 01:50.240] and we aim to bring you a race review before your Monday morning commute. Might be wrong,
[01:50.240 -> 01:51.120] but we're first.
[01:58.880 -> 02:04.320] Oh, Sommers, it is good to see you again. Thanks for taking a little time to come have a chat with
[02:04.320 -> 02:05.120] us. No problem, Matt. It's good to be here. Good to see you,. Thanks for taking a little time to come have a chat with us.
[02:05.920 -> 02:06.880] No problem, Matt. It's good to be here.
[02:06.880 -> 02:08.240] Good to see you as always.
[02:08.720 -> 02:12.560] And I have to comment briefly for those of you who are audio only,
[02:12.560 -> 02:18.240] he is wearing a very special and highly celebratory shirt as well.
[02:19.280 -> 02:22.720] Yeah, it's a bit of a Hawaiian theme going on.
[02:22.720 -> 02:24.720] There's a bit of a summer vibe, let's say.
[02:25.440 -> 02:26.260] I do like it.
[02:26.260 -> 02:28.140] And the summer break is kind of interesting,
[02:28.140 -> 02:30.020] I guess, from a technical point of view,
[02:30.020 -> 02:33.340] because it is sort of a, the trends are all set.
[02:33.340 -> 02:35.000] You have an idea of what's going on,
[02:35.000 -> 02:37.380] but there's still sort of a lot of time left
[02:37.380 -> 02:39.580] in the season for things to change.
[02:39.580 -> 02:41.980] Yeah, I mean, obviously at this point in the season,
[02:41.980 -> 02:45.120] we've kind of seen the bulk of the developments
[02:45.120 -> 02:47.120] in terms of what we're going to get this season.
[02:47.120 -> 02:50.360] Will there start to see some convergence in the back end of the season?
[02:50.360 -> 02:57.380] And then obviously a little bit of focus on the 2024 cars in terms of teams looking at
[02:57.380 -> 03:02.120] development streams that they might be interested in with next season as well.
[03:02.120 -> 03:04.220] Okay, that's fantastic.
[03:04.220 -> 03:08.840] What I'd like to talk about first, and this is just because everyone is talking about
[03:08.840 -> 03:16.560] it and I'll begin with my flaming mild take, but there has been rumors going around, there
[03:16.560 -> 03:22.560] have been rumors going around, that the FIA might actually get rid of DRS and qualifying
[03:22.560 -> 03:27.040] altogether. And I'm curious, how true is that?
[03:27.040 -> 03:31.000] And what kind of an effect do we think that might have?
[03:31.000 -> 03:33.640] My personal take is as far as Red Bull goes,
[03:33.640 -> 03:35.620] because the accompanying the rumor is
[03:35.620 -> 03:38.760] this is a way to make things harder for Red Bull is,
[03:38.760 -> 03:41.720] I don't think it'll make a lick of difference to Red Bull
[03:41.720 -> 03:44.640] whether or not there's DRS and qualifying or not,
[03:44.640 -> 03:45.480] but you
[03:45.480 -> 03:46.480] are more learned than I.
[03:46.480 -> 03:50.480] So what are you thinking and what is your knowledge on this subject?
[03:50.480 -> 03:53.960] Okay, so I think it's an interesting take.
[03:53.960 -> 03:59.480] I think it's a step backwards in many respects because if you remember when DRS was first
[03:59.480 -> 04:09.540] introduced, we actually had unlimited DRS in qualifying. That soon got tailed off when teams could find a way to run DRS through the
[04:09.540 -> 04:14.580] 130R corner in Suzuka, which obviously was Red Bull at the time as well.
[04:14.580 -> 04:16.620] So that put pay to that.
[04:17.000 -> 04:22.400] I think it could be interesting in some respects because of the way in which
[04:22.400 -> 04:26.840] the teams set their cars up for use of DRS
[04:26.840 -> 04:28.640] through a race weekend.
[04:28.840 -> 04:34.600] Obviously, sometimes they'll sacrifice qualifying pace to improve their
[04:34.600 -> 04:39.640] performance during the race, utilizing DRS and vice versa.
[04:39.640 -> 04:44.040] So there are some strategic aspects to why this might be interesting.
[04:44.280 -> 04:47.600] I don't think it's the answer to where we should be going with DRS.
[04:47.600 -> 04:51.720] So as you know, I've talked about things in the past about my personal take
[04:51.720 -> 04:54.220] on how I think DRS should be used in the sport.
[04:54.220 -> 04:57.720] But this is just a mild sort of
[04:58.220 -> 05:02.720] change to the regulations in many ways from a sporting aspect.
[05:03.160 -> 05:06.000] But I don't think it would make things particularly
[05:06.000 -> 05:07.000] different.
[05:07.000 -> 05:14.040] It's just going to make it a different strategic or tactical interest from a qualifying perspective
[05:14.040 -> 05:15.040] to a race perspective.
[05:15.040 -> 05:16.040] Well, yeah.
[05:16.040 -> 05:27.840] I mean, if I think about it a little bit, would I be sort of wrong in assuming that essentially teams that can do well in a race but essentially
[05:27.840 -> 05:34.200] have a poor lift drag coefficient i.e. they are draggier for the amount of
[05:34.200 -> 05:38.980] downforce they create would simply be shuffled to the back of the race at the
[05:38.980 -> 05:43.240] start and then have a harder time moving forward because they're essentially
[05:43.240 -> 05:49.600] using DRS to compensate for oh should we be fancy and call it non-optimal aero design?
[05:49.600 -> 05:50.600] Yeah.
[05:50.600 -> 05:55.120] I mean, there's also other things to think about here in the way in which teams set up,
[05:55.120 -> 05:56.120] as I mentioned.
[05:56.120 -> 06:02.800] So if we think about the relationship between the diffuser downforce generation, the beam
[06:02.800 -> 06:07.760] wing and the rear wing, they all talk to one another in many respects, and we'll get to this a little
[06:07.760 -> 06:10.400] bit later in terms of where Red Bull might be at.
[06:10.400 -> 06:16.600] But if you think about using a higher downforce rear wing, but use a beam wing
[06:16.600 -> 06:21.000] setup that doesn't carry as much drag versus somebody who is doing the opposite,
[06:21.000 -> 06:23.320] then you're changing the DRS ratio.
[06:23.520 -> 06:28.000] So, as I say, from a tactical and strategic point of view, this might
[06:28.000 -> 06:34.880] pay out for some teams, but it may not work in the respect that perhaps the FIA,
[06:34.880 -> 06:38.480] if indeed this does come to fruition, they're looking to obviously
[06:38.480 -> 06:40.840] change the makeup of how things work.
[06:40.840 -> 06:44.440] I don't know if it's actually going to do that for too long because the teams
[06:44.440 -> 06:51.280] will just work their way around it. Well, yeah, you would expect that. But I do want to talk about
[06:51.280 -> 06:57.440] an observation that you made before we got started, which is that one of the biggest issues with DRS
[06:58.160 -> 07:06.560] as a tactic in the sport is that there's not really any kind of a defense for it. So the defending driver
[07:06.560 -> 07:14.640] has no way to fend off a car with enough advantage in DRS. And I thought about this because there was
[07:14.640 -> 07:21.840] an IndyCar race this weekend, and Scott Dixon won it through fuel saving. But at one point in the
[07:21.840 -> 07:25.800] race, he had something like a 20 or 30 second advantage in push to
[07:25.800 -> 07:31.800] pass over his nearest rival because he'd been fuel saving the whole race.
[07:31.800 -> 07:37.920] And I want to use that to bring up your brilliant idea about how DRS or anything like this should
[07:37.920 -> 07:42.880] be used, which is namely to leave it to the drivers and or the strategists on the team
[07:42.880 -> 07:51.420] to figure out where to use it best. Yeah, I mean, again, I think DRS should be used in a manner that the driver has more
[07:51.420 -> 07:58.920] control over in terms of it's more of a tactical advantage to the driver, whether it be for
[07:58.920 -> 08:00.320] attack or defense.
[08:00.320 -> 08:05.060] Unfortunately, the way that DRS came about, it became more of an overtaking aid because
[08:05.060 -> 08:08.260] of the wake problem that Formula One had at the time.
[08:08.260 -> 08:13.720] Now, obviously, because of this generation of cars has supposedly moved the needle in
[08:13.720 -> 08:17.540] that respect, then you would expect that we should be able to get into a position more
[08:17.540 -> 08:20.200] easily to make those overtakes.
[08:20.200 -> 08:27.120] The way that I personally think that DRS should be used is pretty much like the push to pass system
[08:27.120 -> 08:33.040] that you've just mentioned in IndyCar. If you give them so many seconds or so many uses of DRS
[08:33.040 -> 08:38.800] during the course of a race, then it becomes a tactical battle between the drivers as to how
[08:38.800 -> 08:43.600] it's used. Then that means that it could be used for attack or defense. Now, I still think that
[08:43.600 -> 08:45.120] there should be zones
[08:45.120 -> 08:50.560] as we have now in that respect, but you lose the one second thing, which again is something that's
[08:50.560 -> 08:56.320] a bit arbitrary because one team's DRS is more powerful than another team's, so that one second
[08:56.320 -> 09:03.360] doesn't really bear out. It did in the beginnings of DRS because we shortened and lengthened the
[09:03.360 -> 09:05.520] zone at race weekends. Again, this is where the needle has moved from when DRS because we shortened and lengthened the zone at race weekends. Again,
[09:05.520 -> 09:09.520] this is where the needle has moved from when DRS was first introduced.
[09:09.520 -> 09:14.960] But it could be even more tactical than that. You could give a time allotment over the course of an
[09:14.960 -> 09:20.800] entire race weekend or a put amount of pushes that you can use over the entire course of a race
[09:20.800 -> 09:27.500] weekend rather than just the race. And then obviously that becomes a battle or a sub battle between free practice
[09:27.500 -> 09:31.680] sessions, the qualifying sessions, sprints and the race.
[09:31.960 -> 09:38.220] And then it becomes even more interesting as to who's saved their DRS usage and
[09:38.220 -> 09:40.500] where that pans out during the course of a race.
[09:40.640 -> 09:45.520] And as an added bonus, it will probably stop DRS trains, because then you
[09:45.520 -> 09:50.040] have to play a bit of a game of chicken. And not everybody's going to be wanting to press
[09:50.040 -> 09:54.600] their DRS every single time in order to deal with that problem.
[09:54.600 -> 10:00.480] So basically kind of like the game we play now with tire allotments across the entire
[10:00.480 -> 10:05.120] weekend. And yes, if you were playing along at home, you may have your first drink.
[10:11.200 -> 10:12.000] The other thing that as a side quest on this that you could actually introduce as well is that
[10:17.520 -> 10:22.000] where you qualify could also give you an extra few passes for argument's sake. If you're starting down the back of the grid, you get an extra few passes to those that start at the front of the
[10:22.000 -> 10:26.680] grid. So there are many ways in which that you could reutilize DRS.
[10:26.680 -> 10:31.640] I think it's, we've had it for over, well over a decade now, perhaps
[10:31.640 -> 10:33.000] it's time to just mix things up.
[10:33.000 -> 10:37.000] And it's not like we don't have sprint races to try these things out in either.
[10:37.240 -> 10:41.880] You know, the format allows us in some ways to experiment and that could be a
[10:41.880 -> 10:45.280] way of looking at it differently and give these sort of things a try.
[10:45.840 -> 10:52.480] Well, I like that and I did bring up sort of entertainingly the tire allotment, but we also
[10:52.480 -> 10:57.520] saw the first usage of the alternate tire allotment and I realized that I don't think we've
[10:57.520 -> 11:03.440] spoken to you since that happened. So real quick, just a recap and your impressions of whether or
[11:03.440 -> 11:06.000] not that was a successful experiment for the sport.
[11:06.000 -> 11:09.000] Again, it's something just a little bit different, isn't it?
[11:09.000 -> 11:19.000] So the problem that you encounter when we run these sorts of experiments is that the teams don't know how they're going to work to begin with.
[11:19.000 -> 11:32.080] So these things always look very good from the outset, but then unfortunately, the teams then get very good at being able to change their direction to improve how they work over
[11:32.080 -> 11:35.200] the course of a race weekend.
[11:35.200 -> 11:40.880] Although obviously, it perhaps was successful on the first attempt, I'm not so sure that
[11:40.880 -> 11:42.640] over a period of time that would work.
[11:42.640 -> 11:46.360] I think that might be the way to look at these things is that perhaps there
[11:46.360 -> 11:50.980] needs to be more jeopardy involved in making decisions over the course of a
[11:50.980 -> 11:54.280] race weekend and you have different rules for different races at the end of the day.
[11:54.600 -> 12:01.680] That's again where DRS, for example, you're not going to have 25 passes in
[12:01.680 -> 12:06.880] one race and every race, you will mix it up and have them at different races,
[12:06.880 -> 12:15.200] the different amounts. And I think that's where some variability might help to improve the sporting
[12:15.200 -> 12:20.960] side of things. And as I've always mentioned, the problem with DRS is that I think fans find it too
[12:20.960 -> 12:26.520] artificial in that it's more of a slam dunk pass with the driver that's
[12:26.520 -> 12:27.780] attacking.
[12:27.780 -> 12:32.200] If it's a system that's allowed to attack and defend, then you lose some of that and
[12:32.200 -> 12:37.240] perhaps people will be more on board with DRS as a system that can be used in the sport.
[12:37.240 -> 12:39.440] Yeah, well, and then let's go ahead.
[12:39.440 -> 12:43.280] I mean, we're sort of looking to the future a little bit anyway with our first question
[12:43.280 -> 12:44.320] here.
[12:44.320 -> 12:49.720] There's already a discussion about Active Arrow and the next regulation set.
[12:49.720 -> 12:52.760] Would this be essentially used to replace DRS?
[12:52.760 -> 12:55.080] Is this something else entirely?
[12:55.080 -> 12:59.880] And are we basically at risk of the same problems that we're already seeing now, that DRS is
[12:59.880 -> 13:05.600] sort of a mature aspect of the teams and how they approach the race weekend?
[13:11.920 -> 13:21.200] I think from the 2026 side of things, things are going to work a little bit differently because we're trying to use active aero from a drag-saving point of view. So I think it will be something
[13:21.200 -> 13:29.500] that's sort of tied in all the time. They'll still want something that overpowers that in terms of like a DRS system.
[13:29.500 -> 13:37.500] So I do think that there'll be sort of layers to your Active Aero and then obviously DRS on top of that.
[13:37.500 -> 13:42.000] But we'll have to wait to see how the regulations actually get framed in many ways.
[13:42.000 -> 13:46.320] Okay, so I'm going to pivot very cleverly now. We've been talking about
[13:46.320 -> 13:53.120] DRS and we've been talking about advantage and that clearly to me brings up Red Bull. And so
[13:54.160 -> 14:00.960] the first question I have, and this is a very big general question, is they clearly, and Max
[14:00.960 -> 14:06.000] especially, has a very obvious advantage to the rest of the field.
[14:06.000 -> 14:11.000] But we are essentially halfway through this regulation set.
[14:11.000 -> 14:27.400] Do you think there is any team out there that can catch them before the regulations change again? Unless we see some regulation changes that sort of has an impact on the entire field
[14:27.400 -> 14:31.800] and draws Red Bull back to everybody else in doing so,
[14:31.800 -> 14:35.400] I think we're sort of in the realms of where we've been in the past,
[14:35.400 -> 14:38.800] that until we get right to the end of a regulation set,
[14:38.800 -> 14:44.800] I can't see the teams making a big enough jump to be able to catch Red Bull.
[14:44.800 -> 14:48.800] Having said that, obviously they did take that penalty,
[14:48.800 -> 14:51.800] which is going to have an impact on their development
[14:51.800 -> 14:54.000] from the course of this year.
[14:54.000 -> 14:56.400] And we've already seen that in many respects.
[14:56.400 -> 14:58.400] And certainly in the tail end of the season,
[14:58.400 -> 15:02.300] I don't think that we'll see a huge amount of development from Red Bull.
[15:02.300 -> 15:10.320] But also the 2024 car, I think perhaps people aren't quite up to date with how that will have an
[15:10.320 -> 15:14.800] impact on next year's car and that then obviously does allow the other
[15:14.800 -> 15:16.600] teams to perhaps vault towards them.
[15:17.120 -> 15:19.800] But as I've already mentioned, I think that it might be a bridge
[15:19.800 -> 15:22.120] too far in many respects.
[15:22.120 -> 15:28.260] And until we see bulk convergence on many of the sort of main aerodynamic
[15:28.260 -> 15:33.400] concepts of this regulation set, we could be struggling to see a front end
[15:33.400 -> 15:36.120] battle, even though the midfield battles have obviously been quite
[15:36.120 -> 15:37.840] entertaining in many, many ways.
[15:38.400 -> 15:38.640] Yeah.
[15:38.640 -> 15:43.440] Well, I mean, if I think about other, the reason I ask is like we saw by about
[15:43.440 -> 15:45.920] 2017 in the last set of regulations,
[15:45.920 -> 15:51.360] Ferrari beginning to get close and making a run of it with Mercedes and we're approaching that.
[15:51.360 -> 15:57.360] But the difference to me, or the thing that I worry about would be that it seems like everybody
[15:57.360 -> 16:08.440] was very, very far away at the beginning. Like they got it mostly or are completely wrong except for Red Bull. So it's sort of a time left versus a diminishing returns equation.
[16:09.000 -> 16:15.480] Um, and let's talk about DRS a little bit because we have the head aerodynamicist
[16:15.520 -> 16:21.760] at Red Bull out there mocking the other teams about DRS and about even their
[16:21.760 -> 16:26.080] basic understanding of why Red Bull is doing as well as it is,
[16:26.880 -> 16:31.520] saying that he can't believe they haven't figured out what's going on there. Well,
[16:31.520 -> 16:35.840] I'm sure you're smarting the smarter than all the other Formula One teams put together. So
[16:36.480 -> 16:41.200] why is he, what is he doing with this? What is he talking about? Can you explain that a bit?
[16:41.760 -> 16:46.320] Okay. Well, I wouldn't say that I'm smarter than any of the Formula One teams.
[16:46.320 -> 16:48.160] You might have been hyperbole there.
[16:48.160 -> 16:56.000] Yeah. But as I mentioned earlier in the discussion about DRS, I think the one thing that differs
[16:56.000 -> 17:02.240] with Red Bull compared to many of the other teams is their approach to the combination of the rear
[17:02.240 -> 17:10.400] wing and the beam wing setup. So it's something that they've really carried over from the RB18 and really expressed it more in the
[17:10.400 -> 17:14.880] RB19. If you look at their setup throughout the course of most of this
[17:14.880 -> 17:18.520] season, unless they're at a high downforce circuit, they're running a solo
[17:18.520 -> 17:23.920] beam wing and that obviously means that they're producing less downforce and
[17:23.920 -> 17:26.560] less drag from that particular component.
[17:26.560 -> 17:29.680] But it's a compound thing because of the way
[17:29.680 -> 17:32.360] that those two flow structures or three flow structures,
[17:32.360 -> 17:34.720] if you count the diffuser and everything else
[17:34.720 -> 17:35.880] that's going on at the rear end,
[17:35.880 -> 17:39.080] connect to one another in as much as the way
[17:39.080 -> 17:43.160] that they upwash upstream of each other.
[17:43.160 -> 17:47.620] So they sort of talk to one another in an aerodynamic perspective.
[17:48.100 -> 17:54.280] So if you imagine Red Bull running a high downforce rear wing with a low
[17:54.280 -> 17:59.140] downforce beam wing, it means that when they open the DRS, they're shedding
[17:59.140 -> 18:01.780] much more drag from that higher downforce rear wing.
[18:02.100 -> 18:06.240] And that's where I think that the discussion point comes from in
[18:06.240 -> 18:11.200] terms of what they're actually doing. It's just that the other teams are having to bite off more
[18:11.200 -> 18:16.480] than they can chew in terms of what they're using in terms of the beam wing versus how big a rear
[18:16.480 -> 18:23.360] wing they're using. Now, the other team that have stumbled into this and in a different way in some
[18:23.360 -> 18:28.320] respects because of the way they're positioned in terms of the downforce that they're able to generate is Williams.
[18:28.320 -> 18:33.200] Now they're the other team that have trended towards just running a single
[18:33.200 -> 18:39.080] beam wing element and it shows in their track figures if you look at them when
[18:39.080 -> 18:43.320] they're not running DRS against some of the other teams they're one of the
[18:43.320 -> 18:45.760] quickest teams and I think that's purely
[18:45.760 -> 18:50.640] down to the setup that I've just mentioned of having the beam wing talking to the rear wing
[18:51.360 -> 18:55.200] from an aerodynamic perspective and the amount of downforce and drag that are obviously
[18:55.760 -> 19:01.600] generated from a ratio point of view. Okay, so explain how that beam wing functions a little
[19:01.600 -> 19:06.720] bit more. Obviously, on its own, due to an isolation, it's a way to add
[19:06.720 -> 19:12.960] downforce at the back of the car. But it seems to me that you're talking about the importance,
[19:12.960 -> 19:19.680] one, of connecting the diffuser output to the center of the car's output to the air that's
[19:19.680 -> 19:31.280] coming off of the rear wing. If those aren't connected, then the aerodynamics don't work. So is that its most important function, or is it also involved in
[19:31.280 -> 19:35.160] how well you're getting air through and out of the diffuser?
[19:35.160 -> 19:39.920] Yeah, I mean they're a function of each other. They all work together to
[19:39.920 -> 19:47.960] generate both downforce and drag. So when you obviously put DRS open you're
[19:47.960 -> 19:53.600] effectively trying to shut those off as well. So you're gaining from having
[19:53.600 -> 19:58.660] less drag on the beam wing by using a single element, you're gaining from having
[19:58.660 -> 20:10.940] the downforce from a rear wing that is much larger than your rivals. So during the corner phase of a circuit, you are using the car
[20:10.940 -> 20:13.840] to balance from the rear wing, but then you're shutting
[20:13.840 -> 20:15.440] these things off with DRS.
[20:15.660 -> 20:20.000] So you're sort of compounding everything with the DRS open.
[20:20.260 -> 20:23.280] It's just a different way of approaching it.
[20:24.380 -> 20:28.280] It's something that we used to see pre-2014 when the
[20:28.280 -> 20:29.960] beam wings were in use then as well.
[20:29.960 -> 20:33.880] And Red Bull were the kings back then of this situation.
[20:33.880 -> 20:39.080] So as Pierre said, he can't quite understand why the
[20:39.080 -> 20:40.440] other teams haven't caught on to this.
[20:40.440 -> 20:42.840] Well, I don't think it's that they haven't caught on to it.
[20:42.840 -> 20:50.040] It's just that they are approaching the ratio differently to Red Bull. And that is because of how their car
[20:50.040 -> 20:56.440] in general works in terms of how it creates downforce and its drag profile.
[20:56.440 -> 21:03.240] Okay. So I'm already loving this and I'm going to ask you another big general discussion
[21:03.240 -> 21:06.240] question. And namely, that is, what are we missing here?
[21:06.240 -> 21:11.200] I mean, all of us, I think, in Formula One are subject to bright, shiny object disorder. Oh,
[21:11.200 -> 21:15.760] look, McLaren, they're now the fastest team because they did well at a single race.
[21:16.400 -> 21:22.480] But you have the long view. You sit back and you look at these changes race after race. You have
[21:22.480 -> 21:25.120] a much better idea of where these teams are
[21:25.840 -> 21:31.520] when you average all the different racetracks in. So is there something that's missing from the
[21:31.520 -> 21:36.000] general Formula One discussion that you feel really ought to be up front and present?
[21:37.120 -> 21:45.000] I think in general, it's as it's always been. The important low-hanging fruit is where the most gains can be made.
[21:45.320 -> 21:50.960] And teams decide upon where they're spending their development to try to get
[21:50.960 -> 21:52.200] to that low-hanging fruit.
[21:52.200 -> 21:55.520] And certain teams will take one route, certain teams will take another.
[21:55.920 -> 21:59.920] In my opinion, Red Bull spent a huge amount of their resources in the beginning
[21:59.920 -> 22:06.240] of this regulation set on understanding how to get the best from their floor and obviously
[22:06.240 -> 22:08.040] how the side pods worked.
[22:08.040 -> 22:13.280] Other teams perhaps lent more on other areas of the car based on their experience prior
[22:13.280 -> 22:15.120] to the prior regulations.
[22:15.120 -> 22:21.200] I'm talking about the likes of Mercedes here who have had to unfortunately walk back, say,
[22:21.200 -> 22:26.160] the zero pod solution because it just doesn't work as they expected it to
[22:26.160 -> 22:28.800] under this current set of regulations.
[22:28.800 -> 22:33.080] The prevailing regulations are always the factor here.
[22:33.080 -> 22:36.040] Formula One is very circular in how cars are designed.
[22:36.040 -> 22:41.920] We see many things that come back after time because suddenly they're more of a potent
[22:41.920 -> 22:43.640] force once again.
[22:43.640 -> 22:48.680] And so we're at that point in this regulation set where teams are now
[22:48.680 -> 22:53.980] starting to sort of hone in on certain design aspects and obviously we'll get
[22:53.980 -> 22:57.600] to many of those in the course of looking through the rest of the teams.
[22:57.600 -> 23:01.600] But there are some interesting development areas that we're starting to see.
[23:01.600 -> 23:07.140] But the bulk of where teams have to have had their focus in the original
[23:08.080 -> 23:12.880] design aspect is the floor, the side pods, and how those interact with one
[23:12.880 -> 23:18.600] another to generate the kind of downforce that's available from, again, ride height
[23:18.680 -> 23:24.440] is a major contributing factor because of the way that the cars generate downforce.
[23:24.840 -> 23:27.400] And how everything just talks to one another.
[23:27.400 -> 23:28.720] That's the key factor.
[23:29.440 -> 23:34.840] Obviously Red Bull got it right in many of those areas, the side pods and the floor,
[23:34.840 -> 23:38.840] because as we're now seeing other teams have ventured down those
[23:38.840 -> 23:41.200] pathways in terms of development.
[23:41.760 -> 23:42.160] Okay.
[23:42.160 -> 23:44.320] So, so tell me this then.
[23:44.720 -> 23:46.420] I'm looking at these teams. I'm looking at of development. Okay. So, so tell riddle me this then I'm looking at these teams, I'm
[23:46.420 -> 23:47.860] looking at their development.
[23:47.860 -> 23:51.260] I'm reading your articles on motorsport, which everyone should
[23:51.380 -> 23:53.820] religiously to keep up with this all.
[23:54.320 -> 23:58.820] And I noticed that, you know, some teams are bringing rear
[23:58.820 -> 24:00.220] wings to every other race.
[24:00.220 -> 24:04.900] Some teams are bringing new side pods, for example, to every other race.
[24:05.840 -> 24:12.000] Do you looking at it from your perch, have a sense of which teams are bringing new side pods, for example, to every other race. Do you, looking at it from your perch, have a sense of which teams are really developing the concept
[24:12.000 -> 24:18.040] they have versus which teams are trying to just simply compensate to the end of the season for
[24:18.040 -> 24:23.600] problems that they're not able to fix? And if the answer is Red Bull is the only one developing and
[24:23.600 -> 24:25.320] everyone else is compensating,
[24:25.320 -> 24:29.040] I will be sad, but I will accept that as an answer.
[24:29.040 -> 24:35.520] Get ready to accept that, Matt, because that's kind of where we're at, unfortunately.
[24:35.520 -> 24:37.920] That's kind of where we're at.
[24:37.920 -> 24:44.640] As you mentioned, circuit specificity in terms of upgrades or updates, as I prefer to call
[24:44.640 -> 24:48.140] them, because not everything that goes on the car is an upgrade.
[24:48.140 -> 24:50.100] Oftentimes it can be a downgrade.
[24:51.260 -> 24:53.600] Tends to be front wings and rear wings
[24:53.600 -> 24:55.600] because they're the balancing side of things.
[24:55.600 -> 24:59.800] So teams change those because of the amount of downforce
[24:59.800 -> 25:02.680] that they need or the amount of drag that they want to reduce
[25:02.680 -> 25:04.120] at that particular venue.
[25:04.120 -> 25:09.040] So they're the things that you tend to see the most from an iterative point of
[25:09.040 -> 25:14.080] view, from circuit to circuit, because you'll have low, medium, medium, high
[25:14.120 -> 25:16.160] and high downforce configurations.
[25:16.900 -> 25:20.700] The one thing that has changed, and I don't know if you've noticed this, but
[25:20.700 -> 25:26.240] because of the way that the calendar now has changed, we're not seeing so much
[25:26.240 -> 25:33.680] teams bring those kind of circuit specifics in advance. So in the past, we might have
[25:33.680 -> 25:40.080] seen a Monza-spec rear wing arrive at Spa, but because there's now the Dutch Grand Prix
[25:40.080 -> 25:44.160] in between and the summer break in between, we don't tend to see that happen because it's
[25:44.160 -> 25:47.920] too far forward in the development
[25:47.920 -> 25:53.400] schedule and you're not going to have a Monza-spec rear wing available at Spa
[25:53.400 -> 25:54.880] because it's just too far away.
[25:55.160 -> 26:01.840] And unfortunately, that is a disadvantage in many ways because we used to see teams
[26:01.880 -> 26:05.140] perhaps try stuff that would
[26:05.640 -> 26:09.400] benefit them at Spa that they might not otherwise have tried
[26:10.760 -> 26:13.440] because of the downforce level that they think they should be
[26:13.440 -> 26:16.520] running at and the drag level that they should be running at.
[26:17.120 -> 26:19.760] But they'll just chuck something on the car that they've got
[26:19.760 -> 26:21.960] coming up for Monza just to give it a go.
[26:21.960 -> 26:26.720] Oh, suddenly the car comes alive and they go for it during the race.
[26:27.000 -> 26:29.880] Um, but we don't get that anymore because of the calendar shuffle.
[26:30.020 -> 26:33.920] And I think we've seen that, uh, in many respects in other areas as well, from
[26:33.920 -> 26:37.800] how a downforce, medium downforce, all the way up to, to allow downforce.
[26:37.800 -> 26:41.120] So that, that obviously has changed because of the calendar.
[26:41.620 -> 26:46.280] Well, and the cost cap too, I have to say that's, that's clearly and the
[26:46.280 -> 26:51.120] limited testing as well, all these new sort of sporting regulations
[26:51.160 -> 26:52.520] are going to play into it.
[26:53.040 -> 26:57.480] And I sort of felt like I noticed this last season, but I really feel like
[26:57.480 -> 27:04.120] I've noticed this season that a lot of the teams rather than sort of showing
[27:04.120 -> 27:07.360] up, bringing like their first big update sometime
[27:07.360 -> 27:13.120] around Spain, and then just iteratively iteratively adding onto the car at every single race.
[27:13.120 -> 27:17.600] And like you say, bringing stuff maybe a race or two ahead of time to get some real world
[27:18.240 -> 27:27.200] data on it. Instead, it seems like most teams are aiming at one or two points in the season, bringing a lot of stuff,
[27:27.200 -> 27:33.120] and then just kind of coasting. I mean, I think McLaren is maybe a great example of this,
[27:33.120 -> 27:38.480] saying, yeah, yeah, because of production reasons, we didn't have a rear wing that was
[27:38.480 -> 27:42.480] even vaguely appropriate for spa, so we just showed up and did whatever we did.
[27:43.120 -> 27:47.080] Yeah, that's problematic, obviously, isn't it? And as you mentioned, the cost
[27:47.080 -> 27:51.440] cap, the resource restrictions in terms of how they're handicapped from a wind
[27:51.440 -> 27:56.120] tunnel and CFD perspective, and how that pans out in terms of the race calendar.
[27:56.320 -> 27:59.640] You also have to think about the sprints as well that are now part of the
[27:59.640 -> 28:05.320] calendar. We've now got six of those dotted around the various venues.
[28:05.320 -> 28:11.600] And that has a major impact on development because we lose a free practice session and
[28:11.600 -> 28:15.400] we're basically chucking stuff straight into the deep end as such.
[28:15.400 -> 28:21.160] So teams don't want to bring major upgrade packages to those particular races because
[28:21.160 -> 28:24.520] they've got no time to put them on the car and test them out.
[28:24.520 -> 28:28.060] And if they do, they're probably going to split them between their drivers in
[28:28.060 -> 28:32.520] order that one driver has one package and another driver has another in order
[28:32.520 -> 28:38.300] that they can have a back-to-back correlation between the two after the
[28:38.300 -> 28:42.520] race, after the event, and they can obviously gain data between both of them.
[28:43.080 -> 28:47.340] But yeah, it is a difficult one to try to balance for all of the teams.
[28:47.340 -> 28:49.420] All of them are doing it in different ways.
[28:49.780 -> 28:55.060] But as you mentioned, there's two types of development streams.
[28:55.060 -> 28:58.300] You either get drip fed all the way throughout the course of the season and
[28:58.300 -> 29:02.820] just smaller updates time after time, or you get the larger packages.
[29:03.100 -> 29:05.120] And as I mentioned earlier about the calendar shift,
[29:05.840 -> 29:10.880] Spain was what, round seven this year compared to where it used to historically be around five.
[29:11.440 -> 29:19.360] And so it becomes a different point in the season, a different point at which the aerodynamicists,
[29:19.360 -> 29:28.720] et cetera, have to work on to get towards that introduction of that package. You know, you've had so many flyaways prior to that where they don't want to send huge
[29:28.720 -> 29:32.740] packages out on flyaways because of the cost elements.
[29:32.740 -> 29:37.040] And so it changes how you develop your car throughout the course of the season because
[29:37.040 -> 29:38.040] of that.
[29:38.040 -> 29:39.040] Yeah.
[29:39.040 -> 29:52.760] Well, it seems like a lot of teams were sort of aiming, I think, at Emela really for their first big update package, which wound up being Monaco and then dripped in to Canada. But I have
[29:52.760 -> 29:59.080] sort of noticed that Red Bull, interestingly, aside from Azerbaijan,
[29:59.080 -> 30:04.400] they haven't really brought, they haven't been that same, oh here's a whole brand
[30:04.400 -> 30:05.440] new big package.
[30:06.480 -> 30:11.520] They seem to be in drip feeding mode a little bit. Is that an accurate observation from
[30:11.520 -> 30:18.640] your point of view? Yeah. I think that's down to the fact of the CFD and wind tunnel allocation
[30:18.640 -> 30:23.280] that they're working with because not only obviously do they have the least at their
[30:23.280 -> 30:25.160] disposal in the beginning, they also
[30:25.160 -> 30:26.800] had the penalty on top of that.
[30:26.800 -> 30:33.000] So they're at the worst case scenario in terms of how they deal with development this season,
[30:33.000 -> 30:35.920] which will carry over on to next year's car as well.
[30:35.920 -> 30:41.520] Interestingly, though, I don't know if you noted the latest SidePod update that they
[30:41.520 -> 30:48.180] had in terms of how they interpreted the regulations, a very clever
[30:48.180 -> 30:56.240] move in many respects because radiators and duct work are isolated from the percentages
[30:56.240 -> 30:58.720] that you have in CFD and wind tunnels.
[30:58.720 -> 31:06.720] You have almost an unlimited amount of wind tunnel time to develop just those aspects. So because they worked incredibly hard
[31:06.720 -> 31:12.320] in improving their side pod design, they were able to do that because of the way in which they
[31:12.320 -> 31:22.720] cleverly adopted the regulations. So they separated the radiator and duct work from essentially their
[31:23.600 -> 31:26.880] aerodynamic side of the development. And they were able to spend
[31:26.880 -> 31:33.360] unlimited time on those aspects and then work on the aero side of it to make further gains. So,
[31:33.360 -> 31:38.560] a very clever interpretation of the regulations when you box in a corner because you don't have
[31:38.560 -> 31:42.960] the resources at your disposal. Yeah, I like that. And just so that I'm clear,
[31:42.960 -> 31:49.960] I'm understanding, when you talk about that, you're talking about the internals, like the internal ducting of the side pod, where the air
[31:49.960 -> 31:56.760] goes, where it exits, and the actual shape of the radiator interchange itself. You have unlimited
[31:56.760 -> 32:02.720] testing for that because it's essentially cooling. Yeah, as long as there's no forces being measured,
[32:02.720 -> 32:07.800] so you can't run aero testing effectively, but as long as there's no forces being measured. So you can't run aero testing effectively, but as long as there's no forces being measured,
[32:07.800 -> 32:13.320] you have unlimited wind tunnel CFD time on those internal components.
[32:13.320 -> 32:14.320] Yeah.
[32:14.320 -> 32:19.840] Oh, well, it shouldn't surprise me at all that they've been this clever, because they've
[32:19.840 -> 32:23.120] always been that clever.
[32:23.120 -> 32:29.360] And let's talk now, since we brought up next season, we've heard a couple of teams
[32:29.360 -> 32:37.320] already into the, well, you know, next season's gonna be our season.
[32:37.320 -> 32:43.400] Are there any teams we should be watching for hints of what they might be doing next
[32:43.400 -> 32:47.000] year with stuff that they're bringing this season?
[32:47.000 -> 33:11.400] Again, I think that's a difficult one to really try to measure because the likes of Mercedes and Ferrari, for argument's sake, have obviously made a switch in some respects towards the sort of concepts that we've already seen applied to other teams. Red Bull, Alpine and Alpha Tauri were the first adopters of what we call
[33:11.400 -> 33:13.560] the downwash generation of side pod.
[33:14.000 -> 33:18.840] And so we've sort of seen everybody else head in that direction.
[33:19.160 -> 33:24.520] However, the problem that Mercedes have is where their side impact support
[33:24.520 -> 33:28.360] spar is, the upper one, because it sits in a position that doesn't
[33:28.360 -> 33:30.800] allow them to fully adopt that concept.
[33:31.160 -> 33:34.880] It also means that their cockpit is slightly further forward.
[33:35.120 -> 33:40.280] And we've already seen that Lewis Hamilton has kind of hinted at the
[33:40.280 -> 33:45.680] fact that that is problematic from a driver's perspective in as much as how the car
[33:45.680 -> 33:54.880] reacts and the forces that he and George have to deal with. And so with Mercedes, unfortunately,
[33:54.880 -> 34:01.200] it is a bit of a Franken-pod that they've ended up with because their design can't fully adopt
[34:01.200 -> 34:11.240] the downwash ramp because of the inlet. And that's where perhaps the design of the side pods will sort of trend towards the end
[34:11.240 -> 34:12.920] of this regulation set.
[34:12.920 -> 34:17.000] If you remember what we had in 2017, 2018, 2019, 2021.
[34:17.000 -> 34:20.400] Oh yeah, I clearly remember that.
[34:20.400 -> 34:25.000] We have the sort of design that Ferrari first bought out with a low slung
[34:25.100 -> 34:27.000] side impact protection spar.
[34:27.300 -> 34:30.560] Everybody went in that direction with their side pods.
[34:31.000 -> 34:36.120] By the time 2020 come along, every single car had a version of that
[34:36.120 -> 34:40.140] particular side pod and now we're already starting to see that happen
[34:40.360 -> 34:44.960] with the design direction that the trio that I mentioned earlier took.
[34:44.960 -> 34:45.280] with the design direction that the trio that I mentioned earlier took.
[34:49.720 -> 34:53.680] Obviously, Aston Martin last season pretty much got their photocopier out again and copied the Red Bull side of side pods, but they moved their
[34:54.160 -> 34:59.160] needle this year and went in another direction with the really deep gully.
[34:59.560 -> 35:10.000] And we've seen other teams now adopt that in terms of the McLaren for argument's sake. And so there are diverging developments coming from the tree.
[35:10.000 -> 35:12.400] That's the way that I always like to see it.
[35:12.400 -> 35:19.200] It's a development tree and you get different branches from the original branch that starts to occur.
[35:19.200 -> 35:26.160] And so Red Bull are still on the original branch in terms of the shape of the side pod,
[35:26.160 -> 35:31.680] but they've pushed the development on the inlet side of things. And that's interesting in, as what
[35:31.680 -> 35:36.320] I mentioned earlier, what they're doing with the cooling side of the side pod. So there's loads of
[35:36.320 -> 35:44.160] different design variants within one major overall concept. And that's what's really interesting. And
[35:44.160 -> 35:47.480] I do think that they'll still continue to be that as we head
[35:47.480 -> 35:50.080] for the course of the next couple of seasons.
[35:50.640 -> 35:50.960] Okay.
[35:50.960 -> 35:53.440] I just, I'm going to get slightly specific here.
[35:53.480 -> 36:01.640] Um, Aston McLaren, Alpine all have variations of the, the gully, the water
[36:01.640 -> 36:05.440] slide, the water slide, whatever you want to call it. And Ferrari now as well.
[36:05.920 -> 36:08.880] But, and I think if Haas could afford it, they'd have it as well.
[36:08.880 -> 36:16.560] But anyway, am I wrong in thinking that Red Bull seem to be very much working on the undercut side
[36:17.120 -> 36:19.520] of their side pod instead of the gully?
[36:19.520 -> 36:24.000] Or is that just me not knowing enough to understand they're just different things entirely?
[36:31.640 -> 36:37.680] No, they're interconnected in many ways. Obviously, all of the teams look to create the most space under the side pod for the undercut, but it's a balancing act between the internal
[36:37.680 -> 36:47.840] componentry that they're trying to house within, dealing with the tire wake. That is the main reason why this particular side pod route is the
[36:47.840 -> 36:52.880] best variant of them all, because it helps deal with that tyre wake and the turbulence and
[36:52.880 -> 36:58.880] everything that's created by the front end. And then it's all about tying in the flow structures
[36:58.880 -> 37:05.920] with the floor itself as well, and how teams incorporate those two together.
[37:08.600 -> 37:09.240] Andrea Stella talks about it as a wider side pod.
[37:14.560 -> 37:19.320] That is how McLaren tend to see it because they want the wider body work to be able to deal with the weight turbulence and also incorporate the flow structures
[37:19.320 -> 37:20.240] towards the floor.
[37:20.760 -> 37:27.360] But there are, as I mentioned, different ways of dealing with the same sort of problem.
[37:27.360 -> 37:32.680] The water slide, I think, is something that interests teams because of the way that Ferrari
[37:32.680 -> 37:39.240] came along with their bathtub solution, because of the drag versus downforce scenario. So
[37:39.240 -> 37:50.680] it's just a different way of dealing with the same problem and how you make all of these flow structures talk to one another to improve the aero map over the entire
[37:50.680 -> 37:54.940] entirety of the car. I may not be the first to have come up with this but I
[37:54.940 -> 38:01.660] will be sad if you don't from now on call McLaren side pods wide pods in
[38:01.660 -> 38:06.080] honor of that quote. Well we did call the Alpine side pods,
[38:06.080 -> 38:08.120] the slide pods when they first came out
[38:08.120 -> 38:09.080] with the gully as well.
[38:09.080 -> 38:14.080] So yeah, there are variations upon the same thing,
[38:14.080 -> 38:14.920] aren't there?
[38:16.880 -> 38:19.480] Looking for a fun way to win up to 25 times your money
[38:19.480 -> 38:20.560] this football season?
[38:20.560 -> 38:23.020] Test your skills on prize picks.
[38:23.020 -> 38:26.080] The most exciting way to play daily fantasy sports.
[38:26.080 -> 38:30.140] Just select two or more players, pick more or less on their projection for a wide variety
[38:30.140 -> 38:35.340] of statistics, and place your entry. It's as easy as that. If you have the skills, you
[38:35.340 -> 38:43.080] can turn $10 into $250 with just a few taps. Easy gameplay, quick withdrawals, and an enormous
[38:43.080 -> 38:49.000] selection of players and stat options are what make PrizePicks the number one daily fantasy sports app.
[38:49.000 -> 38:56.000] Ready to test your skills? Join the PrizePicks community of more than 7 million football fans who have already signed up.
[38:56.000 -> 39:07.760] Right now, PrizePicks will match your first deposit up to $100. dollars. Just visit prizepicks.com slash get 100 and use code get 100. That's code get 100 at
[39:07.760 -> 39:15.520] prizepicks.com slash get 100 for a first deposit matchup to $100. PrizePicks daily fantasy sports
[39:15.520 -> 39:16.440] made easy.
[39:20.440 -> 39:28.800] Davey All right, let's talk about McLaren a little bit. They announced they didn't have the car they wanted, but they were going to build the car
[39:28.800 -> 39:33.920] they wanted and bring it at some point in the season, and they did that in Austria and
[39:33.920 -> 39:39.960] in England, to rousing, immediate success.
[39:39.960 -> 39:49.100] And I have some questions about this, because it was such a big jump for them, and because they did so well at those tracks,
[39:49.100 -> 39:54.980] because it seems like, whether it was luck or planning, they brought the development
[39:54.980 -> 40:01.280] to the tracks where it was absolutely going to do the best against everybody else.
[40:01.280 -> 40:08.080] Is it that much better than anything we have seen so far from Aston or Mercedes or Ferrari?
[40:08.080 -> 40:11.680] Or is it just, again, a track-specific thing?
[40:11.680 -> 40:16.840] And related to that, how much is that going to cost them?
[40:16.840 -> 40:22.480] An inability to bring race-specific developments, like I'll Hold Up Spa, we've already talked
[40:22.480 -> 40:30.500] about as an example, but is this sort of where we bet it all on one number on the roulette table and we won,
[40:30.500 -> 40:33.320] but now we're going to have to live off that for the rest of the year?
[40:33.320 -> 40:39.320] Yeah, well, this is the difficulty in many respects of changing your development stream
[40:39.320 -> 40:41.400] whilst it's already in process.
[40:41.400 -> 40:46.240] And we've seen this historically in other regulation sets and we're seeing it in
[40:46.240 -> 40:47.240] other teams as well.
[40:47.480 -> 40:53.360] I'll highlight Mercedes and Ferrari in that respect because you can't just turn
[40:53.360 -> 40:54.880] the tap off entirely.
[40:55.240 -> 41:00.080] You still have to continue to bring or drip feed developments from your old
[41:00.720 -> 41:05.460] development path, or you do turn them off almost entirely, which is what
[41:05.460 -> 41:10.380] McLaren essentially did, and just go for it all in one hit, which is what
[41:10.380 -> 41:13.020] we saw in Austria and Silverstone.
[41:13.340 -> 41:15.980] So it's a balancing act.
[41:15.980 -> 41:22.820] And I think it's difficult for people to appreciate how different it can
[41:22.820 -> 41:26.400] be for these teams to make that call and that decision.
[41:26.400 -> 41:30.500] Because they don't have, with their original design, let's say,
[41:30.500 -> 41:33.400] let's look at the ZeroPod on the Mercedes for argument's sake.
[41:33.400 -> 41:36.700] They have a year's worth of data from the previous car.
[41:36.700 -> 41:42.100] They have the opening phase of the season's data from that particular car.
[41:42.100 -> 41:45.960] And they have a very good model in terms of CFD
[41:45.960 -> 41:51.560] and wind tunnel of those components. Now if you're going to suddenly throw a new
[41:51.560 -> 41:56.440] concept onto the car you don't have a good interpretation of what you are
[41:56.440 -> 42:01.760] going to put on there until you've iterated, until you've made several
[42:01.760 -> 42:05.000] steps in CFD and the wind tunnel.
[42:05.000 -> 42:08.500] And that's where I think you find the likes of Mercedes
[42:08.500 -> 42:10.540] currently are, Ferrari currently are,
[42:10.540 -> 42:13.620] because they're midway between concepts.
[42:13.620 -> 42:18.500] So until they iterate further with what we've seen,
[42:18.500 -> 42:21.080] you won't see them unlock the full potential
[42:21.080 -> 42:23.720] of that particular design concept.
[42:23.720 -> 42:31.200] They'll have to take things further, as I've already mentioned in terms of Mercedes, especially with the fairing that they have over their side
[42:31.200 -> 42:36.800] impact protection spar. But from McLaren's perspective, they made a very early call in
[42:36.800 -> 42:43.120] the season to just literally cut the development down from where they were heading. Stop it,
[42:42.360 -> 42:42.600] down from where they were heading.
[42:49.120 -> 42:51.040] Stop it, start again, iterate, take the pain early on, and then throw everything at it all in one major hit.
[42:51.400 -> 42:56.760] The problem with doing so is that once you've put all of those development eggs
[42:56.760 -> 42:59.560] in that basket, you've then got to make those parts.
[42:59.560 -> 43:04.280] And that's why we saw only one set of parts arrive for Lando in Austria.
[43:07.600 -> 43:13.560] we saw only one set of parts arrive for Lando in Austria, the car get updated for the other side of the garage in Silverstone and we'll start to see that drip feed start again as
[43:13.560 -> 43:16.920] they bring more parts throughout the rest of the season.
[43:16.920 -> 43:20.080] That's why they didn't have a rear wing for Spa, essentially, because they'd spent all
[43:20.080 -> 43:24.280] of their development getting to this point.
[43:24.280 -> 43:27.920] From a manufacturing point of view, you've made a huge amount of parts.
[43:28.120 -> 43:31.900] You can't also make a rear wing because you just don't have the resources to do so.
[43:32.460 -> 43:32.960] Okay.
[43:33.120 -> 43:37.520] Um, before we get to the thing I really want to talk about one more question.
[43:37.620 -> 43:44.000] Uh, we saw Aston have a similar development strategy, only they brought
[43:44.000 -> 43:45.280] their car at the beginning of the
[43:45.280 -> 43:49.600] year. They did very well with it. And, you know, hats off. They saw, I think, what
[43:49.600 -> 43:53.160] Alfa Romeo did last year by just showing up at the car that was on the waitline,
[43:53.160 -> 43:59.560] grab a huge haul of points, and then hang in there. But their first big update on
[43:59.560 -> 44:09.160] the car hasn't necessarily made it faster. Is this also a risk for McLaren now that sort of we made the one big step, but it seems
[44:09.160 -> 44:14.140] like maybe that second step, unless you're Red Bull, who's already nine steps ahead,
[44:14.140 -> 44:16.320] it can be a bit of a doozy.
[44:16.320 -> 44:19.320] It's like the difficult second album, isn't it?
[44:19.320 -> 44:29.240] Basically, you know, this is the problem when you, when you're working in iterative design, sometimes you might make a misstep that doesn't quite work with something else
[44:29.240 -> 44:33.500] and I think that might be more to be the point with Aston. It's not that it
[44:33.500 -> 44:38.080] doesn't work, it's just that it doesn't all work together.
[44:38.080 -> 44:42.520] There's a piece missing outside of the jigsaw puzzle effectively and I know
[44:42.520 -> 44:46.480] that there has been the rumors going around about the
[44:46.480 -> 44:50.980] flexible front wing on the Aston and how that might've played into
[44:50.980 -> 44:52.460] their performance drop-off as well.
[44:52.460 -> 44:58.020] So there are other outside factors that could possibly be causing
[44:58.100 -> 45:01.360] Aston to be in somewhat of a drought.
[45:01.400 -> 45:08.560] But the other thing that I think that people aren't really paying attention to is, yes, they might have started out
[45:09.040 -> 45:13.280] fast out the blocks and looked very good, Aston, but look at
[45:13.280 -> 45:14.200] who have caught them.
[45:15.480 -> 45:18.360] Mercedes and Ferrari were well off the pace compared to Aston
[45:18.360 -> 45:20.920] at the start of the season, and suddenly they reeled them in.
[45:21.280 -> 45:24.640] And I think that kind of plays into this narrative as well.
[45:24.800 -> 45:25.280] It's not just
[45:25.280 -> 45:30.320] that Aston have got, haven't improved. It's just that some of the teams that are around them have
[45:30.320 -> 45:35.200] improved to the point that they've actually gone beyond where Aston originally were. And that's
[45:35.200 -> 45:40.320] kind of played into this whole narrative. Yeah, no, I see that. And this is actually one of the
[45:40.320 -> 45:49.360] more entertaining things about teams that are spreading out their efforts versus teams that come in one big leap. They make the big leap, they
[45:49.360 -> 45:55.720] look very good, but then they tend to revert back over time to where they came
[45:55.720 -> 46:00.280] from as development from other teams, which is steady or an ongoing, sort of
[46:00.280 -> 46:06.280] sort of nibbles, nibbles them back down. The thing that I also want to talk about McLaren,
[46:06.280 -> 46:10.360] and we can't ignore this, is their new wind tunnel.
[46:10.360 -> 46:14.500] I see that as either a huge advantage for them
[46:14.500 -> 46:17.840] or a potential massive catastrophe.
[46:17.840 -> 46:20.760] So talk a little bit about their new wind tunnel,
[46:20.760 -> 46:22.560] how they think it's going to help them.
[46:22.560 -> 46:25.360] And the thing that scares me most, or the
[46:25.360 -> 46:30.720] thing that's most interesting to me, is that they're not putting their current car in that
[46:30.720 -> 46:37.440] tunnel at all. And I just would think from a validation point of view, maybe you would do that
[46:37.440 -> 46:53.920] once? I don't know. Aside from the fact that you can't. From a regulation point of view, you can only use one tunnel at the same time aside from some very quite tight regulations around correlation. But essentially, the season
[46:53.920 -> 46:58.840] you're in, you run in one tunnel. You can't change tunnels throughout the course of a
[46:58.840 -> 47:03.760] year. And that's why they've obviously earmarked next year as the first time that they will
[47:03.760 -> 47:09.520] enter into their own wind tunnel, having used the Toyota tunnel in Cologne for what is
[47:09.520 -> 47:16.000] probably a decade now. And at the time, and probably still is, is one of the best
[47:16.000 -> 47:21.400] tunnels on the planet. And that is why McLaren moved there. We've obviously seen
[47:21.400 -> 47:25.320] other teams use that facility as well because there are two tunnels on site.
[47:25.320 -> 47:36.000] Force India, Racing Point, whatever they were called at the time, have used that facility and we've seen others in there as well in the past.
[47:36.000 -> 47:41.200] But it was at the cutting edge a decade ago.
[47:41.200 -> 47:46.560] Obviously, things move on. I think from a logistical point of view,
[47:47.520 -> 47:54.560] that is where McLaren are hoping to make the most gains, is that having their own tunnel
[47:55.600 -> 48:00.240] brings everything back in-house. They obviously had their own tunnel in the past as well,
[48:00.240 -> 48:05.280] moved out to Cologne to use the Teatr Tunnel.
[48:08.800 -> 48:08.840] But I think that's primarily where they think that they'll make the most gains.
[48:13.040 -> 48:13.840] Obviously, they'll have the most up-to-date tunnel on the grid as well.
[48:19.200 -> 48:24.120] But I think from a production point of view, from having your staff in the right position point of view, all of those things will add up to something that
[48:24.120 -> 48:26.300] helps them in the long run.
[48:26.300 -> 48:29.640] Perhaps not in the short term because they're so used to the operation that they've been
[48:29.640 -> 48:32.240] running for such a long time.
[48:32.240 -> 48:38.400] And I understand that Toyota are also going to help in the transition period from some
[48:38.400 -> 48:40.080] respect.
[48:40.080 -> 48:43.320] So hopefully for McLaren, this is a good move.
[48:43.320 -> 48:47.520] I think it will be, but I don't think it will make a major difference in the very,
[48:47.520 -> 48:48.440] very short term.
[48:48.660 -> 48:52.460] As soon as they turn that tunnel on, it's not going to make, uh, you know, it's not
[48:52.460 -> 48:56.120] going to gain the massive amounts of performance, but it should do in the long
[48:56.120 -> 48:56.380] term.
[48:56.920 -> 49:02.380] And I guess I would just say from my point of view, the concern that I have is that it
[49:02.380 -> 49:03.400] is a new tunnel.
[49:03.900 -> 49:08.000] And so if any of your mathematical tools, it seems like it
[49:08.000 -> 49:13.040] could be very easily be an issue where they show up and say, oh, the wind tunnel gave us these
[49:13.040 -> 49:18.560] numbers, but we don't see these numbers on the track. And so that would be my major concern.
[49:18.560 -> 49:26.040] Is that much of a possibility, do you think? It is a possibility, yes.
[49:26.040 -> 49:29.380] However, it's all about interpretation at the end of the day, isn't it?
[49:29.380 -> 49:35.460] You look at what is considered to be mistakes that have been made by Mercedes under this
[49:35.460 -> 49:40.400] generation of regulations, and some people have pinpointed that to be the wind tunnel
[49:40.400 -> 49:41.580] that's in use.
[49:41.580 -> 49:49.860] However, you look over the other side of the the fence and ask the Martin use the same tunnel, uh, and I've made great gains, uh, against the, the, the rest of
[49:49.860 -> 49:50.340] the field.
[49:50.340 -> 49:55.900] So, you know, it, it, it's how you use those tools, uh, and how the people
[49:55.900 -> 50:00.040] interpretate, interpret, uh, the information that is generated from them.
[50:00.580 -> 50:01.000] Okay.
[50:01.020 -> 50:02.080] Last question.
[50:02.080 -> 50:05.360] And this is just, again, based on something that I saw Andrea Stella
[50:05.360 -> 50:13.440] say, which was that they feel like what they did this season didn't really go far enough.
[50:13.440 -> 50:20.040] Are they just going to iterate what they have, or are they going for a much bigger redesign
[50:20.040 -> 50:21.800] for next season?
[50:21.800 -> 50:25.640] I think again, it comes down to the fact that you're sort of
[50:25.640 -> 50:32.420] locked into certain design areas of the car if you haven't done the right things
[50:32.420 -> 50:38.000] in the beginning. Things like the crash structures, the cockpit position, you know
[50:38.000 -> 50:42.480] these are the way that the coolers are set up, how you house the power unit, all
[50:42.480 -> 50:47.100] of these things are sort of locked into that design and it's
[50:47.100 -> 50:49.440] very difficult to make those changes throughout the course
[50:49.440 -> 50:52.860] of the season if you don't have the resources to do so because
[50:52.860 -> 50:55.400] you're busy concentrating on other areas that you might have
[50:55.400 -> 50:56.320] made mistakes in.
[50:56.640 -> 51:01.360] So I do think that there's areas that obviously McLaren will
[51:01.360 -> 51:04.360] continue to make improvements on, as will the rest of the
[51:04.360 -> 51:05.200] field, but it's a constant process. obviously McLaren will continue to make improvements on, as will the rest of the field.
[51:09.000 -> 51:09.300] But it's a constant process.
[51:15.600 -> 51:15.800] At the end of the day, the RB20 is going to be superior to the RB19, just purely because
[51:19.600 -> 51:19.700] they will be able to iterate beyond where they are currently.
[51:24.500 -> 51:31.480] And it's up to the rest of the teams then to make that step towards them. I do think that McLaren will continue to make gains.
[51:31.720 -> 51:37.560] And I think the reason being is how we've now got the system set up in terms of how
[51:37.560 -> 51:42.040] much of a percentage of wind tunnel and CFD time each team gets throughout the
[51:42.040 -> 51:46.560] course of a season, obviously with the reset being halfway through, and then again, at the start of
[51:46.560 -> 51:52.360] a season, it does allow for teams to make a jump and continue to jump forward if
[51:52.360 -> 51:54.400] they're, if they make that jump at the right point.
[51:54.600 -> 51:59.080] And that I think might be the key to why McLaren did their upgrade when they did.
[51:59.620 -> 52:06.080] Because when they took the temperature of the field for the reset, McLaren was still
[52:06.080 -> 52:07.880] in sixth place, wasn't it?
[52:07.880 -> 52:08.880] Correct.
[52:08.880 -> 52:09.880] Yes.
[52:09.880 -> 52:14.560] Well, then perhaps it was a smart thing to wait till after that to bring your big update.
[52:14.560 -> 52:17.960] It's always, there's always a competition in Formula One.
[52:17.960 -> 52:20.360] Occasionally, to be not good, it would seem.
[52:20.360 -> 52:25.040] Yeah, well, it's like we've said before, Matt, that the competition isn't always on the track.
[52:25.040 -> 52:30.760] It's how you develop your car off track and how you work the regulations to suit yourself
[52:30.760 -> 52:35.360] and the sporting regulations, not just the technical regulations, the sporting regulations,
[52:35.360 -> 52:37.360] which is where these lie.
[52:37.360 -> 52:42.080] You know, if you interpret them differently to your competition, then there's an area
[52:42.080 -> 52:43.080] to make gains in.
[52:43.080 -> 52:49.000] All right. We've talked a bit about Aston, but I do have a specific question.
[52:49.000 -> 52:54.000] Aside from the obvious, you don't know anything that you're happy just to tell me and not
[52:54.000 -> 52:59.000] the other 40,000 or so listeners that might be paying attention to this.
[52:59.000 -> 53:02.000] About what's going on with the FlexiWing?
[53:02.000 -> 53:07.480] Well, it's still at a rumor stage at this stage, isn't it?
[53:07.480 -> 53:12.040] We've not got the full story because there was no technical directive is the main issue
[53:12.040 -> 53:13.520] here.
[53:13.520 -> 53:19.080] It was a case of somebody perhaps being told this isn't quite as we anticipated it should
[53:19.080 -> 53:20.080] be.
[53:20.080 -> 53:26.320] Now, I helped with an article over on mightofsport.com about the pivots that were in place on the
[53:26.320 -> 53:32.160] wings that were different between the two specifications, the one that started the season
[53:32.160 -> 53:35.920] and the one that came in as part of the upgrade update.
[53:35.920 -> 53:38.840] It's not an upgrade because it's not always an upgrade.
[53:38.840 -> 53:40.940] Sometimes it's a downgrade.
[53:40.940 -> 53:46.300] But the flat pivots, you're allowed three, and they all have to operate within a certain
[53:46.300 -> 53:49.200] parameter of the axis.
[53:49.200 -> 53:55.640] So we know that obviously the flaps can be moved up and down to allow for more downforce,
[53:55.640 -> 53:56.960] et cetera.
[53:56.960 -> 54:02.520] We've all seen the onboards of how flexible front wings are, and they have to be flexible
[54:02.520 -> 54:09.360] because unfortunately if they weren't they would break so there has to be some flexibility built into the wings
[54:09.360 -> 54:15.480] to enable them to pass the crash, pass the push tests but also obviously so
[54:15.480 -> 54:19.760] that they don't actually fail but obviously there's a margin somewhere in
[54:19.760 -> 54:23.940] the middle there that allows for more performance and we're talking about the
[54:23.940 -> 54:25.560] difference between adding downforce
[54:25.840 -> 54:27.360] and also reducing drag.
[54:27.600 -> 54:30.680] And teams have been playing this game for decades.
[54:30.720 -> 54:32.320] It's nothing new.
[54:32.440 -> 54:36.720] We have a flexi debate every single season about some components on the car,
[54:36.920 -> 54:40.480] whether it be the front wing, the rear wing, the floor, the side pods,
[54:40.520 -> 54:45.600] the engine cover, something is always going to flex and it's always going to become a story.
[54:46.560 -> 54:52.560] This appears to be that particular point in the season and it correlates to where they obviously
[54:52.560 -> 54:57.120] had the downfall in terms of their performance drop-off alongside everything else that's
[54:57.120 -> 55:03.760] obviously going on narrative-wise against Mercedes, Ferrari, McLaren and that backdrop.
[55:08.640 -> 55:15.760] Mercedes, Ferrari, McLaren and that backdrop. In terms of what's actually supposed to be occurring, I would imagine it's to do with how much the wing flexes under load. I just think that they were
[55:15.760 -> 55:22.720] nudged to say, perhaps, this isn't quite as it should be, please, can you adjust something in
[55:22.720 -> 55:26.320] the way that the wing operates in order that it doesn't flex
[55:26.320 -> 55:31.280] as much? And that is something that the FIA have been studying for a long time because
[55:31.280 -> 55:37.440] they now monitor the onboards as well to pick up on these things. It's not only about the test that
[55:37.440 -> 55:45.160] they do in advance of a race weekend, out, uh, both front and rear wings.
[55:45.160 -> 55:48.160] So, um, I think it's just a case of.
[55:48.840 -> 55:52.400] Let's let's just try and reign this in a little bit before all the other teams
[55:52.400 -> 55:56.560] try to do something similar or more aggressively, and we end up with a, with
[55:56.560 -> 55:59.240] a major fight on our hands to keep things under control.
[55:59.760 -> 56:00.240] Okay.
[56:00.240 -> 56:01.020] That's fair enough.
[56:01.040 -> 56:06.080] And is that then, because we do have Mike Crack saying, yeah,
[56:06.080 -> 56:12.540] we did put updates on. Yeah, the updates are working, but we're not on top of them yet.
[56:12.540 -> 56:17.460] And I'm going to ask you before we move on to explain that but, and no, not that kind
[56:17.460 -> 56:23.120] of a but, you filthy minded listeners. I mean, the but, they're not working as expected.
[56:23.120 -> 56:26.640] Do you have a sense of which updates have, I don't know,
[56:26.640 -> 56:31.440] would destabilize maybe be the right word to use here, the car a bit and made it harder for the
[56:31.440 -> 56:38.080] drivers? Or is it really a case that they're just a bit lost at this point? Yeah, I mean, if we think
[56:38.080 -> 56:45.320] about what the updates were, the main one was to the side pod structure. So the large water slide gully
[56:45.320 -> 56:46.440] that we talked about earlier,
[56:46.440 -> 56:49.600] they moved the position at which that starts
[56:49.600 -> 56:50.840] and where it finishes.
[56:50.840 -> 56:53.800] And they also increased the size of the undercut.
[56:53.800 -> 56:55.920] So around the center of the car
[56:55.920 -> 56:57.780] is what we're talking about.
[56:57.780 -> 56:59.200] They also had the new front wing,
[56:59.200 -> 57:01.180] which I've already just mentioned,
[57:01.180 -> 57:03.360] some changes to the floor structure.
[57:03.360 -> 57:06.800] And since then, there have been further modifications.
[57:06.800 -> 57:13.440] Now, the interesting part is that they reverted to an old specification of the undercut on the last
[57:13.440 -> 57:20.240] race at Spa, which kind of identifies where they think that the problem might be because of the
[57:20.240 -> 57:27.440] flow structures we've already talked about and how they all interact with one another. Now, if something has changed at the front end of the car,
[57:27.440 -> 57:29.440] which is the assumption or the rumor
[57:29.440 -> 57:31.720] that is circulating around,
[57:31.720 -> 57:35.760] then that obviously bears to how you have a problem
[57:35.760 -> 57:37.760] with the flow structures downstream
[57:37.760 -> 57:41.240] with the area under the side pods, with the undercoats,
[57:41.240 -> 57:44.200] how those things that have changed suddenly now don't work
[57:44.200 -> 57:47.680] because something upstream of it has been changed and doesn't work as it was planned.
[57:48.480 -> 57:54.240] These things perhaps did work at a certain point until certain things were reined in,
[57:54.240 -> 57:58.320] and then those things don't work anymore and you have to start to backpedal a little bit to try to
[57:58.320 -> 58:02.000] get the similar amount of performance. It's all a balancing act at the end of the day.
[58:02.560 -> 58:06.120] They're not the only team that you see have walked back developments this season.
[58:06.120 -> 58:11.560] Other teams have made changes and had to walk them back because they don't work as they anticipated.
[58:11.560 -> 58:19.480] And they might produce more downfalls locally, but they disrupt things either up or downstream of that particular area.
[58:19.480 -> 58:27.920] So it's a difficult balancing act that all of the teams face. And I think that's where Aston Martin might have fallen down slightly
[58:27.920 -> 58:30.640] this with this particular side of things.
[58:31.200 -> 58:34.840] I will say you intrigue me a bit with mention of other teams that
[58:34.840 -> 58:36.760] have walked back developments.
[58:38.040 -> 58:40.720] Which teams would be another notable example?
[58:41.240 -> 58:43.320] Well, we've seen McLaren do that in the past.
[58:43.320 -> 58:44.520] We've seen Ferrari do it.
[58:44.560 -> 58:48.100] It tends to be with floors with the areas around
[58:48.100 -> 58:51.960] the floor, uh, because they'll try certain things that they've seen perhaps,
[58:52.000 -> 58:54.360] or they've adopted from, from other teams.
[58:54.600 -> 58:57.680] Uh, they might think that it will work because they've seen results in the wind
[58:57.680 -> 58:59.840] tunnel or CFD that have been promising.
[59:00.080 -> 59:03.200] But when you put them on the car and you're talking about, uh, ride
[59:03.200 -> 59:05.680] height changes and variations,
[59:06.320 -> 59:09.920] they don't work in the real world as you would anticipate them to.
[59:11.440 -> 59:16.400] It's not, as I say, the first time that you would see it. It's just that we don't often
[59:16.400 -> 59:20.720] talk about these things because they're not considered to be updates or upgrades,
[59:20.720 -> 59:27.360] as many would consider. They're more of a retrograde or a downgrade to a previous part.
[59:27.360 -> 59:33.920] And that is one thing that perhaps gets left out of the discussion because most people now look at
[59:33.920 -> 59:39.040] the documentation that the teams have to give in the car presentation document prior to a race
[59:39.040 -> 59:45.640] weekend and they just assume that everything is an upgrade, when in reality, sometimes teams, as I say,
[59:45.640 -> 59:49.560] have to walk things back and retrograde or downgrade things
[59:49.560 -> 59:52.400] that haven't worked, that they've already introduced.
[59:52.400 -> 59:55.240] Well, and that is why we are lucky to have people
[59:55.240 -> 59:58.560] like yourself to point out the difference
[59:58.560 -> 01:00:01.000] and when the teams are doing these sorts of things.
[01:00:01.000 -> 01:00:05.920] But it is, I will say, I do sort of enjoy the documentation just because
[01:00:05.920 -> 01:00:11.760] if you watch it over time, you can sort of see where teams are having to pay the most attention
[01:00:12.400 -> 01:00:16.080] to areas. And I know that sometimes they do things that they don't put on there too,
[01:00:16.080 -> 01:00:21.840] which also kind of messes with the ability to draw too serious conclusions from it.
[01:00:21.840 -> 01:00:27.320] But is that an advantage for you in some ways to sort of just have things all quantified
[01:00:27.320 -> 01:00:28.840] in categories ahead of time?
[01:00:28.840 -> 01:00:33.800] Does it just save you some Excel spreadsheet work?
[01:00:33.800 -> 01:00:39.360] From a workload point of view, it has changed how I operate over the course of a race weekend.
[01:00:39.360 -> 01:00:47.040] That is undeniable because most of my time in the pre-car presentation document era was about
[01:00:47.040 -> 01:00:53.680] spotting changes. Now we kind of have a scenario where we're given a huge amount
[01:00:53.680 -> 01:00:59.360] of information from the teams themselves so they have to present what has changed
[01:00:59.360 -> 01:01:06.760] from one race to another. However, as I say, it doesn't preclude the downgrade scenario,
[01:01:06.760 -> 01:01:08.100] the retrograde scenario.
[01:01:08.440 -> 01:01:14.080] And we have noticed that some of the teams do tend to miss changes that
[01:01:14.080 -> 01:01:17.420] they've made to the car or they'll generalize things, oh, well, we've
[01:01:17.420 -> 01:01:21.600] changed the side pod, but they've also changed the bit that connects to
[01:01:21.600 -> 01:01:25.720] the floor, the engine cover, everywhere else around the
[01:01:25.720 -> 01:01:30.160] car, but they've just generalized it as one big change.
[01:01:30.160 -> 01:01:32.600] You still have to play the game.
[01:01:32.600 -> 01:01:37.880] There's still a huge amount of effort that goes into trying to understand what has changed
[01:01:37.880 -> 01:01:46.440] and how it's changed, but it has made life a little bit more of an easier task pre-race weekend.
[01:01:46.440 -> 01:01:47.160] Let's put it that way.
[01:01:47.800 -> 01:01:48.880] I will accept that.
[01:01:48.880 -> 01:01:51.080] And that's also another great advertisement.
[01:01:51.080 -> 01:01:56.600] Why should go and read your articles and pay attention to this and not just look
[01:01:56.600 -> 01:01:59.780] at someone who tweets out a document and say, okay, now I know everything that's
[01:01:59.780 -> 01:02:02.080] going on because there's always more to this story.
[01:02:02.640 -> 01:02:04.480] I'm having a bit of a quandary here.
[01:02:05.680 -> 01:02:12.160] The teams that I really want to talk about now are Alpine for, I think, obvious reasons given the mass exodus of
[01:02:12.160 -> 01:02:18.640] talent from that team and Williams, which has been surprising but raises the age-old question of can
[01:02:18.640 -> 01:02:25.520] they ever actually add downforce to their cart and still be successful? I know the answer since 2014 has generally been
[01:02:25.520 -> 01:02:32.400] no, but you keep hoping maybe this will be the magic combination. But then it also made me realize
[01:02:32.400 -> 01:02:39.520] that why am I not really interested in talking about Ferrari and Mercedes so much? And so I want
[01:02:39.520 -> 01:02:46.400] to start with Mercedes then. I might have done it to myself, I might've psyched myself out, but I've been saying
[01:02:46.400 -> 01:02:52.800] for a while now, they have a Franken car because they brought the chassis and the setup for the
[01:02:52.800 -> 01:03:00.320] ZeroPods and they can't fix it to next season. So am I wrong in just saying, well, there'll be races
[01:03:00.320 -> 01:03:07.400] they do very well in where they optimize, but there's just a limit to what we're going to see out of them for the rest of the season.
[01:03:08.120 -> 01:03:10.840] Yeah, I think you've hit the nail pretty much on the head there, to be honest,
[01:03:10.840 -> 01:03:11.080] Matt.
[01:03:11.160 -> 01:03:15.760] Um, essentially the car will show up at certain races because it suits that
[01:03:15.760 -> 01:03:20.080] particular circuit characteristic and it won't show up at other races because it
[01:03:20.080 -> 01:03:23.200] just simply doesn't suit that particular circuit.
[01:03:23.560 -> 01:03:26.600] You've also got to throw on top, obviously, how it operates with the
[01:03:26.600 -> 01:03:31.280] tyres, which obviously we had the change in construction at Silverstone.
[01:03:32.560 -> 01:03:36.140] The weekend format, whether it's a sprint race weekend or a
[01:03:36.140 -> 01:03:42.960] conventional race weekend, those tend to be areas where Mercedes can either
[01:03:43.160 -> 01:03:46.240] make big gains on the rest of the field or make big losses
[01:03:46.240 -> 01:03:52.680] because of the way that they're able to find or not find the sweet spot of the car.
[01:03:52.680 -> 01:03:58.840] And I did read a comment recently that they were struggling in terms of the fact that
[01:03:58.840 -> 01:04:05.160] it's a car that is quite dead in certain corners, at certain points.
[01:04:08.920 -> 01:04:09.200] It just doesn't do what it's supposed to do from an aerodynamic point of view.
[01:04:14.240 -> 01:04:20.240] And that's the problem that they're going to struggle with, because as you say, it's a Franken car, there's no glossing over the fact that they will have a very
[01:04:20.240 -> 01:04:27.760] different car next year, and this is really just a sort of step towards that and ways, a way in which to
[01:04:27.760 -> 01:04:30.460] learn how to make that, that transition.
[01:04:30.980 -> 01:04:31.220] Yeah.
[01:04:31.220 -> 01:04:32.680] Just find the limits.
[01:04:32.760 -> 01:04:37.880] So they know what they have to swap to go in the direction they really want to go in.
[01:04:38.420 -> 01:04:48.560] And I think Ferrari, I mean, actually I can say. Ferrari is actually, I think, doing well, all things being equal, but they have jettisoned
[01:04:48.560 -> 01:04:56.120] last season a big chunk of their technical brains, and I just have a sense that they've
[01:04:56.120 -> 01:05:02.320] sort of reached the point of, well, we ran out of the previous team's plans, and we're
[01:05:02.320 -> 01:05:05.380] not next season yet, where we're going to be going in whatever
[01:05:05.380 -> 01:05:09.020] path whoever's left has decided to put them on.
[01:05:09.020 -> 01:05:17.220] So we'll see them get better and optimize, but are they carrying on with the plan that
[01:05:17.220 -> 01:05:22.220] Bonato set forth with them or do you get the sense that they're going to sort of change
[01:05:22.220 -> 01:05:25.000] it up a little bit next season too.
[01:05:28.880 -> 01:05:28.960] Well, I think Ferrari, as always are in a bit of a transition phase.
[01:05:32.240 -> 01:05:32.600] Uh, unfortunately it seems to be par for the course for them.
[01:05:37.580 -> 01:05:42.600] Uh, they, they, they tend to get in this cycle where, uh, they're a bit like a football team or soccer team that for yourself, Matt, that they sack the wrong,
[01:05:42.640 -> 01:05:53.000] that they sack the head, they sack the manager, and they think that's going to solve all their problems, but they forget that tactically, they might be a bit inept and they might not have the right resources in the right places.
[01:05:53.000 -> 01:05:55.000] They might be funded in the wrong areas.
[01:05:55.000 -> 01:05:59.000] And unfortunately, that's not isolated to just Ferrari.
[01:05:59.000 -> 01:06:07.040] Fans from the UK of a certain program of a certain era, only fools and horses.
[01:06:07.040 -> 01:06:12.400] There's a saying that Del Boy always used to come up with about Rodney
[01:06:12.840 -> 01:06:16.360] will be millionaires next year, but next year never comes.
[01:06:16.480 -> 01:06:22.400] And that tends to be the way in which I see certain Formula One teams operate
[01:06:22.640 -> 01:06:27.980] in as much as that there's a cycle that goes on and they never seem to catch up to that cycle and when they're very,
[01:06:27.980 -> 01:06:31.420] very close to that, where they think they need to be, suddenly just drifts
[01:06:31.420 -> 01:06:35.580] away from them and Ferrari were in that position with this particular
[01:06:35.580 -> 01:06:36.620] generation of car.
[01:06:36.920 -> 01:06:41.060] They were almost there at one point and then it sort of started to drift away
[01:06:41.060 -> 01:06:47.120] from them as the rest of the field sort of caught up to them in many respects.
[01:06:48.960 -> 01:06:56.400] Ferrari do have, I believe I read that Fred has hired 25 people from outside the company
[01:06:56.400 -> 01:07:01.920] that he is waiting to bring in, but as usual, the biggest problem in Formula 1 is not actually
[01:07:01.920 -> 01:07:05.680] getting those people, it's the time at which you can then
[01:07:05.680 -> 01:07:11.360] utilize them with Gardening Leaf. Luke Serra has left Mercedes and will go to Ferrari,
[01:07:11.360 -> 01:07:17.120] but at the moment, unless they can agree something with Mercedes, he will not start work on the car
[01:07:17.120 -> 01:07:31.560] until 2025. That's two years from here. So that's the major problem that you have when you're trying to steal personnel from another team, let's say, is that unfortunately there's a timeframe to
[01:07:31.560 -> 01:07:34.920] getting those people working on the project.
[01:07:34.920 -> 01:07:39.960] And you know what just strikes me as being a little bit, well, I guess the word ironic
[01:07:39.960 -> 01:07:46.640] might actually be appropriate here, is that it's the FIA that could just say, well, no,
[01:07:46.640 -> 01:07:52.800] maximum gardening leave is three months or six months because they're all about, well,
[01:07:52.800 -> 01:07:54.360] let's collapse the field.
[01:07:54.360 -> 01:07:57.720] Let's make it all more competitive at the top.
[01:07:57.720 -> 01:08:04.320] But one of the biggest obstacles to that is that knowledge from the winning team can take
[01:08:04.320 -> 01:08:07.080] years to spread in the paddock.
[01:08:07.080 -> 01:08:12.120] And when you only have a regulation set that's essentially like what, four or five years long,
[01:08:12.120 -> 01:08:17.240] well, you know, if three years is the earliest you can get any information from someone who's
[01:08:17.240 -> 01:08:22.000] been a senior member of another team that's more successful, well, then that's not really
[01:08:22.000 -> 01:08:25.620] a lot of time left to do anything about it or make the racing more interesting.
[01:08:26.420 -> 01:08:28.380] Yeah, it is a problematic area.
[01:08:28.380 -> 01:08:33.060] And I think the, the one area where the FIA will struggle with that is from a HR
[01:08:33.060 -> 01:08:37.420] point of view and the different laws that, that would, um, stop them doing
[01:08:37.420 -> 01:08:40.900] those sorts of things in terms of, you know, different laws in different
[01:08:40.900 -> 01:08:48.680] countries regarding the employment side of things, but, um, it is problematic. It is problematic, but it has always been the case in Formula 1.
[01:08:48.680 -> 01:08:55.000] And it's why we see teams disbanded in many ways over a period of time.
[01:08:55.000 -> 01:09:03.320] The likes of Red Bull will run very well between 2009 and 2013, but not
[01:09:03.320 -> 01:09:09.280] only did the regulations come as a surprise to them for 2014 with the power
[01:09:09.280 -> 01:09:17.840] unit side of things, you also had a disbanding of some of their personnel. So you sort of see that
[01:09:17.840 -> 01:09:22.960] it's a cyclic event within Formula One with personnel moving from one team to another.
[01:09:23.480 -> 01:09:26.600] Formula One with personnel moving from one team to another. And obviously you do have key personnel
[01:09:26.600 -> 01:09:29.480] that tend to stay within a certain team
[01:09:29.480 -> 01:09:31.200] for a very long time.
[01:09:31.200 -> 01:09:34.240] And getting those people is incredibly difficult.
[01:09:34.240 -> 01:09:37.600] So it's a problem that Formula One will always have,
[01:09:37.600 -> 01:09:40.220] I do feel, unless, as you say,
[01:09:40.220 -> 01:09:42.560] they can somehow write it into the regulations
[01:09:42.560 -> 01:09:46.120] that gardening leave becomes a maximum amount
[01:09:46.120 -> 01:09:49.120] of time rather than a minimum amount of time.
[01:09:49.120 -> 01:09:55.180] Okay, so you bring up power unit issues and that gives me a convenient springboard to
[01:09:55.180 -> 01:09:58.120] have a brief chat about Alpine.
[01:09:58.120 -> 01:10:05.260] And the place that I want to start is, from a technical point of view, I think an interesting point, which is their
[01:10:06.040 -> 01:10:11.040] complaint to the FIA that despite there being an engine freeze,
[01:10:11.560 -> 01:10:18.680] magically, they're now 20 or 30 brake horsepower down on all the other power units, and that that's very unfair and
[01:10:18.760 -> 01:10:23.000] something should be done about it. So my question is,
[01:10:23.560 -> 01:10:27.200] how big of a deal is the power unit discrepancy they're
[01:10:27.200 -> 01:10:31.440] talking about, really? I mean, yes, I've done a little bit of my own research, but I'm curious
[01:10:31.440 -> 01:10:38.240] to get your opinion on it. And secondly, looking at it, because you also look at the cars and how
[01:10:38.240 -> 01:10:43.520] they're designed, are they exaggerating a bit here, trying to get a little bit of help they're
[01:10:43.520 -> 01:10:45.280] not entitled to? Or do you really think this is, once again, very dropping the here, trying to get a little bit of help they're not entitled to?
[01:10:45.280 -> 01:10:50.360] Or do you really think this is, once again, very dropping the ball, so to speak?
[01:10:50.360 -> 01:10:53.760] I think it's a combination of factors, as it always is.
[01:10:53.760 -> 01:11:00.000] Obviously, Formula One is a very political sport, and the louder you shout, the more
[01:11:00.000 -> 01:11:01.800] attention you draw to yourself.
[01:11:01.800 -> 01:11:05.880] And that means that you tend to get something in terms of your favor.
[01:11:07.200 -> 01:11:12.640] I do think that Red Bull made a massive, massive gain in this respect by
[01:11:13.200 -> 01:11:17.860] initiating the engine freeze in the beginning anyway, right at a point when
[01:11:18.280 -> 01:11:26.780] Honda were leaving in inverted air quotes the, and had already caught up to the likes of
[01:11:26.780 -> 01:11:30.740] Mercedes and Ferrari in many ways and perhaps have surpassed them in some
[01:11:30.740 -> 01:11:37.660] aspects. But as you mentioned, Alpine, I think some of their main issues are that
[01:11:37.660 -> 01:11:42.260] they only have themselves working on that power unit. They've got no
[01:11:42.260 -> 01:11:45.160] other teams running the Renault power unit.
[01:11:45.160 -> 01:11:47.480] And that has been the case for quite some time now.
[01:11:47.840 -> 01:11:50.600] Uh, so you've only got one data set to work with.
[01:11:51.620 -> 01:11:55.580] They do seem to need a lot of cooling for that car compared
[01:11:55.580 -> 01:11:56.840] to their competitors as well.
[01:11:57.060 -> 01:12:01.080] It's perhaps not as bad as it was, uh, when we think about the massive
[01:12:01.080 -> 01:12:04.240] engine cover that they had sort of two or three seasons ago.
[01:12:04.620 -> 01:12:05.260] Uh, but that
[01:12:05.260 -> 01:12:08.820] was based upon a chassis that was quite a few years old.
[01:12:10.220 -> 01:12:12.080] But yeah, it is a difficult one, isn't it?
[01:12:12.080 -> 01:12:18.100] Because at the end of the day, they are at a deficit to their rivals that you can
[01:12:18.100 -> 01:12:23.580] tell that there's a deficit between them and the likes of Mercedes, Ferrari, and
[01:12:23.580 -> 01:12:26.000] Honda, but how do you make that equitable?
[01:12:26.000 -> 01:12:32.800] How do you suddenly take away a freeze and make it so that one team can make an advantage
[01:12:32.800 -> 01:12:33.860] on the rest?
[01:12:33.860 -> 01:12:36.380] And how do you measure that success rate?
[01:12:36.380 -> 01:12:41.400] Because if you suddenly open the floodgates and say Alpine slash Renault slash whoever
[01:12:41.400 -> 01:12:45.760] they might be in the future suddenly make a massive gain. And it's more than 30 horsepower.
[01:12:45.920 -> 01:12:51.080] I think there might be some complaints from Mercedes, Ferrari and Honda or
[01:12:51.080 -> 01:12:54.300] Red Bull, um, because they're now want to catch up.
[01:12:54.300 -> 01:12:59.840] So it's a really difficult one and a, and a tight rope to be walked in many respects.
[01:13:00.380 -> 01:13:00.960] Okay.
[01:13:01.300 -> 01:13:07.200] I, I had, I had looked at where they might be this is interesting to me and
[01:13:07.200 -> 01:13:11.780] the reason I'm asking is I'm sort of saying if we set aside the power unit
[01:13:11.780 -> 01:13:16.680] for a minute and look at the Alpine car like what I did was I just basically
[01:13:16.680 -> 01:13:20.820] assigned a numerical value to what that was worth by talking to a couple of
[01:13:20.820 -> 01:13:30.560] different people and seeing you know what, what was in print generally. And I found that they would be ahead of McLaren right now if you just gave them that amount
[01:13:30.560 -> 01:13:36.180] of power per race, just applied it to race finishes, and that if you took away the three
[01:13:36.180 -> 01:13:42.640] races they didn't actually finish in either car and gave them points for that, well, they'd
[01:13:42.640 -> 01:13:46.080] only be about 40 points back of the battle
[01:13:46.080 -> 01:13:48.280] between Ferrari and Aston.
[01:13:48.280 -> 01:13:52.760] So when I looked at that, the thought that I had was not that these are real numbers
[01:13:52.760 -> 01:13:58.440] per se, but it made me think that the Formula One team, the Formula One team's side of
[01:13:58.440 -> 01:14:05.760] it, had kind of delivered on where they said they wanted to be, within what I would consider
[01:14:05.760 -> 01:14:07.720] to be a reasonable margin of error.
[01:14:07.720 -> 01:14:13.080] And I'm just curious, looking at what they've done, would you agree with that?
[01:14:13.080 -> 01:14:21.020] Have they sort of moved the ball forward on the aerodynamic side of things, ignoring the
[01:14:21.020 -> 01:14:24.000] fact that the engine is obviously hurting them to some degree?
[01:14:24.000 -> 01:14:26.520] Yeah, I would totally agree with that.
[01:14:26.520 -> 01:14:33.920] I find it very interesting that Alpine have perhaps been one of the outstanding development
[01:14:33.920 -> 01:14:39.160] teams from an aerodynamic point of view under this regulation set, because we've seen other
[01:14:39.160 -> 01:14:44.360] teams copying many of their solutions, very much in the way that we used to see with the
[01:14:44.360 -> 01:14:49.160] likes of Force India when they were punching above their weight.
[01:14:49.160 -> 01:14:56.520] And this kind of has the same vibe in as much as the Alpines, as you say, chassis side,
[01:14:56.520 -> 01:15:01.080] aero side, are having to punch above their weight to be able to deal with the deficit
[01:15:01.080 -> 01:15:02.080] of the power unit.
[01:15:02.080 -> 01:15:06.080] And as you say, if you sort of equalize the things out, then yeah, perhaps they
[01:15:06.080 -> 01:15:11.400] would be a little bit further up the field relative to the rest of their rivals.
[01:15:12.560 -> 01:15:17.160] It is interesting, as I say, that they are the ones that have led the rear wing
[01:15:17.160 -> 01:15:24.040] development for argument's sake in terms of the tip design and other teams have
[01:15:24.040 -> 01:15:26.640] copied that, other teams copied the water slide gully.
[01:15:26.960 -> 01:15:29.240] So, they've not had bad ideas.
[01:15:29.560 -> 01:15:34.880] It's just that because they can't get the performance from the power unit,
[01:15:34.880 -> 01:15:40.600] they're not able to vault themselves into the rest of the field as they would wish.
[01:15:40.880 -> 01:15:48.720] And that, unfortunately, as Otmar has recently said, is a failing of the managerial
[01:15:48.720 -> 01:15:58.440] strategy of that particular team. The higher ups want something that isn't achievable in
[01:15:58.440 -> 01:16:06.240] a very short space of time. And that has been a problem of the brand in general for a very long time.
[01:16:06.240 -> 01:16:10.720] If you think about people that have been in charge at Enstone in the past,
[01:16:10.720 -> 01:16:18.240] and unfortunately, Ockmar is just the latest of those type of people to be given the door,
[01:16:18.240 -> 01:16:20.720] because they haven't got results quick enough,
[01:16:20.720 -> 01:16:23.520] when unfortunately, it's not really their problem.
[01:16:23.520 -> 01:16:31.200] It's just the fact that the mechanism of Formula One and how everything works to get the results.
[01:16:31.200 -> 01:16:37.040] So if I was to call them French Ferrari, perhaps, I would not be too far off the mark.
[01:16:37.040 -> 01:16:39.720] I do have one small question.
[01:16:39.720 -> 01:16:47.600] I had thought that Matt Harmon was the lead either aerodynamics guy or lead designer at Alpine.
[01:16:47.600 -> 01:16:54.480] And while Otmar and Alan Permain and Pat Fry, perhaps, will have an impact technically speaking,
[01:16:55.040 -> 01:17:00.320] it seems like a lot of the staff directly responsible for designing the car is still
[01:17:00.320 -> 01:17:07.120] there. Am I wrong? Like, for the three Alpine fans that are left, I'm just trying to find
[01:17:07.120 -> 01:17:09.520] something for them to hang their hat on.
[01:17:09.520 -> 01:17:13.040] Am I not wrong in saying that Pat Fry's going to Williams?
[01:17:13.040 -> 01:17:14.760] Yeah, he's going to Williams.
[01:17:14.760 -> 01:17:23.600] Yeah. So there's another major factor that's been lost within the team. Obviously, Alan
[01:17:23.600 -> 01:17:27.440] Permain is probably the biggest one out of the bunch to go
[01:17:27.440 -> 01:17:34.160] because he's such a mainstay at Alpine, Renault, Benetton, whatever the name they wanted to trade,
[01:17:34.160 -> 01:17:43.600] Lotus, whatever name they traded under, he's been there forever. So it's obviously disenchanting,
[01:17:43.600 -> 01:17:47.280] I would imagine, for many of the staff to see somebody of his
[01:17:47.280 -> 01:17:50.200] stature disappear from the team.
[01:17:50.200 -> 01:17:55.000] But as you say, from a technical standpoint, in terms of the chassis and aero side of things,
[01:17:55.000 -> 01:18:00.560] there's not too much been going on in terms of movement, although they have lost personnel
[01:18:00.560 -> 01:18:03.560] in the past, they sort of steadied that ship.
[01:18:03.560 -> 01:18:05.440] So from a technical standpoint,
[01:18:05.440 -> 01:18:11.920] it shouldn't be too drastic an issue. But if the people that come in have the short-term mentality
[01:18:11.920 -> 01:18:17.120] again, because of the leadership from above, then obviously you're going to have another situation
[01:18:17.120 -> 01:18:30.560] where things don't gel and the wrong people get blamed and the cycle continues once more. So it needs a long-term objective from Alpine in respect of how they think that
[01:18:30.560 -> 01:18:34.700] they should be doing over the course of this set of regulations and maybe even
[01:18:34.700 -> 01:18:39.040] the next set of regulations, rather than just thinking results, results, results,
[01:18:39.040 -> 01:18:42.060] because unfortunately that won't do them any favors.
[01:18:42.600 -> 01:18:43.880] No, indeed it won't.
[01:18:43.880 -> 01:18:45.200] Sorry, Alpine fans.
[01:18:45.200 -> 01:18:50.240] I tried, but it's not looking good, according to the old Magic 8-Ball here.
[01:18:50.240 -> 01:18:57.360] And briefly, before we wrap things up, I asked earlier, halfway jokingly, about Williams
[01:18:57.360 -> 01:18:59.800] and adding downforce.
[01:18:59.800 -> 01:19:01.400] But what is your take?
[01:19:01.400 -> 01:19:06.360] I mean, if we go by what they're good at right now, they should do well at Monza.
[01:19:06.360 -> 01:19:10.320] And then, yeah, whatever they get, they get the rest of the season.
[01:19:10.320 -> 01:19:17.480] But do you see this starting to turn for them technically next season?
[01:19:17.480 -> 01:19:20.480] I think we're a ways away from it turning that quickly.
[01:19:20.480 -> 01:19:25.940] And again, I think it needs to be a long-term scenario
[01:19:25.940 -> 01:19:28.940] that plays out for the likes of Williams because they're so
[01:19:28.940 -> 01:19:31.140] far behind from a resources point of view.
[01:19:31.300 -> 01:19:34.440] I think James Vowles mentioned recently that from an
[01:19:34.440 -> 01:19:37.860] infrastructure point of view, they're probably 10 years behind
[01:19:37.960 -> 01:19:39.980] where Mercedes were when he left.
[01:19:40.260 -> 01:19:43.860] And that is, in Formula One terms, it's massively different
[01:19:43.860 -> 01:19:47.800] and it's obviously why they are where they are in the pecking order.
[01:19:48.120 -> 01:19:52.240] I think they are another team that are massively punching above their weight,
[01:19:52.960 -> 01:19:57.600] because they've made some interesting decisions in terms of how they operate
[01:19:57.600 -> 01:19:59.840] the car from race weekend to race weekend.
[01:20:00.120 -> 01:20:03.480] They've kind of done what we've seen from the likes of Force India, as I've
[01:20:03.480 -> 01:20:05.380] already mentioned in the past.
[01:20:05.380 -> 01:20:12.140] Williams did in 2014, and that's that they've basically tried to create a car that is a
[01:20:12.140 -> 01:20:18.580] little bit more benign in terms of its setup, but also is very quick at the quick circuits
[01:20:18.580 -> 01:20:21.200] because they just don't have the downforce to play with.
[01:20:21.200 -> 01:20:26.480] They're not able to trim their car at the high downforce circuits to get
[01:20:26.480 -> 01:20:29.080] the levels of performance that they're looking for.
[01:20:29.440 -> 01:20:34.280] I do think that they've got an exceptional talent from Alex Albond's point of view.
[01:20:34.920 -> 01:20:37.120] He's really doing well with that car.
[01:20:37.320 -> 01:20:46.320] Logan, obviously a rookie, so you can't read too much into that, but Alex is doing a very good job with that car, as
[01:20:46.960 -> 01:20:53.920] he probably did in previous seats that he's had in the past, but couldn't really show them up
[01:20:53.920 -> 01:21:00.560] because of the Red Bull situation. But yeah, Williams, I think, is more of a long-term
[01:21:00.560 -> 01:21:06.400] project, unfortunately. They're not going to suddenly break into the front of the pack, but they are doing a very
[01:21:06.400 -> 01:21:08.960] good job with what they have at their disposal.
[01:21:08.960 -> 01:21:09.960] Okay.
[01:21:09.960 -> 01:21:15.480] Well, I got to say, thanks so much for taking all the time to sit here and explain all the
[01:21:15.480 -> 01:21:18.400] complicated things to me in small little words.
[01:21:18.400 -> 01:21:20.360] I do really appreciate it.
[01:21:20.360 -> 01:21:24.520] And for the listeners and viewers, where can people find you?
[01:21:24.520 -> 01:21:25.760] Where should they look for your work?
[01:21:26.400 -> 01:21:30.960] Well, the best place is on that platform that doesn't really know what it's called anymore.
[01:21:31.520 -> 01:21:32.720] But I still call it Twitter.
[01:21:33.360 -> 01:21:35.200] And it's some as F1 over on there.
[01:21:35.760 -> 01:21:36.240] All right.
[01:21:36.240 -> 01:21:41.040] As for me, I'm at MattPT55 on your social media of choice.
[01:21:41.040 -> 01:22:10.000] And until next time, this has been missed Apex podcast tech time. ♪♪
[01:22:10.000 -> 01:22:13.000] ♪♪
[01:22:13.000 -> 01:22:16.000] ♪♪
[01:22:16.000 -> 01:22:20.000] Looking for a fun way to win up to 25 times your money this basketball season?
[01:22:20.000 -> 01:22:25.000] Test your skills on Prize Picks, the most exciting way to play daily fantasy sports.
[01:22:25.000 -> 01:22:32.000] Just select two or more players, pick more or less on their projection for a wide variety of stats, and place your entry.
[01:22:32.000 -> 01:22:39.000] It's as easy as that. If you have the skills, you can turn $10 into $250 with just a few taps.
[01:22:39.000 -> 01:22:47.120] Easy gameplay, quick withdrawals, and injury insurance on your picks are what make PrizePicks the number one daily fantasy sports app.
[01:22:47.120 -> 01:22:48.440] Ready to test your skills?
[01:22:48.440 -> 01:22:52.840] Join the PrizePicks community of more than 7 million players who have already signed
[01:22:52.840 -> 01:22:53.840] up.
[01:22:53.840 -> 01:22:58.160] Right now, PrizePicks will match your first deposit up to $100.
[01:22:58.160 -> 01:23:03.040] Just visit prizepicks.com slash get100 and use code get100.
[01:23:03.040 -> 01:23:10.000] That's code get100 at prizepicks.com slash GET100 for a first deposit matchup to $100.
[01:23:10.000 -> 01:23:14.000] Prize Picks, daily fantasy sports made easy.