It really is starting to feel like 2009.
When apparently you could get disqualified for lying!
When apparently you could get disqualified for lying!
Pre-Season Barcelona Test - 8th to 12th March
- Thread starter teabagyokel
- Start date
As far as I understand it, up until last year McLaren ran two, parallel design teams. One working on upgrading and improving this year's car, the other working on next year. At the end of the year the two swapped roles, so that one team would effectively be looking after a single car design for two years. The 2011 McLaren is the last car designed under this system (according to Eddie Jordan).
Soooooo....minimal test mileage, overheated bodywork, and an illegal design. McLaren have certainly started 2011 on the right track! It's a good thing they've got Hammy in the cockpit.
Pat Fry was the leader of one of the two parallel design teams (he did the even-numbered cars) - since his departure to Ferrari they must have reviewed their processes. Can't remember who leads/led the odd-numbers. If he left in the middle of designing the 26 it may have had a negative impact (though McLaren really ought to be big enough to be insensitive to that sort of thing by now).
Has anyone else seen a pattern develop
2002 Poor car
2003 Good car
2004 Poor car
2005 Good car
2006 Poor Car
2007 Good Car
2008 Good Car
2009 Poor car
2010 Good car
So with the exception of 2007/8 McLaren find it impossible to develop 2 consistent race winning cars 2 years in a row
2002 Poor car
2003 Good car
2004 Poor car
2005 Good car
2006 Poor Car
2007 Good Car
2008 Good Car
2009 Poor car
2010 Good car
So with the exception of 2007/8 McLaren find it impossible to develop 2 consistent race winning cars 2 years in a row
I suppose there's a sound theory behind it - everytime McLaren develop anything half-decent, the FIA ban it for a year...
Toyota were DSQed from qualifying in Melbourne a few years ago as I recall.
Or maybe they just had their times scrubbed
That was in 2009 at the Australian GP, but they were allowed to race from the pit lane, and finished "3rd and 4th"*
Jarno Trulli crossed the line 3rd having passed Lewis Hamilton under SC - Lewis let him through after Jarno had gone on to the grass under no obligation out of fear of being hammered by the FIA. Lewis then told the FIA he hadn't let Jarno through, so Jarno got a 25 second penalty.
The FIA then "discovered" that Lewis had lied to them half-a-week later through the miracle of video technology and reinstated Jarno to 3rd and disqualified Lewis. Timo Glock hence moved up to fourth, having not placed fourth at any point and behind four perfectly legal cars...
The FIA then "discovered" that Lewis had lied to them half-a-week later through the miracle of video technology and reinstated Jarno to 3rd and disqualified Lewis. Timo Glock hence moved up to fourth, having not placed fourth at any point and behind four perfectly legal cars...
snowy
Champion Elect
McLaren usually discuss their innovations with Charley Whiting and he usually advises them on the legality. Has he given them another bum steer like he did in Spa? Or is this ban on Pyrosic material another McLaren oversight, forgetting to mention they were going to use it to Charley?
If the Octopus is real, then the way Lewis was talking about the team being very clever and coming up with new parts for the car suddenly makes sense. McLaren would need a plan B, the fact that the team failed to run any effective plan B during testing I find alarming, they don't appear to have made any contingency.
If the Octopus is real, then the way Lewis was talking about the team being very clever and coming up with new parts for the car suddenly makes sense. McLaren would need a plan B, the fact that the team failed to run any effective plan B during testing I find alarming, they don't appear to have made any contingency.
Right, next set of graphs - these based on snowy's outstanding race simulation recording (page 26 of this thread). These are intended to give an indication both of relative pace and durability.
There are 3 graphs as to put all the drivers on one would be too messy to read, however Alonso appears on all three as a reference line. The left-hand axis is the laptime in seconds (so 90 = 1:30); breaks in the lines are for pit stops or, in a few cases, for red flags.
In short, the lower down the line to the bottom of the graph, the quicker the lap, and the shallower the angle of the line (curving upwards) the less time lost over the course of a stint (probably an indication of tyre degradation).
There are 3 graphs as to put all the drivers on one would be too messy to read, however Alonso appears on all three as a reference line. The left-hand axis is the laptime in seconds (so 90 = 1:30); breaks in the lines are for pit stops or, in a few cases, for red flags.
In short, the lower down the line to the bottom of the graph, the quicker the lap, and the shallower the angle of the line (curving upwards) the less time lost over the course of a stint (probably an indication of tyre degradation).
Excellent graph's G but I notice there is no McLaren driver, Is this because there was a severe lack of running by them or are the results too embarassing to show. 
