Current McLaren

Arguably one of the big teams in Formula One but lately they don't seem to be able to get the basics right.
Some of their strategy and decisions in the last few years has left more than a few observers scratching their heads.

Just a few for starters:

• Leaving Kimi out on a badly flat-spotted tyre, resulting in it exploding on the last lap.
• Leaving Hamilton out on tyres so badly worn they were down to the canvas; Bridgestone themselves demanded that McLaren bring him in and McLaren refused, keeping him out for a few more laps. That decision arguably cost Hamilton the first rookie WDC and is one which will haunt him and McLaren for the rest of their days.
• Not sending Button and Hamilton out to get banker laps in during Q1.
• Sending Hamilton out on used tyres in Q3, with rain forecast, meaning it would be impossible to set a fast lap time on his second attempt on new tyres.

Their major updates seem to send them further down the grid, instead of challenging for pole positions and wins. As the season progresses they tend to get worse before getting better, by which time it is generally too late.

It's often said of them "write them off at your peril", but is this necessarily true?

The last time they won the WCC was in 1998 and their last WDC was 2008, before that 1999.
Their days of regularly winning championships seem to be well and truly behind them.

It's all well and good coming up with reasons why they haven't won championships.
The fact remains though, they have won just one WDC in the last 12 years.

So where to now for McLaren?

(I wrote this in rather a hurry so I will flesh it out when I have more time.)

 

[no-FIAt-please]

Would a new nose even bring a lot of laptime? Because didn't McLaren say they had no "major" upgrades, and although I am disspointed that Macca may switch to a high nose, I still think it's the best looking car and it doesn't have the step!

 

[Senna's_right_foot]

I don't think anyone is judging anyone 'guilty' of anything, merely asking the question if it was a good idea not to take race drivers to test what on the face of it appears to be a substantial upgrade. I hardly think that's an unreasonable question to ask
Let's hope it works though

 

[racecub]

It seems a bit arse about face to me to send test drivers to try out a new part, to translate the performance back to a simulator so the race drivers can see what it feels like. Er...just send the race drivers to the test track

 

[Cookinflatsix]

A team that starts the season with a major design philosophy departure from all the other teams, and then 4 races later reverts to the consensus interpretation of the rules must be guilty of something, unless its performance advantage is so pronounced that it can afford to experiment with whole philosophies and interpretation of major regulation changes

As far as not taking the drivers, if there was an advantaged gained by taking the test drivers only then good, however with Mclaren having gone backwards from the start of the season I find it hard to believe that the team are not guilty of not doing the best job possible, guess no one is perfect and someone has to come last etc

 

[teabagyokel]

Someone has to come last etc

McLaren are currently 9 points behind Championship leaders Red Bull, 35 points ahead of third-placed Lotus and 92 points ahead of Caterham, HRT and Marussia in last.

 

[Cookinflatsix]

Yup poor Marussia, someone has to come last, good to have low budget outfits in F1

 

[Lewywo4]

Mark Webber IMO had it right when he said it's a " no brainer ", especially with the limited mileage that drivers have today.

http://www.thef1times.com/news/display/05916

 

[The Pits]

It may be a no brainer for Red Bull, that may not mean it was a no brainer for McLaren.

Who is the Red Bull test/reserve driver? do they get a lot of time in the simulator? Are they eligible for the young driver test at Silverstone?

Oliver Turvey and Gary Paffett are regulars in the sim, and Gary Paffett certainly has done lots of work on the cars throughout the seasons, and they are both eligible for the young driver tests at Silverstone.

Also, when it comes to simply correlating data, and doing aero runs, it does not really matter who is behind the wheel, indeed at an unfamiliar circuit, it may be a hinderance with a need to do set up work rather than data pure data gathering, besides, I am sure that Vodafone would not have been ready to part with many millions in sponsorship if McLaren had said that they could have Oliver or Gary for any significant PR event.

Red Bull and Ferrari have also both come out and said that they feel the in season test was of little real value.

So, maybe McLaren have come up with a masterstroke, and come Silverstone young driver test, they can use the time with Gery to test some new bits for the remainder of the season, safe in the knowledge that they have a familiar and reliable base line.

We also have no real way of knowing how much real value it adds to have the race drivers in the car. Sure, it gives them more time in the cars, in an unfamiliar track, but how much does that really help? Come Spain, we shall maybe be able to tell, but I think the more likely outcome is that we will not really know, at all, either way.

 

[Senna's_right_foot]

We also have no real way of knowing how much real value it adds to have the race drivers in the car. Sure, it gives them more time in the cars, in an unfamiliar track, but how much does that really help? Come Spain, we shall maybe be able to tell, but I think the more likely outcome is that we will not really know, at all, either way.

At today's Press Conference, Alonso, Vettel and Kobayashi all said the test was valuable for getting time in the car working on different set-ups and being able to test aero parts but obviously was less valuable than testing on a track where they actually raced. Also, in pre-season testing McLaren changed from the under-wing 'snowplough' to the two hanging-down strut thingys (technical term) under the nose that they have now, as both drivers said they instantly felt it improved performance, of course after crunching the numbers at Mission Control. I would have thought the same approach would have been the one to go with, although McLaren obviously have faith in their testers and their data. I hope it gives them the increase in performance they're after

 

[Cookinflatsix]

These days the time spent on track by the drivers is limited, this year there is a big learning curve wrt to understanding and fully utilising the 'over engineered' pirellis.

For the driver more experience with the tyres has to be better than less full stop. As long as the benefit gained by the team in not taking the drivers outweighs any benefit lost by the driver wrt his direct competitors then its another masterstroke by the team

 

[The Pits]

If it was a circuit on which the teams had a base line, I could understand more. I do think that drivers will always appreciate time in the cars, and are unlikely to say otherwise, but I would also add that providing the driver is consistent, and knows the car, assessing aero parts and set ups can be done independantly. For example, Silverstone 2010, when McLaren were struggling with the EBD, Gary was in the simulator assessing set upd for the race drivers to try. Surely this indicates that he has a strong understanding of each drivers requirements (A pre-requisite for a test driver?)

I guess if the race drivers were involved, it would not be a negative at all, although there may be a temptation to make decisions based on set up rather than pure data gathering, but I am not so convinced that running test drivers is that much of an issue. If a driver can run round the track consistently, the team can make changes, and then the driver runs some more, feeds back, check the data, I am sure that a program can be completed which allows the team to understand the car, then changes can be applied to the simulator to allow the test and race drivers to work together to set the car up for Spain. Every track requires different set ups, so the value in getting the car working at Mugello may be secondary to understanding how the car behaviour changes when you adjust the suspension settings.

Also, as I have said, maybe this will provide added benefits at the Silverstone test too, with Gary and Oliver being a known quantity in the current car.

 

[Senna's_right_foot]

The Pits Absolutely fair comment, I suppose it boils down to whether you believe the car is more important than the driver, the driver more important than the car, or that the car's strengths need to be tailored to suit the driver and/or vice versa. As I say, i'm looking forward to practice tomorrow to see how the car performs, and (slightly) less importantly, if the new nose has ruined the looks of the best-looking car on the grid.

 

[Bill Boddy]

Anyone remember the Walrusnose Williams? The simulator said it was good, the wind tunnel said it was good, the track said it was rubbish.

Williams blamed the problems on the calibration of the simulator and wind tunnel being out. Could it be that this is why McLaren have taken the chance when there were only minor upgrades arriving to ensure that they have everything in sink? Better to do that now than spend a season bringing on upgrades that don't work.

 

[racecub]

But Id suggest that the best people to decide whether what the wind tunnel said...and what the track said...were the drivers who regularly drove on tracks.Or am I missing something here??

 

[Josh]

Yes you are missing something. Gary and Olivier are the guys spending the most time in the simulator testing new parts. They will most likely have been testing the parts they brought to Murello in the simulator and then by testing the parts on an actual race track they will be the two guys who can (most) reliably decide whether the car (with the new parts) feels the same on track as in the simulator.

 

[racecub]

But the race drivers will be the ones to say whether the new parts feel better than the old ones on the track, since they've been racing the old parts on the track since the beginning of this season . And on the track rather than in the simulator is where the car really has to be at its best.

Yes,Id have expecterd better of McLaren with all their experience, but it seems, looking at this season, that experience doesn't equip one well to make common sense decisions, to be sharp about strategy and on top of regular procedures like pitstops. Maybe I should apply for a consultative role

 

[Josh]

But wouldn't they be able to develop their parts more efficiently and have less (semi-)useless upgrades if the simulator feels more like it does on track?

 

[racecub]

Yes. And the race drivers, being the ones who drive the car on track, would surley be best placed to say whether the simulator feels like the track

 

[Viscount]

But the race drivers will be the ones to say whether the new parts feel better than the old ones on the track, since they've been racing the old parts on the track since the beginning of this season . And on the track rather than in the simulator is where the car really has to be at its best.

But the race drivers aren't always the best judge. Look at Red Bull this season for instance, presumably their data from testing at the factory told them their new exhaust design was faster but on track Vettel wasn't happy with the new car design so reverted to the old in China whereas Webber was. They listened to Webber's feedback, continued to develop that design and won the next race. If they hadn't and kept the old exhaust, they might not have performed as well as they did in Bahrain.

As has been mentioned, the McLaren test drivers spend far more time in the simulator than the race drivers so they're probably best placed to evaluate the difference between new parts in the simulator and on track. Though I'm sure the race drivers would like to spend as much time in the car as possible.

Anyway, I'm more curious to see if McLaren have gone the wrong direction with the low smooth nose over the high stepped nose.

 

[racecub]

Well I guess the tester v racer is a chicken and egg debate, but I would most definately put more trust in my racing drivers..thats why i would have chosen them to be racing drivers.Yes the red Bull drivers disagreed, but at least they both felt theyd had their input and their say listened to. They made their own mind up based on how the car felt, the Mclaren drivers didnt have that luxury.