Brawn to analyse new parts

[CNR]

http://www.teletext.co.uk/motorsport/motor/stories/2e1afa5a6f46a9f101f1876a411e4570/F1+Brawn+to+analyse+new+parts.aspx

Ross Brawn admits his team will be reverse engineering their car during the summer break to get to the bottom of their recent performance issues.

The 2009 newcomers have slumped off the pace having been out in front in March.

Brawn told Gazzetta dello Sport: "It's certainly related to some modification which we've introduced so we are analysing every step we've taken to understand what's caused this problem."


if they take all the updates off the car and run it as it was at the start of this year i wonder how many teams would be ahead of them ?

[Donney]

I guess this had to happen, all the others have evolved and they have lacked the funds to do so. I wish them good luck.

[Sonic]

t
http://www.teletext.co.uk/motorsport/motor/stories/2e1afa5a6f46a9f101f1876a411e4570/F1+Brawn+to+analyse+new+parts.aspx


if they take all the updates off the car and run it as it was at the start of this year i wonder how many teams would be ahead of them ?

Well I think two assumtions must be made;

1) Ross Brawn and co. are not dumb enough to run a car which is slower than before the "improvements" were made (for three whole races!). So assumtion number 1 is that although the car is now unbalanced there must be some small performance gain over its melbourne spec.

2) Therefore assumtion number 2 is that simply removing some or all of the tweaks won't be a quick fix and return the car to the front as everyone else has moved on.

So to answer the question; if we accept that on outright pace Brawn is now behind Red Bull, Ferrari, possibly McLaren and mearly level with Williams, taking the parts of would surely put them clearly behind Williams and perhaps on level pegging with Renault.

But what do I know? :)

[wedge]

Bad timing as well

No testing and summer break with 2 week factory shutdown hasn't helped things with R&D

[ClarkFan]

t

Well I think two assumtions must be made;

1) Ross Brawn and co. are not dumb enough to run a car which is slower than before the "improvements" were made (for three whole races!). So assumtion number 1 is that although the car is now unbalanced there must be some small performance gain over its melbourne spec.
There may be some question about this assumption with no mid-season testing allowed. Teams end up "testing" updates on simulations, with no live data until actual free practice at the race site. It is just possible that an update tested faster in simulation, the team commited to the change, and then found issues in practice. At that point, it could be very difficult to return to the earlier configuration for qualifying and the race.

ClarkFan

[ioan]

It is just possible that an update tested faster in simulation, the team commited to the change, and then found issues in practice. At that point, it could be very difficult to return to the earlier configuration for qualifying and the race.

ClarkFan

Why is that?

Look at other teams who often conducted back to back testing of old and new packages and than used the one they found to be better.
Why couldn't BrwanGP do that?

[BillBald]

It is just possible that an update tested faster in simulation, the team commited to the change, and then found issues in practice. At that point, it could be very difficult to return to the earlier configuration for qualifying and the race.
ClarkFan

In the case of Hungary, Brawn didn't find issues in practice on Friday, it was only on Saturday that they started having problems. At that point, it probably was a little late to revert to an earlier configuration.

In fairness, Brawn are defending a championship lead, so it's not easy for them to experiment in the way that Macca and others have sometimes been doing. If Lewis has a really bad race, like at Silverstone for example, it really doesn't matter that much. If both Brawns were to finish out of the points, that would be a bit of a disaster.

But I think that Brawn are going to have to start experimenting more. It might be better to have one or two non-scoring races while they were sorting things out, and then get back on top, than to score just a few points each race, as they've been doing recently.

[Saint Devote]

Engineering is precise - motor racing cars are an art.

Therefore there is nothing to say that what Brawn are doing is negative.

Ross Brawn is a rational person and therefore of course logic is present. He is not someone unknown and if he says thats what they need to do then I believe him.

Also, since when did money solve racing issues? Toyota and Honda would have a few words to say on that.

Lastly, how many times must Brawn declare - as they did from the start of the season - that they are fully funded for the year and it is 2010 that financial negotiations are about.