Honda found a bug in the McLaren CPU?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Me too. But some people still believe that McLaren and RD are purer than a virgin.

---

So what good does bringing it up time after time do? You're unlikely to sway any opinions. I changed my view on the matter for reasons other than people going on and on about 'McCheat', etc, etc, etc...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tamburello

And I have not said that there is any foundation to it.
But when Mclaren are self-confessed cheats, don't be surprised when people do not trust them.
That was my point....and it was perfectly clear.

---

Yes it was, and there's no surprise at the lack of trust where McLaren are concerned, but your first point about a lack of foundation is important IMHO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mstillhere

So, in your opinion Ferrari suffering 3 engine failures in the same race is just a poor engineering issue?

---

I have no idea, but equally I'm not making the assumption it was the ECU; and even if it was the ECU are we to assume that MES have installed a feature that only affects Ferrari engines, or perhaps Ferrari haven't got the system working with the car as well as others. Who knows!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Me too. But some people still believe that McLaren and RD are purer than a virgin.

---

Perhaps they do, but equally some still believe that all teams except McLaren are whiter than white.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

Perhaps they do, but equally some still believe that all teams except McLaren are whiter than white.

---

All I know that they are all different shades of gray, with McLaren at the dark end after last season.

I think we should wait until Ferrari confirms exactly what caused the engine failures.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mstillhere

So, in your opinion Ferrari suffering 3 engine failures in the same race is just a poor engineering issue? It's just a coincidence that these failures happened just when the ECU was installed. Hum....I don't know. At Ferrari they know how to bulid engines. And I said I truly hope that you are right. it's just a coincidence. I don't dare imagining the consequences if you were not right.

---

Seeing as the clearly faulty and cheating ECU powered their engines perfectly during testing it probably was a run of the mill failure....after all it happened to MS in Japan so it's not like they're 100% reliable, no engineered component can be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

As far as I know only Bridgestone and Michelin took part in the tender.

With Michelin proving in 2005 that they couldn't build a capable tire for every circumstances, the obvious choice was Bridgestone.

---

I have a bit of an issue with that.

Firstly, wasn't Pirelli also invited to tender, as buddies of BCE?

Secondly, and please, CMIIAW, but 2005 was the first year that indy had the track surface diamond cut.

Now, Firestone tyres used in American racing series (not sure which, but hey) had already run on this surface, so Bridgestone, same company, had advanced notice.

Question is, were Michelin told of the change in surface finishing? Because it seems that if they were not, and the failures were directly as a result of the improved grip and hence heat build up on the tyre shoulder, that these are mitigating circumstances.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

I have a bit of an issue with that.

Firstly, wasn't Pirelli also invited to tender, as buddies of BCE?

Secondly, and please, CMIIAW, but 2005 was the first year that indy had the track surface diamond cut.

Now, Firestone tyres used in American racing series (not sure which, but hey) had already run on this surface, so Bridgestone, same company, had advanced notice.

Question is, were Michelin told of the change in surface finishing? Because it seems that if they were not, and the failures were directly as a result of the improved grip and hence heat build up on the tyre shoulder, that these are mitigating circumstances.

---

Pirelli were invited, but did they participate?!

As for Michelin's incredible mistake, who's job was to know about the real state of the track?
It's not like the resurfacing was kept a secret, everyone else seemed to know about it, it was widely reported during the weeks before the race, they simply fuked it up. Was it overconfidence or plain stupidity? I don't know. One thing is sure, they followed it up with very personal attacks directed to Max and the FIA.

In any society in this world they would have been treated the same way, thrown out.

The bug in the ECU made Honda more competitive than they were expecting.....Ha ha!!
As for Michelin against the FIA, they have come off worse. No longer in F1, lost the contract in WRC to Pirelli, when Michelins were far superior to Pirelli. They have surely learned their lesson??? Or have they??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyRAC

They [Michelin] have surely learned their lesson??? Or have they??

---

So long as they continue to make 125 tyres for my 2CV, I don't care. :laugh:

This is quite vague, but it is the latest I can find on Ferrari engine issue.
It states clearly enough that Ferrari feels it was their responsibility to understand the system. It's not the the type of oversight I would expect from them in this millennia!
http://formula-1.updatesport.com/new...-ECU/view.html

"It is similarly being reported that Ferrari thinks the fuel pressure problem that stranded Kimi Raikkonen down the Melbourne grid last Saturday is also related to the McLaren ECU.

"This kind of thing can happen when you are working with one procedure that you do not know so well. Now we know that there is a conflict we can make sure it does not happen again," a team spokesman told GP Week.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Pirelli were invited, but did they participate?!

As for Michelin's incredible mistake, who's job was to know about the real state of the track?
It's not like the resurfacing was kept a secret, everyone else seemed to know about it, it was widely reported during the weeks before the race, they simply fuked it up. Was it overconfidence or plain stupidity? I don't know. One thing is sure, they followed it up with very personal attacks directed to Max and the FIA.

In any society in this world they would have been treated the same way, thrown out.

---

ioan, you are being purposefully naive again I think.

Firestone had experience of running on the new surface and as they are owned by BS, then BS had testing data for their F1 race tyres.

Mich were not allowed to test and consequently found that the new diamond cut, coupled with the banked circuit, destroyed the tyre walls.

You know this and must also concede that Mich are not clairvoyant. They could not for-see this issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knock-on

ioan, you are being purposefully naive again I think.

Firestone had experience of running on the new surface and as they are owned by BS, then BS had testing data for their F1 race tyres.

Mich were not allowed to test and consequently found that the new diamond cut, coupled with the banked circuit, destroyed the tyre walls.

You know this and must also concede that Mich are not clairvoyant. They could not for-see this issue.

---

Come on, get with the programme! It was all David Coulthard's fault. If he, in his GPDA role, had inspected the track and then seen to it personally that the surface was changed, it would all have been different. However, because he now wants every driver in F1 to be killed as a result of his blatant disregard for safety, he didn't. Meanwhile, Lewis Hamilton couldn't be bothered to intervene either. I'm still appalled. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knock-on

ioan, you are being purposefully naive again I think.

Firestone had experience of running on the new surface and as they are owned by BS, then BS had testing data for their F1 race tyres.

Mich were not allowed to test and consequently found that the new diamond cut, coupled with the banked circuit, destroyed the tyre walls.

You know this and must also concede that Mich are not clairvoyant. They could not for-see this issue.

---

Who stopped Michelin from testing???
No one stopped them. I doubt that Tony George would have turned them down if they would have wanted to do a few laps on the circuit on a day when there was nothing else scheduled. Plus they can recreate everything on their testing machines, still they did nothing about it, unless you think that whining and finger pointing is something productive.

So, who stopped them???

I'm glad they are out of F1, we don't need people that try to win using the back door.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Who stopped Michelin from testing???
No one stopped them. I doubt that Tony George would have turned them down if they would have wanted to do a few laps on the circuit on a day when there was nothing else scheduled. Plus they can recreate everything on their testing machines, still they did nothing about it, unless you think that whining and finger pointing is something productive.

So, who stopped them???

I'm glad they are out of F1, we don't need people that try to win using the back door.

---

Come on.... you should know this.

Indy is not an FIA approved test track, and the regulations clearly state what type of testing and where they are allowed. I believe this was added to the concord agreement or sporting regulations a few years back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jjanicke

Come on.... you should know this.

Indy is not an FIA approved test track, and the regulations clearly state what type of testing and where they are allowed. I believe this was added to the concord agreement or sporting regulations a few years back.

---

Formula 1 2005 sporting regulations says about testing the following:

Quote:

---

TESTING
63) a) No testing is permitted at sites which are not currently approved for use by Formula 1 cars. In order to ensure that venue licence conditions are respected at all times during testing, Competitors are required to inform the FIA of their test schedule in order that an observer may be appointed if deemed necessary.
b) During all Formula One testing :
- red flag procedures must be respected ;
- no other type of vehicle is permitted on the track ;
- every reasonable effort should be made to ensure that the recommendations concerning emergency services detailed in Article 16 of Appendix H to the Code are followed.

---

To me this looks like it would have been possible to test in Indianapolis but don't know if there were some other limitations.

Source http://www.fia.com/resources/documen...ulations_a.pdf

Sorry, but I lost track...are we blaming a bug in the ECU for the Michelin tire failures in 2005??? ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DonJippo

To me this looks like it would have been possible to test in Indianapolis but don't know if there were some other limitations.

---

Limitations being that, unlike every other purpose-built racetrack on the calendar, the IMS Road course is not ready-made.

Therefore, an F1 test there in 2005 would have been next to impossible, it is way too impractical.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Who stopped Michelin from testing???
No one stopped them. I doubt that Tony George would have turned them down if they would have wanted to do a few laps on the circuit on a day when there was nothing else scheduled. Plus they can recreate everything on their testing machines, still they did nothing about it, unless you think that whining and finger pointing is something productive.

So, who stopped them???

I'm glad they are out of F1, we don't need people that try to win using the back door.

---

Go and dig up the original thread please. It was all explained there with all regulations.

Really, this is soooo old and Mich had no opportunity to test or rectify the situation when they realised that the high speed corner, coupled with the diamond cut of the track, was destroying the tyres.

As soon as they found out, they contacted Max in London (who stayed there well away from the farce that brought F1 into disrepute) and offered to ship alternative tyres but the FIA refused as they also did to a request to slow the cars with a chicane.

The result, well, we know :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Malllen

Limitations being that, unlike every other purpose-built racetrack on the calendar, the IMS Road course is not ready-made.

Therefore, an F1 test there in 2005 would have been next to impossible, it is way too impractical.

---

Michelin have their own test tracks, prepared for to test anything at any moment. They could also have replicated the conditions on a testing bench.

Problem is they didn't do anything, I think they didn't even bother to send an engineer check the track surface while deciding the tires they would bring to the race.
They did nothing to ensure their tires were adapted to the task.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knock-on

Go and dig up the original thread please. It was all explained there with all regulations.

Really, this is soooo old and Mich had no opportunity to test or rectify the situation when they realised that the high speed corner, coupled with the diamond cut of the track, was destroying the tyres.

As soon as they found out, they contacted Max in London (who stayed there well away from the farce that brought F1 into disrepute) and offered to ship alternative tyres but the FIA refused as they also did to a request to slow the cars with a chicane.

The result, well, we know :(

---

What a load of bullcrap.
What if Airbus realizes that their plane can't land only after taking off?!
Michelin should have engineered their tires according to the race conditions, Who's job was to know what the race conditions will be?!
Was it Max' responsibility or Michelin's?!

Michelin were caught out because they threated the problems superficially. And such low level of professionalism shouldn't be accepted at the level of F1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Michelin have their own test tracks, prepared for to test anything at any moment. They could also have replicated the conditions on a testing bench.

Problem is they didn't do anything, I think they didn't even bother to send an engineer check the track surface while deciding the tires they would bring to the race.
They did nothing to ensure their tires were adapted to the task.

---

( why do i bother :rolleyes: )

Of course, they can have a butchers at the tarmac and immediately guess what forces, G and attrition rates a F1 car will inflict on a tyre at 170 mph. :laugh:

Next you will suggest than instead of building wind tunnels, aero engineers should just fart over a sheet of paper and extrapolate up :laugh:

But, as you say, they couldn't be bothered. If you were in charge of Michelin, you would have had someone lick the circuit, design a F1 tyre on the back of a fag pack and be home by Tea.

Perhaps they should just hire a genius like you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knock-on

( why do i bother :rolleyes: )

Of course, they can have a butchers at the tarmac and immediately guess what forces, G and attrition rates a F1 car will inflict on a tyre at 170 mph. :laugh:

---

Did you ever hear about engineers?
Should I explain you how they go about their work?
Would like to know how many possibilities of predicting tire degradation and mechanical response they have? They can start with computer design and calculations and finishing with a testing bench.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knock-on

Next you will suggest than instead of building wind tunnels, aero engineers should just fart over a sheet of paper and extrapolate up :laugh:

But, as you say, they couldn't be bothered. If you were in charge of Michelin, you would have had someone lick the circuit, design a F1 tyre on the back of a fag pack and be home by Tea.

Perhaps they should just hire a genius like you?

---

Thanks for demonstrating your intellectual level to all of us.
Next time when I need advice about farting over a sheet of paper I know I can rely on your expert opinion, however it obviously would be useless to share any engineering ideas with you, as I doubt you even know how to use a nail and hammer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Did you ever hear about engineers?
Should I explain you how they go about their work?
Would like to know how many possibilities of predicting tire degradation and mechanical response they have? They can start with computer design and calculations and finishing with a testing bench.



Thanks for demonstrating your intellectual level to all of us.
Next time when I need advice about farting over a sheet of paper I know I can rely on your expert opinion, however it obviously would be useless to share any engineering ideas with you, as I doubt you even know how to use a nail and hammer.

---

PML

This from someone that believes Michelin can design a F1 tyre by taking a look at a track lol

You're talking rubbish and you know it. Michelin know a little more than you about designing tyres (shock, horror!!) and even they got it hopelessly wrong.

I'm sure that they are chastising themselves that instead of spending millions of $$$ developing, building and testing tyres for F1 teams, they should just send an engineer to a track to have a look at it.

So, either you know more about building tyres than Michelin or you're talking bollox again (yes, that was the word you used the other day :) )

I think that was an example of me using a hammer to hit a nail accurately on the head :laugh:

Well, back to the thread title.

Ferrari suffered engine problems probably brought on by the excessive heat and nothing to do with the ECU. :)

Keep your personal comments to yourselves and discuss the matter in and, which sure as hell is'n Michelin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knock-on

Well, back to the thread title.

Ferrari suffered engine problems probably brought on by the excessive heat and nothing to do with the ECU. :)

---

There was a quote in the last day or 2 where Ron(I think) , defended Domenicalli and Ferrari , and said something about there being millimetres between the top teams .
I know , a little sketchy , but it was something like that .

Anyway , could that be a reference to McLaren mounting it in some way the others haven't tried -i.e.-spacing it up 2 or 3 mm from the mounting surface ?

hmmmmmmm, let me see, I'm sure there are very likely still wheel speed sensors, numerous brake sensors, an electronically operated transmission, ..... thinking out loud.......a pit speed limiter button....... I'm sure there is at least one accelerometer in the car somewhere......... :look: still just thinking out loud...... :s tareup: most early tc utilized brakes, not engine retardation......... pushing multiple buttons....... driver "inadvertently" hitting pit speed limiter coming off of corner...... :uhoh: rumours of ghosts........ hmmmmmmmm. :rolleyes: ;)

Ferrari certainly have their hands full. Multiple engine failures in P1 alone. Ouch. They better get to learning the ins and outs of the ECU fast, if that's really the problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jjanicke

Ferrari certainly have their hands full. Multiple engine failures in P1 alone. Ouch. They better get to learning the ins and outs of the ECU fast, if that's really the problem.

---

Ferrari have already said that the failures they have had are not to do with the ECU ;)