Vettel nominated for Sportsman of the Year

F1 Fanatic round-up

Sebastian Vettel, Red Bull, Yas Marina, 2012In the round-up: Sebastian Vettel and Red Bull receive nominations from Laureus.

Links

Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

Laureus World Sports Awards 2013

Sebastian Vettel has been nominated for Sportsman of the Year and Red Bull have been nominated as Team of he year following their three consecutive Formula One world championship successes.

Mercedes reveals 2014 Formula 1 engine (Autosport)

Mercedes-Benz High Performance Engines managing director Andy Cowell: “The engines are going to be loud, but I think sweet sounding. The frequency will be higher and, with the turbocharger running at 125,000rpm, they will be loud. When you are stood next to it on the dyno it is not quiet and you need ear defenders.”

A glimpse into how F1 will change in 2014 (James Allen on F1)

“Rather than the single KERS system used today, which gives around 80hp boost for seven seconds per laps, the 2014 units will also harvest energy from an electric machine connected to the turbo and a heat converter, all of which will boost the output to 161hp for 33 seconds per lap.”

The future of Formula One sounds sweet to Mercedes (Reuters)

“Cars currently start a race with around 150kg of fuel on board, which means that in 2014 they will leave the grid lighter but finish slightly heavier than before. This is because of the extra weight of the new combined power unit, weighing in at 145kg compared to 95kg for the old V8 on its own.”

How to make an F1 car – part 2 (BBC)

“There is no Christmas. There is no winter off. People obviously have to have holidays, but work goes on year-round.”

Top 20 Cases of 2013 (The Lawyer)

“In October a fight that thus far has only been heard in Germany will arrive on British shores, with [Bernie] Ecclestone defending claims of bribery and corruption in the High Court. Gerhard Gribkowsky, then chief risk officer of state-owned BayernLB, was sentenced to eight and a half years after being convicted by a Munich court of taking $44m (??27m) in bribes from Ecclestone and his family trust Bambino Holdings. The bank reckons it lost more than $400m.”

Colin Davis obituary (The Guardian)

“The moustachioed, pipe-smoking Davis was not as well known as he deserved to be, thanks to an early decision to spend most of his career living and racing in Italy, and to retire from the sport in his 30s, dismayed by the frequency of fatal accidents on the track.”

F1 can?t find traction in Korea (The Korea Herald)

“Since the inaugural 2010 Korean Grand Prix, Korean interest is sagging and the organizer?s three-year loss is approaching 175 billion won ($163 milion), which has attracted negative coverage in the local press.”

Unfortunate that I am being held solely responsible for Kingfisher Airlines’ difficulties: Vijay Mallya (The Times of India)

“‘As you know, the media has continued their negative reporting on Kingfisher. I would urge each one of you to be particularly careful in any interaction you may have with them,’ Mallya cautioned his employees, who have threatened to file a winding-up petition.”

Austin?s F1 date has visiting Oklahoma State scrambling for rooms (Austin-American Statesman)

“That weekend, F1 has a Sunday race, practice and qualifying on Saturday and practice on Friday. Hotels can require a minimum four-day stay during F1 weekend and last year many Austin hotels doubled or tripled their average daily rate.”

2013 – F1 Car design trends, what’s banned and what to look out for (Somers F1)

“DRS has been reduced to usage only within the specified zone(s) at each GP this year with it previously having unlimited usage. This will have an effect on how the teams design their rear wing planes in 2013 with the DRS delta now changed.”

Tweets

Comment of the day

Nick (@npf1) on how attitudes to tyres in F1 have changed.

I just so happened to see a video of a Bridgestone test in 1996 the other day. Arrows was testing their tyres at Magny-Cours with Jos Verstappen driving (he complained about the Good Year tyres in 1997 all year as a result).

The voiceover (in Dutch, from Eurosport) kept mentioning how F1 needed a tyre war and how F1 teams welcomed it, as well as Verstappen and Walkingshaw being very supportive of the Bridgestone tyres. The arguments the voice over used, winning half a second, innovations, closer competition, everything has since reversed in the eyes of many, including the FIA and F1 teams.

Of course, this has a lot to do with the financial elements of today, but seeing that video earlier this week and reading this article today, makes it very clear just how F1 has changed its perception on tyres in the past 17 years.
Nick (@npf1)

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Abdurahman!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is by emailling me, using Twitter or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Michael Schumacher prepared for his F1 comeback by testing a GP2 car three years ago today:

Advert | Go Ad-free

56 comments on Vettel nominated for Sportsman of the Year

  1. I doubt he’ll win it as there are some very deserving sportsmen included in the nominations, such as Usain Bolt and BBC Sports Perspnailty of the year Bradley Wiggins but as for the team nominations I’d say Red Bull have a decent claim to being named as “team of the year”. To sustain the level of performance sufficient to win three straight titles, especially in these times of ever-constricting rules and when your “toys” are being outlawed is no mean feat. They staged an immense comeback from the position they were in at the start of the season and in my mind would be deserved winners of the team of the year.

    As for sportsman of the year, I’d say Bradley Wiggins was phenomenal as was Bolt in making history by retaining all three sprint gold medals so either of those two would get my vote. But also there’s Mo Farah…oh god too many choices!

    • OmarR-Pepper (@omarr-pepper) said on 12th January 2013, 0:35

      Probably the hardest obstacle he could have to win is the fact that many people don’t consider F1 as a sport, without knowing that it requires a lot of preparation to be sit there handling a beast at 300kph and running in the afternoon wearing the anti-flame and the long-sleeve uniform plus helmet, with G-forces ready to reap your head and a long etcetera. Some people think anyone can drive a F1 car but they’re wrong.

      • Nick.UK (@) said on 12th January 2013, 0:54

        Lewis Hamilton won breakthrough award in 2008, Button in 2009 and Brawn also won the team of the year. Red Bull will almost certainly win the team award I think, although the European Ryder Cup team have a good chance too.

        I hope to hell doesn’t win the sportsperson of the year. He does nothing outside of the track, we never see or hear from him! With the likes of Wiggo and Mo Farah in the running hopefully he’ll be justly overlooked.

      • @omarr-pepper. I face the same issue as @brazil2007 dictates: the genral majority of my friends (mainly footballers/brought up in a football environment) just simply don’t acknowledge the physical demands of driving a modern F1 car. The safety equipment as you have said (nomex suits etc.) coupled with ambient temperatures in excess of 30°C mean that frequently the cockpit of an F1 car can exceed 50°C and drivers lose around 2/3l of body fluid, only a litre of which can be replenished with the water bottle. So naturally this leads to dehydration and the main effects of this is a loss of concentration and blurred vision: the two things you absolutely do not want when driving wheel-to-wheel at +300km/h.

        In actual fact I’d say the average F1 driver is much fitter than the average proffesional football player as you have to have a certain degree of fitness even to fit in the car, particularly in Newey’s! Which I have tried to explain many times but usually to no evail: people cling to their previous beliefs and opinions despite what the evidence suggests!

        @nick-uk

        I hope to hell doesn’t win the sportsperson of the year. He does nothing outside of the track, we never see or hear from him!

        That could be the fault of the sponsors, the demands of the sport (of course it is an unusually long season as sports go and the winter break isn’t really a break) or indeed (although I should say more unlikely) he just doesn’t bother! Either way though I agree with you to an extent that there are more deserving candidates this year although I reckon he had a very good claim to it last year.

        As for this:

        To be perfectly honest, I don’t think that Wiggins would deserve the award. The course in last year’s Tour was really “easy” (it’s all relative), allowing for somebody like him, who’s far from the best climber, to win. And Chris Froome really looked much stronger (but had to do his duty as his teammate). Not to mention that he had very little proper opposition, with Schleck missing and Evans collapsing completely.

        I can’t honestly say I am an avid cycling fan, so I have no return argument! Other than the fact he competed very well in the Olympics also and won the Tour de France without drugs I am pretty under-informed, so I’ll take your word for it and plug for Bolt! ;)

        • Bob (@bobthevulcan) said on 12th January 2013, 2:42

          That reminds me of a spirited debate I had with a friend the other day, when I disagreed with his assessment that F1 was just “drivers going around in circles, nothing physically demanding.” So I put on an on-board lap video of Spa, with the speedometer and g-force sensor overlays, and began my own voiceover commentary, describing the physical hurdles facing the driver at all points along the lap – coping with cornering forces, the brute strength required to just operate the car (especially the brake pedal), multitasking (managing brake bias, KERS/DRS, and all those knobs on the steering wheel), all while under duress from navigating a challenging racetrack. I’m pleased to say that it shut him up.

        • david d.m. said on 12th January 2013, 6:47

          Forget about the physical demands of driving an F1 car, the level of sustained concentration, quick reactions and multitasking is nowhere to be found in other sports, I think anyone could be fit if they are dedicated enough but to be a top F1 driver you really need to be something else.

      • beneboy (@beneboy) said on 12th January 2013, 14:50

        @omarr-pepper

        Probably the hardest obstacle he could have to win is the fact that many people don’t consider F1 as a sport

        I don’t think that’s a true reflection of what non F1 fans think. Most people I know that don’t like F1 don’t like it because they think that almost anyone can win in a superior car and that the car is the most important factor in the overall performance so whereas a sprinter wins or loses depending on how fast they can run in F1 you could get a driver winning even though they’re less talented than the guys they’re racing against.
        There’s a similar argument to be had for equestrian sports, sailing, cycling and a few others too, it’s not a view I necessarily agree with but I can understand it.

        • @beneboy – true but then again usually (and not by coincidence) the best drivers find themselves in the best cars.
          I happen to think that people generalise F1 as sitting down driving round in circles for 2 hours, which simply is not the case. Even from an non-F1 fans perspective I think the Brazillian GP would be absolutely thrilling to watch (even more so if they were filled in beforehand on the championship standings) so I think it is due to ignorance really that many people have the opinions that I, omarr-pepper and Bob have discussed above.

          Sure the fact that the car is as much of an influence as the driver has an effect but as you have said I’m sure Britain’s bikes had a slight influence in their gold medal haul or of course in equestrian where horses like Red Rum often gain more acclaim than their jockey’s. I very much agree with you that it isn’t a view I agree with.

        • uan (@uan) said on 12th January 2013, 20:16

          @beneboy – I think the view with cycling is “who has the best drugs”. ;)

          • @uan – which to me increases the value of Bradley Wiggins’ Tour win, because supposedly he was drug-free! I think drugs are more of a Tour thing though and they haven’t found their way into the velodrome (thankfully)!

      • AndrewTanner (@andrewtanner) said on 13th January 2013, 11:51

        @omarr-pepper Unfortunately you’re right. They rarely appreciate the work of the human behind the wheel.

        I used to work with someone who had no concept of athleticism in modern F1. She explained to me that she has more respect for guys like Mansell and Senna collapsing and pouring with sweat than the current generation. Apparently because they don’t almost collpse at the end of every race they’re not being worked hard enough and it’s all about the car! I swiftly argued that modern F1 drivers are so fit and dedicated to the gym that they don’t need to break a sweat! This is the kind of people the F1 fan is up against!!

        • @andrewtanner – also, the collapsing at the end of races usually coincided with unusually hot conditions (in the case of Mansell) or problems with the cars (in the case of Senna). But yes in general F1 drivers are much more dedicated to improving their fitness that before, a trend which started with Schumacher (who coincidentally to the best of my knowledge has never collapsed at the wheel of an F1 car).

          Really though F1 isn’t difficult so much because of the physical strain (although obviously that is a factor) but the supreme levels of concentration needed: it is probably the most difficult sport from a mental perspective on the planet.

    • @vettel1 To be perfectly honest, I don’t think that Wiggins would deserve the award. The course in last year’s Tour was really “easy” (it’s all relative), allowing for somebody like him, who’s far from the best climber, to win. And Chris Froome really looked much stronger (but had to do his duty as his teammate). Not to mention that he had very little proper opposition, with Schleck missing and Evans collapsing completely.

      @omarr-pepper Some of my friends just don’t understand F1 cars at all. It’s not that the average person would be slow in one; they’d be completely incapable of driving it.

  2. Prisoner Monkeys (@prisoner-monkeys) said on 12th January 2013, 0:47

    Unfortunate that I am being held solely responsible for Kingfisher Airlines’ difficulties: Vijay Mallya

    Unfortunate? That’s open to debate.

    Deserved? Certainly. After all, Vijay Mallya is the chairman of the airline, and under his direction, Kingfisher has managed to lose over a billion dollars. Lenders are refusing to deal with the Kingfisher, the airline’s bank accounts have been frozen, its licence to fly has been suspended, and an arrest warrant was issued for Mallya (which has since been revoked when he managed to pay up just in time). As chairman, Mallya is responsible for this. If he’s not responsible, then he’s incompetent, which just makes him all the more responsible.

  3. Hi Keith,

    I was wondering why you have links to JA but he never links to you? Are your sites not in competition or are you just happy to admit that he his higher up in the F1 chain than you? Is really accessible to alot of information that you can’t obtain?

    No disrespect intended, I’m just interested where you stand on this.

    Thanks,

    M

    • Sorry,

      I’m sure I wrote is: Is JA really accessible to alot of information that you can’t obtain?

      rather than: ” Is really accessible to alot of information that you can’t obtain”

      Cheers,

      Matt

    • Prisoner Monkeys (@prisoner-monkeys) said on 12th January 2013, 3:01

      James Allen doesn’t run his blog the way Keith does. In fact, Allen runs his blog in a much mroe conventional way than Keith; Allen is a lot more like Adam Cooper and Joe Saward than F1 Fanatic. F1 Fanatic is a lot more community-oriented than the other blogs, and is updated far more frequently. Keith usually posts at least one article a day (other than the round-up), whereas the others might only post an article once a week.

    • Brace (@brace) said on 13th January 2013, 2:08

      I’m surprised that someone who, I suppose, follows both sites can ask such an, let’s say, odd question.

      James Allen’s blog is exactly that, a blog, pretty much personal one, with quite an extensive array of posts types though.
      F1 Fanatic is firstly a community place for all stuff F1, with probably the best content I found so far. I came to F1F for the community interaction in the first place.

  4. Kevin Campos (@kcampos12) said on 12th January 2013, 3:03

    Can someone please help me out and see if I can watch this f1 2012 season review in a USA PS3? This is the link http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/B00ADKS5IQ/ref=mp_s_a_1?qid=1357959454&sr=8-2&pi=SL75

  5. Chris (@tophercheese21) said on 12th January 2013, 3:08

    IMO Lebron deserves sportsman of the year.
    Tough to beat the year he had:

    – 3rd regular season MVP
    – NBA Championship
    – Finals MVP
    – and an Olympic Gold medal.

  6. AdrianMorse (@adrianmorse) said on 12th January 2013, 6:49

    Something has always puzzled me about chassis construction: if every chassis built has to pass 10 crash tests, aren’t they slightly damaged?

    Some of the structure will deform, but if it deforms more than it is allowed to – which is 50mm, or there are any marks more than 100mm away from where you’re applying the force – then you fail.

    So everyone races with a slightly deformed chassis?

    On the new engines, how is the ERS going to work, are cars going to run out of steam on Monza, if there is no energy to be recovered, or is the heat of the engine itself enough to keep the ERS going?

    • verstappen (@verstappen) said on 12th January 2013, 7:55

      every design has to pass al 10 tests.

    • Prisoner Monkeys (@prisoner-monkeys) said on 12th January 2013, 8:00

      @adrianmorse

      Something has always puzzled me about chassis construction: if every chassis built has to pass 10 crash tests, aren’t they slightly damaged?

      The teams don’t actually build a full car and repeatedly drive it into a wall. Rather, they build a survival cell and a minimal amount of bodywork – and dictated by the FIA regulations – and crash that for most of the tests. They do have to build one full chassis and crash it for certain tests, but once the FIA is satisfied that the car is safe, the survival cell is homologated and the teams build every single suvival cell off those plans, which cannot be changed (except in certain, highly specific circumstances).

      On the new engines, how is the ERS going to work, are cars going to run out of steam on Monza, if there is no energy to be recovered, or is the heat of the engine itself enough to keep the ERS going?

      Even though KERS is designed as an energy recovery system, there’s actually a whole lot of energy that goes to waste in its current form. I’m pretty sure that braking for the Variante del Rettifilo is enough to fully-recharge the battery; if not, then braking into Variante del Rettifilo and Variante della Roggia is. Everything else just gets wasted. It’s not particularly efficient, but the FIA always intended to give the teams a few years to get to understand how KERS works with a view to fully incorporating it into the engine design from 2014.

      As for the Thermal Energy Recovery System, I’m pretty sure there are several solutions that could be used. This verges into thermodynamics, which is not a subject I know a lot about, but I seem to recall reading – possibly from Scarbs – that the heat will be harvested from the exhaust manifold. Like the current version of KERS, it will only be used under certain conditions, but I’m pretty sure that the FIA will have measured everything to make sure that there is no danger of a car being able to run out of steam, as you put it (but if there was, it might make for some interesting tactical racing).

      In fact, I believe that one of the proposals being considered – I don’t know if it is still in the regulations – was a system of “double-charging” the ERS device. Under this proposal, the car would receive a 50% charge at the end of each lap, about the same as what if being used now. However, if they go for a lap without using it, they will get a 100% charge, and be free to use that. It was intended to introduce a tactical element (and could serve as a replacement for DRS; I think it could be very popular with the fans because it would address a lot of the issues most people have with DRS), but I don’t know about its current status.

      • “Under this proposal, the car would receive a 50% charge at the end of each lap, about the same as what if being used now. However, if they go for a lap without using it, they will get a 100% charge, and be free to use that”

        That’s a pretty awful idea, which seems designed to reinforce any speed advantage the faster cars might have.
        The power output of the ERS system is double that of KERS (161 vs 80 bhp), so running a lap entirely without using it just isn’t going to happen. It would cost too much time.
        A faster car behind a slower one would be able to save a few seconds of usage, however. That would result in ‘push to pass’ which dwarfs the effect of today’s DRS.
        A car comfortably in the lead would be able to do the same thing, saving the odd second of usage each lap, making it even more difficult to challenge.

        • @nigelf1 – Ah yes but it is a much farer method than using DRS. Both drivers have an equal amount of ERS usage per lap and so they decide when to use it, be it to try and overtake or defend or for ultimate lap time. DRS of course is only available to the chasing car and so the leading car has little to defend with, which usually results in the chasing car breezing past undramatically and easily, robbing us of a possible good fight for position.

          That is why I would support the tactical use of ERS but loathe the artificial, manufactured overtaking that DRS provides.

        • Prisoner Monkeys (@prisoner-monkeys) said on 12th January 2013, 12:37

          The power output of the ERS system is double that of KERS (161 vs 80 bhp), so running a lap entirely without using it just isn’t going to happen. It would cost too much time.

          Under the proposal, any driver who elected not to use ERS for a lap would get twice the boost for twice as long on their second lap. However, at the time, the proposeal called for ERS to only offer 80bhp for ten seconds in the lap as standard; with a fully-charged unit, the driver would get 160bhp for twenty seconds. Now that the agreed-upon amount is 160bhp for thirty-three seconds per lap, I suspect the original proposal has been dropped entirely.

          A faster car behind a slower one would be able to save a few seconds of usage, however. That would result in ‘push to pass’ which dwarfs the effect of today’s DRS.

          Not really – if a genuinely faster car is behind a slower car, then the pass is pretty much a foregone conclusion. ERS will only speed the process up.

          • “if a genuinely faster car is behind a slower car, then the pass is pretty much a foregone conclusion. ”

            Only since the introduction of DRS. Otherwise, there are plenty of tracks where overtaking is far from certain, especially if the cars are reasonably closely matched.

          • Prisoner Monkeys (@prisoner-monkeys) said on 12th January 2013, 23:08

            No, that’s pretty much how racing works in general: the faster car can catch up to the slower cars and pass.

          • “that’s pretty much how racing works in general: the faster car can catch up to the slower cars and pass.”

            Gee, PM, thanks for that stunning insight. Guess I’d just hallucinated all those times a faster driver got stuck behind someone who knew where to place his car.

            The point I was making – which you completely ignored – was that this is another technical innovation which makes passing easier, and adds to the advantage of a slightly faster car.

      • Absent the silly idea of allowing differential use of ERS depending on how much you used the previous lap, I think the change to a much higher powered version of KERS in 2014 is a positive one, and will result in a lot of tactical innovations.

        One (as yet unforeseen ?) consequence of the new system is that it will make getting a good tow in the slipstream of a car in front much more valuable.

        According to some estimates, the drivers average time on full throttle is somewhere around 50 seconds per lap (obviously this varies from circuit to circuit). A difference of 161 bhp with and without ERS is pretty significant, so if teams can work out how to get the benefit for more than the 33 seconds per lap it’s available, that will be quite an advantage.

        I would predict that quite a few will try out the kind of slipstreaming that Ferrari tried a couple of times in qualifying last year (and possibly during the race as well).

  7. Atticus (@atticus-2) said on 12th January 2013, 13:59

    Interesting insights on the 2013-2014 car specifications.

  8. andae23 (@andae23) said on 12th January 2013, 16:12

    I have been very worried about the 2014 engine regulations, especially when it came to engine sound. The sound has become more dull over the years: we went from V12s to V10s to V8s, and the max. rpm was reduced from 20k to 18k. With the V6 turbo engines, my fear is that the main ‘noise’ will come from the turbo itself, which could be an awful sounds if it is too dominant.

    I just read that Autosport article, which stated that the amount of torque increases, which could lead to a four-wheel drift on the exit of corners. There are two main reasons why this type of cornering is unwanted: higher fuel consumption and higher tyre degradation. The fuel consumption is a problem, because it would mean that the car would be very slow at the beginning of a race, and progessively starts picking up the pace with respect to the rest of the pack. Regarding the tyres, what if Pirelli and the engine manufacturers (Renault, Ferrari, Mercedes, Cosworth) would have a chat that results in Pirelli designing tyres specifically for four-wheel drifting? That would be awesome, seeing F1 drivers trying to learn how to take a corner Fangio-style! A consequence of this would be that the drivers that know their car very well would suddenly be more adequate than the current ‘established’ drivers.

    Whether all of this will happen? I don’t think so, simply because the advantage that drivers have with drifting is outweighed by the fuel consumption.

    • @andae23 – I’d love if they were to have a similar (although more Formula 1-esque) sound to the Holden/Vauxhall VXR8 Barthurst, i.e. a V8 below followed by the whine of the supercharger/turbocharger in the higher rev ranges. The best footage I could find on a youtube search was on top gear () and the sound is infectious. A punchy, gutsy sound from the V6 in the lower rev ranges progressing into a turbocharged whine would do nicely for me! It’s pretty difficult to top a V12 though.

      About the prospect of the tendency for the 2014 cars to 4-wheel drift out of corners: I feel, if Pirelli wish to continue their contract, that they will redesign the tyres accordingly so that shouldn’t be too much of an issue but I feel personally that it will give more scope for drivers to prove their skill which can only be good from a sporting perspective, although most certainly not from a designers perspective!

  9. HoHum (@hohum) said on 12th January 2013, 18:53

    Well I asked earlier in the week for an analysis of the differences 2013 would bring and hey presto an excellent article on exactly that subject, thanks Keith, and thanks “Somers”.
    Next question(s); For 2014 we have 2 energy recovery systems I feel need explaining, (a) how do you harvest electrical energy from heat without the weight and complication of a steam engine or turbine?
    (b) Adding an alternaror/generator to a turbocharger is apparently in common use on planes and ships, I can understand this usage as the engines are being used at constant rpm for long periods of time but in cars let alone F1 racers it is important that the turbine reacts to throttle openings almost instantly, how will this be achieved with the drag and mass off a generator added or will the turbo be sufficiently small so as to be providing max boost and rpm throughout the useful powerband?

    • crr917 (@crr917) said on 12th January 2013, 19:49

      The name is misleading. The MGUH is just a generator linked to the shaft of the turbo unit.

      1.26 Motor Generator Unit – Heat (MGUH) :
      The Heat Motor Generator Unit is the electrical machine linked to the exhaust turbine of a
      pressure charging system as part of the ERS.
      5.1.6 Pressure charging may only be effected by the use of a sole single stage compressor linked to a sole single stage exhaust turbine [...] An electrical motor generator (MGUH) may be directly coupled to the same shaft.

      Maybe the boost pressure limit is low enough so it will be easily achieved even with the extra mass of the MGUH.

      • HoHum (@hohum) said on 12th January 2013, 20:57

        @crr917, it is the “maybe” that has me intrigued, if max boost comes in at low rpm it suggests that a lot more power could be developed with bigger or multiple turbochargers.

        And thanks for the “heat” explanation, which is really converting KINETIC energy (high velocity exhaust gas), not heat, into electric energy?

        • crr917 (@crr917) said on 12th January 2013, 22:15

          @hohum I think that certainly much more turbo boost is possible but FIA won’t allow because it is dangareous. 30 years ago cars reached 1300 hp. I doubt engine builders forgot how to do it :D

          About the heat explanation: In power plants(coal, gas, nuclear) steam rotates the rotors if electric generators thanks do the attached blades which absorb the energy from the pressurised fluid. In the MGUH case, the fluid is the exhaust gas, the turbo has the blades and MGU is a generator. So it is using the heat in the exhaust in the same way, hence “heat”.
          Although there are thermoelectric materials, that convert heat to electricity directly. I read that BMW is using such. I don’t know if the 2014 rules allow them.

          • HoHum (@hohum) said on 12th January 2013, 22:48

            True, but using that argument the engine is just a heat pump and all the energy used is derived from heat.
            I do hope that a new technology using thermoelectric materials is both allowed and developed in F1 as both the internal combustion engine and the turbine are old technologies and F1 seems determined to restrict any further development of them.

  10. HoHum (@hohum) said on 12th January 2013, 21:18

    Someone at the Korean Herald should look at a world map, due S of Korea below the Equator they will find a land mass that is neither Europe or the Americas and from whence a couple of F1 champions have come.

  11. Russell Gould (@russellgould) said on 13th January 2013, 0:36

    As a US citizen, I can say that Seb Vettel is as well known here as all but a handful of now-retored F1 stars. He’s better known than Lewis or Jenson over here.

    Humorous that some think he does nothing outside the track. He’s perhaps one of the hardest working people in motorsport. I only hope that he gets enough time to get those trophies put of his kitchen!

  12. AndrewTanner (@andrewtanner) said on 13th January 2013, 11:58

    Big thanks to AMG Mercedes HPP for whetting our collective appetite! I really am so excited about this 2014 regulation change. It’s annoying many puzzling others and raising a lot of questions which in my opinion high grade technology should be about. I can’t wait for the teams to pull their hair out over it and I think the Powertrain over engine philosophy is a bold but interesting move.

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.

1 trackback