Ferrari seeks solutions after Melbourne

[Sianellen]

By Jonathan Noble Monday, March 28th 2011, 13:41 GMT


Ferrari plans an investigation back at its Maranello base this week to work out why its form fell short of expectations in the season-opening Australian Grand Prix.

The Italian outfit had appeared to be as fast as Red Bull Racing with its long-run form throughout winter testing, but it could do little to recapture that form in Melbourne, where Fernando Alonso and Felipe Massa finished fourth and seventh.

Although it is suspected its main problem related to getting its tyres into the right operating window, which then had subsequent balance ramifications, the team says it cannot fully explain what went wrong.

"What we need to understand is why in this weekend we did not get out the performance that we were expecting from ourselves," said team principal Stefano Domenicali.

"This is the main thing we need to look at back home and make sure that in Malaysia this thing will come back.

"For sure this weekend was not the one that we wanted in terms of performance, but in the race I have to say with regards to Fernando, who was in ninth position after the first lap, that it was a really difficult situation.

"He did a fantastic race and he was able, also due to the strategy, to be faster and faster and fight for the podium. For sure if he would have had a clean start then the race would have been totally different."

Massa, who especially struggled with the tyres, thinks the problem could be track specific - after saying that the 2011 Ferrari had been better throughout the winter.

"For sure the result at the end was not exactly what we expected to have," he said. "We expected to have a quicker car in qualifying at least. We didn't see that here.

"We saw a good direction in other tracks so maybe it was something that we maybe need to understand. What didn't work like we expected to see here, and what was not the same case in other tracks? That is something we need to understand for the next race tracks."

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/90309

[burak karakutuk]

http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMjA4OTQ2OTc2.html
look at last year Felipe's drive.he is driving much more flat out to the corners.car gives more confidence to drivers.it means a big downforce loss.

[Grillo]

It would be great if the team get to understand what happened in Melbourne before they arrive to Sepang. I'm positive the problem was partially track specific but I'm afraid we are going to see the Red Bull dominating Q3 for many races to come.

What we have to do?

1.- Improve qualifying, focus on improving Q3 and forget about race pace for a minute

2.- Improve start system as much as possible, if you're in 2nd or 3rd row you need it

Eeasier said than done.

[F2002]

Yes, it's the first race of the season and all that, however when one considers that Ferrari was the team that tested the most during winter testing, the least that could have been expected is that they had at least as much insight as the other front runners about tyre management. Yet, they are now complaining that they did not manage to get the tyres into the optimal operating window, and they also ran a three pit stop strategy, compared to the winning two stops.

And yes, Alonso had a bad start and was pushed down the order, but the real problem is the enormous gap in qualifying, up to two seconds for Felipe. This is not the sort of performance that has to be delivered to win the championship, especially as the intention was to have a car which could compete for victory from the first race.

As a fan, I believe that there are no excuses this time. They really should have delivered much more in Australia, and for one reason or another, they failed miserably. We are now back to "looking for immediate solutions", which is what they were doing, permanently, in 2010, with no success (we all know that Red Bull could have won the championship very easily much before Abu Dhabi).

[Greig]

There is no excuses, but what else can we do but try and improve, excuses won't change the result. If they can find out why things did not work then great, if not then it's time for some heads to roll

[Hornet]

One positive thing compared to last season is we seems to have a strong reliability this year, so far *knocks on wood*

Regardless if it was the change of tires compound or whatever that was missing, one thing we saw in the test session that wouldn't change is our reliability. So hopefully we can just focus on the performance part, and we'll be able to fight back sooner this time around

[Grillo]

I expect Red Bull being more reliable this season too. The positive is that they might need KERS in Sepang, at least for the long straight at the start and KERS can give a headache sometimes. Sepang is usually very very hot, it should be good for us, no? Although I expect a cold weekend as usually when we need a warm one.

[ferrari4life]

What would settle my mind and make me feel hopeful is this..
Compared to testing did the Bulls and McLaren get FASTER and Ferrai stay the same?
or
Compared to testing ferrari got SLOWER?

I do not know how to read the times and compare so maybe someone else can. If we got slower then its down to the track and setup that caught us offguard. If we stayed the same and they improved then we are done for the year.

[F2002]

@Hornet
Reliability is a hygiene factor. Red Bull, Mclaren, Renault, Toro Rosso and Force India all finished with both cars, so I doubt that reliability alone will give us any competitive advantage.

@ferrari4life
Ferrari was the only team at the front who qualified with a time which was higher than their time last year in qualifying. The other front runners dropped their time.

[Grillo]

@ferrari4life
Ferrari was the only team at the front who qualified with a time which was higher than their time last year in qualifying. The other front runners dropped their time.

I think it was Massa? who said this year's car was slower than last year's. But expected it was the same for everyone.

[burak karakutuk]

I think it was Massa? who said this year's car was slower than last year's. But expected it was the same for everyone.

http://www.todanoticia.com/24676/rec...he-es/?lang=en
alda costa said

[LeonKennedy]

http://www.todanoticia.com/24676/rec...he-es/?lang=en
alda costa said

So RedBull and McLaren succeded at making their car faster than last year while we, with all the other times, failed to do it?

We're supposed to be good at making cars go fast, aren't we? :S

[scuderiafan]

Interesting how Fernando says that he could have challenged Lewis. Positive for me.

[LeonKennedy]

Interesting how Fernando says that he could have challenged Lewis. Positive for me.

I wouldn't have though that he could have challanged lewis in normal circumstances (had a broken plank, losing downforce and having to conservate the car). But Alonso seems to be always right in what he says, so be it :P

[Greig]

All fine and well him saying we can challenge Lewis, is he forgetting about the Red Bulls, and why are we happy to be challenging for 2nd....

[burak karakutuk]

So RedBull and McLaren succeded at making their car faster than last year while we, with all the other times, failed to do it?

We're supposed to be good at making cars go fast, aren't we? :S

i dont think they are faster than last year because season is so long and cars are improving race by race.So comparision at the end of 2010 and begining.If they came here 2010 final race packet they would have been faster.The difference between 2010 Albert Park-2011 is 0.3sn

[scuderiafan]

All fine and well him saying we can challenge Lewis, is he forgetting about the Red Bulls, and why are we happy to be challenging for 2nd....

I guess that was the best we could have hoped for.

I wouldn't have though that he could have challanged lewis in normal circumstances (had a broken plank, losing downforce and having to conservate the car). But Alonso seems to be always right in what he says, so be it :P

But, correct me if i'm wrong, but it didn't make much difference for him, and the commentators were taling about it not passing the scrutineering as it may have given them an advantage.

Anyways, McLaren look very good, and they have upgrades for the next race. No upgrades from us, but then again, we never had upgrades form Turkey to Canada last year, but that produced completely different performances.

Now, imo, we just need to find some front downforce. Hopefully they will get the wing sorted for the next race, or setup.

[Forzi]

Well, the teams that won the most are those that less changed since last year. Our car has prety much nothing from last season and the RBR still has the flexi wing, no Kers and speed. Guess the new regulations were not much of a great thing to our team. All in all, since the big change in aerodinamics and regulations (2009) we lost our speed. Since then, we didn't have anything big or anything near a headache to other teams to figure out. Guess we knew and used something, but lost it because of change in rules. I wonder, how long will it take, till we get the hang of the regulations and start being consistantly fast like RedBull.

[LeonKennedy]

i dont think they are faster than last year because season is so long and cars are improving race by race.So comparision at the end of 2010 and begining.If they came here 2010 final race packet they would have been faster.The difference between 2010 Albert Park-2011 is 0.3sn

What you say does not matter as there are different regulations. At the end of the last season, the 3 cars were pretty much matched. They made them into the new rules, and here are the results:

RBR Q3 -> 2010 = 1:23.919 / 2011 = 1:23.529 (-0.390s)
Ferrari's Q3 -> 2010 - 1:24.111 / 2011 = 1:24.974 (+0.863s)
McLaren's Q3 -> 2010 - 1:24.675 / 2011 = 1:24.307 (-0.368s)

[LeonKennedy]

Anyway, how do you find "front downforce"? aren't the wings "almost perfect" as they are very very evolved? I mean, yea, they can probably make it a bit better and gain a tenth, but that wouldn't be enough, would it?

Or does this mean McLaren and RBR are flexing a lot and that's why we lack front downforce?

[Forzi]

Anyway, how do you find "front downforce"? aren't the wings "almost perfect" as they are very very evolved? I mean, yea, they can probably make it a bit better and gain a tenth, but that wouldn't be enough, would it?

Or does this mean McLaren and RBR are flexing a lot and that's why we lack front downforce?

Well, the front wing is prety much the only thing that generates front downforce, besides the weight of the car it self
And comparing the RBR with other teams, it looks like their front is glued to the track. Guess we have no choice but to spend time and get the wing/nose flexing sooner or later, or get a monstrous front wing like Reno had last year.

[scuderiafan]

Anyway, how do you find "front downforce"? aren't the wings "almost perfect" as they are very very evolved? I mean, yea, they can probably make it a bit better and gain a tenth, but that wouldn't be enough, would it?

Or does this mean McLaren and RBR are flexing a lot and that's why we lack front downforce?

maybe a new concept as Tomazis suggested rather than going for sqaring everything on the wing.

I think if we can get that extra front downforce, it will make the car more balanced and better.

(heres a pointless story, but i was playing GT5, and i bought a Ferrari 599. tuned it up full, and bought every aero part i could, as i wanted it to beat race spec cars. turns out there was only a spoiler available to buy, so i thought some downforce must be better than none, so i bought it. cost me 20000. then i turned the rear downforce to 40, and the front downforce was none. tested it round the ring, to see if i could beat the 599xx's time. i got a 7:10s and crashed 3 times. car was a nightmare, like what it looked like to me in Quali for F150.

so then i took the spoiler off, and had 0 DF at the front and back. went round 7:00.3s. and the car felt very good to drive.)

The moral of this randomness?
imo, getting the balance of a car is better than getting too much Downforce on either end.

[LeonKennedy]

maybe a new concept as Tomazis suggested rather than going for sqaring everything on the wing.

I think if we can get that extra front downforce, it will make the car more balanced and better.

(heres a pointless story, but i was playing GT5, and i bought a Ferrari 599. tuned it up full, and bought every aero part i could, as i wanted it to beat race spec cars. turns out there was only a spoiler available to buy, so i thought some downforce must be better than none, so i bought it. cost me 20000. then i turned the rear downforce to 40, and the front downforce was none. tested it round the ring, to see if i could beat the 599xx's time. i got a 7:10s and crashed 3 times. car was a nightmare, like what it looked like to me in Quali for F150.

so then i took the spoiler off, and had 0 DF at the front and back. went round 7:00.3s. and the car felt very good to drive.)

The moral of this randomness?
imo, getting the balance of a car is better than getting too much Downforce on either end.

That's a good story of how car balance works, but I hope Ferrari knows what car balance is haha

I fail to understand why the car was so unbalanced in qualy. I know it is hard to get the balance right for high speed corners, low speed corners, underbraking, etc, but the general car handling in qualy looked really bad... To me, on Saturday, Ferrari looked like an average team who couldn't get the balance right for some reason... hope they can fix this for Malaysia.

[scuderiafan]

yeah, would be worried if someone who doenst get high school physics would know more than ferrari about car balance. havent played gt5 in a long time, but watching that ferrari in quali reminded me of that story.

and that makes Fernandos achievements even better, as driving a car like that must have been extremely difficult. but heres to Sepang, where we have had the most Pole positions at the track ever

[Nova]

Well, mabey Ferrari should just start using their flexi wing....that would help I bet...

[Hornet]

Whatever happened to our flexing front wing

@Hornet
Reliability is a hygiene factor. Red Bull, Mclaren, Renault, Toro Rosso and Force India all finished with both cars, so I doubt that reliability alone will give us any competitive advantage.

My point was actually that we could focus on developing the car's performance, as opposed to previous year where we had to solve the engine issue first.

[Grillo]

Red Bull vs Ferrari FW.jpg

I think this is another area where the aerodynamicists have to work.

It might give not a so big advantage for the race but I'm positive the advantage is quite big on a flying lap.

I didn't expect our front wing weren't flexing at all.

Edit: Maybe this one is a bit better.

Flexing FW.jpg

[Rob]

Red Bull vs Ferrari FW.jpg


I think this is another area where the aerodynamicists have to work.

It might give not a so big advantage for the race but I'm positive the advantage is quite big on a flying lap.

I didn't expect our front wing weren't flexing at all.

there is yet again so much flex in that wing

[Greig]

Shocking that the FIA have yet to put a stop to it, they would never get away with that in Jean's day..............

[Grillo]

there is yet again so much flex in that wing

Our wing was flexing last year, not as much as Red Bull's but more than McLaren's.

Now McLaren's is flexing, Red Bull's too... Why?

We need a flexi wing for Sepang or else... I'm gonna cry for real!