F14-T- Development & News

[BigGar32]

So when we are going to fire Fry and Tombazis??????

So now it's their fault? First of all it was Massa and Stefano and now it's Fry and Tombazis? Who's on the list after these two?

[Stebandelareina]

So when we are going to fire Fry and Tombazis??????

After we fire Aldo Costa and a couple of years later he desing one of the most dominant car of the last years we should probably have a deep thought about what's the real problem with Ferrari. What does Mercedes have that we don't? better infraestructure and diferent working philosophy? I think yes. But Ferrari is remodeling the infraestructures and this year the working philosophy is starting to change. Allison already said it, as well as LCDM. More freedom to the engineers, more creativity, less politics and intermediaries.

But, any good F1 project (as a team), needs at least 4-5 years to success. We need to start to realize that we need a long term plan. There is no way we get to the winning way if we didn't make really deep changes.

Of course, that's my opinion.

[zike]

So now it's their fault? First of all it was Massa and Stefano and now it's Fry and Tombazis? Who's on the list after these two?

You must be blind or you are not very bright......so let me explain to you, in a business world where you are paid to accomplish the objectives that the CEO has put in front of you, you must deliver or you go. That is how things work in a real world and my advice to you is to snap out of that pretty and shiny world that exist in your head.

[BigGar32]

You must be blind or you are not very bright......so let me explain to you, in a business world where you are paid to accomplish the objectives that the CEO has put in front of you, you must deliver or you go. That is how things work in a real world and my advice to you is to snap out of that pretty and shiny world that exist in your head.

I am fully aware of how businesses operate but I do appreciate you taking the trouble to attempt to educate me today. My question to you is why should it be Fry and Tombazis that go? Are there not any others (above or below in the hierarchy) that should be for the "high jump" or are you just plucking out names?

[zike]

I am fully aware of how businesses operate but I do appreciate you taking the trouble to attempt to educate me today. My question to you is why should it be Fry and Tombazis that go? Are there not any others (above or below in the hierarchy) that should be for the "high jump" or are you just plucking out names?

I am sorry if I misunderstand you, no I am not plucking out names, I realy mean that they should go as they are the most accountable for the design of our cars in the past 4 years...... our Luca should fire himself.

Cheers mate

[Silent Bob]

You must be blind or you are not very bright......so let me explain to you, in a business world where you are paid to accomplish the objectives that the CEO has put in front of you, you must deliver or you go. That is how things work in a real world and my advice to you is to snap out of that pretty and shiny world that exist in your head.

So if the CEO requests that you accomplish his objectives but doesn't give you the tools or the personnel to do so... should you still be fired? They just fired the Team principle, would you like them to get rid of all the staff now? How would the car develop with no one to develop it?

[zike]

So if the CEO requests that you accomplish his objectives but doesn't give you the tools or the personnel to do so... should you still be fired? They just fired the Team principle, would you like them to get rid of all the staff now? How would the car develop with no one to develop it?

We put James Allison at the helm, and we bring some young guys to work under him

[PURE PASSION]

If we need changes,why not go wild.Lets disband the whole team and duilt a new one, THE NEW FERRARI!! Ιn that way we will exorcize any bad carma from the past!!!!!

[Nero Horse]

If we need changes,why not go wild.Lets disband the whole team and duilt a new one, THE NEW FERRARI!! Ιn that way we will exorcize any bad carma from the past!!!!!

What "bad karma from the past"??? What are you talking about lol?

[rodri12001]

Anyone can explain why we are still using those big brake cooling intakes if we are not using the blown wheelnut? Obviously such big air intakes produce more drag...

[PURE PASSION]

What "bad karma from the past"??? What are you talking about lol?

Humor mate!!! Humor!!!!

[Stebandelareina]

In canada the brakes needs a lot of cooling.

[Kiwi Nick]

If there is any thing to take away from Canada, it is the fact that the F14T is a platform that cannot be developed satisfactorily when compared to other cars. In spite of a number of supposedly significant upgrades to aero efficiency and PU output, the gap to Merc seems to be widening. RBR and Williams seem to have passed Ferrari and Force India look as though they have drawn even with the red cars. Try as they might, the engineers seem unable to develop the car's performance faster than the competition.

So, write the F14T off. Only use it as a development mule for next years car. Because if the F15T is as bad as this year's car, Ferrari are on the verge of a new dark age.

[PadGeT]

For the umpteenth time, the front wheel axle is still doing blowing.

Anyone can explain why we are still using those big brake cooling intakes if we are not using the blown wheelnut? Obviously such big air intakes produce more drag...

So, write the F14T off. Only use it as a development mule for next years car. Because if the F15T is as bad as this year's car, Ferrari are on the verge of a new dark age.

I some times wonder if the update of rear bodywork was brought too early. The team has already told they are bringing updates sometimes too soon for it to have the desired effect. So is it possible, that they haven't revised the rear suspension mounting point for the airflow around wishbones to have the desired effect at the rear.(that sounded less vague in my mind).
Look at the placement of the control arms....


I see the rear suspension arms in Red Bull more staighter, but maybe thats got to do do with their rear wing design philosophy?!?
Ferrari's are sort of like V's. It affects the shape of the roll centre to the centre of mass as it goes around a turn by altering its virtual swing angle.. from what I remember.

Aerowise, after all the main aim to create turbulence further at the back, so as to increase the area of pressure difference. It would be nice to see some more rear suspension changes and as always they can ofcourse get their exits tighter at the back.
I see nothing more to change for the season if they don't sort out their issues at the back. FW isn't getting revised, cause the nature of F14 T is such front inherently carries lower CG and higher d.f than is necessary for its rear d.f points and forced based dynamic roll centre of the car. The thing strikes me is the diffuser isn't getting revised, or maybe they have not found its full potential yet...

It carries low AoA, so that means it would theoretically create turbulent zone nearer to the rear of the car making it more draggy, than suppose a Red bull would with this sleek diffuser profile

[NickEice]

Everything we build looks like it was designed with legos, whereas the Red Bull looks like it was molded from a piece of clay...

[rodri12001]

For the umpteenth time, the front wheel axle is still doing blowing.




I some times wonder if the update of rear bodywork was brought too early. The team has already told they are bringing updates sometimes too soon for it to have the desired effect. So is it possible, that they haven't revised the rear suspension mounting point for the airflow around wishbones to have the desired effect at the rear.(that sounded less vague in my mind).
Look at the placement of the control arms....


I see the rear suspension arms in Red Bull more staighter, but maybe thats got to do do with their rear wing design philosophy?!?
Ferrari's are sort of like V's. It affects the shape of the roll centre to the centre of mass as it goes around a turn by altering its virtual swing angle.. from what I remember.

Aerowise, after all the main aim to create turbulence further at the back, so as to increase the area of pressure difference. It would be nice to see some more rear suspension changes and as always they can ofcourse get their exits tighter at the back.
I see nothing more to change for the season if they don't sort out their issues at the back. FW isn't getting revised, cause the nature of F14 T is such front inherently carries lower CG and higher d.f than is necessary for its rear d.f points and forced based dynamic roll centre of the car. The thing strikes me is the diffuser isn't getting revised, or maybe they have not found its full potential yet...

It carries low AoA, so that means it would theoretically create turbulent zone nearer to the rear of the car making it more draggy, than suppose a Red bull would with this sleek diffuser profile

Probably you are right but, are you sure that this small hole is doing blowing? In my opinion the hole is too small to do so, above all if we compare it with the version seen in china. By the way, here are some pics of the new bodywork and its effect on the rear of the car (the one that we finally did not use due to high temperatures).

carrozzeria_ferrari2.jpg
new_diffuser.jpg

[PadGeT]

Don't know if this has been posted or not..
Marco Mattiacci said

"We are very angry with ourselves," admits, "but we have no intention of giving up. The Canadian circuit definitely didn't suit us, given that it highlighted the strong points of some of our competitors and, on top of that, not everything went right either, given that we started from too far back and the others improved more than we did.
On the positive side of this weekend, everyone wants to fight back, starting with our drivers, Kimi and Fernando, who are both extremely tenacious guys, competent and competitive and they know how to work as a team to point us in the direction of the areas that are a priority in our development programme. Some updates produced good results on track and that's why we will continue down this path race by race.
We have improved since the start of the year, but every step forward we make must be looked at in the context of what our rivals have done," he continues. "Ferrari has begun work on a specific approach, based around a few key figures; President Montezemolo, James Allison, Fernando Alonso, Kimi Raikkonen and a group of highly talented engineers. It's a case of restructuring the team, with people being given the best possible conditions in which to get the job done.
"There is a clearly defined development programme that we are working through and which will see us bring updates to every race," he concludes. "Another major target is to speed up our reaction time, which is something our competitors seem to manage to do."

[Alonso14]

So now it's their fault? First of all it was Massa and Stefano and now it's Fry and Tombazis? Who's on the list after these two?

It's beyond me how anyone can absolve Stefano of any fault. He was the man responsible for Ferrari - who is part of the team, at what role, management structure, push for better technology (this didn't happen until 2011/12).

Saying Stefano is not responsible for Ferrari's performance is like saying Steve Jobs was not responsible for Apple Inc. Yes, Jobs didn't go and plan every bit of the design, didn't write the code, didn't manufacture any part of any device - but he was the man responsible, simple as. Same with Stefano, and the worst part is that SD did long-term damage to the team. Why do you think we are restructuring now? Because our previous structure was too good and we don't want to have such advantage over the others?

[NickEice]

Below is from formula1.com

In an effort to improve the efficiency of their overall package, Ferrari tested a much tighter-fitting engine cover in Montreal, featuring longer sidepods and - as can be seen in the main drawing - extending further at the rear of the car, finishing inside the rear tyres. The main function of the new configuration was to help the overall cooling, although that came at the cost of downforce. It would therefore only have been of use in Montreal and Monza, due to the higher average speeds of the two tracks. Ferrari, however, decided the package didn't offer enough benefit in terms of cooling, and reverted back to their original configuration (inset).

So the engine cover we tested was developed to help cooling specifically for Montreal and Monza and we still didn't use it...?

[Wildcat]

If that is true, we are mediocre...

[PadGeT]

Ferrari F14 T - Montreal engine cover

via F1.com

[shamim179]

Below is from formula1.com

In an effort to improve the efficiency of their overall package, Ferrari tested a much tighter-fitting engine cover in Montreal, featuring longer sidepods and - as can be seen in the main drawing - extending further at the rear of the car, finishing inside the rear tyres. The main function of the new configuration was to help the overall cooling, although that came at the cost of downforce. It would therefore only have been of use in Montreal and Monza, due to the higher average speeds of the two tracks. Ferrari, however, decided the package didn't offer enough benefit in terms of cooling, and reverted back to their original configuration (inset).

So the engine cover we tested was developed to help cooling specifically for Montreal and Monza and we still didn't use it...?

That's mind boggling. Use what you've manufactured and see what it does. After all it's only for this race. I do think Ferrari were gambling on the notion that their competitors will not improve by that much - by that I mean Ferrari thought they would have qualified better.

[Kiwi Nick]

What is striking about the thermal images of the heat coming out the rear of the Merc, RBR and Ferrari, assuming running times were equal, is how little heat is exiting the rear of the RBR. Where did the heat go? Secondly, the difference in heat from left to right on the Ferrari points up how the two sides are used for different cooling applications.

Below is from formula1.com

In an effort to improve the efficiency of their overall package, Ferrari tested a much tighter-fitting engine cover in Montreal, featuring longer sidepods and - as can be seen in the main drawing - extending further at the rear of the car, finishing inside the rear tyres. The main function of the new configuration was to help the overall cooling, although that came at the cost of downforce. It would therefore only have been of use in Montreal and Monza, due to the higher average speeds of the two tracks. Ferrari, however, decided the package didn't offer enough benefit in terms of cooling, and reverted back to their original configuration (inset).

So the engine cover we tested was developed to help cooling specifically for Montreal and Monza and we still didn't use it...?

This means that the car is still having a very hard time generation rear downforce, which is part and parcel of why it is twitchy and suffers on rear limited circuits.

[PadGeT]

What is striking about the thermal images of the heat coming out the rear of the Merc, RBR and Ferrari, assuming running times were equal, is how little heat is exiting the rear of the RBR. Where did the heat go? Secondly, the difference in heat from left to right on the Ferrari points up how the two sides are used for different cooling applications.

Sorry mate, but as someone pointed out it was a bad photoshp. The reason - check the rear crash structure of RB and its monkey seat, it shows a false thermal charctersestic.

[AfterLife]

Below is from formula1.com

In an effort to improve the efficiency of their overall package, Ferrari tested a much tighter-fitting engine cover in Montreal, featuring longer sidepods and - as can be seen in the main drawing - extending further at the rear of the car, finishing inside the rear tyres. The main function of the new configuration was to help the overall cooling, although that came at the cost of downforce. It would therefore only have been of use in Montreal and Monza, due to the higher average speeds of the two tracks. Ferrari, however, decided the package didn't offer enough benefit in terms of cooling, and reverted back to their original configuration (inset).

I can't believe this is true. Upgrades were not introduced just for cooling purpose. Fernando Alonso has said the car was better for driving with upgrades and Jame Allen has replied to one of the questions in his article about Canada GP:

James Allen:
The Ferrari was good with the full update kit, they just couldn’t run all of it due to cooling concerns so faded in quail and the race. They will be stronger in the next two races, I imagine

[Hornet]

I believe there are aero benefits to having a small engine cover, this is why Red Bull has such a small cover. Therefore I believe the aim of our engine cover was not to improve cooling, but to improve aero performance. Unfortunately it didn't provide enough cooling (since smaller means lesser air going through). Not sure how the article conclude that smaller cover improves overall cooling.

[wacc]

Lower one, I suppose, was used in Qualifying.

Neither of the above photo shows the new engine cover.
The new one is even tighter:


Comparison:

[PURE PASSION]

I personally tend to believe what Mr Allen said. In first 2 Fps we where quite good!!I was watching it live and for the 1st time for quite a long time,i saw us to be cose to the front ALL the time!! And i dont believe that we where running low in fuel,decause i see our drivers to be quitq confident on their statments.And for the 1st time i was reeding very good comments from almost all the "experts" in the net,and they where are the 1st to point out things like fuel weights to downgrade a good appearance of ferrari.

[killer]

Below is from formula1.com

In an effort to improve the efficiency of their overall package, Ferrari tested a much tighter-fitting engine cover in Montreal, featuring longer sidepods and - as can be seen in the main drawing - extending further at the rear of the car, finishing inside the rear tyres. The main function of the new configuration was to help the overall cooling, although that came at the cost of downforce. It would therefore only have been of use in Montreal and Monza, due to the higher average speeds of the two tracks. Ferrari, however, decided the package didn't offer enough benefit in terms of cooling, and reverted back to their original configuration (inset).

So the engine cover we tested was developed to help cooling specifically for Montreal and Monza and we still didn't use it...?

I wonder if there is one person who makes the call or if it is a consensus of a group (department heads, drivers, race engineers, management).

[bonzo]

If there is any thing to take away from Canada, it is the fact that the F14T is a platform that cannot be developed satisfactorily when compared to other cars. In spite of a number of supposedly significant upgrades to aero efficiency and PU output, the gap to Merc seems to be widening. RBR and Williams seem to have passed Ferrari and Force India look as though they have drawn even with the red cars. Try as they might, the engineers seem unable to develop the car's performance faster than the competition.

So, write the F14T off. Only use it as a development mule for next years car. Because if the F15T is as bad as this year's car, Ferrari are on the verge of a new dark age.

We ARE in the dark age, mate. Have been there for some years now.