Prevoditelj njemački-engleski. Bolje prevedeAlonso-champ je napisao/la:Ih jos da znam njemacki bilo bi super

Moderatori/ce: F1NAC,Zweki,Scuderia,Cuky,47,gringo73
Prevoditelj njemački-engleski. Bolje prevedeAlonso-champ je napisao/la:Ih jos da znam njemacki bilo bi super
Očigledno se nije mislilo na to?Cuky je napisao/la:To je maksimalna brzina na liniji na kojoj počinje/završava krug a koja se u Bahrainu nalazi prije polovice pravca...Speed Trap je na kraju pravca, malo prije kočenja
Ne mora značiti da nisi u pravu, meni ovo miriše da amus malo "loži"Cuky je napisao/la:a onda se izvinjavam, moj njemački se svodi na hvala, molim, doviđenja
AMuS published an interesting report about Ferrari:
http://www.auto-moto...ht-8166040.html/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Essentially:
************************
Ferrari and the strange Testing strategy:
Bluff or cautiousness?
Mercedes (Costa) thinks they are as fast as the laptimes show, i.e. 1 sec slower than them. They base this on GPS measurements they have done. (Btw, how can they measure other cars with GPS????)
He says that they ran a very strange test program and that Merc could not make any sense about their program and what they were doing.
AMuS thinks that Ferrari could not use constantly the 160 HP of the MGU-K, but usually used 120 HP. All in all they speculate that Ferrari gave away 1.5s because of the conservative engine settings (I assume they mean 1.5s during long runs).
Also, rumours are that Ferrari should be marginal with consumption. It seems now confirmed that Ferrari uses the MGU-K to blip the engine at downshifting.
An Expert: "You do that when you have consumption problems".
Mercedes thinks that this is a waste of electrical energy which could be brought to better use.
Toyota disagrees, they have investigated this for their LMP1 (Le Mans) program and say that doing it electrically has no negative effects and is the best way for the gearbox.
The theory that Ferrari is sandbagging is backed up by following:
- Andy Green of Force India is sure they are sandbagging
- Example Top Speed: In the last day, Alonso reached 339,6 km/h, way faster than the competition. The associated lap was rather slow, 1:35.509, 1.2s slower than his best 1:34.280
- Same story 2 days before: Alonso 338,5 km/h, with an associated lap of 1:40.634.
- And the same the other way around: In his absolute top lap Alonso reached only 308,5 km/h, over 30 km/h slower than what was possible. The Sector times in his fastest lap were not recorded, Ferrari mentioned transponder problems.
- No other team had so many empty data points in the sector time detection. And this in every testing day. Only at the start-finish line and at top speed measurements Ferrari could not hide anything, as this is not only measured with the transponder but also by other means. There are no empty data points with those measurements.
- Adding the best sector times of Alonso, measured officially by Ferrari, the quickest lap would be 1:35.559, 1,279 sec slower than his best lap, which is a "guaranteed" time.
**********************************
There are some unclear things in this report, though, but Ferrari clearly is an enigma.
Edit:
I forgot that AMuS says, Domenicali, Alonso and Räikönnen are surprisingly calm. Normally, with one second gap, the roof would already burn at Ferrari.
Also, in that interwiev when Domenicali admitted that they were behind Merc and Williams, after all microphones had been switched off, he added that the gap isn't that big and that they can close it.
dobro kaže, tog se i ja plašim.Ferrari president Luca di Montezemolo has warned that Formula 1 risks emulating "taxi-cab driving" due to fuel and tyre conservation concerns.
A new limit of 100kg of fuel per race is set to make fuel management a major strategic concern in 2014.
Di Montezemolo fears that dynamic, coupled with the constant need to look after tyres, will reduce the spectacle of F1 while simultaneously making the races harder for fans to understand.
"I don't like his sort of taxi-cab driving," was quoted as saying by Autosprint.
"What I don't like is this complexity in the interpretation of the race, both from the drivers' and the spectators' point of view.
"Up until yesterday you'd only look at tyres: most of the attention went to tyre management.
"It was misleading to see a driver in the lead, while realising that you can't consider him really leading because he would soon pit for a tyre change anyway. It was difficult to fully interpret a race.
"These days, on top of all that, you need to add fuel consumption and managing of a race with a limited amount of fuel.
"I prefer the sort of F1 where you need to always push at the limit."
Despite such concerns, di Montezemolo stressed that he was fully in favour of F1's new era.
"We can't be among the ones who don't push for a more technological and innovative F1, because we then transfer this knowledge on production cars," he said.
"For us it [has been] like piecing together a jigsaw puzzle: some things have gone the way they were supposed to, others haven't.
"The difficulty has been the balance between the combustion engine and the electrical one; the thing that has pleased me the most was seeing correlation between wind tunnel and track data, which has always been our problem for the last four years.
"These new 'hybrid' F1 cars represent an extremely complex project. The difficulties also encountered by the others demonstrate that.
"Reliability will be important; it will be interesting to see how many cars finish the first race."
One area where Ferrari appear to have out-innovated the competition this year is the turbo housing. It involves the interpretation of technical regulation 5.18.5, which states: “Measures must be taken to ensure that in the event of failure of the turbine wheel any resulting significant debris is contained within the car.”
As a consequence of this Mercedes and Renault have covered their turbo housing with a ballistic cover intended to contain debris in the event of a failure. Ferrari have omitted such a cover and save roughly 3kg in weight. This represents a considerable saving, particularly given the location of the housing and the imperative to lower the centre of gravity.
The FIA is satisfied with Ferrari’s design. Ferrari have likely argued that the turbo housing itself is sufficient to comply with this regulation – maybe they have reinforced it as well in which case they’ll have given back some of the weight saving. It will be interesting to see if the other engine manufacturers decide to tweak their designs, but with the deadline for homologation having now passed their options will be limited.