Probably as long as there have been people they have been asking the question "who is the fastest?". There were running races in the Ancient Greek Olympic Games, the Romans built circuses for their chariot racing, and there are reports of medieval carnivals holding running races and horse races. Probably as soon as we'd built motor cars, we also asked that same question "who is the fastest?"
Every race ever always comes down to the same basic problems: how you can put power to the ground for the longest period of time; how quickly you can rotate through the corners so that you can put power to the ground for the longest period of time; and, the skill of the competitors at manipulating the equipment.
Clearly the combination of Max Verstappen and Red Bull is the current top of the pile. When you have 20 drivers who are all there or thereabouts and cars which are all close, it is not just enough to see that someone is the best when you can ask the far more difficult question of "why?". The why in Formula One changes from time to time. Sometimes the engine is the factor which makes the difference. Sometimes it is the chassis. Sometimes it is very much just the driver.
Formula One is a game of thousandths. To get to those extra thousandths you need to spend millions of dollarpounds. Usually the advantages that a team has are such that a team and driver will be the best in most places and it is difficult to see where and why those advantages exist. It is really only when you end up with comparative lap times that are near enough to dead equal that you get a chance to examine them from the outside. The qualifying laps of Max Verstappen and Fernando Alonso at the Monaco Grand Prix gave us such a chance.
Of all the circuits that the Formula One circus travels to, the streets of Monte-Carlo are both the slowest and silliest. Formula One cars outgrew this place almost as soon as they arrived for the first Monaco Grand Prix long before the Second World War. The streets of Monte-Carlo in being slow and silly, slow down the dynamic differences between the cars sufficiently enough that even us nuff-nuffs get a chance to observe them.
I think that it's fair to say that the relative ability of these two drivers is indeterminable. Both Verstappen and Alonso have been World Champion; which means that in those given years they made best use of the equipment available to them. They are not in similar equipment but they are both excellent. I think that it is also fair to say that the Mercedes engine and powertrain are better than the Honda engine and powertrain are. So what is the difference?
Monaco is almost but not quite slow enough that aero advantage is neutralised. The thing about aerodynamic devices, both on top and under the car, is that because they are an exercise in applied fluid dynamics, they can not work as well if less fluid passes over and around them. Air flowing over an aerodynamic device is what generates downforce and the streets of Monte-Carlo are often too slow for these aerodynamics to have any decent effect. In consequence, we can almost say that the Red Bull's advantage at Monaco is not generated by better aero.
In every part of the circuit where the Aston Martin has been able to pull ahead, it is because the Mercedes powertrain is able to provide better punch out of corners. The Red Bull appears to be better under breaking and is able to rotate through corners better. This might be as simple as a turning advantage because the Red Bull has more inbuilt turns lock-to-lock but I do not think so. If this were the case, then the Aston Martin should not be able to pull out of the Hotel Hairpin and the run though the tunnel as easily. That powertrain advantage is more or less neutralised during the longer periods of time that the cars are on the power; which explains why at the beginning of the lap, Alonso has to chase down Max to draw level. Max was already likely quicker coming out of Rascasse, past the line, and onto St Devote.
It should be obvious to anyone that the only point of contact of a car and the road, are its tyres. Since all the teams in Formula One have access to the same tyres, then no advantage can be gained here.
This only leaves the three fundamental axes of rotation in the car; pitch, roll, and yaw. If cars do not porpoise, then pitch near enough makes not difference to a lap time. Roll characteristics will affect how well the tyres load up and take forces going though corners. Yaw will determine how well a car rotates around the apex of a corner.
Here's where the rubber his the road, literally. I think that the Red Bull, by using cleverer suspension settings which help their cars roll and rotate through corners better, is better at eliminating a loose condition. What I think is happening is that the Red Bulls are better at loading up the outside rear of the car, keeping those tyres better planted on the road, and eliminating more slip; which all means that they rotate through corners better.
Now obviously Max Verstappen is supremely talented and he is able to make best use of the equipment but in a game of thousandths, the equipment has to be better somewhere; since Fernando Alonso and the likes of Lewis Hamilton are as good drivers if not better. Hamilton is likely the best driver but the car isn't up to the job. Alonso has a better powerplant than Verstappen but it isn't mated to as good a chassis. It is really only in places like Monaco where things don't work properly due to the slower speeds, that we the nuff-nuffs who don't have access to reams of data get a chance to glimpse a fraction of what the teams who spend millions of dollarpounds get to see in real time.
No comments:
Post a Comment