I have had a technological feast today, hence the vague title of this thread.

I've had the privilege of being appointed to "babysit" the Renault F1 test team and the F1 Roadshow driver, Jonathan Cochet.

The team have been absolutely brilliant, sharing all sorts of information and data with me, especially when I told them the reason I wanted to know stuff was so that I could share it with everyone here!

The first thing I learned about was the padding around the cockpit - surprisingly it's "squidgy"! I hadn't realised that before. Neither did I realise that they have three different types of foam which they use, depending on temperatures. Apparently, the foam swells as the temperature rises so, in Turkey for example, they use the hardest compound, which doesn't swell so much in the heat.

Speaking of heat, the engine cannot be started until it reaches 50 degrees, so they initially pump hot water round it and then when it reaches the required temperature, start it up and get it really hot before they turn it off. The lap tops are then plugged in to monitor the temperature.

I also saw at close hand the system in the driver's seat which enables an extrication whilst the driver is still in it. This is very simple and extremely effective. First, there is a slot in the seat behind the driver's head, into which would go a spine board. Various straps are positioned around the seat, to which other straps (all colour coded) are attached, before trussing the driver up like a chicken to avoid any further injury. The seat is then tilted forwards slightly and the whole lot lifted clear of the car.

The team also showed me the various nuts and bolts that went into the wings and explained how easy it was to add or remove various bits and pieces in order to set the car up to suit the circuit or the weather.

The best bit (which is why I have saved it until last) was looking at the data on the laptops after the demonstration runs.

Anyone who has followed F1 closely for several years will know that the outright lap record at Donington Park is 1m 18. 029, set by Senna in 1993. I was timing Cochet and was convinced that I needed a new stop watch when he passed me at 1m15s, so after he'd done his bit, I asked the team if they had any idea of his lap times. They hadn't but invited me back to the truck to check the data with them. Well that was a chance not to be missed, so I went.

I had a map of the circuit and Martin Haven was in there too. Martin did a commentary while the team showed me all the laps Cochet had done, showing his gear changes, braking, speeds, etc. Cochet's fastest lap was 1m 14.2s.

Tomorrow, I intend to learn all about the steering wheel and all it's components, but please don't tell the team as they don't know yet. <roflmao>

One thing to say about Senna's time - the race was wet/dryish/wet/dryish etc, tons of pitstops (four/five/six for some drivers!), so the times in that race weren't representative. Plus, I *think* Senna put that time up when there was a cockup between himself and the pit crew because he came in before they were ready, so just drove straight through the pits. It may have been this lap he set the record, but without looking it up, I don't know for sure. My ruddy great encyclopedia (two huge volumes!) has charts from virtually every F1 race ever, so I'll see if it goes into that sort of detail....

You are correct Norbert. I was in the privileged position in 1993 of being Senna's Pit Observer. I forget how many pit reports I wrote on tyre changes, but it was a few! The weather was, as you say, wet, dry, wet, damp, wet, dry (possibly not in that order, but you get my drift!)

The outright lap record was set on something like lap 57 (I could be wrong, but it was something like that). Senna came up the Melbourne Loop, dived into (the now defunct) pit entrance at the top of the loop, thereby avoiding Goddards completely. The team weren't ready for him, so he shot out on track again, only to come back in again on the subsequent lap.

Senna's fast lap was lap 57, at the aforementioned 1:18.029 May be the race lap record, but pole in the dry for that race was by Prost, at 1:10.458

Senna won by 1:23.199 from Hill, and everyone else was a lap down or more, from third place Prost, to last classified Alboreto who like Barrichello was 6 laps adrift!

Well WW, that's fascinating stuff, and I am envious. I have a couple of questions that I'm going to have you ask, but you must act really dumb or they will not answer them correctly. <flirt>

I want you to ask about the mechanical brake bias controls. What I'm trying to find out is whether or not Kimi could have mis-adjusted his bias to the point of creating the problem that caused his crash. He was seen fiddling with the controls just before he lost control. Don't ask the question about Kimi, just ask about the possibility of mis-adjustment.

Second, ask them to show you the thingy that holds up the splitter or tea tray. This is what was questioned regarding the flexifloor controversy. The splitter is the part that is at the front of the bottom of the floor tub and looks like a Stingray. And, ask them how heavy it is (it's ballast and is especially important to the balance required by the new tires).

And, you have my cell number, call me and reverse the charges and I will interview them for Motorsport Flood Weekly (weakly). <roflmao>

that bit is easy - and I don't act really dumb - I just am!

If I am supposed to be really dumb, which I admit I am, how am I going to word that?

That's more my style - I DO thingys <roflmao>

Oh, one thing I forgot to mention, which may or may not assist. They are using the 2006 chassis with the 2007 bodywork.

Brake bias: The fronts or the backs get more grip or less depending on the settings. If you put too much in one place or the other, a lock-up can occur.

So ask, "I hear commentators say that he's adjusting the brake bias. Why do they do that? Is it an electronic control or does the driver control it? What if he muffs up the settings?"

And, my dear, you are not dumb, technically or in any other sense of the word.

Thank you for the vote of confidence in my dumbness, or lack of.

However, would it not be better for me to say "I hear the commentators saying he is adjusting the brake bias. What exactly is that and how does it work?"

Hey, you were the one that said you were dumb, not me!

I take it that that is the right question to ask then?

Absolutment!

thought so!

Anything else you wish me to be thick about?


Ooh I know - marbles. I KNOW what they are but why is it so important to collect them?

Like, your ride height is marginal and colleting marbles would probably make you legal?

No, it's that you might be underweight from tire wear. The marbles are discarded bits of rubber from tire wear. So, drive around on the areas off-line when you do your cool down lap and get a bumch of that hot, sticky, rubber refuse on your tires to make up for your loss of rubber.

I shall act dense and ask the quetsion any way

It only clicked sometime last year that this was why at the end of the race, the tyres always looked in such dreadful condition! <doh>

WW, just out of interest, that 1:14.2 lap, how close to 'optimum' performance would that have been? I would have thought a 100% lap would be some way under a 1993 lap time.

Way off apparently. He did 1m 12s today and the car isn't even set up for Donington. In fact it's not set up for ANYWHERE! It's just general average settings so they can demonstrate the car without having to do too much fiddling with it before Cochet takes it out on track. Also, the ride height is a lot higher than it would be in a race car.

A correction to my initial post. This lot are not the test team. They are the exhibition team, which basically means they travel around the world just showing off the car and Jonathan's driving skills in it.

Today's techno feast.

Mechanical brake bias. If it's dry they set the fronts at 51% and the rears at 49%. If it's wet the fronts are 49% and the rears are 51%. The guys were very busy so I didn't get chance to ask if it was possible for a driver to screw the settings. (Actually, I forgot but I prefer the explanation I've just given! <roflmao> )

The undertray is bolted to the bodywork and chassis at various points and the plank is fitted at the rear in pretty much the same way. Apparently the plank affects the ride height and downforce, as if it wasn't there, they could lower the car much further. And yes, I forgot to ask how much it weighed. <doh>

Apparently the oil and water in the engine run at around 20 degrees hotter than in your average road car and there are various methods they can use to ensure that it doesn't get TOO hot, although they admitted that sometimes they can get them wrong.

I asked about the steering wheel too. The team did no less than reach into the car, remove the steering wheel and give it to me to play with. <blink>

There are knobs and dials to set things like traction control, launch control and fuel mix, buttons for radio, pit lane speed limiter and one that the driver can use to cancel his last action.

There are four flappy paddles - two clutches at the bottom, one (on the top right) for changing up and the one at top left for changing down.

And I completely forgot to ask them about the marbles. <doh>

Really? That's impressive :D I guess that if Donington was ever to want F1 there, they would have to extend the track somewhere.

Well, they didn't do it in 1993, so I see no reason why they should do so again. However, the infrastructure of Donington is not really conducive to hosting an F1 meeting, so sadly I don't think it will happen.

The cars these days are a lot faster. Brazil for example, I looked earlier. The 1993 fastest lap was 1:20.0 and last year it was 1:12.1 (both Schumacher :P) or 1:10.3 in qualifying, so I'd guess a qualifying lap around Donington would be something like 62 seconds maybe. That's a bit short.

I know what you are saying, but unfortunately it's not the track length that's the problem. It's the facilities (or lack of) and space to put them in. There simply isn't the room.

Yes, I know that as well. I think if the British GP was to go anywhere else, I'd rather see it at Brands Hatch anyway. I prefer the circuit layout, although you would see no overtaking. Mind you, you can say that about most venues now!

This is very true.

Anyway, back to my tech feast - I forgot to add at the bottom of today's post that Red Andy seemed to enjoy getting up close and personal to the F1 car!

I absolutely did enjoy it - it was a superb experience!

Even in a couple of minutes listening to WW having a conversation with one of the Renault guys I learned about thirty things I hadn't previously known about the technical side of F1! And when you see the contours of the body up close, taken together with all the fiddly little aero bits, you can see why it's impossible for these cars to follow one another!

Andy, glad you and your friends enjoyed getting up close and personal with that beautiful car.

And it was beautiful. Such a lovely, flowing, curvy, shape - even I could see what the aerodynamic design was all about!

I find that in the flesh they are a lot bigger than you imagine and its a slight reality check that it is a real live F1 car.

Did you like the colour scheme? (I assume it was in 07 livery?)

Yes, thanks very much for arranging that for us. <bow> The input on how the driver is extracted in a serious accident was very interesting, too!

The shape of the cars is unbelievably beautiful, as you say. When you compare it to the historic Renaults (which I didn't get as close to, but did manage to see from behind a barrier in the paddock), it's amazing how far things have moved on. It's just a shame that such attractive cars can't race properly.

Interesting you should say that, because a lot of the older watchers (no offence) say the older cars are the best-looking. Which I could not disagree with more. I'd say that the Mclaren MP4-22 (minus the stupid raised front wing) is the best-looking Mclaren ever, closely followed by the MP4-21 and the MP4-20. For example.

My pleasure <thumbsup>

Glad you liked my lecture on extrication!

And to answer safc - yes it was in this year's bodywork and livery and I thought it was very good looking.

Now, as for the older cars - I believe that the livery on the JPS Lotus will never be beaten. Yes, some of the older cars were chunky and downright ugly but in their day they were the equivalent of today's cars.

I shall have a think and a bit of a Google and see if I can't come up with some other cars which I thought (and still think) looked gorgeous in their day.

Yes, in terms of livery, the JPS Lotus was fantastic. But today's cars are so much prettier in terms of shape, IMO.

Some of today's liveries are a little questionable (Renault's looks a mess, IMO!) but I think the actual cars are a lot more impressive.

I think today's cars are far too untidy with so many little winglets, vanes and all the other bolt-on twiddly aero parts. Bring back mechanical grip, all is forgiven!!

I see your point Norbert, but without all those additions what would happen?

I'm not Norbert, but anyway...cars in theory would be able to follow each other closely through medium to high speed corners. The winglets are designed with clear airflow in mind, so in the 'dirty air' behind another car, they don't function properly so the car lacks downforce, so they lose grip in fast corners and can't get in the slipstream to overtake.That is the main reason why on a lot of tracks, overtaking is next to impossible. That's in simple terms at least, and my take on it!

I don't understand what mechanical grip is though...anyone care to expand on it please? :D

BTW when I say impressive, I mean because they are designed with such detail. On the MP4-22 for example, nothing is left untouched. Everything is moulded into precise shapes to improve airflow, give more downforce, reduce drag or whatever. I haven't seen a modern F1 car up close, only cars from the early 90s, but just by looking at photos the way that the cars have 'evolved' since then is pretty interesting, I think :)

Chris, thanks for that - actually the boys from Renault explained that to me.

As for mechanical grip - it's no good asking me - as you know I don't DO technical!

Ok then <roflmao> Pat Symonds said sometime ago that no time in the wind tunnel is spent considering airflow when behind another car. I found that a bit surprising, because although ultimate pace is necessary for qualifying, if you could develop something within the rules which allowed you to run behind another car better, you would get an advantage. Anyone think that could have benefit or is it impractical/impossible within the rules?

I have the advantage over you then. Over the years I have seen loads of F1 cars close up and of course my local track being Donington I get to see the museum exhibits on a pretty regular basis.

I think my pictures in the other thread show how F1 cars have evolved over the years pretty well.

I mean, cars like the Maserati were basically a cigar shape with a wheel at each corner (yes I know cigars don't have corners, but you get my drift). The commentators over the weekend constantly reminded us that modern day F1 cars are like upside down aeroplanes, which might sound strange but it is true. Of course, it was the late, great, Colin Chapman who started all that off by putting wings on his Lotuses (or should that be Loti?)

Loti???

One thing I always wonder is what the cars would look like today if the rules were as relaxed in terms of innovation as they were in the 60s, for example. Also how fast they would go!