Why can't McLaren play a 'joker' for Brazil?

[Redmax]

There's been some discussion that the Ferraris will be on fresh engines for Brazil with Lewis's engine on its second race. Apparently these 'second hand' engines deliver around 20-30 horsepower less than new ones.

I understand that the teams can play a 'joker' during the season, i.e. replace an engine before the race without penalty. Massa did this for Monza and Glock did it for Fuji.

Why can't McLaren do the same thing for Brazil?

[flemke]

For reasons of which one has yet to read a rational explanation, the rules specifically exclude the "joker" option from the last race.

[NathanE]

There is a rule which prevents the joker being used for the last race, i.e. Brazil.

The "used" engine produces same power really its just they map it differently. Retard the ignition and things like that. Most of the power loss comes from the team being overly cautious... since the engine has been through probably 10 or so heat cycles.

LH had his engine turned way way down for most of the 2nd half of China plus he was upshifting early. Should be a lot of life left in it !

The engine map is controlled by the driver so if he feels like risking it he can certainly turn the power up if he wants... but if it blows because of what he did then he could be in big trouble !

Heikki Kovalainen has a fresh engine for Brazil. I think McLaren will be using him to do their dirty work with. I.e. fuel slightly light and get him up front, in front of LH too. I suspect that if the points are such that LH will win the title then they won't do a switcharoo like what Ferrari did.

Edited by NathanE on Wednesday 22 October 22:07

[AlexS]

flemke said:

For reasons of which one has yet to read a rational explanation, the rules specifically exclude the "joker" option from the last race.

I suspect that it stops the team building a 1 race special. I presume that the engine freeze still covers an allowable tolerance range on components and that something could be produced which allows an increase in power at the expense of life. To gain maximum benefit the engine could even be swapped out after qually as Ferrari did with Massa's engine change.

[flemke]

AlexS said:

flemke said:

For reasons of which one has yet to read a rational explanation, the rules specifically exclude the "joker" option from the last race.

I suspect that it stops the team building a 1 race special. I presume that the engine freeze still covers an allowable tolerance range on components and that something could be produced which allows an increase in power at the expense of life. To gain maximum benefit the engine could even be swapped out after qually as Ferrari did with Massa's engine change.

Exactly, or the joker could have been played by using a one-race special in the third-from-final race.
It just strikes me as inconsistent to allow it earlier in the season, but not in the final race.

The language of the rule was a bit ambiguous to me; perhaps you know the answer: if Hamilton's engine were literally to blow up during Brazil practice, in that case would he be allowed a free engine change?

[friederich]

As I said on a previous thread, the thing that puzzles me is why the 'joker' is offered at all. It makes no sense in the context of forcing the teams to make the engines last two races.

[bullies180]

I believe but not having checked that lewis can change the engine in FP1 and FP2 but after that he would incur a 10 place grid drop. don't take that as gospel, it is purely off the top of my head after reading various f1 sites like planetf1 for example. If that isn't the case then i would imagine that the FIA have worked it out to prevent as flemke says a strategy for the last three races where a driver could end up with a new engine each race. The interesting thing is that with the FIA allowing honda and renault to develop their engines and play catch up mclaren stated they were not happy with this as they had layed off staff who worked on engine performance and focused on staff that would improve engine reliability. Apart from heiki's problems of late you have to say that the merc engines have performed fabolously this season with not too many problems, i hope that lewis doesn't have his first problem in the last race of the season, it is a worry but that comes from wanting our boy to finish the job properly and after last year we all have a valid reason to worry. At least in china he was so dominant that he could preserve the engine and hopefully that will pay dividends in brazil. Whitmarsh has also stated that macca will also bring a big development to brazil for the car so that should help the cause too! A lot of people say lewis buckled last year in the last two races and lost it but in reality it was mclaren, the tyre decision in china and the wierd problems with power loss in brazil, my thinking is that the team feel they lost lewis the championship last year and are going to work as hard as they can to make sure they don't do that again. At the end of the day what will be will be. That is how history is written.

Go Lewis!!

[flemke]

friederich said:

As I said on a previous thread, the thing that puzzles me is why the 'joker' is offered at all. It makes no sense in the context of forcing the teams to make the engines last two races.

Agreed - when the FIA announced the "joker" exception at the start of the season, it seemed like a daft idea, and it still does.

[MonkeyHanger]

flemke said:

The language of the rule was a bit ambiguous to me; perhaps you know the answer: if Hamilton's engine were literally to blow up during Brazil practice, in that case would he be allowed a free engine change?

According to quotes i've seen elsewhere from Martin Whitmarsh, an engine failure at any time this weekend would incur a 10 place grid penalty.

Apparently Hamilton's gearbox will be on its 3rd race this weekend too.

Edited by MonkeyHanger on Wednesday 22 October 23:44

[bullies180]

flemke said:

friederich said:

As I said on a previous thread, the thing that puzzles me is why the 'joker' is offered at all. It makes no sense in the context of forcing the teams to make the engines last two races.

Agreed - when the FIA announced the "joker" exception at the start of the season, it seemed like a daft idea, and it still does.

it was designed as a way to get round a really unlucky circumstance and not destroy the competitiveness of a race before it began. The two race engine rule was made to keep costs down, there is a part of me that thinks if f1 is the pinnicle of racing it should be so that it is the best drivers and machines possible, that means money no object, if they introduce a standard engine we may as well watch a1gp.

The rule wouldn't be so much of a problem if there wasn't a performance loss between the two races. next year it will be three races.

[flemke]

bullies180 said:

flemke said:

friederich said:

As I said on a previous thread, the thing that puzzles me is why the 'joker' is offered at all. It makes no sense in the context of forcing the teams to make the engines last two races.

Agreed - when the FIA announced the "joker" exception at the start of the season, it seemed like a daft idea, and it still does.

it was designed as a way to get round a really unlucky circumstance and not destroy the competitiveness of a race before it began.

I do not doubt what you say, but why have teams been allowed in the first 17 races to have a "free" change of an undamaged engine only because they wanted to be precautious?
It's one thing to allow a free change in the case of an actual engine failure, but several of the free changes this year have been to properly functioning engines.

[friederich]

bullies180 said:

flemke said:

friederich said:

As I said on a previous thread, the thing that puzzles me is why the 'joker' is offered at all. It makes no sense in the context of forcing the teams to make the engines last two races.

Agreed - when the FIA announced the "joker" exception at the start of the season, it seemed like a daft idea, and it still does.

it was designed as a way to get round a really unlucky circumstance and not destroy the competitiveness of a race before it began. The two race engine rule was made to keep costs down, there is a part of me that thinks if f1 is the pinnicle of racing it should be so that it is the best drivers and machines possible, that means money no object, if they introduce a standard engine we may as well watch a1gp.

The rule wouldn't be so much of a problem if there wasn't a performance loss between the two races. next year it will be three races.

Yes, but the whole business of F1 development is to engineer out the 'really unlucky circumstances' whilst maximising the performance. The 2 race engine regs have just introduced an artificial spill over from one race to the next.

[friederich]

bullies180 said:

flemke said:

friederich said:

As I said on a previous thread, the thing that puzzles me is why the 'joker' is offered at all. It makes no sense in the context of forcing the teams to make the engines last two races.

Agreed - when the FIA announced the "joker" exception at the start of the season, it seemed like a daft idea, and it still does.

it was designed as a way to get round a really unlucky circumstance and not destroy the competitiveness of a race before it began. The two race engine rule was made to keep costs down, there is a part of me that thinks if f1 is the pinnicle of racing it should be so that it is the best drivers and machines possible, that means money no object, if they introduce a standard engine we may as well watch a1gp.

The rule wouldn't be so much of a problem if there wasn't a performance loss between the two races. next year it will be three races.

Just to add (and I'm sure I'm preaching to the converted here)....

Max really doesn't understand how engineers work. The idea that regulating that the engine should last longer will reduce budgets is just crazy. It's just another set of parameters that the engineers will work to, the only difference is that the dyno test to prove out their latest 'reliability' mods now takes twice as long and hence costs more. All things being equal, the team with the biggest budget will have the advantage.

[bullies180]

flemke said:

bullies180 said:

flemke said:

friederich said:

As I said on a previous thread, the thing that puzzles me is why the 'joker' is offered at all. It makes no sense in the context of forcing the teams to make the engines last two races.

Agreed - when the FIA announced the "joker" exception at the start of the season, it seemed like a daft idea, and it still does.

it was designed as a way to get round a really unlucky circumstance and not destroy the competitiveness of a race before it began.

I do not doubt what you say, but why have teams been allowed in the first 17 races to have a "free" change of an undamaged engine only because they wanted to be precautious?
It's one thing to allow a free change in the case of an actual engine failure, but several of the free changes this year have been to properly functioning engines.

Yes it does seem a waste, i wonder if they have any of them spare and if i could shoe horn one into the front of my car? I do understand peoples different points of view on this subject, but the real problem is not with the rules but with the people who make them.

[friederich]

flemke said:

bullies180 said:

flemke said:

friederich said:

As I said on a previous thread, the thing that puzzles me is why the 'joker' is offered at all. It makes no sense in the context of forcing the teams to make the engines last two races.

Agreed - when the FIA announced the "joker" exception at the start of the season, it seemed like a daft idea, and it still does.

it was designed as a way to get round a really unlucky circumstance and not destroy the competitiveness of a race before it began.

I do not doubt what you say, but why have teams been allowed in the first 17 races to have a "free" change of an undamaged engine only because they wanted to be precautious?
It's one thing to allow a free change in the case of an actual engine failure, but several of the free changes this year have been to properly functioning engines.

I agree that it does seem very unclear as to why/when a team is allowed to do a swap, but I can see a hint of logic in the rule that you can't do it in the last race. Those teams who elect to swap an undamaged engine in anything but the last race are risking the fact that they may have a proper need for a swap later in the season, and would therefore be penalised. It's a distortion created by the 2 race rule.


ETA - perhaps the best thing would have been to say that your joker could only last one race - then at least everyone would be on the same schedule.

Edited by friederich on Thursday 23 October 00:24

[anonymous-user]

bullies180 said:

I believe but not having checked that lewis can change the engine in FP1 and FP2 but after that he would incur a 10 place grid drop. don't take that as gospel, it is purely off the top of my head after reading various f1 sites like planetf1 for example. Go Lewis!!

They don't use the race engine in Free Practice, they are allowed to use a fresh engine for that, as the practice sessions don't form part of the race, they are just like having a test day at another circuit.

The race engine only gets used in Official Qualifying and the Race.

[bullies180]

jsf said:

bullies180 said:

I believe but not having checked that lewis can change the engine in FP1 and FP2 but after that he would incur a 10 place grid drop. don't take that as gospel, it is purely off the top of my head after reading various f1 sites like planetf1 for example. Go Lewis!!

They don't use the race engine in Free Practice, they are allowed to use a fresh engine for that, as the practice sessions don't form part of the race, they are just like having a test day at another circuit.

The race engine only gets used in Official Qualifying and the Race.

Well i didn't know that, are you sure?

[heebeegeetee]

I guess McL should have used the joker before, to ensure a new engine in the final race. A shame, 'cos i reckon even with an 'old' engine at China, McL would still have won.

[Airbag]

Ask Elaine Du Naely.

[marcia1]

jsf said:

bullies180 said:

I believe but not having checked that lewis can change the engine in FP1 and FP2 but after that he would incur a 10 place grid drop. don't take that as gospel, it is purely off the top of my head after reading various f1 sites like planetf1 for example. Go Lewis!!

They don't use the race engine in Free Practice, they are allowed to use a fresh engine for that, as the practice sessions don't form part of the race, they are just like having a test day at another circuit.

The race engine only gets used in Official Qualifying and the Race.

IIRC the race engine is used for sat practice also,cause mark webber's engine went in china sat prac,and got 10 place grid -drop.