Anthony Davidson who is the Mercedes test driver said that the teams can simulate these scenarios and it seemed that the Mercedes cars were not affected so it seems that other teams hadn't done similar testing in various scenarios.

▲

_thisdot 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Piastri and Norris, both on Mercedes engines, seem to have been affected. Not to mention the start of this season where McLaren allegedly forgot to upgrade the firmware on their Mercedes engines and couldn't run more than a few laps for two races.

	▲	rossriley 35 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I imagine this is handled at a team level though, Red Bull were giving Max instructions over the radio to keep the revs at a certain level. Presumably if the team had simulated these conditions they'd have discovered the potential problem and then come up with a process to mitigate it.

▲

monkeydust 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Right. There's plenty of software simulators in racing so was surprised their testing harness doesn't use one.

▲

jcomp 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Interesting that both Mercedes also had great starts relative to the Red Bull that was affected, wonder if that’s somehow related

▲

altmanaltman 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

One of the mercedes literally broke down and did not finish the race. They might not have faced the issue during the first time they went out in that race but Merc reliablity has been very shaky. And ofc Ant will talk only good things about Mercedes. But this is not the type of things they use the driver simulator for, it is to help the drivers train. These types of issues don't make sense to spend simulator time on with the driver in it

▲

dylan604 6 hours ago | parent [-]

Seems a lot better place to learn than in the middle of the race and earning $0 for the race. Isn't that the entire point of a simulator to learn things that are too expensive to learn in the real world?

▲

michaelt 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

There's more than one type of simulator, and F1 has certain 'spending caps', after a spending war bankrupted bunch of teams.

Wind tunnel time and aerodynamics simulator time are included in the cost cap, as are car parts and most staff (but not driver salaries, travel or marketing)

Drivers can spend all the time they want in standard consumer sim racing rigs, practising the tracks. But when it's the type of extra-high-fidelity simulator that lets you make the car better - that's subject to the cost cap.

▲

TeMPOraL 3 hours ago | parent [-]

> but not driver salaries, travel or marketing

I assume someone is already offering an extremely high-fidelity CFD simulator (or a wind tunnel) to help companies shoot awesome videos of their cars, for purposes of including them in TV spots, of course.

	▲	rurban 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		CFD simulations came at around 2010. Redbull had the best of them, that's why they took over from Mercedes-McLaren those years. I worked on engine and powertrain simulations, and my compiler was used for vehicle and driver simulations. This was built for Honda, but Honda left, bought by Mercedes, and won them several championships.

▲

altmanaltman 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> Seems a lot better place to learn than in the middle of the race and earning $0 for the race.

That's... not how it works at all, though. There are no prizes for individual races and the championship money is also pennies to the teams.

Mercedes's Kimi Antonelli is going to win the WDC anyway for sure at this point, given the points difference.

> Isn't that the entire point of a simulator to learn things that are too expensive to learn in the real world?

You're right but this is not those expensive things. Track time is extremely limited, so the primary role of the sim is to develop the car and how it feels to the drivers, mainly so the setup feels perfect to them.

System-level bugs etc must have their own testing but sim is mainly for driver-engineer testing. Many drivers also don't like using the sim at all like Hamilton.