Audi LMP1 Discussion

[chernaudi]

IMO, DTM should ban team orders, but that's a different story.

Any changes on the R18s from the test about a month ago?

[Adam43]

Join bobec in the DTM thread to discuss the incident: http://tentenths.com/forum/showthrea...142863&page=14

[Deleted]

There is police inquiry now about the incident. Do we think Ullrich will be present at all of the remaining WEC events if this goes awry? If nothing else, maybe Audi thinks it bad PR having him there?

[J Jay]

I can see him sitting the WEC out if anything comes of the enquiry, to take any undue attention off the team if nothing else. Between Reinke & Juttner I'm sure Audi have the personnel to handle major decisions in Ullrich's absence.

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by Chiana

There is police inquiry now about the incident. Do we think Ullrich will be present at all of the remaining WEC events if this goes awry?

This police inquiry is simply and plainly ridiculous...

[Deleted]

Lawsuits have been made of much, much, much smaller happenings.

[chernaudi]

Anyone think that Audi may've guessed wrong on their aero package for the Nurburgring? I know that their race pace should be better, but in FP3 and qualifying they weren't especially fast in any of the sectors in spite of having higher trap speeds than the Porsches.

Did Audi guess wrong on the aero for the Nurburgring, or is it simply still down to Porsche still having qualifying lap pace? Or did Audi chose this aero package because it should better suit them at the other tracks remaining on the schedule, namely Fuji, Shanghai and Bahrain?

BTW, the front fenders on the Porsche look like what I was hoping Audi would do for their sprint package (and are very similar to how Audi contoured theirs from the side on their Silverstone package).

I'm wondering if Audi decided to run their Silverstone package here if it would make any difference in lap times?

[chernaudi]

Audi onboard of the Nurburbring during practice:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBTK3BMkm74

[MyNameIsNigel]

Some interesting (and worrying) report indicating that Audi actually have only two engines to play with for the remainder of the season (one used engine and one new engine). The first engine used at Silvertsone, Spa and Wednesday practice of LM was apparently taken apart and the seals opened, meaning that it cannot be used again.

[MoMedic9019]

Originally Posted by MyNameIsNigel

Some interesting (and worrying) report indicating that Audi actually have only two engines to play with for the remainder of the season (one used engine and one new engine). The first engine used at Silvertsone, Spa and Wednesday practice of LM was apparently taken apart and the seals opened, meaning that it cannot be used again.

That's been known for a long time... http://www.dailysportscar.com/2015/0...ularities.html

It was not taken apart, but, the electronic seals failed to read, they are RF tags. It was an Audi issue, not an ACO one, therefore, per the rules, it's just as good as if had been opened up.

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by MoMedic9019

That's been known for a long time... http://www.dailysportscar.com/2015/0...ularities.html

It was not taken apart, but, the electronic seals failed to read, they are RF tags. It was an Audi issue, not an ACO one, therefore, per the rules, it's just as good as if had been opened up.

The penalty (Audi losing two brand new engines + fine) was known indeed, but not the fact that Audi could not use again one of their two "used" engines. It was previously thought and understood that Audi still had three - not two - engines to play with (two used + one unused):

“The problem is at the beginning we did not know this would happen,” Jüttner said. “The first engine we used for Silverstone, Spa and Wednesday of Le Mans was taken apart to check. It was never thought to be used again.

“When you open it, you obviously open the seals so it’s not reusable. That’s why we only have two [engines] left.”

Ralf does in fact refer to the taking apart of the older engine used for Siverstone, Spa and LM. He is not referring to the seal issue that affected the engine used during warm-up and the race at LM.

[MoMedic9019]

Interesting... that story has changed...

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by MoMedic9019

Interesting... that story has changed...

Has it ?

[J Jay]

That could explain the somewhat reduced pace in free practice, if Audi are now having to stretch their remaining engines to the absolute limit.

[chernaudi]

That means that judging the pace of the #7 Audi might be hard to judge at least in FP1/2 until the end of the season or when they have to take the penalty, especially if they're using old engines to try and get though the end of the season (only problem with that assessment is that the #8 hasn't been really any slower or faster).

If we knew that the EOT would speed up the Audis/slow down the Porsches, or if Porsche sticks to their high downforce kit the rest of the season, then Audi could take the penalty at one of the tracks with a slower lap time (Shanghai probably), and still have a good shot at ending up on the podium.

IMO, it seem that Audi chose a modified LM aero kit knowing that it wouldn't be 100% optimal for Nurburgring, knowing that the rest of the tracks favor straightline speed. I can't see Porsche doing well at Shanghai, Bahrain and especially Fuji if they still run their new HD kit. Even though it did achieve 317km/h at Nur, I can't seem them doing those speeds without taking off a lot of downforce.

Though to be honest, I'm betting that Audi now sort of regret taking apart the pre-LM engine once it reached what they though was the end of its useful life.

Any more news on the #9 possibly making a return in some races?

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Any more news on the #9 possibly making a return in some races?

I haven't particularly followed Audi discussions lately, but you mean there has been talk of it actually returning at some point?

If you were gonna bring the third car back in post LM period, Ring would have been the best choice for such right? Same for Porsche...

[MoMedic9019]

Originally Posted by MyNameIsNigel

Has it ?

Perhaps evolved is a better phrase...

Provided all is true, there is a significantly more information here than what was originally laid out. Which, is, mmm.... interesting.

Makes me wonder what the entire truth is.

[chernaudi]

Reinke says that Audi's hybridized LM package won't be it's greatest at Nurburgring and COTA:

http://www.dailysportscar.com/2015/0...-they-are.html

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by MoMedic9019

Perhaps evolved is a better phrase...

Provided all is true, there is a significantly more information here than what was originally laid out. Which, is, mmm.... interesting.

Makes me wonder what the entire truth is.

BTW, I just found a copy of the relevant post-LM Stewards Decision, which may clarify a few points and raise further questions as a matter of fact.

That leads me to a very basic question: If the only remaining used engine is the one that was actually raced at LM, i.e. the very same engine that was found to have defective electronic seals, have Audi been allowed to replace the relevant seals on that particular engine ?

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by MoMedic9019

Makes me wonder what the entire truth is.

It is probably this:
report.

[Victor_RO]

Originally Posted by MyNameIsNigel

That leads me to a very basic question: If the only remaining used engine is the one that was actually raced at LM, i.e. the very same engine that was found to have defective electronic seals, have Audi been allowed to replace the relevant seals on that particular engine ?

As far as I understood, in the end the engine did race with functional FIA seals, but the engine went through several defective/accidentally-tampered-with/damaged seals throughout the Le Mans week, which is what caused the issue with their engine allocation.

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by Victor_RO

As far as I understood, in the end the engine did race with functional FIA seals, but the engine went through several defective/accidentally-tampered-with/damaged seals throughout the Le Mans week, which is what caused the issue with their engine allocation.

The relevant Stewards Decision suggests otherwise, i.e. that additional engine seals were found to be defective following the race (in addition to the two seals that were previously found to be defective following warm-up).

How can the ACO-FIA actually check that this is the same engine that raced at LM if the relevant seals are (still) defective ? Could be that the defective seals cannot be replaced and that they have to rely on the remaining hopefully working seals.

[TF110]

How can the ACO-FIA actually check that this is the same engine that raced at LM if the relevant seals are (still) defective ?

The team put seals in the engine in question in different places. Then the team acknowledged that and said there must have been a change of engine- their 3rd. So after the race it was found there were others broken again.

You answered your own question it seems. They used two engines because they admitted to a change. Then the changed (new) engine was found to have additional broken seals. So they get penalized twice.

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by TF110

The team put seals in the engine in question in different places. Then the team acknowledged that and said there must have been a change of engine- their 3rd. So after the race it was found there were others broken again.

You answered your own question it seems. They used two engines because they admitted to a change. Then the changed (new) engine was found to have additional broken seals. So they get penalized twice.

That was not my question or maybe I was not clear enough I am referring to the continued use of this engine at the Nurburgring and subsequent races.

Considering that this is the very same used engine that they have run for FP1 and FP2 last Friday, how can the ACO-FIA check that this is the same engine as previously used at LM ? Are they exclusively relying on any of the remaining functional seals ? Are Audi allowed to replace the defective seals ?

[TF110]

The penalty you linked to says seals were moved, so obviously thats not allowed. Since theyre electronic seals, I guess the fia has a way to check if theyre still 'connected'. Maybe the regs have the wording on how theyre installed or checked.