Virgin fuel tank not big enough

RLeb · Post by **RLeb** » 15 Mar 2010, 04:31

Virgin Racing would have been brilliant if they had one of their drivers as an extremely lanky and clumsy 18-year-old with pimples everywhere and a cracking voice. :mrgreen:

coops · Post by **coops** » 15 Mar 2010, 08:36

RLeb wrote:Virgin Racing would have been brilliant if they had one of their drivers as an extremely lanky and clumsy 18-year-old with pimples everywhere and a cracking voice.

Trouble is Brendon Hartleys under contract at Red Bull :lol:

K-RON · Post by **K-RON** » 15 Mar 2010, 10:24

Will they ever run long enough to find out?

Phoenix · Post by **Phoenix** » 15 Mar 2010, 18:56

The Virgins were really harassing Trulli and Kovalainen yesterday :lol:

noisebox · Post by **noisebox** » 15 Mar 2010, 19:13

Phoenix wrote:The Virgins were really harassing Trulli and Kovalainen yesterday

In fact one of the Virgins made a pass on a Lotus...

P_Friesacher · Post by **P_Friesacher** » 15 Mar 2010, 19:35

The end came prematurely for the Virgins in their first race.

ibukowinski25 · Post by **ibukowinski25** » 17 Mar 2010, 14:11

Premature but great race! :geek:

Stefangp · Post by **Stefangp** » 17 Mar 2010, 16:06

by P_Friesacher » 11 Mar 2010, 21:40

Perhaps these suspicions are true for more than just these two teams and we will have a finish like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDt9Dc2X5hc
(which is also, clearly, GP2's most rejectworty moment so far). Except for Senna and Petrov being in front.

Or perhaps something as exciting as this. http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=hockenheim+86&search_type=&aq=fI know it's in French. I have the English version knocking around somewhere. I'll have to post it up if I can find it...

Which brings about another question, will be see in the emergence or last lap fuel shortage with teams running a very fine line of fuel allowance. Or is that wishful thinking nowadays with so many computers making so many calculations.

P_Friesacher · Post by **P_Friesacher** » 26 Mar 2010, 02:04

Incredibly the story seems to be true http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsp ... 588379.stm

thehemogoblin · Post by **thehemogoblin** » 26 Mar 2010, 02:30

P_Friesacher wrote:Incredibly the story seems to be true http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsp ... 588379.stm

Computer-fudged design?

Post by **mario** » 26 Mar 2010, 08:55

P_Friesacher wrote:Incredibly the story seems to be true http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsp ... 588379.stm

Looks like I'll have to retract my earlier comments about the fuel tank not being large enough - and being 13 litres short of a full race distance is quite an embarrassment. Not only that, it is going to hold up some of the developments that they were planning, since they now have to modify the chassis to fit the larger tank.
However, given how many problems they have had with their car, at least they haven't had the indignity of running out of fuel, given that they are yet to make it a full race distance...

K-RON · Post by **K-RON** » 26 Mar 2010, 09:30

thehemogoblin wrote:
P_Friesacher wrote:Incredibly the story seems to be true http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsp ... 588379.stm

Computer-fudged design?

Complete f**king disaster!

dr-baker · Post by **dr-baker** » 26 Mar 2010, 10:18

P_Friesacher wrote:Incredibly the story seems to be true http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsp ... 588379.stm

Also confirmed on Autosport: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/82374

Interesting comment from the article:

The team has discovered that the capacity of its tank does not allow it to fill up with enough fuel to comfortably get it through races where consumption is quite heavy.

This could prove to be a particular problem at this weekend's Australian Grand Prix, with the Albert Park circuit being one of the most demanding in terms of fuel use.

CarlosFerreira · Post by **CarlosFerreira** » 26 Mar 2010, 11:18

Some things never change. Go Simtek!

Tealy · Post by **Tealy** » 26 Mar 2010, 12:17

dr-baker wrote:
P_Friesacher wrote:Incredibly the story seems to be true http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsp ... 588379.stm

Also confirmed on Autosport: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/82374

Interesting comment from the article:
The team has discovered that the capacity of its tank does not allow it to fill up with enough fuel to comfortably get it through races where consumption is quite heavy.

This could prove to be a particular problem at this weekend's Australian Grand Prix, with the Albert Park circuit being one of the most demanding in terms of fuel use.

How on earth have they managed that. It's not like they can blame a lack of windtunnel use for not knowing. Ok a lack of testing has delayed them finding out but even that would have been far too late to get a design in for Bahrain.

noisebox · Post by **noisebox** » 26 Mar 2010, 13:37

homerbhoy wrote:I heard from someone that the virgin fuel tank is not big enough to finish the gp. Hope this ain't true

Take a bow! What a scoop - the BBC were reporting it as new news this morning...

dr-baker · Post by **dr-baker** » 26 Mar 2010, 14:46

noisebox wrote:
homerbhoy wrote:I heard from someone that the virgin fuel tank is not big enough to finish the gp. Hope this ain't true

Take a bow! What a scoop - the BBC were reporting it as new news this morning...

As were Autosport and Autocar...

IdeFan · Post by **IdeFan** » 26 Mar 2010, 15:07

dr-baker wrote:
noisebox wrote:
homerbhoy wrote:I heard from someone that the virgin fuel tank is not big enough to finish the gp. Hope this ain't true

Take a bow! What a scoop - the BBC were reporting it as new news this morning...

As were Autosport and Autocar...

The point is not that BBC got a scoop, but that homerbhoy reported it weeks before anyone else did, and it seems to be true.

Post by **mario** » 26 Mar 2010, 18:47

Tealy wrote:
dr-baker wrote:
P_Friesacher wrote:Incredibly the story seems to be true http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsp ... 588379.stm

Also confirmed on Autosport: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/82374

Interesting comment from the article:
The team has discovered that the capacity of its tank does not allow it to fill up with enough fuel to comfortably get it through races where consumption is quite heavy.

This could prove to be a particular problem at this weekend's Australian Grand Prix, with the Albert Park circuit being one of the most demanding in terms of fuel use.

How on earth have they managed that. It's not like they can blame a lack of windtunnel use for not knowing. Ok a lack of testing has delayed them finding out but even that would have been far too late to get a design in for Bahrain.

Thinking about it, there are a few possible reasons - either they underestimated the fuel consumption based on the data provided by Cosworth (which is unlikely, since the other Cosworth teams have been able to avoid making the same mistake), or the car is producing more drag then expected, so their fuel consumptions is too high (not implausible - at Bahrein, they were not that fast on the straights (about 10kph off the mid field teams) - but no slower then Lotus). An alternative is that the car is overweight (the HRT - Dallara is known to be about 20kg overweight, according to comments made by Bruno Senna at the launch), which would also push the fuel consumption up.
But, all in all, this is not at all what the team needed - now, they are having to modify the chassis, which is taking up time and money, and slowing down new developments (since they can't evaluate whether a new part will work unless after the car has been updated).

Barbazza · Post by **Barbazza** » 26 Mar 2010, 19:10

They'll just have to make like it's the mid-80s and make the drivers get out and push it over the line. For the last 3 laps.

Popi_Larrauri · Post by **Popi_Larrauri** » 26 Mar 2010, 19:39

When written here for the first time, I could have bet my arse that it was fake. God lord, ROTR straight away an ROTY candidate right now.

noisebox · Post by **noisebox** » 26 Mar 2010, 19:42

IdeFan wrote:The point is not that BBC got a scoop, but that homerbhoy reported it weeks before anyone else did, and it seems to be true.

That's what I meant too.

Myrvold · Post by **Myrvold** » 26 Mar 2010, 20:09

Well, they are now allowed to make chassis-changes, maybe they can come up with something that is faster too... who knows!

dr-baker · Post by **dr-baker** » 26 Mar 2010, 20:15

noisebox wrote:
IdeFan wrote:The point is not that BBC got a scoop, but that homerbhoy reported it weeks before anyone else did, and it seems to be true.

That's what I meant too.

Erm, me too...?

thalion · Post by **thalion** » 27 Mar 2010, 08:31

Popi_Larrauri wrote:When written here for the first time, I could have bet my arse that it was fake. God lord, ROTR straight away an ROTY candidate right now.

They still have to make the car reliable enough to actually make it to the finish before they can even dream of getting ROTR for not having enough fuel. What a thing to look forward to!

thehemogoblin · Post by **thehemogoblin** » 27 Mar 2010, 22:54

CarlosFerreira wrote:Some things never change. Go Simtek!

The American commentators were having an absolute field day with that. They were just ripping Nick Wirth to shreds during qualifying.

JOSH[trulli toyota] · Post by **JOSH[trulli toyota]** » 28 Mar 2010, 00:35

Virgin team are being forced to make major modifications to their car after discovering that its fuel tank is too small to get to the end of races.
THERE fuel tank is 13 liters to small to finish any of the next 3 races but should not b a problem as they probably would not have made the end of the next 3 rces regardless

they will new have to design and build a whole new chassis out of carbon fiber .which takes age's or dismatle the current one bond a bigger piece on to the end nd hope it passes tests and hold 160kg of fuel

CarlosFerreira · Post by **CarlosFerreira** » 28 Mar 2010, 00:41

JOSH[trulli toyota] wrote:Virgin team are being forced to make major modifications to their car after discovering that its fuel tank is too small to get to the end of races.
THERE fuel tank is 13 liters to small to finish any of the next 3 races but should not b a problem as they probably would not have made the end of the next 3 rces regardless
they will new have to design and build a whole new chassis out of carbon fiber .which takes age's or dismatle the current one bond a bigger piece on to the end nd hope it passes tests and hold 160kg of fuel

It is amusing. We've been laughing for weeks now...

thehemogoblin · Post by **thehemogoblin** » 28 Mar 2010, 00:41

CarlosFerreira wrote:
JOSH[trulli toyota] wrote:Virgin team are being forced to make major modifications to their car after discovering that its fuel tank is too small to get to the end of races.
THERE fuel tank is 13 liters to small to finish any of the next 3 races but should not b a problem as they probably would not have made the end of the next 3 rces regardless
they will new have to design and build a whole new chassis out of carbon fiber .which takes age's or dismatle the current one bond a bigger piece on to the end nd hope it passes tests and hold 160kg of fuel

It is amusing. We've been laughing for weeks now...

Way to merge at the exact same time I did.

Bleu · Post by **Bleu** » 28 Mar 2010, 18:10

They might have enough fuel to finish because they will probably finish at least two laps down. So in next two races they would need fuel for 54 laps instead of 56.

homerbhoy · Post by **homerbhoy** » 29 Mar 2010, 00:36

I reckon i should get a F1 reporter job, couldnt be worse that ted kravitz

jackanderton · Post by **jackanderton** » 29 Mar 2010, 12:30

http://www.planet-f1.com/news/18227/605 ... has-issues

Mmm. Except your issues are being guaranteed to not finish a Grand Prix until May. Not even Hispania Racing has those sort of issues.

Ross Prawn · Post by **Ross Prawn** » 31 Mar 2010, 13:13

Nick Wirth has agreed to pay for all the changes, (even though it wasn't a mistake, oh no.) This must be a pretty big cost for a little company like Nick's to bear.

Basically this means Branson is beating him with a big stick. I bet Nick regrets getting into bed with Virgin.

CarlosFerreira · Post by **CarlosFerreira** » 31 Mar 2010, 14:52

Ross Prawn wrote:Basically this means Branson is beating him with a big stick. I bet Nick regrets getting into bed with Virgin.

Headline of the year, part II.

Post by **mario** » 31 Mar 2010, 16:05

And now it is going to get even more painful for Wirth Research, because they have agreed that since the mistake was on their part, they will foot the bill for the replacement chassis (both the redesign and the rebuild). http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/82558
To compound problems, even if the tank was large enough for them to do an entire race distance, they currently have fuel pick up problems - so even if they had enough fuel, they can't use all of the fuel in the tank. And because they can't use all of the fuel in the tank, they are having to qualify with extra fuel on board in order to be able to set a fast lap time - which might explain why the VR-01 was not as quick in qualifying as perhaps we had expected.
Interestingly, on the BBC, there is a little clip where Wirth is explaining why the tank was too small (I hope that this is available outside of the UK) http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/sarahholt/20 ... ibili.html
What is worth noting is that Wirth signed off the design of the chassis in the middle of last year (June), and blames the shortfall on the following points. Firstly, the fact that the FIA changed the regulations (banning, for example, topping up the tank after the out lap to the grid - in previous years, you were allowed to top the tank up before the race), including crash testing with full tanks (which changed the chassis design and construction), and the fact that the team were expecting to be allocated a much denser fuel (which was changed - to presumably a lower density fuel - in September).
However, they do not blame Cosworth in any way, as the figures that they have given out are very accurate, and have been the same throughout the design phase.

CarlosFerreira · Post by **CarlosFerreira** » 31 Mar 2010, 20:23

mario wrote:What is worth noting is that Wirth signed off the design of the chassis in the middle of last year (June), and blames the shortfall on the following points. Firstly, the fact that the FIA changed the regulations (banning, for example, topping up the tank after the out lap to the grid - in previous years, you were allowed to top the tank up before the race), including crash testing with full tanks (which changed the chassis design and construction), and the fact that the team were expecting to be allocated a much denser fuel (which was changed - to presumably a lower density fuel - in September).
However, they do not blame Cosworth in any way, as the figures that they have given out are very accurate, and have been the same throughout the design phase.

All plausible reasons, but they mostly uncover how marginal Wirth Research was going. Why maximize performance in this department in a team with everything to do, I ask? Why not run it safe and pack an extra 10kg capacity, over and above the worst estimates? It's not like it would make any difference anyway (admittedly, the benefit of hindsight operates in this latter statement of mine).

Tealy · Post by **Tealy** » 01 Apr 2010, 08:28

CarlosFerreira wrote:
mario wrote:What is worth noting is that Wirth signed off the design of the chassis in the middle of last year (June), and blames the shortfall on the following points. Firstly, the fact that the FIA changed the regulations (banning, for example, topping up the tank after the out lap to the grid - in previous years, you were allowed to top the tank up before the race), including crash testing with full tanks (which changed the chassis design and construction), and the fact that the team were expecting to be allocated a much denser fuel (which was changed - to presumably a lower density fuel - in September).
However, they do not blame Cosworth in any way, as the figures that they have given out are very accurate, and have been the same throughout the design phase.

All plausible reasons, but they mostly uncover how marginal Wirth Research was going. Why maximize performance in this department in a team with everything to do, I ask? Why not run it safe and pack an extra 10kg capacity, over and above the worst estimates? It's not like it would make any difference anyway (admittedly, the benefit of hindsight operates in this latter statement of mine).

I agree with you completely. As Mike Gascoigne has confirmed Lotus have gone extremely conservative this year and it is obviously working for them. Virgin should have done the same for their first car.

Post by **mario** » 01 Apr 2010, 10:48

Tealy wrote:
CarlosFerreira wrote:
mario wrote:What is worth noting is that Wirth signed off the design of the chassis in the middle of last year (June), and blames the shortfall on the following points. Firstly, the fact that the FIA changed the regulations (banning, for example, topping up the tank after the out lap to the grid - in previous years, you were allowed to top the tank up before the race), including crash testing with full tanks (which changed the chassis design and construction), and the fact that the team were expecting to be allocated a much denser fuel (which was changed - to presumably a lower density fuel - in September).
However, they do not blame Cosworth in any way, as the figures that they have given out are very accurate, and have been the same throughout the design phase.

All plausible reasons, but they mostly uncover how marginal Wirth Research was going. Why maximize performance in this department in a team with everything to do, I ask? Why not run it safe and pack an extra 10kg capacity, over and above the worst estimates? It's not like it would make any difference anyway (admittedly, the benefit of hindsight operates in this latter statement of mine).

I agree with you completely. As Mike Gascoigne has confirmed Lotus have gone extremely conservative this year and it is obviously working for them. Virgin should have done the same for their first car.

It has paid off for Lotus fairly well - Heikki finished in 13th place at Melbourne, and in the opening laps he was not that far off the Toro Rosso cars (so, at the very least, the Lotus probably has reasonably good mechanical grip). HRT, meanwhile, are still lacking experience and resources, but the car is solid enough that they are starting to close the gap down to the other new teams (and Chandhok managing a full race distance and a 14th place actually puts HRT ahead of Virgin Racing).
All in all, it doesn't look like things have been going that well for the team - perhaps Wirth was a little overconfident in his abilities following the success of the Acura's in the American Le Mans series, where all of the Acura entries have been designed with CFD? Also, whilst the team may be aiming for big things, they are on one of the smallest budgets, so development will be hindered by a lack of resources.
It isn't as if they had set themselves a massively ambitious target - their plan was to be the best of the new teams, which was possible, but now things are not looking all that good. It's probably mostly down to a lack of experience with running an F1 team (when the Lotus team has that in spades, thanks to Gascoyne, who also brought quite a few people from Toyota into the team).

RejectSteve · Post by **RejectSteve** » 01 Apr 2010, 13:02

mario wrote:perhaps Wirth was a little overconfident in his abilities following the success of the Acura's in the American Le Mans series, where all of the Acura entries have been designed with CFD?

I don't know if the ARX-01 cars were CFD'ed but they were built upon Courage LC75 monocoques but the ARX-02a LMP1 car was an entirely CFD design. However, while it was a successful car in its class, it didn't actually have any competiton so how good it was has to be questioned. Wirth is keen on his CFD, but didn't Sauber use it too? What Sauber did, however, was use the wind tunnel to confirm what the computer said. Wirth seems so overconfident, as you say, that CFD is as good as anything that he refuses to use a tunnel to refine his design.

Is Wirth worth it?

CarlosFerreira · Post by **CarlosFerreira** » 01 Apr 2010, 13:09

RejectSteve wrote:
mario wrote:perhaps Wirth was a little overconfident in his abilities following the success of the Acura's in the American Le Mans series, where all of the Acura entries have been designed with CFD?

I don't know if the ARX-01 cars were CFD'ed but they were built upon Courage LC75 monocoques but the ARX-02a LMP1 car was an entirely CFD design. However, while it was a successful car in its class, it didn't actually have any competiton so how good it was has to be questioned. Wirth is keen on his CFD, but didn't Sauber use it too? What Sauber did, however, was use the wind tunnel to confirm what the computer said. Wirth seems so overconfident, as you say, that CFD is as good as anything that he refuses to use a tunnel to refine his design.

Is Wirth worth it?

Mind you, the smallish fuel capacity seems to have nothing to do with the CFD. As far as I can tell, the fact that just using computers has produced a car that is roughly in the same ball park as a Lotus and an HRT and not far away of the leaders' raw pace pretty much confirms the process is worth it. If we were suddenly to find out the Virgin suffers buffeting at speed or something like that, than we could all criticize the CFD.

Mind you, I am a bit of an anorak for these things and I am mightily with the idea that car works without ever seeing the inside of a wind tunnel.