Naujienos, gandai...

* The C2 is between 0.8s and 1s faster than the C1
* The C3 is 0.7s faster than the C2
* The C4 is 0.6s faster than the C3
* The C5 is 0.6s faster than the C4

https://imgur.com/a/aa4pODR

tos sekundes yra tentative, nes cia skaiciuojama optimali temperatura - ka ne visiems pavyko pasiekti saltu oru, kaip suprantu

Tentative, but indicative ;)

Full-on race simulations, with full race durations and 'live' pitstops are usually only attempted in the second week. Likewise full qualifying, low-fuel simulations. There was no evidence of either in this first week. So what we had were a series of multiple lap runs, enough to see the patterns – and with no reason to suppose that anyone would be running an order of magnitude different fuel load to anyone else.
Given all the above, here's approximately how it looked if we correct all the times to the hardest tyre used (the C3).
1:17.4 - Ferrari
1:17.8 - Red Bull and Mercedes
1:18.5 - Renault and Alfa Romeo
1:18.6 - McLaren
1:18.8 - Toro Rosso
1:19.1 - Haas
1:19.7 - Racing Point
1:21.5 - Williams

pirmasis leklerko komantaras apie binoto jam suteikta nr.2 statusa
https://ru.motorsport.com/f1/news/lekler-prokommentiroval-reshenie-ferrari-otdat-prioritet-fetelyu/4341774/

"As AUTO BILD MOTORSPORT learnt, it is not only the front wing that is Ferrari's secret. Similar to the Red Bull, the car is extremely heavily set. However, at the track can be observed: On the straight line, the rear lowers, only when braking does it return to its (increased) starting position.
The effect: On the straight the air resistance decreases for a better top speed, in the curves the downforce rises again by the setting. A solution like Red Bull brought to the track in 2018. But this is hardly possi*** with Mercedes due to the low angle of attack.
FIA technical director Jo Bauer also noticed the system. "Absolutely legal," he says. The reason: The lowering of the rear can be controlled via the spring rate and hydraulic dampers. It is not necessary to network the different axles - as is forbidden."

Cia toks ilgas, bet pakankamai solidziai argumentuotas:



Ferrari seems as good if not better than they were last year.. and look set for a similar year to last year in terms of their performance. The balance, the raw pace, and the mood in the team is very positive and there is nothing negative to report. Best case scenario they have a bit of a gap, worst case scenario they are equal fastest team.



Merc seems like they are struggling with balance (aero balance) and it seems likely that they are going to have a harder time than last year. It wouldn't surprise me if the car is equal in raw pace to Ferrari.. but it might be a situation where they are harder on their tyres in order to do it. Or it's harder to dial the car in, so some weekends, they hit the sweet spot and others they don't. Where as Ferrari will be more consistant and a less stressful car to setup and having it run optimally from race to race. It might be that they are a*** to "brute force" it in qualifying and post similar times, but they have to run the engines harder in the race.. or eat through tyres.. or have to make extra stops. To me it's very skeptical, that they could fall beyond third fastest car. And would need to see that for a few races for the reality of that to sink in. But it seems to be true, that this year might be a harder year than their other years and the drivers have said as much. We know that for sure the engine will be strong, the chassis will be there or thereabouts. But the balance/confidence in the car.. and the ability to set it up and protect tyres over a long run might be hard. They might need to sacrifice some rear downforce in order to get the correct balance.. until the front improves and that might take weeks/months. And it might not be until midseason that there is true effeciency in these areas. Best case scenario.. equal first with Ferrari. Worst case scenario third behind Ferrari and Redbull.



Redbull are doing the same thing they do every year in the winter. Sort of going below the radar but then when you look at the longruns they seem strong. But based more on knowledge of previous years, or faith in the fact that they make really good chassis.. rather than any headline times to base it off of. Ferrari have had a perfect start, but Redbull's start seems to be pretty similar, given the circumstance of switching to a new engine. So far very little has gone wrong, and the engine has been good in terms of reliability.. but it remains to be seen what will happen when it's turned up to 100%, and that will probably be a big question mark in these first few months of the season. It seems to the very least.. that they will be at least equal to what they were last year, but there's a chance they could move closer to the front. Hoping for future upgrades from car and engine.. to inch them even closer. They will be strong on certain tracks, but they will be hoping that eventually they can be strong on all tracks. Max will be near the front. Best case scenario.. equal fastest with Ferrari or second behind Ferrari. Worst case.. third behind Merc but being a*** to race with them on certain tracks that suit them.



Renault seem like they might have made a step forward but the gap from the top 3 to the rest was so big during last year, that I am very very skeptical. The idea that they could be level in pace with Merc or Redbull to me is like fantasy.. and would mean that both those teams have screwed up really really bad, and I don't believe they have. It seems in advance.. that this is a bit of a nothing year for Renault.. because the gap is so big, catching up seems impossi***. Even if they close the gap, they'll still be running in 6th or 7th.. which 'appears' to be the same as last year. The actual gaps should be closer.. but how much closer is hard to predict. At this stage, it's too early from there to be any benefit from Ricciardo's RBR knowledge either. That will take months to pay off, and it might not pay off 100% until next years car. This year is sort of like a learning year, where they just hope they can gradually improve the car and engine, and narrow the gaps.. and build a foundation or platform to step off of.. so that next year, they can actually hope to jump somebody in raw pace and move up the order into the top 3. The car so far seems like it could be a*** to achieve this objective with no major problems. It's possi*** that with some luck they could find themselves in some good race positions as well.. but if there's one team where there will be hope (like a tease).. where a good result seems possi*** and then it's stolen away with an exploded engine.. I believe it's this one. The same thing could happen with RBR/Honda.. but I believe Renault is the prime candidate for this. Best case scenario.. 4th but with a smaller gap to the cars infront.. hoping to jump them if they have any bad pitstops or unlucky circumstances. On some tracks, maybe racing with the #2 drivers of Merc or RBR. Worst case scenario.. slipping further back into the midfield and having to fight to get back to 4th, with the gap to the front staying the same or getting larger.



Alfa Romeo (Sauber) I am really really skeptical of. It's too easy to be so far back, and then to release a new car and 'appear' to be so much closer. It's easy to appear that way, but in reality it's really hard to accomplish and IMO.. we need to see it in Melbourne and the next few races to really believe that it could be possi***. Similar to STR, I think it's too easy to appear fast, without actually having that pace. And the same could be said for all of those midfield teams or even McLaren. It's possi*** they could have made a jump forwards but for me, it's hard to even see them as being ahead of Renault. We will just have to wait and see I guess. Best case scenario.. 4th place, where Renault are or want to be. Worst case.. stuck in the midfield battle.. that changes from race to race where you can finish anywhere from 7th to 16th.



The rest of the midfield. It's really hard to trust their times or get a read on it. Traffic plays such a big role during these races that these poor cars rarely even get a chance to show what they can do, and are often forced into one stops where they are just waiting for pitstops. Everyone knows it, so during the first few corners everyone takes big risks and it's easy to get caught up in it and then you never even got a chance to race. Overtaking is hard due to the trains. And everyone wants to get a gap so that they can qualify ahead of the train and get some space so that they can run their own race. There's two McLaren, STR, Haas, Racing Point, AR, and possibly even a Renault or two.



Every year, there's usually a team that has a lower budget that surprises and punches above it's weight. STR often do this early in the year and then fall away. Sometimes it's Force India or Sauber. But who can predict it in advance? It's really tough. It's like one big blur that shifts from track to track depending on track characteristics. It seems like it could be STR, AR or McLaren but who really knows? It's hard to trust any of their times because these are the kind of teams that run less fuel and it's easy to get an inflated impression.. only to fall back to earth in the first few races of the season. The top three or four teams seems easier to predict but beyond this.. it gets blurrier and blurrier.



It seems like each year, the cars become more and more advanced.. so much so, that even saying that "midfield team x" looks sta*** and the drivers seem confident. This doesn't even seem to count for much anymore, because it seems like all the cars are starting to become more like this. In other words, the midfield teams feel like the top cars used to feel five years ago. And even the car coming 10th or 12th is still a nice car to drive. So who knows? Kimi could have a good year and bring something to the team, but it could be any of these and even so.. it seems at best they'll be fighting for 9th or 10th place. There's reasons to be optimistic or skeptical for every single team in the midfield but yeah..



Williams.. after the last few years, who could have thought that they could find a way to actually make things worse. Well they did it.. things got even worse and it's hard to even talk about.. because it's that bad. Both drivers are currently being shortchanged.. and it's going to be really hard for them in the early races.. and even when things settle down.. it's likely that they will be the slowest car for the entire year. With horri*** balance and performance.. and just happy to try and be fast enough to have someone to race with. Outside of wet races it might be very hard to even score a single point this year.



I wouldn't have thought this a few years ago.. but I think already we have seen enough.. after one test. Because so much these days is dependent on dynos, test rigs, and computers simulations. I don't believe a lot is going to change in the next week or two. Even the aero upgrades for Melbourne will be more about customizing the car to the track and will gain tenths rather than a whole second. The fact that these cars were so fast and relia*** in the first few days.. and the fact there there's only two tests before the first race shows proof of this. And the fact that they aren't going to other tracks like Jerez, or Bahrain.



It's more just about gaining further understanding of the car (for future development in the next 3 months) and learning more about how the car reacts to different setup changes. Engine torque curves and mappings etc etc. Williams really needs the second test.. and maybe Merc as well.. but I think overall not a lot will change. It will appear to change on the timesheets but I don't think it will change that much in reality. It's scary how advanced these teams and cars are these days, that they can produce new designs so quickly and how little testing they need to hit the ground running. The best thing Merc fans can hope for is that the drivers say at the end of it that the balance is a lot better now, and they understand everything a lot better. There will also be more race simulation data to go from.. but even that data come sometimes be a bit iffy.

Neseniai buvo čia diskusija apie nuorodų į šaltinius nepateikimą, kur AF1 vienas sakė, kad nieko čia nereikia pateikinėt.

Man asmeniškai nesuprantama, kaip galima paimti iš kažkur kažkieno mintį, numest čia kaip kokią „ale tiesą“ ir viskas gerai.

Taigi, virš šio mano komentaro AF1 tęsia gražias tradicijas: paėmė komentatoriaus „HoldenRT“ komentarą iš Autosport forumo (https://forums.autosport.com/topic/211935-f1-2019-season-testing-thread/page-43) ir įkėlė čia, ale paskaitykit argumentus.

Gal ir nieko blogo, bet įkeliant tokią nuomonę, vertėtų bent parašyt, kad ne žuranlisto, eksperto, ar dar kieno, o paprasto komentatoriaus.

Dar ne metas pradėt ugdytis šiek tiek kultūros?

Mazdaug 80% info cia papostintos nepasiteisindavo - nuolatiniai blogeriu, komentatoriu ir zurnalioku feilai. Rasineja kas tik nori, ka tik nori. Taip kad skaityti sita info reiktu tik del skaitymo, be jokiu isvadu darymo.

diskusija iskeliau as, o Klepsidra su AF1 is manes issityciojo ir toliau kopijuoja citatas. kas del autoritetingojo blogerio kulturos ugdymo (cia turbut tureta omeny profesine puse), tai mano subjektyvia nuomone jis sunkiai ugdosi :))) bet nuo to tik jam paciam blogiau (velgi profesine prasme).

Mes cia, forume, esam ne blogeriai ir ne inzinieriai su vadybininkais.
Postinu man atrodancias idomiomis citatas ar kazkieno pasisakymus. Man svarbu mintys ir argumentai.
O kiekvienas is cia besilankanciu pats sprendzia - skaityti tai, ar ne; imti uz gryna piniga ar ne; gal isvis nekreipti demesio pamacius, kas ikelia posta.
Kitais zodziais tariant, "isjungti mokytojo sindroma" vertetu kai kuriems is jusu, nes, pastebekim, nieko nemokinu ir neaiskinu kas ka turi ar neturi daryti, skirtingai nuo kai kuriu kitu forumo nariu.

Tuscios kalbos. Esme paprasta: jei skolinies kazkieno mintis ar izvalgas, nurodyk saltini. Visose normaliose interneto bendruomenese egzistuoja si paprasta ir intuityvi taisykle. Kuo cia susije, kas tu esi forume, o kas ne. Kuo cia susije visa kita, ka parasei. Nejau taip sunku pridet kelis zodzius, kieno mintis? Ar cia principo reikalas?

bet gi ciane mokymai, AF1. nu kaip tu protingas vyras ir visiskai uzsiblokuoji ir neisikerti, kame yra esme. sakom kultura ir lygis. o tai ir yra skelbiant svetimas mintis rasyti ju saltini. tai vadinasi solidumu ir pagarba autentiskam saltiniui. o musu atveju ir kolegoms, kurie skaitys tavo nukopinta citata. cia forume mes visu ne inzinieriai. taip. bet tik ne tu. ar tu pats suvoki? tu juk pats cia prisistatai blogeriu, pats keli cia nuorodas i savo profesionalu tinklapi ir t.t. turetum suvokti, kad vien jau pats sau turetum kelti skirtingus standartus. mes gi tau gero noredami pastabas rasom, tu juk vienas is nedaugelio musu megstamo sporto apzvalgininku. nieks nenori taves menkinti ar kazko versti daryti. cia tik paprastu vartotoju pastebejimai. bet jei esi tas tipas zmoniu, kurie sako : "eikit na..ui as zinau ka darau ir esu protingiausias is visu", tai tu nebijok taip ir pasakyt. tada nieks tau nuosirdziu pastabu nerasines, o papy...os ir tiek.

Sudetingai kazkaip viskas, lygioj vietoj, apie nieka.
Bet, turit teise kritikuot ir turet kita nuomone. Viskas ok.

Viskas ok. cia gi graziai. be pykcio. tiesiog pastaba. tik diskusija ne lygioj vietoj ir ne apie nieka, o apie labai konkretu dalyka - autentisko saltinio paminejima kopinant teksta ;) o tamsta turit pilna teise rinktis savo soliduma ;)

https://thesportsrush.com/ted-kravitz-has-been-sacked-by-sky-sports-according-to-reports/
Jei tai tiesa, biski liudna. Bicas, nepaisant minusu, labai smagiai snekedavo savo Notebook'uose.

Kita vertus, jei tai tiesa, ji netrukus pasikviesti kiti arba F1 (Liberty).

del Kravitzo tikrai gaila butu. Mieliau jau koki useless Croft ismestu, bet kazkur skaiciau, kad Brundle nenori buti pagrindiniu komentatoriumi. idomu, ka sky siaip darys tiek punditu prisirinke - kur sutilps visi ex pilotai

Anthony Davidson irgi meta lauk, kiek suprantu. Kažkaip man šitie abu visai patiko. Keisti Sky sprendimai. Praeitais metais vidury sezono Mark Priestley atsisakė. Na, šitas gal ir ne pats svarbiausias buvo, rotacija kaip ir normalu. Bet, matyt, kažką per aštriai pasakė šitie du.

Davidsono momentai prie TV boardo, detaliu, smulkmenu pastebejimai budavo priceless.
Bet, Sky, turbut, zino geriau :)

Del Kravitzo labai gaila. Pvz.: Jei teisybe kaip raso toje nuorodoje, jog jo vietoje buys Karunas, tai cia labai keistas ejimas. Man asmeniskai jis neturi nei jokios charizmos kaiop komentatorius, nei pasakoja idomiai.

Karunas nera blogai, turi daug ziniu. Bet del charizmos - sutinku.

Kravitzas buvo eilinis kiemo burundukas, nelabai besigaudantis situacijoje. Jis lenktyniu metu pastoviai i eteri paleisdavo tokias 'teorijas' kad pagrindiniai komentatoriai tiesiog mandagiai patyledavo ir tiek. Jokios naudos ir idomumo jis nesiteikdavo, nenuostabu kad pramete. O Crofto nemes tikrai nes jo energija ir tempas yra labai geras ir visos re-transliacijos ir istraukos sedi pagrinde ant jo komentavimo. Brundlas nemegsta daug kalbeti, ypac ant tempo tai jam labai gerai kad Croftas salia.

Brundle nėra lead komentatorius. Jo darbas būti ekspertu. Normaliose televizijose taip ir yra – vienas yra lead komentatorius, kuris pliurpia ir taip vadinami pundit, kurie teikia ekspertines įžvalgas, bet neužsiima veiksmo komentavimu.

Kas dėl Kravitz, tai jo Notebook buvo maladiec, kol to paties nepradėjo daryt Liberty su Paddock Pass ir Will Buxton. Tai, matyt, dviejų konkuruojančių šou nelabai reikėjo. Tik panašu, kad Paddock Pass bus pakištas po F1 TV skėčiu, nors pernai buvo Youtube ir man labai gerai sueidavo, tiek prieš lenktynes, tiek po.

va apie Crofta ka sako ir visai pritarciau:
The one they need to replace is that dude who keeps messing up the official FOM videos by SHOUTING ALL THE TIME ABOUT STANDARD RACING THINGS !!!

There is a reason, why FOM chose him and not someone else.

Šiaip jo darbas toks. Jei stebi transliacijas tai jis gana ramiai komentuoja ir pyst kažkuriuo momentu rėkt pradeda. Nes tas jo rėkimas paaštrina emociją ir paskui puikiai tinka į visokius highlights dėt. Nerėkia, gi, jis visų lenktynių. Tik tiek, kad tas jo perdėtas entuziazmas kartais tikrai užknisa, nes jis dirbtinis. Bet toks jo darbas, ir jis jį dirba.

Lights-out-and-away-we-go!!! :-)

viskas ok - meme buti nesiulau, bet rekti, kad Vettelis tik 5s atstumu nuo Hamiltono yra kazkokia prasme? Plius jis pastoviai nusisneka ir Brundle yra tam, kad ji pastoviai taisytu

Pritarčiau, kad Crofty dažnai šneka neaišku ką, maišo dalykus ir t.t. Tik vienas dalykas: jį atleidus, reikia kažkuo pakeist, o tai problema. Vis tik komentavimas (ypač pagrindinio komentatoriaus) yra gana nelengvas darbas, turi pastoviai šnekėt, turi rodyt emocijas, kad žiūrovai neužmigtų ir panašiai. Dėl šios priežasties, kad ir gaila, bet Ted'as yra lengviau pakeičiamas nei Crofty.

Perdėtos emocijos geriau nei lietuvių komentatorių lygus balsas.

Beje, kazkur buvo imestas LT komentatoriu 1996m keletos etapu komentavimas - vertas pasiziurejimo siais laikais :) Pauzes tarp komentavimo kai kada ir po pora minuciu. Ramus ir letas pokalbis, su nuolatiniais 'dingimais' is eterio :)) Klasika.

Lieka ponas.


Industry sources have indicated to this site for some time that Kravitz’s Sky future was in doubt. Motorsport Broadcasting can now confirm the reports that circulated over the weekend that Young initially opted not to renew Kravitz’s contract for the 2019 season.

However, this site can exclusively confirm that the decision to axe Kravitz was overturned from within, with discussions between Sky and Kravitz ongoing regarding his ‘return’ in recent weeks.

The u-turn from Sky is not a result of any social media storm that unfolded over the weekend, the wheels for his return were in motion far before the leak. This writer chose not to write about the subject of Kravitz’s potential exit given that negotiations were ongoing between both parties, and any decision to publish an article could jeopardise those.

Elsewhere, Sky have confirmed that Anthony Davidson will remain part of their line-up despite Sky omitting him from their press release last Friday. Expect a similar number of races for Davidson compared to previous years.

Smagu. As tikrai mieliau keisciau Ted'a vietoj Herberto. Tas tai pastoviai kazkokias nesamones sneka. Vienintelis pliusas is jo kai patys pilotai is jo pasisaipo. Vienintelis kuris turbut jei dingtu tikrai nepasigesciau.
O Karunas tai nors ir gan nuobodokai pasakoja, bet siaip kai ziurejau testus gyvai per sky kiek rode, tai ziniu jis tikrai turi nemazai ir geru dalyku pastebi ir papasakoja.

Grynai mano mintys.

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.bottas-i-still-haven't-achieved-anything-in-f1.2nIX0f3KI65KXe9vPXWKih.html – rašiau spėlionėj, kad jei Bottas pasiliks barzdą, gali būt reikalų. Kol kas vis dar su barzda :D Ir šiaip, žiūrint jo interviu, kažkaip labiau pasitikintis savim atrodo.

tai ta Brundle ir reiketu mesti...

matyt jau pamirsot LT komentatorius....jeigu Sky komentatoriai nusishneka...tai kas budavo per LT transcliacijas pastaruosius desimt metu :D

pradekim nuo to, kad lyginimas nera korektiskas. nors niekada nemegau Volungeviciaus (nesutapdavo poziuriai uz ka akivaizdziai buvo sergama), bet manau kad ju pora su Kaikariu komentuodavo adekvaciai tam laikmeciui, turimai informacijai, lesoms ir t.t. Be abejo, kad dabar paziurejus irasus atrodo patetiskai, bet nepamirskim, kad dabar mes turim n+k daugiau info saltiniu ir ta info pasiekia way greiciau nei anksciau.

Sky siai dienai tikriaus yra geriausia, ka turime, kad ir kokius trukumus jie beturetu.

ar volungeviciaus pastovus riaugejimas i eteri cia irgi prie palyginimo nekorektiskumo?