迈凯伦在意大利大奖赛排位赛中为何自陷困境
在蒙扎意大利大奖赛排位赛中，皮埃尔·加斯利与阿尔派表现出色，而迈凯伦因多个关键因素导致排位赛成绩不佳。尽管此前在布达佩斯和赞德沃特两连胜，高速的蒙扎并非迈凯伦的强项。
迈凯伦是如何在F1意大利大奖赛上让自己陷入被动局面的
迈凯伦在F1意大利大奖赛排位赛中的失误，掩盖了车队在一条本应对其艰难的赛道上令人鼓舞的表现
当皮埃尔·加斯利和阿尔派在蒙扎将排位赛的博弈发挥得淋漓尽致时，迈凯伦只是几支F1车队中的一支，在若干关键因素导致了不尽如人意的意大利大奖赛排位赛成绩之后，不禁遐想本可以取得怎样的结果。
在布达佩斯和赞德福特这两条高下压力赛道接连夺冠之后，高速的蒙扎赛道从来不被认为是迈凯伦最强的赛道，原因既包括赛车的空气动力学效率略低，也包括众所周知的低速弯（减速弯）方面的弱点。
事实上，领队安德烈亚·斯特拉称这条速度圣殿赛道是一次很好的检验，可以看看迈凯伦的进步是否能在不同赛道布局上延续。从第二节排位赛来看，MCL40 看起来有望出色地通过这次考验，奥斯卡·皮亚斯特里和兰多·诺里斯位列第二和第三，仅次于梅赛德斯的安东内利。
但是，和其他几支领先车队一样，迈凯伦未能在第三节排位赛中重现那种状态。皮亚斯特里在第三节排位赛的第一次飞驰圈只快了0.1秒，而诺里斯则因皮亚斯特里在一号弯的失误而受到牵连，失去了来自队友的关键尾流。
正如加斯利驾驶 阿尔派 令人震惊地夺得杆位所显示的那样，执行是决定一切的，从电池和轮胎管理到出站准备圈（outlap）时的赛道位置以找到完美尾流，无所不包。梅赛德斯的拉塞尔正是因此丢掉了杆位，因为他跟在狡猾的维斯塔潘后面太近了；而据斯特拉说，他们车队在第三节排位赛的执行失误，也让皮亚斯特里未能取得比第三名更好的成绩，诺里斯更是只排在第九。
斯特拉解释道："当我们执行得很好时，比如在第二节排位赛中，我们的两辆赛车一度占据第一和第二，最后在第二节排位赛结束时排在第二和第三，这是因为赛车在尾流方面的位置摆放得恰到好处，而且奥斯卡和兰多都把车开得非常好，尽管与前车存在微小的差距。"
“在第三节排位赛（Q3）中，第一次尝试时兰多可能跟前车之间的差距太大，他在几个弯角损失了一些时间。所以在执行层面我们留下了一些性能没有发挥出来，而奥斯卡跑出了非常不错的一圈。然后，在最后一轮，我们在管理电池方面遇到了一些问题，而在蒙扎这里，每一分电池电量的损失都会让你付出相当可观的毫秒数。之后我们还遇到了奥斯卡在1号弯锁死轮胎的问题。所以总体来说，我们在多个环节上的执行都没有达到应有的水准。”
不过有一个可以缓和的因素——尽管斯特拉并不愿把它当作借口——那就是迈凯伦维修区位置在维修通道尽头。这极大地促使两辆迈凯伦在最后一轮率先出场，因为如果他们等待其他车，就有可能在驶出维修区时被快速通道上的一列车队堵住。那会让他们落到车阵末尾，甚至可能在计时结束前来不及开始最后一圈尝试。
皮亚斯特里在1号弯的锁死——还连累了队友——让网络上的阴谋论者们炸开了锅。
实际情况是，皮亚斯特里和诺里斯排在车队最前面，前面没有其他车可以提供尾流。随后这位澳大利亚车手在1号弯错过了刹车点，这让诺里斯完全暴露在外。
"这绝不应该成为借口，但当你排在第一个车库时，你需要稍微注意不要太晚驶出车库，因为如果你是最后一个，就有可能来不及开启飞驰圈，"斯特拉解释道。"所以这也是为什么我们发现自己排在第一个，但可能我们必须重新审视所采用的余量，因为考虑到今年的尾流效应，排在第一个显然是一个你不想要的位置。"
皮亚斯特里在一号弯的锁死——过程中还影响了他的队友——让网络上的阴谋论者陷入狂热，不过他和诺里斯一整天都在发夹弯（ chicane ）处苦于前轮锁死。斯特拉解释说，2026年F1的电池管理需求在能量匮乏的蒙扎赛道上，让车手很难给刹车加热，因为他们不能偏离最优的能量回收策略。
"这是蒙扎非常特有的情况，"这位意大利人说。"在出场圈中你没有多少能量可以用来充分给刹车加热，因为回收的能量太有限了，你必须非常小心地管理它。你不可能做大量的加速和制动来暖刹车，而且如果你开始这样做，你可能会跟不上前车，所以非常棘手。
"这肯定是我们可能需要研究的问题，确保刹车即使在没有出场圈中必须提供的这种能量输入的情况下也能正常工作，但我想说，这个问题很大程度上是蒙扎特有的。"
迈凯伦对其旋转尾翼设计在比赛中的竞争力表现感到满意，这一概念是由法拉利首创的。
总体而言，斯特拉认为车队的基础性能对于赛历上其他低下压力赛道来说是令人鼓舞的，并表示车队在空气动力学效率上的欠缺是一个“误导性的假象”，因为车队已经在赛车改进上取得进展，包括引入了旋转尾翼设计。
如果说蒙扎是对 MCL40 整体表现的一次考验，那么斯特拉给车队打了半个及格分。“我们的工程师在降低阻力方面做得很好，而且一旦我们同时优化了动力单元和能量管理，其实在极速方面我们并没有落后多少。如果说我们阻力太大，那其实是有点误导性的假象，或者说是一种借口。”
“我认为，如果我们在执行方面做得更好，更好地控制那些并不仅仅取决于赛车纯性能的参数，我们肯定可以在发车排位上拿到前两排的位置。所以，从性能角度来看，蒙扎作为一场考试，这差不多算是半个及格分。”
英文原文
How McLaren left itself exposed at the F1 Italian Grand Prix
McLaren's qualifying slip-ups at Formula 1's Italian Grand Prix masked encouraging performance on what was supposed to be a tough track for the team
As Pierre Gasly and Alpine mastered the qualifying game to perfection at Monza, McLaren was one of several Formula 1 teams wondering what could have been after several key factors led to an underwhelming Italian Grand Prix qualifying result.
Off the back of two wins at high downforce circuits in Budapest and Zandvoort, high-speed Monza was never expected to be McLaren's strongest track, both because of a slightly less aero efficient car and a known weakness in low-speed chicanes.
In fact, team principal Andrea Stella called the Temple of Speed a good test to see if McLaren's progress was able to carry over on different track layouts. Looking at Q2, the MCL40 looked set to pass that test with flying colours, with Oscar Piastri and Lando Norris second and third behind Mercedes' Kimi Antonelli.
But, like several other frontrunners, McLaren couldn't replicate that form in Q3. Piastri only found a tenth on his first Q3 run, while Norris was exposed by Piastri's off at Turn 1, robbing him of a crucial slipstream from his team-mate.
As Gasly's shock pole in the Alpine showed, execution was everything, ranging from battery and tyre management to on-track positioning on the outlap to find the perfect tow. That's where Mercedes' George Russell lost pole as he was too close behind a cunning Max Verstappen and, according to Stella, his team's Q3 execution also cost it a better result than third for Piastri and a lowly ninth for Norris.
"When we executed well, like in Q2, we had the two cars P1, P2, then they ended up P2, P3 at the end of Q2, because the cars were positioned in the right place in terms of slipstream, and both Oscar and Lando drove the cars very well despite the small gaps to the cars ahead," Stella explained.
"[In Q3] on the first attempt probably Lando had too big a gap to the car ahead, he lost some time in some corners. So, in terms of execution we leave some performance behind, while Oscar did a very good lap. Then, in the final run, we had some issues managing the battery, and here in Monza every percent of battery charge costs you a significant amount of milliseconds. And then we had the issue with Oscar locking in corner 1. So overall, there are multiple areas in which we have not executed at the level that we should have."
One mitigating factor, though Stella was keen not to call it in as an excuse, was McLaren's garage position at the end of the pitlane. That heavily encouraged the McLarens to go out first for the final run, because if they had waited for others they were at risk of getting blocked leaving their pit box by a train of cars in the fast lane. That would relegate them to the tail end of the field, with a chance of not being able to start the final attempt before the clock runs out.
Piastri's lock-up in Turn 1, hurting his team-mate in the process, sent the internet's conspiracy theorists into a frenzy.
As it was, Piastri and Norris were first in the train with no other cars to collect a slipstream from ahead of them. With the Australian then missing his braking point into Turn 1, it left Norris all exposed.
"At no point should this be an excuse, but when you are at the first garage, you need to be a little bit careful in leaving the garage too late, because if you are the last one, there's a risk that then you're not going to be in time opening the lap," Stella explained. "So that's also why we found ourselves being first, but probably we have to review the margins that we adopted, because then being first with the slipstream effect that we have this year seems definitely a position that you don't want to be."
Piastri's lock-up in Turn 1, hurting his team-mate in the process, sent the internet's conspiracy theorists into a frenzy, though both he and Norris had been struggling with front-tyre locking into the chicane all day. F1's 2026 battery management needs on energy-starved Monza made it tough for drivers to work heat into their brakes, Stella explained, because they couldn't afford to deviate from their optimal energy harvesting strategy.
"It's very specific to Monza," the Italian said. "There's not much energy that you can spend in an outlap to properly work your brakes, because the harvest is so limited that you need to pay a lot of attention to it. It's not like you can do lots of acceleration and braking, warm up your brakes, plus if you start to do so, you may lose contact with the car ahead, so it's very tricky.
"That's certainly something that we might have to look into in terms of making sure that the brakes can operate even without this input of energy that you have to give in outlaps, but I would say that the problem here is very much Monza-specific."
McLaren was satisfied with the competitive running of its rotating wing design, a concept pioneered by Ferrari.
Overall, Stella felt the team's underlying performance was encouraging for other low-draw circuits on the calendar and said its lack of aero efficiency was a "red herring" given the improvements the team had made to the car, including the introduction of its rotating rear wing design.
If Monza was an exam for the overall performance of the MCL40, Stella gave his team a half pass. "Our engineers have done a good job of minimising drag, and once we also optimised the power unit and the energy management, we were actually not that far off in terms of top speed. It would be a little bit of a red herring or an excuse to say we have too much drag.
"I think if we had done a better job of execution and controlling some parameters that don't only depend on the pure performance of the car, we could have definitely qualified on the first couple of rows on the grid. So, it's almost a half pass from a performance point of view in terms of Monza being an exam."
Motorsport.com ·
内容来自公开信源，聚合内容版权归原作者与来源所有。