Another good write up about the Honda turbo issue -
http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/f1/exclusive-honda-misery-set-to-continue-into-2016/ - hopefully resolved with a new design for 2016 (well, you can only hope).
This article is completely nonsense, like literally. If the compressor could run faster it would create more heat and that heat could be captured. It sounds like the idiot directly thinks the heat capture is from hot running parts of the compressor and not talking about using the hot exhaust to spin the turbine with the mgu-h harvesting kinetic energy as with the mgu-k. He has a fundamental misunderstanding of what he's talking about.
Also Arai himself has directly said that Honda are now working on a new layout which wasn't possible to change with the few tokens they have left. A new compressor design would not require a full layout change. Arai has already basically said the entire turbo and mgu-h is being completely changed relative to this year so the idea they are just making a new compressor to make the current layout work is dead before it starts.
Anyone, literally anyone can chase after being an F1 reporter and the constant barrage of incorrect information on more technical engines is really proving who knows what they are talking about and who doesn't. When it's a case of like Ted going "that piece of aero is curvier that it used to be... it much be better" isn't cutting it anymore, when they talk crap about the engine they get shown up for talking rubbish.
The actual design sounds brilliant though, the compressor should be able to rotate at 130,000 revs, more than any other team's... but because of it's situe it's not able to achieve that without overheating and frying everything, with the size zero back end hindering reliability. As a result of that McLaren have had to run the power down, and much less HP than their rivals, which in turn effects the other energy recovery systems. Apparantly McLaren have two PUs in development, a modification of 2015s to fit within the size zero package at increased power and reliability as well as a substitute engine setup which can be used by the homologation date in Feb if the existing concept can't be improved enough, but that would require a chassis rethink.
Sorry but getting excited over a design that sounds brilliant, it doesn't. More than any other teams... it's a tiny compressor. bigger compressor = run smaller for same amount of air pushed, that isn't complicated. Efficiency of any rotational system will be worse at 130k than at 100k, than at 50k. The lower you can run the better in almost every situation you can possibly think of.
Likewise these systems, it's about the balance. Let's say for max engine power they need the compressor running at 100k, the turbine/mgu-h/compressor are designed so the exhaust from the engine at that power can rev that system up to 130k rpm, that means the mgu-h can constantly harvest energy out of the system the second it's above 100k rpm which will be almost all time under power. That is going to provide the air required to the engine and huge amount of harvesting power. If the engine needs 120k rpm for the power it needs you both won't be able to harvest as hard(only drawing out the power from 130k to 120k, but also it will take longer for the engine to hit 120k rpm than 100k and/or it will take more power from the battery to keep it spun up at those higher rpm. So either you use more power in the corners to spin up the compressor or it's 3 seconds into a straight instead of 1 before you can start harvesting.
Now if you have a system where by the engine needs the compressor running at 130k rpm to feed it... and you can't hit 130k rpm, you're screwed, and IF and when you hit 130k rpm, you still need that speed so you can't easily harvest power from it.
There is nothing special about something spinning at 130k rpm, it's not wanted by a good balanced system. Higher rpm = more power required to spin it = more power from battery to get it that high, less efficiency and less headroom for harvesting when up to speed as well.
The other engines aren't 'not capable' of 130k rpm, no one wants to be anywhere near it because it's not practical, efficient or good for reliability. It's an entirely poor design choice to want a turbo that needs to run that fast to power the engine. There is also someone, possibly scarbs(the real scarbs uses that name on several forums), who is now saying the compressor isn't axial just a tiny, semi useless radial compressor.
Honda will not come next year with a new version of the current layout. Arai has literally confirmed on several occasions now that this years engine was down the wrong path, it didn't do what they thought it would, next years engine is a different layout.
