That's assuming there aren't two or three evenly matched cars....in that case it would be the driver followed by the team that make the difference.

 

You guys totally missed my sarcasm about the lights appealing to the US audience. I meant that NASCAR isn't exactly a non-contact sport.

 

On the dangerous BMW link/post:

I may be wrong, but remember when BMW had the bullnose that everyone made fun of in the Ralf /JPM era? that was an ugly and unsuccessful car. Maybe they designed their wings wrong again this time, and that is why Robert and Nick are scared. (I would be too, recal Kubicas' crash in Canada.)


On the link next to it (about KIMI):

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/030120...-09-title.html

Blundell may be on to something here; I said before he was too busy partying, but maybe the party is over for him and he is fast and has the machine. (I always thought of him much better than Massa, another category of driver altogether.) He just has rotten luck that follows him around (remember his McLaren years?) and last year he added to the mix no real incentive, he was the reigning world champion resting on his laurels.

2009 is a new era, with less money to go around and an urgency to react to it by making this F1 industry worth keeping alive. Notice how all luxuries are being dropped, (just go over to a used car dealership anywhere in the States to see all exotic cars on the discount block.) People that have it are not flaunting it anymore in fear of looking reckless and out of touch with the times.

F1 is a luxury sport, top class, pinnacle of sport... yada, yada, yada.
The introduction of KERS is a step in that direction of relevance; something directly applicable to everyday Joe the plummer use (well now he is famous, so he doesn't count). So are all these cost saving measures we read about.

I hope drivers like Kimi also step up to the plate and deliver, giving us the kind of spectacle that we love. Massa and Hamilton did that in 2008... now give us more!


How about this one SpitfireMK1:

"Wind in my hair..
shifting and drifting..
mechanical music..
adrenaline surge."

(maybe my new signature? nah, already done by you.)
Saw Rush in their Snakes and Arrows tour here in South Florida, they played for three hours (with a short rest in between). It was very hard to top that concert last year, (that is, until Radiohead came to town.)

 

Daffy - Point not missed, in a somewhat round about way I was getting at the fact that Ferrari may be cheating, and ya' know that's the law in left turn box cars. You do have a point though, what could be better than combining American Football and Roundy Round racin' ?

Daca- Yeah, there's a NAMmer (sorry I forget their online) that has the:

"Well-weathered leather
Hot metal and oil
The scented country air
Sunlight on chrome
The blur of the landscape
Every nerve aware"

as their signature. I went with mine for the "spirit ever lingers" to go with the Classic Mini and Wensleydale image.

The BMW was known as the "Walrus" and if I remember, wasn't dangerous, it just wasn't as competitive as they thought it would be. I thought it was great because it really showed some radical thinking, something that is getting lost in rules and regulations Something F1 should be (as it was) "innovative" and "radical"

I question whether Kimi didn't fall into the same trap that Alonso fell into. Remember Lewis has been around McLaren for almost his whole life. Sort of like Massa being around Ferrari prior to Kimi coming in. Perhaps the team favors Massa since he had time to become buddies with them. Recall in 2007 Kimi was nowhere halfway through the year, still recall that "I'm not happy" look throughout that whole season. Maybe his party life is how he relieves the everyday tension of a bad job environment.

The anticipation of the season is really gnawing at me ! Can't wait to see these guys coming to grips with the new car. Of course, they all said the drivers would be in trouble without TC and they did fine.

 

True enough, but I think the richies will go as usual. It's too embedded in their culture, especially at Monaco, and it's a social event, too.

As for helping out Joe the plumber, KERS might do that, but I think allowing engine designers free reign would do more. I've never understood Bernie's refusal to allow development for YEARS! Yeah, I know--it's to make F1 more affordable for the teams, blah, blah, blah, but I wonder how much difference that makes. Instead, here is a golden opportunity to help the world, and he's throwing it away (or refusing to allow it). Though it isn't related to racing as far as I know, something like direct fuel injection could well be available for street cars if developed from the top tier racers. And that's one of the major reasons the R56's fuel burn is superior to previous models.

 

Air intake restrictor - $15

Rev limiter - Free, already on board

New V-8 engine development to reduce cost - Millions and Millions

The FIA and Bernie are idiots

Why not just put all these guys in 1600cc Fords and call it F1, you will save tons of money and there will not be any complaints regarding aero turbulence

 

And the new news is...?

 

"It is too wide," he told Marca. "I am curious to see how many of these wings will be flying in the first race in Australia - I believe that they are going to be flying from all sides."

Just like I said in my first post, they're gonna be knocking these things off right and left. The team that can change it the fastest will have a distinct advantage, as will whoever can get out ahead of the field, at least til he comes up on a backmarker.

1st turn, 1st race - I'm betting on a red flag!

 

Just out of curiosity, if you can't go out you can go up, right? On the outboard areas, that is. Any reason that hasn't been done beyond the small amount we've seen? I'm speaking of something that's, say, 6 to 9" above what's been used in the past. Seems like that could also create a better cooling breeze for the brakes and air intake. I'm no aerodynamics expert (although I did major in aero engineering in college ), but can anyone comment on the possibilities?

 

It would appear to me that it first would interrupt the overall flow over the rear of the car plus get into the drivers view. I think it would interfere with the air intake too, since that would be pretty turbulent by the time it gets there, I think that's why they have the intake so high now. Those viking wings were there to help clean up that flow over the rear wing. I'm no expert either though.

I recall back when wings first started appearing on F1 cars (including the ones mounted directly to the suspension) they had some with a fairly high front wing.

It seems to me that if they wanted more passing they would reduce the size of both of the wings, thus relying less on aero and more on mechanical. I guess they are figuring the larger wing will create more down force with less air giving the driver more control even when in the flow of the car ahead. The thing is, turbulent air is just that.....it will disrupt your flow and control, that's why you have to wait to take-off or land following a heavy.

Off to the dealer !

 

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/080120...chumacher.html

 

The more they lose the aero and still maintain the speed, the more dangerous it becomes. Not that F1 is a living-room-couch activity now, but it could be disastrous, and all the HANS devices, etc., in the world wouldn't save the driver. Do you remember the two Mercedes that flew end over end?

http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=mer...p=mss&ei=UTF-8

I think Bernie needs to tread very lightly in this area, and hope that the drivers vote him down on really stupid stuff.

 

Hello all,
I have been an avid watcher of F1 for about 8 years now(i'm only 23). I have not missed one race of the past 4 seasons tanks to Tivo.
I have read though this thread and some of the 2008 (too many post to read all of it) and like the debate that going on. Thought I would throw in my 2 cents.

I don't like a lot of the changes this season, it seems that Bernie and the FIA are way to concerned about making sure everyone can afford the sport and not so much about being the pinnacle of racing technology and development, which F1 is known for. I know the FIA and Bernie say that it is to make it more competitive, but looking back over the last few seasons with Shumi and the last 2 seasons without him, it has been pretty close every year; it's not broken, don't try and fix it.

As far as wing size and safety; a larger wing will create more down force which it what the teams are after, but what really affects the turbulent air is weight and wing configuration(amount of curve in the wing), so if they design it correctly then there should not be a drastic change in the amount of turbulent air coming off of the wings. I don't think that we will have to worry about flipping F1 cars. Although changing all of these rules and also cutting down on the amount of time that the teams have to test could be setting them up for disaster.

All in all I am really looking forward to the official launches to see what the cars are going to look like, and it should be interesting to see how all the new rules and regulations affect the sport this season. If this season is as full of controversy as last then this should be a busy thread.

 

75 days 19 hours 53 minutes.

 

As you know, the more "lift" or ("downforce" in this case) you make, the more drag you make, so the trick is of course, to make as much down force as possible with the least amount of drag. As you indicated, the airfoil has lots to do with it. However, low drag foils need to go faster to generate the same lift (like a jet fighter) so how do they work with that ? Increase the aspect ratio by reducing chord and increasing span as they are doing with the new wing.

So what are the drawbacks to the wider wing ?

The more wing area, the more down force and thus more drag = You can't have your cake and eat it.

The more lift/down force generated, the more turbulent air behind that. So with the smaller rear wings, it will be interesting to see how well the rear stays planted.

Remember, a large heavy passenger plane with slats and flaps down (which alter the airfoil to make to make more lift and drag to help slow the plane and reduce landing speeds) creates huge turbulence behind it.

That is why this whole thing started, the rear wings in the cars now create that turbulence that destroys the smooth flow of air over the following car, but that is also how they get the tow on the straights.

The aero engineers will be running the wind tunnel triple time now and that does what ? Increases cost, every time they change the regs, they add additional cost....stupid

My guess is you will see more spins with the increased front wing and reduced rear wing (more over steer) and you will still have the turbulence issue with the car in front.

They would be better off restoring the aero regs, keep the groves and just limit rpm and engine management.

The fact is, the competitive drivers will always put the car on the edge to be competitive. Be it winged or not....

 

If you want better racing its more mechanical grip and less aero grip. The reason cars weren't safe in the past is due to construction, not the fact that they didn't have wings. Wings caused the installation of all those chicanes I'm sure you love.

Alan

 

Can't agree more . Also I like the explanation, I was having a hard time explaining it with out using words to specific to aviation. I think you got it.

So as I see it, the F1 engineers have the job of figuring out what types of wings they need on what places on the car so that they generate the desired amount of force at a specific speed, then dissipate the air in a way that allows wings further back on the car to still be effective. So it seems reasonable to force teams to completely change their aero packages, add a whole new technology(KERS), not allow them to test the cars during the season, and expect to see reliable cars and for people to save a bunch of money. Now with that said, as long as the racing it good then I will get over all the controversy.

Off topic:
Spitfire - was your car in for service at MOS today? I though I recognized your car on one of the lifts. It was their most of the day it seemed like, if it was you I hope it was nothing too serious.

 

Nope, she was, however, over at MOA on Friday for a thermostat replacement.

As for the aero, without the wings those cars will be dangerous regardless of the composite construction. Again, the drivers will always push them to the limits, right to the edge of losing control. That is what seperates the winners from the back markers. The one thing they won't have to face is the trees, houses and other things that were on the old race courses The whole reason for the aero is to make the car stick at high speeds on corners.

If the driver stay sane and don't push then the racing will be much slower, so why not go to my idea of Formula Fords ? If being safe, lots of passing and saving money is the goal.

 

I still think the big teams have engineers working on not only smoothing the air over the car but actually figuring out ways to disturb the air behind it. Thus making it harder for someone to get close enough to pass. There was one driver that said he lost lots of grip behind the Ferrari......

 

Sort of like this?

 

No that's Massa taking Hamilton out in Japan

 

Had not see any talk about the "Medals" to help Ferrari I mean F1.

http://f1.gpupdate.net/en/news/2008/...re-excitement/

 

Hadn't seen this.

Looks like it will work for the big ones, but I pity the backmarkers and new teams. I disagree that medals will bring more excitement, or that points allow teams to be more "conservative," as he puts it. We haven't seen a Michael Schumacher, who could afford to coast. I don't think anyone since he left has had the luxury.

 

Yeah I don'y like the medal system, almost makes it a 2 team race right from the beginning. And what driver needs more of an incentive to win a race? They already get ton of money, a very nice piece of hardware, get to spray champaign on everyone, and valuable points towards the championship.

Plus if another Shumacher came along and won the first 9 of 12 races (like he did in 2002) then the next 5 races he could just drive around at 50mph and wave to the crowd and still win the Championship. Where in a points system, he would be very far ahead, he would also have to at lease show up and get some point finishes to keep his lead.

Also, drivers in the middle to back of the pack would race hard to get a few more points, now what it their motivation. Especially with needed to run engines for 3 races, saving the engine could help not get a grid penalty the next week.

 

I just can't see the metals making it better for the mid packs. Did anyone see Bernie snap at Ferrari! He stated that the 80 million a year given to Ferrari for not crossing over to the break away teams gives Ferrari no right to talk bad about FIA and him. Wow I know they are trying to cut costs seems to be a good place to start!

http://f1.gpupdate.net/en/news/2008/...-ferrari-deal/