Markus S
Trade
Ian Wright said:
So there's no reason for banning flexible aerodynamic devices, after all?
The F1 season 2006
- Thread starter Markus S
- Start date
So there's no reason for banning flexible aerodynamic devices, after all?
michaelab
desafinado
I too think that banning flexible aero devices on the grounds of safety is stretching things somewhat!
"So there's no reason for banning flexible aerodynamic devices, after all?"
You are quoting out fo context. That relates to the same process and the same compexity decision.
The point I made before tha is still valid as it refers to a different process. As the tests conducted make it more difficult to find solutions that give a car drag reduction with speed the solutions become more complicated and less well understood. Therefore they become more dangerous.
Whether you are happy for the teams and drivers to take that risk is not up to you as you don't drive those cars. Losing a rear wing (or part thereof) at speed is very dangerous! It is up to the rule makers (and enforcers as they are not the same) and the teams how they want to deal with this.
Please note I am explaining why it is more complicated than you have portrayed. And that I am not qualified to make any call re safety etc nor whether the FIA shouldjudge this on safety along with a lot of other issues.
Ian
You are quoting out fo context. That relates to the same process and the same compexity decision.
The point I made before tha is still valid as it refers to a different process. As the tests conducted make it more difficult to find solutions that give a car drag reduction with speed the solutions become more complicated and less well understood. Therefore they become more dangerous.
Whether you are happy for the teams and drivers to take that risk is not up to you as you don't drive those cars. Losing a rear wing (or part thereof) at speed is very dangerous! It is up to the rule makers (and enforcers as they are not the same) and the teams how they want to deal with this.
Please note I am explaining why it is more complicated than you have portrayed. And that I am not qualified to make any call re safety etc nor whether the FIA shouldjudge this on safety along with a lot of other issues.
Ian
Markus S
Trade
I see your point, Ian. And I certainly don't want to put anyone at risk.
But can one not turn it around and say that flexible devices can be allowed provided that the fixing is specified to withstand - for argument's sake - 100 times the load that is mathematically expected for the device?
I guess my point here is that I don't actually see valid safety reasons for disallowing flexible devices. I see the move more as a nod to those teams with less generous financing than the frontrunners as finding flexible devices that work must take a huge amount of design and wind tunnel time.
But can one not turn it around and say that flexible devices can be allowed provided that the fixing is specified to withstand - for argument's sake - 100 times the load that is mathematically expected for the device?
I guess my point here is that I don't actually see valid safety reasons for disallowing flexible devices. I see the move more as a nod to those teams with less generous financing than the frontrunners as finding flexible devices that work must take a huge amount of design and wind tunnel time.
"But can one not turn it around and say that flexible devices can be allowed provided that the fixing is specified to withstand - for argument's sake - 100 times the load that is mathematically expected for the device?"
Not really as the more copmplex designs have more complex load paths and require different load tests to ensure safety to a required level. Test could be devised to give a high level of confidence but it would be fairly expensive.
"I guess my point here is that I don't actually see valid safety reasons for disallowing flexible devices. "
I disagree with you and Michael in this area. I think it really should be considered as very important (by the rule maker, enforcers and teams) as rear wing failure is one of the most dangerous failures that you can have on an F1 car. Resulting in a completely unstable car and very little means to slow the car down or change direction!
"I see the move more as a nod to those teams with less generous financing than the frontrunners as finding flexible devices that work must take a huge amount of design and wind tunnel time."
Your last point re the financial side of the sport is of course why they are banned. I think safety isn't even considered.
Not really as the more copmplex designs have more complex load paths and require different load tests to ensure safety to a required level. Test could be devised to give a high level of confidence but it would be fairly expensive.
"I guess my point here is that I don't actually see valid safety reasons for disallowing flexible devices. "
I disagree with you and Michael in this area. I think it really should be considered as very important (by the rule maker, enforcers and teams) as rear wing failure is one of the most dangerous failures that you can have on an F1 car. Resulting in a completely unstable car and very little means to slow the car down or change direction!
"I see the move more as a nod to those teams with less generous financing than the frontrunners as finding flexible devices that work must take a huge amount of design and wind tunnel time."
Your last point re the financial side of the sport is of course why they are banned. I think safety isn't even considered.
The ban on moveable aero is surely historic. The first wings were attached to the obvious places, the suspension uprights. The first real upgrade was a driver actuated cable to tilt the wing flatter down the straight. IIRC this all happened in 1968/69. There were lots of failures culminating at the Spanish GP 1969. The wings were then banned on safety grounds. I don't know what the new regulations said, but the implication is 'fixed to the sprung part of the car' (and therefore moveable wrt groung...)
The later Lotus 81 and Brabham 'fan car' were both banned on the grounds of having 'moveable aerodynamic devices'.
Since all wings and bodywork flex under aerodynamic load, the teams spend huge amounts of money ensuring they flex to their advantage. It would perhaps be cheaper and safer to allow arbitrary flex rather than encouraging the search for optimal flex while meeting arbitrary load and deflection tests.
Or not.
Paul
The later Lotus 81 and Brabham 'fan car' were both banned on the grounds of having 'moveable aerodynamic devices'.
Since all wings and bodywork flex under aerodynamic load, the teams spend huge amounts of money ensuring they flex to their advantage. It would perhaps be cheaper and safer to allow arbitrary flex rather than encouraging the search for optimal flex while meeting arbitrary load and deflection tests.
Or not.
Paul
Markus S
Trade
Anybody willing to predict the top three in Barcelona? My guess is that MSC will win again, followed by ALO and RAI.
Well, Kimi is not looking so good post qualifying.
lhatkins
Dazed and Confused
Hay Ian, just seen Murrey Walker on Brundles pit walk, he's working for BAR Honda now then? What's he doing there? Though he had retired, wow, glad to see he's still around, what a ledgend ! 
Is anyone else having trouble with the F1 official timing app, ait takes ages to load for me, then when it does it doesn't update, tried in both IE and Firefox, with java 1.4.2 and 1.5 any ideas.
Is anyone else having trouble with the F1 official timing app, ait takes ages to load for me, then when it does it doesn't update, tried in both IE and Firefox, with java 1.4.2 and 1.5 any ideas.
Last edited by a moderator:
michaelab
desafinado
Lee...it's just Honda now, not BAR Honda 
Didn't use the timing app during the race but yesterday during qualifying it was useless as it was always at least a minute or two behind what was actually happening. They must be having some problems. Normally it's pretty good. Having the F1 timings screen up on the laptop next to you whilst watching the race means you have reached the top tier of F1 geekdom
Regarding today's race....pretty boring and unfortunately Ferrari not quite able to match Renault's pace but the two of them showing the rest of the field a clean pair of heels.
Michael.
Didn't use the timing app during the race but yesterday during qualifying it was useless as it was always at least a minute or two behind what was actually happening. They must be having some problems. Normally it's pretty good. Having the F1 timings screen up on the laptop next to you whilst watching the race means you have reached the top tier of F1 geekdom
Regarding today's race....pretty boring and unfortunately Ferrari not quite able to match Renault's pace but the two of them showing the rest of the field a clean pair of heels.
Michael.
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2005
- Messages
- 2,309
- Reaction score
- 0
Who agreed to have the rear facing camera on MSC's Ferrari? Didn't see too much going on with the rear wing elements.
michaelab
desafinado
OTOH on the front wing cam on the Ferrari you could see the front wing still very clearly flexing downwards at high speed, pretty much just as it did before they 'fixed' it. The Renault front wing, esp. the trailing edge also did the same thing, it was very noticable under braking where you could see it flip up almost like an air brake!
Michael.
Michael.
michaelab
desafinado
For some reason vBulletin insists that my post, which was originally just what is below, is longer otherwise it messes with it...so here goes:
LOL
LOL
lhatkins
Dazed and Confused
Oh ya Michael, yes Honda, slip of the keyboard there.michaelab said:Lee...it's just Honda now, not BAR Honda
hehe, how did you know? yep that's me!michaelab said:Didn't use the timing app during the race but yesterday during qualifying it was useless as it was always at least a minute or two behind what was actually happening. They must be having some problems. Normally it's pretty good. Having the F1 timings screen up on the laptop next to you whilst watching the race means you have reached the top tier of F1 geekdom
If they'd stream the other cameras over the web I'd have them up too! Well Kimi was only 20 secs behind the those clean Red Heels, Well tracks where you can't overtake do make make for good viewing, but the race was ok in the main, Montoya trying to blame his total lack of car control on faulty eletronics just isn't going to wash, good to see Jenson dragging the Honda home in 6th, looking forward to Monaco.michaelab said:
lhatkins
Dazed and Confused
Monico GP Quali, that was a definate block by MS, parking his car right on the track, he too expeienced to make a mistake like that, he didn't want anyone to beat his pole, I'm glad the Stwards have finally seen the cheat he is, and done the right thing and sent him to be back, personally I'd disqualify him completely.
Hi Lee,
A qualifying session that I would like to forget.
Both for our drivers struggling and for MSC and what has happened to him.
Surprising to see Flav having a go when Flav taught him very well in his early days!
Ian
A qualifying session that I would like to forget.
Both for our drivers struggling and for MSC and what has happened to him.
Surprising to see Flav having a go when Flav taught him very well in his early days!
Ian
lhatkins
Dazed and Confused
Hi Ian, ya Baracello out qualified Button again, button not happy with his setup?
ya but that move by MS was so blantant, did he really think he'd get away with it ?
ya but that move by MS was so blantant, did he really think he'd get away with it ?
michaelab
desafinado
A very sad day for F1 yesterday. It's extremely disappointing that the stewards have set a precendent meaning a driver can no longer make a mistake in qualifying without getting penalised.
At least now no one can claim that the FIA are biased in favour of Ferrari even if their decision was incorrect.
Agree with Ian that Flav's outburst was seriously pot calling the kettle black!
Michael.
At least now no one can claim that the FIA are biased in favour of Ferrari even if their decision was incorrect.
Agree with Ian that Flav's outburst was seriously pot calling the kettle black!
Michael.
lhatkins
Dazed and Confused
come on, that was no mistake, even the drivers agreed that was deliberate, a driver of that calibar doesn't make mistakes like that, that was a rockie mistake, he's no rockie.
But agree that finally the FIA are no longer biased in favour of Ferrari, I think it helps they have the same head stward for every race so we should see more consistancy in decisions.
But agree that finally the FIA are no longer biased in favour of Ferrari, I think it helps they have the same head stward for every race so we should see more consistancy in decisions.
