Weird Rear-wing Idea To Be Delayed Til 2009

[F1 FANatic 1]

I think the real problem is the constant rule changes. the top teams can adapt very quickly but the lower teams never really can. so all these changes that are supposed to help really hurt contemplativeness. The FIA is micro managing the design of the car far too much, as was said before so many times. there are only a few rules consering car design we need.

1. the aero may only provide a total of the 50% of the cars total down force. that way the team can decide how they want to build the car.

2. One drive train that needs to last Saturday and Sunday with a second drive train that needs to be used on Fridays but that needs to last for 3 races, once that goes the team just cant run that car on Fridays.

3. TC should be limited to speed above 250 kph or be removed entirely. and the teams must send TC data to the FIA directly from the car.(a way to regulate)

4. Shifting should stay with the paddles but the driver must shift both up and down

5. Engine size should be no larger then 3.6L with no more then 12 cylinders. but the capacity and number should be left up to the team.

6. and of course the car must be able to sustain current impact loads for safety

but otherwise just let the team do what they want. on a tire side, slicks and thats it

[Shane2 0]

I'd say the worst was cutting engines to 2.4l v8's in the name of saftey but it just caused cornering speeds to increase. perhaps with the aero being delayed for more tests they are trying to prevent such short sited blunders.

Well imagine what the speeds would have been like if they had kept V10's then. The increase in conrnering speeds was down to the uber-soft tyre compounds used, not the cut in engine power.

[Autumnpuma 0]

Well imagine what the speeds would have been like if they had kept V10's then. The increase in conrnering speeds was down to the uber-soft tyre compounds used, not the cut in engine power.

I thought the whole idea of racing was speed And don't give me the 'it would be too dangerous' argument. This is racing, not table tennis.

[ykickamoocow 0]

I thought the whole idea of racing was speed And don't give me the 'it would be too dangerous' argument. This is racing, not table tennis.

Hey dont knock table tennis. I once got hit in the eye with one of those balls and it really hurt. Table Tennis is a very dangerous sport.

[Autumnpuma 0]

Hey dont knock table tennis. I once got hit in the eye with one of those balls and it really hurt. Table Tennis is a very dangerous sport.

[Quiet One 15]

Hey dont knock table tennis. I once got hit in the eye with one of those balls and it really hurt. Table Tennis is a very dangerous sport.

Call Max Mosley, soon you will have time for a cup of tea while the ball goes from one side to the other. Oh, and the guy that wins the first point will surely win the match, for there wont be any chances to outscore him whatsoever!

[erichbarto 0]

heres an embedded image for your reference

[goferrarigo 0]

thanks for the image shane and erichbarto(how abt eric?) for embedding it. i would in addition to those things F1 Fanatic has i would add engines hve to just last for 1 race not 2 and definatly not 4(planned for 2012)

[F1 FANatic 1]

exactly what i said, but the team should have to run a second engine on Fridays and that engine needs to last for three races and when that testing engine goes then the team just cant run a car on Fridays for that driver.

[goferrarigo 0]

exactly what i said, but the team should have to run a second engine on Fridays and that engine needs to last for three races and when that testing engine goes then the team just cant run a car on Fridays for that driver.

oh sorry didn't fully understnad that earlier. well as along as we agree it does not matter

[Jem of the Shire 0]

If 1 of those rear wings gets knocked off at high speed, the driver is going to be in for a hell of a spin

[Player(1) 0]

If 1 of those rear wings gets knocked off at high speed, the driver is going to be in for a hell of a spin

I'd say it would be much less dramatic then if the rear wing fail's on the conventional rear wings, didnt we see that recently wth Kimi or Montoya in 2005?

[goferrarigo 0]

I'd say it would be much less dramatic then if the rear wing fail's on the conventional rear wings, didnt we see that recently wth Kimi or Montoya in 2005?

i have to disagree if the whole rear wing falls o the general balnce of the car is same. however if only one of them come out the whole car balance changes

[narain fan 0]

i have to disagree if the whole rear wing falls o the general balnce of the car is same. however if only one of them come out the whole car balance changes

i'm afraid this hypothesis is completely wrond,i remember telling this 13 months back to some ignorant forum member that it is "one single wing and not 2 separate components ....

[goferrarigo 0]

i'm afraid this hypothesis is completely wrond,i remember telling this 13 months back to some ignorant forum member that it is "one single wing and not 2 separate components ....

Opps my bad.

[Player(1) 0]

With the conventional rear wing failing the whole rear (anything storing force due to compressive load) unloads the tension created from downforce at once causing the rear to try to go faster then the loaded front and spin the car violently, if only 1 corner unloads it will unbalance the car but the force unloaded will be less and also countered by the other side working correctly, perhaps even enough for the driver to compensate.

Or atleast thats what I feel is the basic mechanic's of how they react to failures.

[Jean Todt 4]

I've learned the hard way that nobody wants to remember the 'old days'. To answer your question, F1 used to be teams building the best cars using any innovative idea they could come up with, and hiring the best drivers to pilot those cars to a win on the most challenging circuits. There were a minimum of rules in those days and gentlemen's agreements abounded. Honour abounded. Treachery too, but that created the magic weave that was the golden era of Formula One. As long as we have a heavy-handed governing body, and fans that think racing is comparable to Football or Cricket, Formula One will never see those days again.

true true true!!!

these days i have no hope of watching the teams come up with innovative ideas! what really p**ses me of is the fact that it is few white haired idiots are the ones making rules! they act like monkeys suddenly given the social powers they are hardly innovative! okay! they brought down the engine capacity, fine! but why the hell cant the teams use one engine a week for heaven sake?

i say, it should be the teams who influence the rule changes, and not those few idiots who only act as if they know about the sport! we need more democracy here!

[F1 FANatic 1]

if you think about it, the last great design innovation in formula one in the past 5 years are the viking horns on the Merc. that is what F1 has become

[Autumnpuma 0]

if you think about it, the last great design innovation in formula one in the past 5 years are the viking horns on the Merc. that is what F1 has become

There were other design/engineering innovations: Flexible wings, TMDs, rear wheel coverings, titanium sleves over carbon fibre suspension parts, BMW's nose-horns...the list goes on. In most cases, the innovation has been banned. My favorite example is the brake-heat recovery system that, I think, McLaren pioneered and was banned at the time by the FIA. Now the FIA says it's ok to use it, but now EVERY team gets the technology.

[narain fan 0]

With the conventional rear wing failing the whole rear (anything storing force due to compressive load) unloads the tension created from downforce at once causing the rear to try to go faster then the loaded front and spin the car violently, if only 1 corner unloads it will unbalance the car but the force unloaded will be less and also countered by the other side working correctly, perhaps even enough for the driver to compensate.

Or atleast thats what I feel is the basic mechanic's of how they react to failures.

its a carbon fibre rear wing and if the wing comes off it will be the entire wing and not the one side, even during a collission it is highly unlikely that one half of the wing breaks ....

[aussief1 4]

There were other design/engineering innovations: Flexible wings, TMDs, rear wheel coverings, titanium sleves over carbon fibre suspension parts, BMW's nose-horns...the list goes on. In most cases, the innovation has been banned. My favorite example is the brake-heat recovery system that, I think, McLaren pioneered and was banned at the time by the FIA. Now the FIA says it's ok to use it, but now EVERY team gets the technology.

Are you refering to the brake steer system that McLaren used in 97 - 98???

I loved that Brake steer technology that McLaren adapted to their cars in 97 - 98. Them photos of the rear discs glowing red while the front discs where not glowing at all while the drivers reduced wheel spin out of slow to medium speed corners with the extra pedal. The system also allowed the drivers to apply one side of the rear brakes at a time.

Once again the FIA banned the system in Brazil 98.

[Jem of the Shire 0]

if you think about it, the last great design innovation in formula one in the past 5 years are the viking horns on the Merc. that is what F1 has become

its cos the rules on car design these days is far too restrictive, so all the cars look pretty much the same

[ykickamoocow 0]

its cos the rules on car design these days is far too restrictive, so all the cars look pretty much the same

Its just not cricket is it.

[Jem of the Shire 0]

Its just not cricket is it.

hey thats an english saying!

and no, thankfully F1 is nothing like cricket otherwise we'd be asleep after 5 minutes

[ykickamoocow 0]

hey thats an english saying!

Actually i think the first use of the saying "Its just not cricket" was in a Australian newspaper during the bodyline series in the 1930's. It is however now a popular saying in all countries where cricket is a popular sport.