good ones
good ones
Eh, why arent the wings red and white?
Because every wing of every car flexes, not just Ferrari's.
Yes, of course every wing of every car flexes (although that second animation doesn't show a flexing wing, but the suspension at work)... That's pretty much inherent to the design of the wing supports. Much like an aeroplane wing will flex... The point the other teams are trying to make is that the flexing of the Ferrari wing is done in such a way that the front moves down about 10mm, but the rear comes down 30mm (or so), in effect creating a different wingsetting at high speeds... Whereas the allowed flexing of the wing would be uniform (front and back go down, but equally far).
I don't think the rules specify anything about that - they just say that for the given test load it must not deflect beyond xmm, and that aerodynamic devices muct be rigidly attached to the entire sprung part of the car. But 100% rigidly attached is impossible, so there has to be a line. As that line hasn't been defined then what all the teams are doing is within the regulations.
Some might argue it's outside the 'spirit of the regulations', but that's just what people say when they are either disadvantaged by it or don't know how to regulate it. As long as driver safety isn't compromised too much then I don't mind it. The FIA should increase the load to at least 1500N in the fore-aft plane at least, and restrict the movement of the wings. But ultimately I think an lift-generating aerodynamic profiled section (e.g. a wing) should be banned. Keep the 'wings' for the sponsers, but get rid of downforce. Then you can legisiate the wings to be much more rigid as they aren't adjustable, improve the racing, reduce costs a bit (though drag efficiency will still become important), yet keep the sponsers happy.
P.S. I wrote that as I thought of it, so it might not be clear, and it might not be a fully working solution, but I'm not paid to fix F1
Some might argue it's outside the 'spirit of the regulations', but that's just what people say when they are either disadvantaged by it or don't know how to regulate it. As long as driver safety isn't compromised too much then I don't mind it. The FIA should increase the load to at least 1500N in the fore-aft plane at least, and restrict the movement of the wings. But ultimately I think an lift-generating aerodynamic profiled section (e.g. a wing) should be banned. Keep the 'wings' for the sponsers, but get rid of downforce. Then you can legisiate the wings to be much more rigid as they aren't adjustable, improve the racing, reduce costs a bit (though drag efficiency will still become important), yet keep the sponsers happy.
P.S. I wrote that as I thought of it, so it might not be clear, and it might not be a fully working solution, but I'm not paid to fix F1
Side note... I just noticed everyone is talking about the front wing... The discussion with the ferrari wing is in fact about the rear wing, and for that the following rule applies (and is alledgedly broken by Ferrari):
3.17.3 Bodywork may deflect by no more than one degree horizontally when a load of 1000N is applied
simultaneously to its extremities in a rearward direction 780mm above the reference plane and 20mm
forward of the rear wheel centre line.
The other rules on the flexibility of the bodywork are:
3.17 Bodywork flexibility :
3.17.1 Bodywork may deflect no more than 5mm vertically when a 500N load is applied vertically to it 700mm
forward of the front wheel centre line and 625mm from the car centre line. The load will be applied in a
downward direction using a 50mm diameter ram and an adapter 300mm long and 150mm wide. Teams
must supply the latter when such a test is deemed necessary.
3.17.2 Bodywork may deflect no more than 10mm vertically when a 500N load is applied vertically to it 450mm
forward of the rear wheel centre line and 650mm from the car centre line. The load will be applied in a
downward direction using a 50mm diameter ram and an adapter of the same size, Teams must supply the
latter when such a test is deemed necessary.
3.17.4 Bodywork may deflect no more than 5mm vertically when a 500N load is applied vertically to it at a point
which lies on the car centre line and 380mm rearward of the front wheel centre line. The load will be
applied in an upward direction using a 50mm diameter ram, teams will be required to supply a suitable
adapter when such a test is deemed necessary.
3.17.5 The uppermost aerofoil element lying behind the rear wheel centre line may deflect no more than 5mm
horizontally when a 500N load is applied horizontally. The load will be applied 800mm above the reference
plane at three separate points which lie on the car centre line and 250mm either side of it. The loads will be
applied in an rearward direction using a suitable 25mm wide adapter which must be supplied by the
relevant team.
3.17.6 The forward-most aerofoil element lying behind the rear wheel centre line and which lies more than 600mm
above the reference plane may deflect no more than 2mm vertically when a 200N load is applied vertically.
The load will be applied in line with the trailing edge of the element at any point across its width. The loads
will be applied using a suitable adapter, supplied by the relevant team, which :
- may be no more than 50mm wide ;
- which extends no more than 10mm forward of the trailing edge ;
- incorporates an 8mm female thread in the underside.
3.17.3 Bodywork may deflect by no more than one degree horizontally when a load of 1000N is applied
simultaneously to its extremities in a rearward direction 780mm above the reference plane and 20mm
forward of the rear wheel centre line.
The other rules on the flexibility of the bodywork are:
3.17 Bodywork flexibility :
3.17.1 Bodywork may deflect no more than 5mm vertically when a 500N load is applied vertically to it 700mm
forward of the front wheel centre line and 625mm from the car centre line. The load will be applied in a
downward direction using a 50mm diameter ram and an adapter 300mm long and 150mm wide. Teams
must supply the latter when such a test is deemed necessary.
3.17.2 Bodywork may deflect no more than 10mm vertically when a 500N load is applied vertically to it 450mm
forward of the rear wheel centre line and 650mm from the car centre line. The load will be applied in a
downward direction using a 50mm diameter ram and an adapter of the same size, Teams must supply the
latter when such a test is deemed necessary.
3.17.4 Bodywork may deflect no more than 5mm vertically when a 500N load is applied vertically to it at a point
which lies on the car centre line and 380mm rearward of the front wheel centre line. The load will be
applied in an upward direction using a 50mm diameter ram, teams will be required to supply a suitable
adapter when such a test is deemed necessary.
3.17.5 The uppermost aerofoil element lying behind the rear wheel centre line may deflect no more than 5mm
horizontally when a 500N load is applied horizontally. The load will be applied 800mm above the reference
plane at three separate points which lie on the car centre line and 250mm either side of it. The loads will be
applied in an rearward direction using a suitable 25mm wide adapter which must be supplied by the
relevant team.
3.17.6 The forward-most aerofoil element lying behind the rear wheel centre line and which lies more than 600mm
above the reference plane may deflect no more than 2mm vertically when a 200N load is applied vertically.
The load will be applied in line with the trailing edge of the element at any point across its width. The loads
will be applied using a suitable adapter, supplied by the relevant team, which :
- may be no more than 50mm wide ;
- which extends no more than 10mm forward of the trailing edge ;
- incorporates an 8mm female thread in the underside.
so Ferrari's wings do it a little more.
edit: tagforce, didn't see your post till right now.Very good info.
I still think nothing will happen. Unless officals notice nothing will happen(probably). It's not like they're looking at us type right now.
edit: tagforce, didn't see your post till right now.Very good info.
I still think nothing will happen. Unless officals notice nothing will happen(probably). It's not like they're looking at us type right now.
well, tagforce, the point is: There is simply MORE force than 500N applied at higher speed. So they are in the rules, if it bends more than the given limits at higher speeds, cause there are probably something like 1kN or even more applied, due to the air. Maybe they found a technique to use that way better, than the other teams. So they are in the rules, but smarter/more technically advanced. Which actually always was and still is one big part of F1: It's NOT only about the drivers, it's also about the technical advantages and development.
It's 1000N for the rear wing (3.17.3)...
I never said they were in fact doing anything illegal, but I was merely saying what the other teams are complaining about. The other teams are simply saying that for each 1000N the rearwing cannot deflect more than 1 degree, and Ferrari's wing is... So for 2000N the deflection may be 2 degrees, 3000N 3 degrees etc... That's what the teams say are the rules (or should be the rules), and they think Ferrari's wing deflects more than 1 degree/1000N when there's over 1000N applied.
I never said they were in fact doing anything illegal, but I was merely saying what the other teams are complaining about. The other teams are simply saying that for each 1000N the rearwing cannot deflect more than 1 degree, and Ferrari's wing is... So for 2000N the deflection may be 2 degrees, 3000N 3 degrees etc... That's what the teams say are the rules (or should be the rules), and they think Ferrari's wing deflects more than 1 degree/1000N when there's over 1000N applied.
Yeah, well. YOu see what is written in the rules. It just says for 1000N there is 1° allowed. It says nothing, what can happen above that limit. Again Ferrari seems smarter and understands the rules better, than a lot of the other teams. It sounds poor, childish and envious, if you complain about something like this, with several hundreds of millions in the own budget. They just missed the next step and now they whine about it. It's like german car manufacturers whining about DIESEL-particle filters or Hybrid-engines, just because they missed the next technology step...
I'm still playing catchup here, so I don't properly get it, but looking at the broader picture it is looking more like the teams are in essence calling 2 words.. "unfair" and "advantage".
To me, the advantage is the effect that applying the rules to their IMPLIED limit has gained Ferarri. The word "unfair", if it's even been used (but any other synonym will do), is subjective.. and it is of course inevitable when one or many teams missed an opportunity that another spotted. If the development had been realised (and spotted by other teams) out of season, rather than bang smack IN the season, the whole field would have turned up at the first race with a Ferarri-alike wing.
You can bet that, while the teams are complaining to the FiA, their R&D are busily working to emulate the development made by Ferarri.
"Renault have had flexy wings from the start of the season. Many teams had - BMW was one for example. In fact, as Geoff Willis said, there are so many examples of flexy wings and behind-the-scenes activity, that it is irresponsible and unreasonable to single out Ferrari, for what is a perfectly legal car that passed all FIA tests - just like ALL the other cars on the grid. But I find this constant whinging about Ferrari, now that they are back on form, particularly amusing. Please do continue... "
What did you expect they would do? Sit back, relax, and let Ferrari keep their "unfair advantage"?
One thing Ferrari seems really good at is reading the rules very carefully, and keeping themselves really close to the letter of the law. I have to admit that I kind of admire them for it. Then again, they seem to have a thing for taking it just that small step too far every now and then and making their tactics a bit over obvious, and then it bites them in the rear end.
Do you remember when F1 was floated? Guess who bought it. Ferrari have a significant stake in Formula 1 and as a result are able to apply pressure to the FIA in ways the other teams are not able too. The irony is they get paid back their investment both as a shareholder AND by using that power to improve their results and tacking a larger share of the winnings.
I dont really hate Ferrari like a lot of other people do though, I admire anyone with a passion for motorsport and you just can't help but have a little soft spot for a company who's workshops are littered with so much historic memorabilia that you can't walk around without tripping over a vehicle or a seat or some other exotic piece that anywhere else would be a prized collection piece.
I'm not so keen on Schumacher though, i've still not forgiven what he did to Jordan let alone what he did to Damon Hill... Maybe i'm stuck in the wrong decade?
Im with you becky.
im in awe of schumi's driving skills, but, and it is a big but, i cant handle his win at all cost approach to racing.
1. he took out hill to win the 94 title.
2. he tried to take out JV in his attempt at the 97 title
3. he took out mika when they drove in F3 or 3000, in the same situation as above, being 1 point ahead, so thinks he can afford to retire.......as long as his rival does too.
4. he always has his teammate working for him, so thats one less car to race against for him, and its as equal a car as he will find in the field.
personally i feel ferrari get away with too much.
and i put my money where my mouth is because i was a huge BAR fan til they were caught cheating at imaola in 2005. i sold all my BAR clothing on ebay!
im in awe of schumi's driving skills, but, and it is a big but, i cant handle his win at all cost approach to racing.
1. he took out hill to win the 94 title.
2. he tried to take out JV in his attempt at the 97 title
3. he took out mika when they drove in F3 or 3000, in the same situation as above, being 1 point ahead, so thinks he can afford to retire.......as long as his rival does too.
4. he always has his teammate working for him, so thats one less car to race against for him, and its as equal a car as he will find in the field.
personally i feel ferrari get away with too much.
and i put my money where my mouth is because i was a huge BAR fan til they were caught cheating at imaola in 2005. i sold all my BAR clothing on ebay!
The one thing I remember seeing on TV (not posted here yet) was the front element of the 248 was seperating from the nose at very high speed. They showed this live during the race and the commentors commented 
on it.
The next race, this seperation was no longer occurring.
There is no doubt that much hanky panky is being played out with aero and wings. But that is only b/c imho the overall package for mech grip so hopelessly weak.
They should:
ban elements between the F/R wings
ban multi-element wings
return to slicks
But I'm just a guy who watches the race and nothing else so that's my .0001 US$
And you guys ROCK with all the links in this thread /bow /salute
on it.The next race, this seperation was no longer occurring.
There is no doubt that much hanky panky is being played out with aero and wings. But that is only b/c imho the overall package for mech grip so hopelessly weak.
They should:
ban elements between the F/R wings
ban multi-element wings
return to slicks
But I'm just a guy who watches the race and nothing else so that's my .0001 US$
And you guys ROCK with all the links in this thread /bow /salute
As the article to which speedfreak227 linked points out, it would seem that Ferrari are going a little bit beyond the rules with their rear wing. The issue is not that the whole wing assembly is flexing in order to reduce the angle of attack. The top plane of the Ferrari wing is flexing downwards towards the bottom element in order to seal off the gap between the elements at speed. As far as I'm aware the FIA test only measures the flexure of the whole wing assembly, not the individual elements.
Ferrari are clearly using moveable aerodynamic devices to gain an advantage, which is against the rules. Now that Ferrari have been allowed to get away with it, all the others will have to join them.
It's not about Ferrari thinking harder than the other teams, forcing the others to play catch up, it's about Ferrari cheating and getting away with it. Again.
Ferrari are clearly using moveable aerodynamic devices to gain an advantage, which is against the rules. Now that Ferrari have been allowed to get away with it, all the others will have to join them.
It's not about Ferrari thinking harder than the other teams, forcing the others to play catch up, it's about Ferrari cheating and getting away with it. Again.
I agree with Mr Grady and Becky Rose, thats the way its been in F-1, most of the drivers have this really childish "win at all costs" mentality.How can one forget the "Prost-Senna" battle during the 1989 and 1990 seasons.It was surprising that Senna who was believed to be an extremely humane and compassionate person could go on to display such feelings on cynicism on the track !!!!
By that do you mean ONLY Ferrari's rear wing flex? Thus breaking the rules?
As has already been mentioned before, ALL structures flex under load. Thus it is inevitable that wings on all F1 cars will flex. A few years ago some teams started making their rear wings flexible which is why the FIA introduced the current 'flex test'.
What Ferrari seem to be doing this time is to design the wing in such a way to cause the top plane of the wing to deflect in an advantageous way. That is clearly not in agreement with the regulations.
I read thoroughly every word of your posts, just can't quite get your logic behind them. So do you think the top planes on other cars don't bend downwards as those on Ferrari do? If they bend too, aren't they gaining an advantage throught it as well? And then all cars are illegal by your standard.
The article on ITV-F1 quoted an 'insider' saying that since Ferrari are getting away with using flexible wings, other teams are going to redesign their wings to flex in a similar way. The problem I have is the rules say that no moveable aerodynamic parts are allowed and now we have engineers designing aerodynamic parts to flex in order to gain an advantage. They're clearly breaking the rules, but they're only doing it because Ferrari have been doing it and aren't being punished for it.
Thing is, even before they found out about Ferrari's flexible wings, their wings did flex too. You could refer to pictures in my previous posts for visual evidence. IMHO, it's just the usual politics around F1, when some teams perform badly they always want to find something to move the focus away to avoid critics. I can't believe Honda lodged a formal concern to the FIA about Ferrari's wing just based on the fact that they are a bit faster on the backstraight.
Ferrari's wing may be a bit more flexible than others', but calling that cheating is a far too subjective view.
I've never denied that wings flex...a laminated sheet of carbon fibre a few mm thick is obviously going to flex under load.
But why is it more flexible? The rules say they must be rigid, therefore the teams should never be using their flexibility to gain an advantage.
I really don't want to call Ferrari cheaters but.....
(60 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG