New nose "submarining" in Melbourne collision?

Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.

User avatar
Juzh
161
Joined: 06 Oct 2012, 08:45

Re: New nose "submarining" in Melbourne collision?

Post

Turns out Newey knows what he's talking about... again. I remember people on some forums calling him all sorts of things at the time he said it.
This could potentially be a major security risk. It's not rare something like this happens in braking zones.

Manoah2u
61
Joined: 24 Feb 2013, 14:07

Re: New nose "submarining" in Melbourne collision?

Post

there are lots of discussions about this going on in the melbourne thread, williams thread and 2014 design thread. :!:
"Explain the ending to F1 in football terms"
"Hamilton was beating Verstappen 7-0, then the ref decided F%$& rules, next goal wins
while also sending off 4 Hamilton players to make it more interesting"

hairy_scotsman
15
Joined: 13 Nov 2010, 22:47

Re: New nose "submarining" in Melbourne collision?

Post

Whoa...

Image
Follow me on twitter @Austin_F1 ...

WALL_ZACK
0
Joined: 13 Mar 2014, 12:08

Re: New nose "submarining" in Melbourne collision?

Post

Two things strike me about the picture above...
1) almost none of the crash energy seems to have dissipated by the nose as it's supposed to because the car in front just rode up and over the crash structure. I can imagine this happening in a singe car crash with the car submarining under a tire barrier and it doesn't look pretty or end well for the driver. Given the potential problems this year with the hybrid braking system (which was found to have cause this crash incidentally) I can see accidents like this happening frighteningly often.
2) the front end of the Caterham looks so much better without the stupid vanity panel! Much more like the narrow and low noses on the pre-2009 cars.

hairy_scotsman
15
Joined: 13 Nov 2010, 22:47

Re: New nose "submarining" in Melbourne collision?

Post

Different angle. Look where KOB's head is. Scary.

Image
Follow me on twitter @Austin_F1 ...

rjsa
51
Joined: 02 Mar 2007, 03:01

Re: New nose "submarining" in Melbourne collision?

Post

The very first fender bender resulted on that. It's the perfect storm. Unreliable systems catapulting cars along the starting field and the low noses with matching rear impact structures.

Just look at the rear end of those cars. Every single aligned ram in will result in submarining.

krisfx
14
Joined: 04 Jan 2012, 23:07

Re: New nose "submarining" in Melbourne collision?

Post

Juzh wrote:Turns out Newey knows what he's talking about... again. I remember people on some forums calling him all sorts of things at the time he said it.
This could potentially be a major security risk. It's not rare something like this happens in braking zones.
I didn't know Newey had said this would happen until recently (shameful of me), but I did think that as their job was to almost destroy themselves in an impact, this sort of thing wouldn't happen. Happy to be proven wrong, the noses seem to just go from one extreme to the other, though.

Lycoming
106
Joined: 25 Aug 2011, 22:58

Re: New nose "submarining" in Melbourne collision?

Post

hairy_scotsman wrote:Different angle. Look where KOB's head is. Scary.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bi6mBYWCYAAkBY-.jpg
First, you can't tell how far the tire is from his head in a shot like that.

Second, this wouldn't be a problem if they just used closed cockpits.

scottracing
0
Joined: 06 Dec 2011, 01:39
Location: Cologne

Re: New nose "submarining" in Melbourne collision?

Post

Not seen that photo of the massa rear ender before. Cant believe there wasnt more reported to charlie whiting about how close koboyashi was to getting a face full of wheel.
newey predicted this, I wonder what will happen if this type of incidents occurs again?

User avatar
ecapox
8
Joined: 14 May 2010, 21:06

Re: New nose "submarining" in Melbourne collision?

Post

Nose tip should never be lower than rear crash structure. Or at least higher than the top of the diffusor so that it can't submarine. Guaranteed this will change in 2015.

rjsa
51
Joined: 02 Mar 2007, 03:01

Re: New nose "submarining" in Melbourne collision?

Post

ecapox wrote:Nose tip should never be lower than rear crash structure. Or at least higher than the top of the diffusor so that it can't submarine. Guaranteed this will change in 2015.
You wish. It would interfere with the all mighty diffuser. Unafortunatly, they wont touch it.

grouch
0
Joined: 29 Jan 2013, 21:08

Re: New nose "submarining" in Melbourne collision?

Post

This picture is crazy, Massa's car is completely off the ground. Any higher in the rear and it seems that compression fractures in the lower back could become an issue once the car slams back down.

User avatar
humble sabot
27
Joined: 17 Feb 2007, 10:33

Re: New nose "submarining" in Melbourne collision?

Post

he means by the regs changing the nose height rather than the diffuser height. We have low noses because they got too high, we had high noses because we wanted more air under the car than we had with the previous low noses, which everybody thought looked better. So now we have a situation where all the aerodynamicists are addicted to feeding as much air as possible under the car with rules that were supposed to make the cars look more like the old ones. Matching the nose height to either the top edge of the diffuser or the light on the rear crash structure seems like the most logical solution to the clear safety issues posed by last years skewer noses and this year's launch ramps
the four immutable forces:
static balance
dynamic balance
static imbalance
dynamic imbalance

rjsa
51
Joined: 02 Mar 2007, 03:01

Re: New nose "submarining" in Melbourne collision?

Post

Or flat bottoms. All the way.

Post Reply