Ferrari 2011 speculation

[Pandamasque]

The side pod openings look like the virgin car in that mock-up.

Those sidepods look like these:

[ing]

Is it the color red that you hate? Allergic to pasta? Parents threw meatballs at you when you were a child?

Jingoism is not limited to the British.

Happy New Year anyway.

No, it must be because the reds sent the car company from blue-white country packing, after spending untold millions of dollars and with nothing to show for it - any excuse is good to justify the lack of success. (Not a surprise to me the latter, considering the laundry list of problems with my road-going example from Bavaria!)

The insinuation, of course, is that Ferrari cannot win without resorting to underhanded tactics, including, somehow, enticing their rivals to spy on them.

The same warped reasoning is used to declare that Ferrari only dominated (another sin, apparently) with a Frenchman, an Englishman and a German on board, but when the sins from that era are recounted, it was only the Italians responsible!

To all the Ferrari-haters, suck it in and celebrate the New Year with some sparkling spumante and some tasty, golden, pandoro cake - you know you like it!

So, back to 662; what chances for the Flybrid/Marelli KERS? Looks to be an interesting solution, as it does away with batteries, but can use the same drive unit as in 2009:

http://www.flybridsystems.com/flywheelcapacitor.html

[747heavy]

something like this?



I think, they flirted with a mechanical/electric solution before:
http://www.themotorreport.com.au/22609/ ... ue-in-2015

as long as the 400kJ/60kW rule is in place, I think a battery solution is lighter/the better compromise.

If the FIA allows more storage capacity, flywheel solutions will become interesting.
But somehow, I have a hunch that most of the OEM´s will lobby within the FIA against it. Look at what most OEM´s use in their road cars, so the have a strong incentive to make sure the same technology is used/showcased in F1.

[donskar]

something like this?



I think, they flirted with a mechanical/electric solution before:
http://www.themotorreport.com.au/22609/ ... ue-in-2015

as long as the 400kJ/60kW rule is in place, I think a battery solution is lighter/the better compromise.

If the FIA allows more storage capacity, flywheel solutions will become interesting.
But somehow, I have a hunch that most of the OEM´s will lobby within the FIA against it. Look at what most OEM´s use in their road cars, so the have a strong incentive to make sure the same technology is used/showcased in F1.

Makes sense. Who knows, if KERS becomes an important part of F1, maybe another manufacturer (Toyota?) will return. At this point, with so much frozen, what can manufacturers add to an F1 car that will drive sales or at least marketing? "Brand XYZ wins WCC because of XYZ's advanced aero solutions! (You can't see it, but trust us its there.)"

[ing]

something like this?

Actually, that's only the CVT gearbox (with Torotrak drive) for a purely mechanical KERS system. The gear at the center of the assembly is the drive feature to the car's gearbox. You can see this system with the flywheel here:

http://www.flybrid.co.uk/F1System.html

In the Flywheel Capacitor system, a motor/generator replaces the gearbox and "is connected to the flywheel allowing a DC voltage to be stored or recovered."

[autogyro]

There is no need for the toloroidal CVT/TVT on the electric storage flywheel system. The electric system is therefore more efficient, smaller and lighter.
It can be used directly to store and apply electrical energy to MGUs, or it can be used to trickle charge a battery pac, to spread the storage and reduce the need for such a rapid battery charge/discharge.
Of course all this apart from batteries can be built into a gearbox using a new generation geartrain, hmmmm.
Then you no longer need seperate MGUs, flywheel or main clutch.

[Agenda_Is_Incorrect]

Of course all this apart from batteries can be built into a gearbox using a new generation geartrain, hmmmm.
Then you no longer need seperate MGUs, flywheel or main clutch.

Why do I have the impression your gearbox is pretty much like this one shown above and already available?

And based on a mechanical flywheel KERS some kind of reduction is very desirable. A full electric gearbox system maybe wouldn't need it, but that is available since the 70's with diesel trains. So I guess it's you trying to sell air as a magical gas again. Start selling the global cooling idea instead, it's the next trend in conning.

[autogyro]

Of course all this apart from batteries can be built into a gearbox using a new generation geartrain, hmmmm.
Then you no longer need seperate MGUs, flywheel or main clutch.

Why do I have the impression your gearbox is pretty much like this one shown above and already available?

And based on a mechanical flywheel KERS some kind of reduction is very desirable. A full electric gearbox system maybe wouldn't need it, but that is available since the 70's with diesel trains. So I guess it's you trying to sell air as a magical gas again. Start selling the global cooling idea instead, it's the next trend in conning.

This is a toloroidal TVT gearbox, driving a flywheel in a vacuum.
It is not part of the main gearbox. The powertrain remains the same and requires a clutch and a layshaft gear cluster churning up oil and wasting torque.
The electric flywheel KERS has a motor/generator geared to the powertrain (usualy the crankshaft), which electricaly charges a flywheel in a vacuum by using induction.
My system is part of the main gearbox with no layshaft and in top gear no gears moving in engagement or churning oil at all.

I have no idea how this thread got here, as I am only answering questions!
Ferrari and Magnetti Marelli have yet to get away from building electric additions the size of a block of flats. so I see little progress in their F1 cars.