FIA - Centreline Downwash Generating (CDG) Wing

Here are our CFD links and discussions about aerodynamics, suspension, driver safety and tyres. Please stick to F1 on this forum.

Post Wed Oct 26, 2005 10:34 am

Sawtooth-spike wrote:The most important thing is...

How will the sponers respond to havin there adverts split in 2 on the back wing?


Joined: 6 Jun 2005

Post Wed Oct 26, 2005 11:15 am

Good point,


Panasonic will become

Pana ...... Sonic

Well atleast the the divers will know whos paying for the to drive in the mirrors
Joined: 28 Jan 2005
Location: Cambridge

Post Wed Oct 26, 2005 3:22 pm

manchild wrote:Scuderia_Russ,

I don’t see why you are taking this personally. Different people have different viewpoints. Why should I overlook fact that AMD is partner with both FIA and Ferrari? I have my views and reasons to suspect events that occur.

Having a viewpoint is one thing, but I find banging on and on about it gets depressing.

manchild wrote:If you think that I feel comfortable on this forum or that I like most of the posts that you’re wrong. I often get annoyed and frustrated like “Michael Moore on republican convention in Texas” but I’m not telling others to stop writing what they think.

Sorry Manchild but you're not Michael Moore. There are no cover ups and no conspiracies that need unearthing. You don't like Ferrari, Michael Schumacher or the F.I.A. and you continue unsubjective rants againt all of these parties. My replies to these comments have been just as unsubjective, I admit and I know this as I write every word, simply to try and show you that there are two sides to every story. This is why I might have appeared to some to be a "Ferrari freak" and that M.S. was my "shining light". I admire the guy for his determination and achievements don't get me wrong but I would rather see the sport succeed and prosper with some top quality close racing than to see Ferrari and/or M.S. trounce the field as some might think.
Ever since Lotus first ran with Gold Leaf sponsorship, the ball has been rolling faster and faster until we are at the point today where nine times out of ten the money will always come first. It's so easy for people to sit back and criticise the F.I.A. when they clearly do not have an easy job. In this day and age, unnecesary risk is unacceptable and people need to face facts that the sport will never be the same as it was 'in the old days', no matter what people think. Safety will always come before the show, but trying to find the blend and make sufficient compromises between keeping the sport safe, keeping entrants happy, and Formula One retaining its status as the best motorsport series in the world is clearly a more difficult task than armchair fans would have you believe. Cars cannot become so slow that lower formulae can lap a given circuit quicker than an F1 car... because people will complain about the fact.

manchild wrote:Since both of us including the others can only speculate what is the truth until it is revealed different views will exist.

Maybe we should get away from posting opinion as fact then yes? And even when the truth is apparently plain for all to see it can still be twisted and misconstrued by others though can't it?

Looks like we'll have to agree to disagree. We both believe we are right and that each other is wrong, but at the end of the day I love this sport, and have done since I was a kid, and I would rather see it prosper before any driver or team! I guess I'd just prefer to see solutions to problems worked towards instead of sitting back and criticising which It seems you have been doing alot of lately that's all.(IMHO) No hard feelings I hope, as I genuinely think you contribute a hell of a lot to this board.

@Tomba (Don't worry mate, you'll se no more ranting from me :wink: )
"Whether you think you can or can't, either way you are right."
-Henry Ford-
Joined: 17 Jan 2004
Location: Motorsport Valley, England.

Post Wed Oct 26, 2005 5:14 pm

Good choice of words Scuderia_Russ, I agree on most of the previous post. We all have opinions, and we also have to try to respect others'. I just hope they reciprocate.
Only in the very first few years of motor racing, was the sport "clean", and full of gentleman racers. But very quickly, commercialism, politics, and many other agendas found themselves in racing, and they are (sadly) an integral part of motor racing. AS far as commercial companies pushing the boundaries of conduct (like AMD), hey, get over it. They are spending many millions of dollars in an attempt for public awareness, and to see them plug their company is in tune with their goals. It's all part of the money package, and money is the oil that makes the racing machinery run.
Getting back to this new rear wing thing, I found an interesting comparison between the two differnt wing types.
Looking at the wing, it is apparent they have very large vertical fences at the ends of the wings. Geez, there's more vertical fin than most airliners. It would make the car more interesting to drive in crosswinds.
Joined: 20 Jan 2005

Post Wed Oct 26, 2005 5:58 pm

No problem, no hard feelings…let us move on. I don’t like this controversy and affairs in F1 either. It was much more fun to follow F1 before this started rolling.

Perhaps I should have said that when I say FIA I don’t think about organization itself but on one and the same group of people on top of it who are making bad moves season after season for more than a decade without having enough moral to step down after major cock-ups. F1 needs impartial ruling body independent from business.

I understand why my posts about conspiracy are annoying to you but try imagining how would you feel if ELF, Michelin and “I mode” were FIA’s and F1 Grand Prix technical partners working on new regulations. It would stink all the way too.

I say that companies involved in competition as sponsors and technical partners of any F1 team with obvious financial interest shouldn’t be allowed to partner FIA especially during process of setting up new regulations.

That’s like Kimi’s future wife winning Miss Finland Contest while Kimi was member of the jury… (This is not made up) :wink:
Joined: 3 Jun 2005

Post Wed Oct 26, 2005 6:29 pm

manchild wrote:That’s like Kimi’s future wife winning Miss Finland Contest while Kimi was member of the jury… (This is not made up) :wink:

He's obviously not stupid then 8)
Joined: 6 Jun 2005

Post Wed Oct 26, 2005 8:37 pm

Sorry i still cnt get the hang of that quote function LOL! Anyway, DaveKillens posted a link to the official F1 website's technical analysis pages. They had a Mock-Up of a CDG wing on a Red says that they are thinking of introducing this in conjuction with wider, SLICK, tyres.

Now THAT, I think is a good thing. Wider Slick Tyres, use them to increase mechanical grip and therefore lessen the dependancy on aero grip. So this way you can reduce turbulance, and still keep high grip levels. Oh and a bonus is that the cars will look like proper race cars without those silly looking "Grooved" tyres!
Silence is golden when you don't know a good answer.
Joined: 11 Apr 2004
Location: London, England, UK

Post Thu Oct 27, 2005 5:47 am

Spensifer_Murphy wrote:And just another thought...Turbulant air...bad for wings trying to make downforce...hence the 2003 engine cover designs. So what happens when we mount rear wings Directly behind turbulange generating rear wheels?! Its madness! We'll endup with skitish rear-ends and car spinning everywhere. Unless they add more wing attack angle...guess what...that means more drag...which means more turbulance...which not only is exactly what we are trying to also means LESS top speed on the straights...weren't the FIA trying to reduce speeds a while back???

I am with the other in saying that this could be the most inovative and impressive ruling to come out of the FIA in quite some time (ever?) By placing the rear wing in a area of turbulent flow then the max downforce achieveable will be limited and if rear downforce is limited then the front has to be reduced to keep the car ballanced. Whilst reduced downforce may case slightly increased top spees it will reduce cornering speed (regained by slicks) but most importantly increase stopping distance. This will allow 2 (or more) cars side by side in the braking zone with the better driver (chassis) being able to utilise the sticker tyers to greater effect.

Manchild: Why is it that Ferrari will benifit from AMD's assosiation with the FIA? Surely they arn't the only team to have an assosiation with them. That Bridgestone domiated the groved tyre era obviously proves that they must be pushing to drop that rulling?
Joined: 24 Apr 2005

Post Thu Oct 27, 2005 10:49 am

:twisted: I HAVE to feed the flames a little (just fun you understand!)

Autosport this week carries a picture of the CDG car on it's front cover - painted Rosso Corsa (if you believe in conspiracies) or Red if you don't :wink:

Cyco - Agree, here's hoping
Joined: 6 Jun 2005

Post Thu Oct 27, 2005 2:13 pm

Cyco wrote:...Manchild: Why is it that Ferrari will benifit from AMD's assosiation with the FIA? Surely they arn't the only team to have an assosiation with them.

Because AMD is only technical partner to Ferrari - no other team.
That is one company whose computers are doing CFD of Formula 1 car for both technical partners (FIA&Ferrari) and I'm sure they don't hide informations from each other.

If CDG gets accepted as part of future regulation, Ferrari will have huge head start because all the data acquired during development of CDG for FIA already are Ferrari's data.
Joined: 3 Jun 2005

Post Thu Oct 27, 2005 3:06 pm

manchild wrote:
Because AMD is only technical partner to Ferrari - no other team.
That is one company whose computers are doing CFD of Formula 1 car for both technical partners (FIA&Ferrari) and I'm sure they don't hide informations from each other.

Manchild, I have been absolutely disgusted with the FIA over the past few year witth what I see as blatant favoritism, in many respects, towards ferrari.
However you cannot let your sceptism, loathing etc etc etc, cloud everything FI colour you judgdment. Yes I am suspicious of the link b/w FIA/Ferrari/AMD.
However I think what AMD have done is CONCEPT, and whilst I think you are probably thinking Ferrari have a head start, each team still has to design its own cars and they have until 2007 (assuming its introduced). That ferrari have a head start does not mean they have a head start in terms of the concept. one year is a very very very long time in F1 as evidenced by Ferrari's 'un-progress' this year. So I think head start or not,
I dont Ferrari will have too much of an advantage.

Post Thu Oct 27, 2005 3:09 pm

ooops sorry that last post was mine
Long experience has taught me this about the status of mankind with regards to matters requiring thought. The less people know and understand about them, the more positively they attempt to argue concerning them; while on the other hand, to know and understand a multitude of things renders men cautious in passing judgement upon anything new. - Galileo..

The noblest of dogs is the hot dog. It feeds the hand that bites it.
Joined: 5 Nov 2004
Location: Timbuck2

Post Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:06 pm

Also, it seems my fingers type faster than my thoughts.
Need to slow them down to brain speed.
Apologies for any confusion etc.


Post Thu Oct 27, 2005 9:27 pm

You know, I think this new wing thing also has another purpose.
One aspect of Formula One is that as the premier open wheel series, not only does it have to be able to brag about superior performance, but it should also stand out, be unique. And this new rear end will instantly make a Formula One car easily identifiable to anyone, even a non-racing spectator.
No more will a Formula One car be easily be mistaken for CART, or IRL, or anything else.
Joined: 20 Jan 2005

Post Fri Oct 28, 2005 1:40 am

Can’t the aero situation be observed in way that specific problem isn’t in a rear end of the car in the lead but in the front half of the following car?

I mean if following car would have low front wing and low nose with flat floor than there wouldn’t be a problem?

If that is so and since 2007 or 2008 we'll have again wide cars and wide slicks than why we wouldn’t have again low noses if that would fix the problem (which I doubt if seq. gearbox stays).
Joined: 3 Jun 2005


Return to Aerodynamics, chassis and tyres

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CCBot [Bot], Exabot [Bot], Yandex [Bot] and 1 guest