hollowBallistix wrote: MeowMix wrote:
It would make absolutely no sense having a real logo.
That logo is painted on. And whoever pointed out that they painted the black background then stuck the logo back on I believe is wrong. Although it seems to show the logo being stuck back on, if you see the way they used tape to hold it in place I reckon they ere going to use it as a template or guide for a different colour shadow (to compliment the black).
I find it incredibly hard to believe that in a sport where 0.05seconds could be the difference between a position, a logo that sticks out by more than 3 or 4 mm would actually ever be allowed on a car. Think of the useless weight, the effect on aero and everything. There is no way in hell that the logo is real ^^.
I find it incredibly hard to believe that when there's video & photo evidence showing that the logo is an actual badge they stick on the car people can still come up with way's to dismiss what it is.
There would be no need to use a badge like that to use it as a template to paint on another colour, masking tape templates generated on some graphics software would be used, not a bloody badge, especially as the badge is would be covering the are they require to paint to give any contrast against the black already laid down.
Weight an issue ? really ? considering the car without fuel & ballast is around 150kg lighter than the required minimum weight limit, this badge is not going to be an issue.
And as for the effect on aero, it's probably so small it's insignificant.
A surface sticking up that much with air flowing around it at high speed can (and does) cause the laminar flow to become turbulent. Why in the world, would the aero engineers allow this to happen? They are just introducing more headaches for themselves...
At that point in time, you want to keep turbulent flow to a minimum. You are dealing with a streamlined object and as such most of the drag will come from skin friction. Something greatly reduced in laminar flow regimes. Turbulent flow is advantageous with blunt objects whose friction is caused mainly by the "vacuum" they create behind them. Turbulent flow would be advantageous say for filling in teh gap between the drivers helment and the airbox. Also, turbulent flow is best kept at a minimum in an F1 car. Turbulent flow over the wings and downforce producing surfaces (and most smooth surfaces in general) will be detrimental to downforce generation and drag reduction (as skin friction is increases, boundary layer separation is onset sooner, etc.).
Ignore Inside F1 programs and stuff, the only reason teams participate in those programs is due to the free advertising. They are obviously going to exaggerate somewhat and lie about certain things.
Look at this picture of the car actually running. I cant discern any change in the profile.http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... day2_7.jpg
That said. Believe what you want to believe, but in an industry where 0.030 seconds can be the difference between 3rd and 5th id see it as a waste tbh...