Red Bull RB8 Renault

[FrukostScones]

There is no regulation.

Merely the box which define the front wing area in the regulation is paralell to the reference plane. This will be affected by the rake of the car, and Red Bull may have designed their front wing around the rake of the car, meaning it's more raked than the rest of it (doubtful).

People need to chill.

So that is the answer, as I guess the endplate has the dimension of the "box" allowed it has to be paralell to the reference plane.
So this "broken" RB wing is clearly illegal. If it designed to behave like this under aero load even more illegal and big time cheating.

No it is 100% LEGAL. The rake they run means that the endplate runs at the same angle as the rake, therefore making it paralell to the reference plane.

[Shafto]

I would be willing to bet that the designers/engineers know the rules that they are according with and will not intentionally break them

2007 Ferrari flexi floor / Spygate
2007 Mclaren bridgewing
2005 BAR fuel tank episode
2003 Michelin tire width

1995 Toyota WRC team and use of illegal turbo's


I have been apart of a few open wheel teams in the SCCA. We have bent and broken so many rules and got caught on a few of them. Its the name of the game.

ex. Suspension components on one of "the cars" (wont say who or what as we still do it and it is in fact illegal) we have found the color combination used on the spec wishbones for the class of car we run. We have now made lighter components as well as used different lengths with modified mounting locations and painted them back to perfect to match. Over the last 7 years, not a single question has been raised. We have 100% broke the rules, but until we get caught, it won't change.

Racing is all about pushing and even breaking the rules where ever possible interpretation of the rules by each individual teams is what makes the sport go round, and finding the next clever thing is the trick. If you can hide it, seal it, beat it, or get away with it in racing..... do it. If you get caught, deny deny deny and say you thought it was right according to the rules.

And until RB either get caught, disclose or otherwise get found out how their wing works, use it and abuse it. It beats the tests but still, is obviously stumping everyone else.

In the meantime, theorizing how and what they do to make it work, and seeing these rather dramatic failures is what drives this thread. The genius behind these bits are what keeps me coming back, and I love to sit here and lurk and read....

That is 110% my view... I guess I somewhat miss stated that line you quoted me on, I meant as in they are not going to break a rule intentionally when they will obviously be called for it. Example: fixing a turbine to the RW. If they think they can do it and not get caught, then for sure by all means, as you said that is racing and that is where the real men are.

[Tozza Mazza]

So that is the answer, as I guess the endplate has the dimension of the "box" allowed it has to be paralell to the reference plane.
So this "broken" RB wing is clearly illegal. If it designed to behave like this under aero load even more illegal and big time cheating.

No it is 100% LEGAL. The rake they run means that the endplate runs at the same angle as the rake, therefore making it paralell to the reference plane.

I hadn't seen this image haha

People were saying the wing must be parallel to the ground however, which is false.

[hardingfv32]

No it is 100% LEGAL. The rake they run means that the endplate runs at the same angle as the rake, therefore making it parallel to the reference plane.

Not clear. Does the wing have to be parallel to the reference plan (rule section?) or just fit in the box?

Brian

[Tozza Mazza]

No it is 100% LEGAL. The rake they run means that the endplate runs at the same angle as the rake, therefore making it parallel to the reference plane.

Not clear. Does the wing have to be parallel to the reference plan (rule section?) or just fit in the box?

Brian

This box is parallel to the reference plane.

[hardingfv32]

[/quote]

In this picture the center plain is flat as required by the rules. If something was broken that would mean it would angled downward in the rear when the endplate was in the correct position.

It is a test setup. What does this rake do for vortex formation? Better or worse?

Brian

[hardingfv32]

This box is parallel to the reference plane.

So then you cut off the rear top of the endplate to get it back in the box to make it legal. You lose some endplate surface area.

Brian

[wesley123]

too bad that then the wing surface extends above this area

[jammer84_03]

Why are people still arguing about the broken wing? the rake of the wing wasn't for testing. The pics were taken after vettel went off and are showing the odd angle it broke at....

[Tozza Mazza]

This box is parallel to the reference plane.

So then you cut off the rear top of the endplate to get it back in the box to make it legal. You lose some endplate surface area.

Brian

No. The box rotates with it. It is always paralell and its shape and size do not change, only orientation.

The reference plane is the bottom of the floor.

[eurocentric]

Why are people still arguing about the broken wing? the rake of the wing wasn't for testing. The pics were taken after vettel went off and are showing the odd angle it broke at....

don't let that get in the way of people arguing over the wording of rules when it is plainly clear if you just stop and think instead of asking question after question.

The FW has to be parallel to the REF plane if the ref plane is angled because of rake the the FW will be angled and still be legal, simple really, although explaining something in simple terms is sometimes too much for some people.

[jammer84_03]

Why are people still arguing about the broken wing? the rake of the wing wasn't for testing. The pics were taken after vettel went off and are showing the odd angle it broke at....

don't let that get in the way of people arguing over the wording of rules when it is plainly clear if you just stop and think instead of asking question after question.

The FW has to be parallel to the REF plane if the ref plane is angled because of rake the the FW will be angled and still be legal, simple really, although explaining something in simple terms is sometimes too much for some people.

I was reffering to this

EDIT: the highlighted part

In this picture the center plain is flat as required by the rules. If something was broken that would mean it would angled downward in the rear when the endplate was in the correct position.

It is a test setup. What does this rake do for vortex formation? Better or worse?

Brian [/quote]

[Fredy4]

Part of me thinks it was just a damaged wing.

But then part of me knows their wing is desgined to flex, has thick wires going through it and Horner can be a bare faced liar.

Hmmm, I dunno but I think I'm going to go for this did go in the gravel and snapped the wires that usually hold it up during the FIA wing test.

The more I think about it as well maybe its actually adjustable, hence RBs ability to suddenly be even faster in qualifying.

Today as well, a gearbox would not have taken all day to replace.

A front wing could easily be swapped... but what if these wires etc go further back, they could have ripped mounting points behind the nose etc. That would explain the huge gap in todays testing for them.

I do enjoy a good conspiracy though

[RB_[Gnx]]

This leads us to 2 conclusions:

Either they have found something intresting and don't want to show it,and choosed to "camp" all day..
Or they have just got serious issues with the Gearbox/Front Wing,justifying the few laps they did today. (which i seriously doubt about)

[Tozza Mazza]

although explaining something in simple terms is sometimes too much for some people.

Prove your statement by stating the section of the rules, please.


Brian

3.7.1: All bodywork situated forward of a point lying 330mm behind the front wheel centre line, and more than 250mm from the car centre line, must be no less than 75mm and no more than 275mm above the reference plane.

3.12.1: All sprung parts of the car situated from 330mm behind the front wheel centre line to the rear wheel centre line, and which are visible from underneath, must form surfaces which lie on one of two parallel planes, the reference plane or the step plane.