Williams FW42

A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter does not belong here.
hollus
Moderator
User avatar
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 12:21 am
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Re: Williams FW42

Post by hollus » Wed Apr 03, 2019 5:34 am

A few posts have been moved to the team thread.
It is not white, it is not black, it is probably gray.

Greg_OR
14
Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2010 2:09 am
Location: Wroclaw, Poland

Re: Williams FW42

Post by Greg_OR » Wed Apr 03, 2019 3:41 pm

humble sabot wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 1:25 am
One big plus is that they did both finish the race in fully running condition. Can't fight for points if you DNF.
Although it is well said by somebody that making fast car more reliable is much easier than making reliable car faster.

But the huge rear cooling opening still make me curious - during the testing in Barcelona air temp was not that much lower than in Australia nor Bahrain (around 20C and little above) - I wonder if it has something common with that suspension 7th element which they had to remove - could it have an impact on the airflow directed to the sidepod intake?

humble sabot
23
User avatar
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 9:33 am

Re: Williams FW42

Post by humble sabot » Mon Apr 08, 2019 6:58 am

I had in mind the other old adage: to finish first, first you must finish.
If it's unreliable, you can't do the work that you need to do to progress.
the four immutable forces:
static balance
dynamic balance
static imbalance
dynamic imbalance

humble sabot
23
User avatar
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 9:33 am

Re: Williams FW42

Post by humble sabot » Mon Apr 08, 2019 10:41 pm

I've been kind of obsessing over the "illegal" mirrors, and I'm not quite sure I understand why they were considered non-compliant. The explanations don't add up IMO. Image
(from https://www.formulapassion.it/motorspor ... 21816.html )
the four immutable forces:
static balance
dynamic balance
static imbalance
dynamic imbalance

FW17
226
User avatar
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 9:56 am

Re: Williams FW42

Post by FW17 » Tue Apr 09, 2019 10:06 am

humble sabot wrote:
Mon Apr 08, 2019 10:41 pm
I've been kind of obsessing over the "illegal" mirrors, and I'm not quite sure I understand why they were considered non-compliant. The explanations don't add up IMO. https://www.formulapassion.it/wp-conten ... 1-2019.jpg
(from https://www.formulapassion.it/motorspor ... 21816.html )


Driver could not see what was behind, so it asked to be modified

I guess the angle of placement meant they had to use a curved mirror which failed to serve the purpose of a rear view mirror

marcush.
268
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 3:55 pm

Re: Williams FW42

Post by marcush. » Tue Apr 09, 2019 11:45 am

One has to realise how destructive it is to earmark your current campaign car as fundentally flawed and not correctable.
How would you be able to find workarounds and exploit the thimg to the max when your thought always is :nah ,its a dog and it cannot be quick amd we all know why...

FW17
226
User avatar
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 9:56 am

Re: Williams FW42

Post by FW17 » Tue Apr 09, 2019 12:05 pm

marcush. wrote:
Tue Apr 09, 2019 11:45 am
One has to realise how destructive it is to earmark your current campaign car as fundentally flawed and not correctable.
How would you be able to find workarounds and exploit the thimg to the max when your thought always is :nah ,its a dog and it cannot be quick amd we all know why...
It is flawed only when have figured out the flaw

Else it just a perfectly designed car that is slower than others

dtro
3
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2019 6:39 pm

Re: Williams FW42

Post by dtro » Tue Apr 09, 2019 7:27 pm

marcush. wrote:
Tue Apr 09, 2019 11:45 am
One has to realise how destructive it is to earmark your current campaign car as fundentally flawed and not correctable.
How would you be able to find workarounds and exploit the thimg to the max when your thought always is :nah ,its a dog and it cannot be quick amd we all know why...
From the perspective of racing it's definitely destructive, from the point of view of running a business/turning a profit it would make sense. Not spending money on developing what they viewed as a dog of a car last year allowed them to post a profit as a result. Insane as that is to me.

humble sabot
23
User avatar
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 9:33 am

Re: Williams FW42

Post by humble sabot » Wed Apr 10, 2019 4:17 am

FW17 wrote:
Tue Apr 09, 2019 10:06 am
Driver could not see what was behind, so it asked to be modified

I guess the angle of placement meant they had to use a curved mirror which failed to serve the purpose of a rear view mirror
What I've read to date says that a challenge came from Racing Point - on the supposition that they thought the driver couldn't see. Variously the mirror being multiple parts and being curved, neither of which are borne out by that image I linked, clearly. I've not heard of either Russell Or Kubica complaining. The grounds on which it was ruled were something to do with the two part attachment, and a reading saying that they may not have an aerodynamic influence.
the four immutable forces:
static balance
dynamic balance
static imbalance
dynamic imbalance

ringo
227
User avatar
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 9:57 am

Re: Williams FW42

Post by ringo » Thu Apr 11, 2019 1:31 am

Image

I think the crime was commited in this area of the car. It may need to be redesigned completely, along with the floor.
For Sure!!

godlameroso
352
User avatar
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 8:27 pm
Location: Miami FL

Re: Williams FW42

Post by godlameroso » Thu Apr 11, 2019 1:41 am

Well yeah.
The height of cultivation is really nothing special. It is merely simplicity; the ability to express the utmost with the minimum. Mr.Lee

roon
444
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2016 6:04 pm

Re: Williams FW42

Post by roon » Thu Apr 11, 2019 1:53 am

That blunt face at the floor leading edge seems odd, but if I consider that airflow is angling downward in that area, it's perhaps not so blunt after all.

wesley123
220
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 4:55 pm

Re: Williams FW42

Post by wesley123 » Thu Apr 11, 2019 11:15 am

It's not really that different compared to Ferrari, for example.


https://twitter.com/albertfabrega/statu ... 36450?s=21

Nor is the blunt face really a bad thing as it would increase pressure in front, and thus cause a bigger pressure differential under the leading edge of the floor.
"Bite my shiny metal ass" - Bender

Morteza
1887
User avatar
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 5:23 pm
Location: Bushehr, Iran

Re: Williams FW42

Post by Morteza » Thu Apr 11, 2019 11:55 am

Image
Via AMuS

Image
Via @AlbertFabrega
"A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool."~William Shakespeare

bill shoe
236
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 7:18 am
Location: Dallas, Texas, USA

Re: Williams FW42

Post by bill shoe » Fri Apr 12, 2019 3:48 am

ringo wrote:
Thu Apr 11, 2019 1:31 am
https://imgr4.auto-motor-und-sport.de/W ... 436721.jpg

I think the crime was commited in this area of the car. It may need to be redesigned completely, along with the floor.
Agree. The bargeboards and leading edge of the floor are Persons Of Interest that should be immediately taken into a wind tunnel for thorough questioning.