Reducing the drag of a two element wing through stall

[machin]

If it is deemed legal that drivers can actively influence the aerodynamics of the cars (other than ther front wing), how about these ideas:-

Downforce producing helmets that vary the downforce if the driver tilts his head up or down? (infact, less stupidly you could have a vent behind the driver's head which is opened if he leans forward?)

Or how about wings on gloves that the driver sticks into the air stream to alter the flow around the cockpit? -Even better how about gloves which have wings on them that get exposed as the driver turns the steering wheel.. i.e. only coming into effect when the car is in the corners?

[autogyro]

I think it is the other way round.
Air is blown from the rear wing slot to keep the boundary layer attached and produce better wing DF.
When the switch is made (knee or otherwise), the air is redirected to the pipe outlet on top of the diffuser, blowing air into the low pressure area behind the car and reducing DF from the diffuser as well as making the top wing semi stall by detaching the boundary layer.
Could be wrong though.

[astracrazy]

Something I've been wondering about all cars that use the shark fins which are connected to the rear wing: Is the angle of the wing still adjustable? And if not, how can the amount of downforce from the wing be adjusted?

i would strongly guess that from previous data and simulations the wing angle for the rear wing would be previously decided. They will have different rear wings and shark fins to suit different tracks. Im guessing!

On some other cars i think you can even see where the end of the shark fin can be replaced with different ends (to suit the angle of attack for the rear wing)

[autogyro]

when should the tunnle need to provide air, when should it close?

it is operated by driver's knees (as is widely believed). it should provide air to rear wing when on a straight line and should close (of course by driver's knee) whilst approaching a turn.

Other way round I think.

[Mr.G]

Hi all, what about this - instead of knee use foot. When is on full trotle you can "rest" your feet on some support, just like in normal car. But in this one is hole and you control the air from snokrel.

Note: This isnt my idea, I read about his somewhere and I only draw this picture. But for me is this the most possible way.

BTW: sorry my english

[Fil]

the big toe is on the wrong side of the left foot.. otherwise.. plausible.
Only prob i see with that is that i think the inlet on top is beyond where the feet are, closer to the driver.

oh and the idea probably should've been posted here. (we're not allowed to discuss that detail of the MP4/25 here..)

[gibells]

Hi all, what about this - instead of knee use foot. When is on full trotle you can "rest" your feet on some support, just like in normal car. But in this one is hole and you control the air from snokrel.

Note: This isnt my idea, I read about his somewhere and I only draw this picture. But for me is this the most possible way.

BTW: sorry my english

Mr G. do you work for the FIA?

[Mr.G]

Mr G. do you work for the FIA?

No I don't why? As I write before, this isn't my idea, I just read about this, and make the picture. I know there is much les space inside the cocpit, but this is for me from the proposals the most plausible.

And the big toe - you right, ist just a scracht drawing, so newermind

[raceman]

when should the tunnle need to provide air, when should it close?

it is operated by driver's knees (as is widely believed). it should provide air to rear wing when on a straight line and should close (of course by driver's knee) whilst approaching a turn.

Other way round I think.

Nope.

[raymondu999]

I suppose that would cause many broken necks and fingers

[F1DanBrits]

Just a bit of topic here. Seening as there are two potential holes too place a Snorkel on the cockpit, on Faster circuits i.e Monza could Mclaren have two Snorkels? or will one do the job?

[thestig84]

Nope.

Errr yes, other way round.

During the corner the drivers is a bit busy to be closing holes! During the turn the hole is open leaving the air just to cool the cockpit. Then on the straight the hole is blocked by the driver to the air no longer vent to cockpit but to wing. That is what we are led to believe anyway!

As Scarbs says http://scarbsf1.wordpress.com/

[thestig84]

Just a bit of topic here. Seening as there are two potential holes too place a Snorkel on the cockpit, on Faster circuits i.e Monza could Mclaren have two Snorkels? or will one do the job?

There have always been 2 access panels/openings on on the Mclaren nose. I dont think they will require both being run as vents.

[forty-two]

Just a bit of topic here. Seening as there are two potential holes too place a Snorkel on the cockpit, on Faster circuits i.e Monza could Mclaren have two Snorkels? or will one do the job?

I believe that the general consensus is that the snorkel is supplying (or not) a "signal" to a fludic valve at the rear of the car which "switches" air from the top vent in the airbox to one of two locations. The volume of air sent for this signal is supposedly significantly lower than that being fed from the main airbox, therefore I don't think a second inlet would be advantageous.

That is all assuming that there's only two possible states for the fludic valve of course! If perhaps there could be an advantage to sending air to somewhere else under different circumstances maybe they're planning something else for the future...

[nacho]

They are soon gonna have flutes in the cockpit that they are playing differently in every corner and straight.