Mclaren Mercedes MP4-25

[thestig84]

but still, to show this much, mclaren are definitely more open then years back, where they would never have allowed this picture that early.
Lol sorry, i meant who took the picture, is it sutton, wri2.net xpb.cc i was asking because maybe there were more good pics like this. In general the photographers are not good at taking the right pics. wri2.net is normally by far the best. But since we lost f1-live and their high res, the pics supplied has been really bad

It was a picture taken by a lucky fan at Bahrain

[imightbewrong]

but still, to show this much, mclaren are definitely more open then years back, where they would never have allowed this picture that early.
Lol sorry, i meant who took the picture, is it sutton, wri2.net xpb.cc i was asking because maybe there were more good pics like this. In general the photographers are not good at taking the right pics. wri2.net is normally by far the best. But since we lost f1-live and their high res, the pics supplied has been really bad

Nope, that is not the case. They are simply not allowed to cover the garage with boards during race weekends, so they can't do much about it. They have to have it out in like that. For some reason though, they are still allowed to cover the garages during the winter testing, that is why we have to wait until real races to see these kinds of pics.

[jason.parker.86]

Nice pic of maccas new steering wheel

[cornermarker]

here is 3d rendered video of the mclaren stall wing.
http://video.gazzetta.it/?vxChannel=Primo%20Piano

its in italian but pretty self explanatory.

also no mention of the snorkel.

Yeah, basically, I think they've got it. Vortices. Don't think it's a laminar bubble, though, more likely a longitudinal (upward) pair or two of vortices, which would be less draggy than that big bubble of swirling air.

How the intake controls it, they'd be guessing just like us.

Kelpster

[thestig84]

I'm all for innovation and technical progress, and for that reason believe that aspects of the rules should be less restrictive, but the innovation should be in the technical solutions not in the way the rules are circumvented.

I dont think you can have both. If you want less restrictive rules, like most of us do then you will get more cases like this. I think the innovation is in the technical solution and how the rules are circumvented. They go hand in hand. If there are rules in place there will always be loop holes and grey areas to exploit. Good on the teams that are cleaver enough to do it.

As a Mclaren fan I say well done Ferrari too. The fact wheels are homo ligated and nobody can copy them is pretty cleaver!

[horse]

I think there remains the possibility that the system does not give an overall advantage to the lap time of the car. The McLaren has yet to show world beating pace, in general. Indeed, their top speed is good which will be advantageous in overtaking, but it may be that the system causes them problems with other aspects of handling. For instance, Jenson was complaining that they don't have enough downforce, even though they have one of the biggest diffusers on the block, so perhaps, because the wing is now not as effective in certain respects, the diffuser is not operating to its maximum potential.

[myurr]

I'm all for innovation and technical progress, and for that reason believe that aspects of the rules should be less restrictive, but the innovation should be in the technical solutions not in the way the rules are circumvented.

I dont think you can have both. If you want less restrictive rules, like most of us do then you will get more cases like this. I think the innovation is in the technical solution and how the rules are circumvented. They go hand in hand. If there are rules in place there will always be loop holes and grey areas to exploit. Good on the teams that are cleaver enough to do it.

As a Mclaren fan I say well done Ferrari too. The fact wheels are homo ligated and nobody can copy them is pretty cleaver!

With the way the current rules are structured then I agree with you that you cannot have less restriction yet more innovation whilst still controlling the pace of the cars. However if the rules were restructured to reward efficiency, ie. you can start with this amount of fuel lets see how quickly you can make the car get to the end of the race with that amount of fuel, then rules could be relaxed a fair bit. The FIA could then police the pace of the cars by reducing the amount of fuel available and restricting the performance of the tyres.

Afterall downforce tends to mean more drag (generalising I know) and drag means less overall fuel efficiency. So restrict the fuel and you in effect also restrict the downforce.

Some rules should be retained possibly in modified form, e.g. to manage how low to the ground the car can be, restrict movable aero, etc.

[gridwalker]

I agree gridwalker and you only let yourself down with one thing.
Atheist?
There is no such thing.
Sorry, dont bother to argue the point, Ciro will hate it.
Have a good race.

a·the·ist

Pronounced ey-thee-ist

–noun

a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.

I think that sums me up quite nicely, but that is enough of that.

I can't wait for Q3

Have a good race!

[segedunum]

That's funny; I thought that they were "sliding skirts" : if they were sticking, the cars wouldn't have gone very far ...

They weren't when they didn't actually slide properly............. That's what made them dangerous. I thought that would have been clear.

We'll just see what happens with the protests and all. The but the avenues that this could be taken in are probably going to get rather ridiculous. History repeats. I'm all for innovation, but there are regulations specifically to stop wing stalls and other aerodynamic changes when the car is moving and they're there for a reason. How Charlie Whiting painted over that I don't know.

However, if McLaren continue like this though then other teams might well not protest. They've got a car currently that isn't fast over a single lap, doesn't look well balanced (packaging?), has a pretty stiff suspension set up (a lot of bouncing and little shimmies down straights and through some corners), God knows what that will do to the tyres in the race and they're doing all that with a straight line speed advantage - that they spent most of the winter concentrating on attaching crap to the car to try to get work. I won't say I told you so yet, but..........

[gridwalker]

That's funny; I thought that they were "sliding skirts" : if they were sticking, the cars wouldn't have gone very far ...

They weren't when they didn't actually slide properly............. That's what made them dangerous. I thought that would have been clear.

We'll just see what happens with the protests and all. The but the avenues that this could be taken in are probably going to get rather ridiculous. History repeats. I'm all for innovation, but there are regulations specifically to stop wing stalls and other aerodynamic changes when the car is moving and they're there for a reason. How Charlie Whiting painted over that I don't know.

However, if McLaren continue like this though then other teams might well not protest. They've got a car currently that isn't fast over a single lap, doesn't look well balanced (packaging?), has a pretty stiff suspension set up (a lot of bouncing and little shimmies down straights and through some corners), God knows what that will do to the tyres in the race and they're doing all that with a straight line speed advantage - that they spent most of the winter concentrating on attaching crap to the car to try to get work. I won't say I told you so yet, but..........

The problem with the skirts wasn't with them sticking, it was with the seal between the skirt and the track becoming broken when a car went over the bumps. This led to a massive loss of downforce as the pressure differential suddenly decreased, which in turn led to accidents. Your point may have been clear, but that didn't make it any more accurate.

As for the McLaren looking slow, P4 isn't a particularly bad position for starting the race. Button's position is less advantageous, but I never rated him as a driver in the first place.

[Shaddock]

People seem to forget that we already have movable aero with the front wings, how many accidents did they cause?

Movable aero was banned originally for safety reasons along time ago in fear of bits failing off the cars. Over the years teams have sort to bend this rule along with their wings and other body parts.

The FIA and the stewards time would be better spent looking at another teams car whose seems to be help together (when bits aren’t falling off) with sticky tape

[segedunum]

The problem with the skirts wasn't with them sticking, it was with the seal between the skirt and the track becoming broken when a car went over the bumps.

Yes, and how did the seal become broken? The skirts did that generally by 'sticking' in a fixed position rather than 'sliding', like they're supposed to do, and thus breaking the vacuum seal. Bumps weren't the problem specifically because that's why the skirts slid and moved up and down, but they also had to slide horizontally in a uniform fashion and keep the seal complete. When they didn't that's when there were real problems. That would certainly have been exacerbated over bumps though.

[horse]

Movable aero was banned originally for safety reasons along time ago in fear of bits failing off the cars. Over the years teams have sort to bend this rule along with their wings and other body parts.

I think the most recent incarnation of the ban was due to problems with parts leaving the car, however the important part of the ban is due to handling issues, similar to the problems with sliding skirts, where the stability of the car could be upset by aerodynamic parts. The ban of skirts and the enforced minimum ride height are examples of taking such action due to car stability issues. The loss of a flexible rear wing also leads to car stability problems.

Essentially, if the McLaren system does not upset the car enough to cause a nasty accident then I see no reason to ban it.

[segedunum]

Essentially, if the McLaren system does not upset the car enough to cause a nasty accident then I see no reason to ban it.

Yer, I suppose that is the way it will be looked upon. We've got a ruling about the FIA's interpretation of this now, however we might feel about it, but whether it will become a real controversy or not is how much of a meaningful advantage McLaren have over other teams (not much on the evidence of today) and it depends on how other teams feel they can actually develop this system. It's the way these things work.

The interesting thing is that other teams might decide against developing this for packaging and balance reasons, and the whole thing might just go away for a while. They might develop something on a smaller scale to get around that. There's obviously a lot of bulges on that McLaren engine cover and a lot of ducting going on under there, which I have never liked since the car launched personally, and it's a question of how much much that is compromising other things versus the rewards.

[Giblet]

Toys, foot stamping, whatever, get over yourself.

It's legal, and over.

Changeable aerodynamic device, that has no moving parts, so it is legal, as the driver is not a part of a system according to the rules, even if they act as one.

What am I not getting again? Your concerns are legitimate, but that doesn't make them not moot. We understand your points, and we are trying to move on, as since the system is now a legal part of the car, we have moved on, like I think it would be healthy for you to.

If the system gets stuck in a corner, the driver adjust the throttle. If not he goes in the gravel, maybe hits a wall. Racing cars do that sometimes, simply by pilot error.

I have addressed your point now. Moving on again. I have contributed a lot to the figuring out of how the basics of this device works, THAT is how I contributed.