Red Bull RB8 Renault

[bhall]

My thoughts, too.

Perhaps this?


(Click to enlarge)

[N12ck]

My thoughts, too.

Perhaps this?

[img]http://thumbnails77.imagebam.com/19246/ ... 99.jpg[img]
(Click to enlarge)

That was there last year

[Gridlock]

Flexibility may be an issue according to Scarbs, along with slots or dimensions.

[bhall]

That was there last year.

The rules are different this year, though.

[N12ck]

Ted Kravitz ‏@tedkravitz
Other teams believe Red Bull have a hole on their floor in front of rear tyre that is illegally situated.

Hmm, I'll have a look around the net for pictyres

[Gridlock]

No need, surely, it's that big hole pictured at the top of the page right in front of the wheel, outside of the fence?

ETA: Any body language experts in? https://twitter.com/tedkravitz/status/2 ... 9015414785

[Crucial_Xtreme]

Here's the "hole"




Edit: The pic posted by Gridlock or Bhall is a better close up, I just wanted to post a picture from yesterday as I wasn't sure if the holes were the same.

Sauber for instance don't have the hole closed off like RB do. The vertical strake is technically closing off the slot whereas it's open on the Sauber.

Edit:2 Here's Sauber




But Sauber have a slot now that is closed on all sides like RB if I'm not mistaken. But the picture above is what I was referring to.

[Gridlock]

So would it be legal if it formed part of the continuous edge, i.e. it had the de rigeur tiny slot linking it to the edge of the floor as seen on side pod gills?

[Nando]

Guys, look just in front on the rear tire. There is the hole.
Edit, saw you had noticed it now, only read the first comment

[N12ck]

Guys, look just in front on the rear tire. There is the hole.
Edit, saw you had noticed it now, only read the first comment

[img]http://quikk.se/?51e701[img]

Just wondering, but did we ever find out where that sidepod tunnel led to?

[Crucial_Xtreme]

So would it be legal if it formed part of the continuous edge, i.e. it had the de rigeur tiny slot linking it to the edge of the floor as seen on side pod gills?

Here's the rule the other teams are using to say the holes are illegal

3.12.5 All parts lying on the reference and step planes, in addition to the transition between the two planes, must produce uniform, solid, hard, continuous, rigid (no degree of freedom in relation to the body/chassis unit), impervious surfaces under all circumstances.
Forward of a line 450mm forward of the rear face of the cockpit entry template, fully enclosed holes are permitted in the surfaces lying on the reference and step planes provided no part of the car is visible through them when viewed from directly below. This does not apply to any parts of rear view mirrors which are visible, provided each of these areas does not exceed 12000mm² when projected to a horizontal plane above the car, or to any parts of the panels referred to in Article 15.4.7

[Gridlock]

Right, so that's DDD then? Or, the rule that stopped it in theory at least. It does seem to rule out the hole we're discussing though, doesn't it? It's on the step plane, and the plane therefore is 'pervious'

[bhall]

Strike that.

[Crucial_Xtreme]

Oh, I get it. You can have a hole there, it just can't have a scoop like that. The scoop is the part of the car you can see when looking from underneath, which makes it illegal. That's why Ferrari's cutouts are OK, as are Sauber's "blades," I guess.

Horner just said on Sky that it's legal so I guess much ado about nothing. It does look like what they've used in previous races so I'm not sure what all the fuss is about. But their interpretation does seem different to Saubers for instance.

[westech]

Anyone with a picture of the part they are talking about; we need to know more about it.