Mercedes AMG F1 W09 EQ Power+

[DiogoBrand]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201805 ... 4d558e.jpg
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201805 ... 82e504.jpg
I've seen that little flap on Sauber's car as well. Is it there to create some sort of outwash?

It looks like the vane is perpendicular to both arms when viewed in plan. I'm not sure what regulation is dictating that however.

Perhaps the regulation about the suspension arms being a neutral aero surface, so you could only have perpendicular flaps, which in theory are neutral.

[cramr]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201805 ... 4d558e.jpg
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201805 ... 82e504.jpg
I've seen that little flap on Sauber's car as well. Is it there to create some sort of outwash?

It looks like the vane is perpendicular to both arms when viewed in plan. I'm not sure what regulation is dictating that however.

Perhaps the regulation about the suspension arms being a neutral aero surface, so you could only have perpendicular flaps, which in theory are neutral.

If someone fancy some light easy reading:
https://www.fia.com/regulation/category/110

That should be around 10.3 Article

[Morteza]

[PlatinumZealot]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201805 ... 4d558e.jpg
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201805 ... 82e504.jpg
I've seen that little flap on Sauber's car as well. Is it there to create some sort of outwash?

It looks like the vane is perpendicular to both arms when viewed in plan. I'm not sure what regulation is dictating that however.

Perhaps the regulation about the suspension arms being a neutral aero surface, so you could only have perpendicular flaps, which in theory are neutral.

Nah.. Remember that rule about the legality volume where all bodywork is considered as a brake duct? It is exactly this at play here.

[roon]

It looks like the vane is perpendicular to both arms when viewed in plan. I'm not sure what regulation is dictating that however.

Perhaps the regulation about the suspension arms being a neutral aero surface, so you could only have perpendicular flaps, which in theory are neutral.

Nah.. Remember that rule about the legality volume where all bodywork is considered as a brake duct? It is exactly this at play here.

Diogo may be right. These fins look farther inboard than the innermost parts of the brake duct assemblies. As pointed out, they are a vertically symmetrical arrowhead shape, and faceted in two planes perpendicular each to a suspension arm, with a permitted fillet joining the two planes together. The little holes are a mystery, though, not sure how they meeting the wording of the rules. Unless the correspond hole on the mirrored side is present but obscured within the suspension arm.

Essentially, these are local enlargements of the suspension arms.

[zioture]

Flex floor ?

[Just_a_fan]

More like broken floor, to be honest.

[mantikos]

More like broken floor, to be honest.

Agreed, clearly broken.

[ScrewCaptain27]

Failure or damaged by debris?

[Morteza]

Mercedes are testing new rain lights






[media]https://twitter.com/MercedesAMGF1/statu ... 0658076674[/media]

[Morteza]

Winglets on the sidepod a la McLaren?

Photo via @ChrisMedlandF1

[Just_a_fan]

Be interesting to see if those VGs stay on the car. I wonder if they're there to compensate for the messy air coming off the pressure plot rigs up front...

[JPBD1990]

Winglets on the sidepod a la McLaren?
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DdOZTojWkAA4cIC.jpg
Photo via @ChrisMedlandF1

Could just be the angle/lighting - but the engine cover looks vastly different. There’s like an indentation on top of the side pod at the front, and it appears more square shaped toward the rear cokebottle... anyone else see that?

[Just_a_fan]

I think there are bodywork changes, yes. Certainly, the tail of the bodywork stops at the rear wishbone attachment where previously the upper wishbone stuck out through holes.

[RZS10]

ninja'd