F1technical.net

As usual there's not "that" feature which makes a f1 car go fast. Even if Brawn had the outwash wing, i'd guess that not the wing alone made them win. It was the whole concept, so frontwing, floor and diffusor.

The same applies for the 2019 aero concept. Both frontwing concepts may work equally if the downstream aero concept works well with it. As usual, you just can't take for ex. the alfa wing and put it onto the merc. This is not how this works...

I think the Brawn also had outwash help from the front wheel spat (hub cap).

jjn9128 wrote: ↑

25 Jan 2019, 11:33

Just_a_fan wrote: ↑

25 Jan 2019, 10:17

I'm not sure that's a wing as in a device generating lift. I think it's a device to tidy up and direct flow.

This is correct. As I've said a lot in this thread bargeboards are downwash (lift) generators. That "cat fish whisker" wing may still be used in 2019 but will be less effective as the height is reduced. It could also start to interfere with the footplate aerodynamics as the pressure fields interact more strongly.

Ended up being a good thing since some teams are trying it?

Tzk wrote: ↑

24 Feb 2019, 11:11

As usual there's not "that" feature which makes a f1 car go fast. Even if Brawn had the outwash wing, i'd guess that not the wing alone made them win. It was the whole concept, so frontwing, floor and diffusor.

The same applies for the 2019 aero concept. Both frontwing concepts may work equally if the downstream aero concept works well with it. As usual, you just can't take for ex. the alfa wing and put it onto the merc. This is not how this works...

There are some here who believe a cut-and-paste approach is workable, even advantageous. Others disagree.

I'd say a cut-and-paste approach may work if the involved teams/cars have a similar aero concept. For example Williams copied the merc cape under the nose. Notsure if those two cars follow a similar concept, but at least this single feature seems to also work on the williams.

I wonder if Red Bull's change is coming in this area, specifically where the side pod deflector connects with the barge boards, I wonder if they'll go for a more TR/Haas approach, but ala Newey.



McLaren seem to have a little bit of that.

This area is massively critical to maintaining downforce under yaw, as are the strakes on the underside of the leading edge of the floor.

After a couple of races under the new regulations, what is your feeling about the new rules? Did they achieve their main goal of allowing cars to follow each other more easily?

I was a bit disappointed after Australia, but to me in Bahrain the situation was better, especially the midfield was pretty close. Obviously even the 3rd DRS zone played a role here...

I still haven't rewatched last year race to have a clearer idea whether the situation is really improved, so mine is just a superficial opinion. What do you think?

I think the new rules have made a positive impact, drivers are clearly able to fight each other more closely and get overtakes done if they are genuinely faster.

For me, I think I need to wait a few more races before deciding. Melbourne was, well, Melbourne. And Bahrain had the 3 DRS zones so I’m not totally convinced if it was the 2019 changes or the DRS that made it.

enry86 wrote: ↑

04 Apr 2019, 21:46

After a couple of races under the new regulations, what is your feeling about the new rules? Did they achieve their main goal of allowing cars to follow each other more easily?

I was a bit disappointed after Australia, but to me in Bahrain the situation was better, especially the midfield was pretty close. Obviously even the 3rd DRS zone played a role here...

I still haven't rewatched last year race to have a clearer idea whether the situation is really improved, so mine is just a superficial opinion. What do you think?

new rules to assist overtaking wont benefit teams that run a shallow outer wing, alfa romeo, ferrari and toro rosso. mandated wider wing was part of the plan to allow closer racing by getting that front wing to reach out and capture air from a car in front so if you have a wing that only produces downforce more towards its center, it wont be able to take advantage of the wider front wing rule...australia was a tough track to overtake and the rules were to challenge this and did not quite achieve it. bahrain is a top five overtaking track(according to brundle i think it was)..

So finally, Ferrari front wing philosophy is a bad choice?

Jambier wrote: ↑

14 Apr 2019, 23:39

So finally, Ferrari front wing philosophy is a bad choice?

they do have something up their sleeves although maybe not when following another car from behind

Had to laugh. Was watching an old tape of qualifying from the Montoya and the grooved tire era and they were discussing the front wings and how when you got close to another car you lost front downforce and made passing next to impossible. Zonta was there so what year was that? Maybe 2004?
So we have been talking about this same problem for more than more than 15 years and we are no closer to a real solution. Hilarious.

Trulli?

Odd to think that in the history of F1, wheel covers were banned quite a long time ago but wings and floors were not. Guess it is easier to say "the wheels must no be covered" than it is to try and define what bodywork is. Also easy to say "the bodywork must not move," to obvious effect.

Choices are made to truncate tech development regardless of whether performance improves or declines. The criteria for decision-making not always clear.