McLaren MCL39

[venkyhere]

By Gary Anderson

Whatever Gary says, its always the opposite to be true

Here his opinion on Front Wing topic. Maybe this time is right
https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/gary ... l-ferrari/

There are 'technical articles' all over F1 media, claiming diametrically opposite results w.r.t TD08:
A) McLaren to suffer least, Ferrari & Redbull to suffer most.
B) McLaren & Mercedes to suffer most, Redbull to a lesser extent and Ferrari the least to suffer.
I think the best thing to do will be to not get sucked into 'confirmation bias'/'echo chamber' conclusions and set expectations around it, and show patience only until Saturday Q, for the truth to show itself up.

[Vanja #66]

[Cs98]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GsL7697WkAA ... name=large

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GsL7695XoAE ... name=large

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GsL7698WMAA ... name=large

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GsL9HgxWgAA ... name=large

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GsL9HgsW4AA ... name=large

https://twitter.com/AeroTechVH/status/1 ... 8128338135

the big shift happens at around 140-150 kmh where the new wing flexes a lot more

I presume you mean the opposite?

Like you say, the biggest difference seems to be in the 150-200 range. So medium-high speed corners.

[Vanja #66]

the big shift happens at around 140-150 kmh where the new wing flexes a lot more

I presume you mean the opposite?

Like you say, the biggest difference seems to be in the 150-200 range. So medium-high speed corners.

yes, the old one starts flexing really quickly at medium speeds, probably even around 100 kmh

new wing is very stiff up to 150-160 and gradually (almost linearly) flexes further

[FDD]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GsL7697WkAA ... name=large

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GsL7695XoAE ... name=large

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GsL7698WMAA ... name=large

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GsL9HgxWgAA ... name=large

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GsL9HgsW4AA ... name=large

Excellent point of these analyses.

[SilviuAgo]

Now on F1TV live stream Alex Brundell, presenting McLaren FW said that he spoke with Rob Marshall and the outcome is like this:
AB: What changes did you do to the FW?
RM: We added one hook to the top flap. No material changes on FW.
AB: So how you mitigate the loss?
RM: What loss?

Interesting. If no material changes were needed to stiffer the FW and only one hook was needed, then the impact should be reduced and new pecking order in F1 not to happen, as many expected staring with Spain.
FP1 on going now, MCl39 looking good.

[Emag]

Now on F1TV live stream Alex Brundell, presenting McLaren FW said that he spoke with Rob Marshall and the outcome is like this:
AB: What changes did you do to the FW?
RM: We added one hook to the top flap. No material changes on FW.
AB: So how you mitigate the loss?
RM: What loss?

Interesting. If no material changes were needed to stiffer the FW and only one hook was needed, then the impact should be reduced and new pecking order in F1 not to happen, as many expected staring with Spain.
FP1 on going now, MCl39 looking good.

I’ve always thought the primary benefit of a flexi-wing is drag reduction. You can run with a big front wing to get the downforce in medium and low speed corners without sacrificing top speed. You could still do the same thing now, with a bigger drag penalty.

The claims about flexi-wings being some sort of balancing tool seemed a stretch, but I am not an aerodynamicist, so I took expert’s word for it.

I just dont think there is enough control in a naturally flexing front wing for it to effectively be used as a corner-to-corner balancing tool.

[CjC]

Now on F1TV live stream Alex Brundell, presenting McLaren FW said that he spoke with Rob Marshall and the outcome is like this:
AB: What changes did you do to the FW?
RM: We added one hook to the top flap. No material changes on FW.
AB: So how you mitigate the loss?
RM: What loss?

Interesting. If no material changes were needed to stiffer the FW and only one hook was needed, then the impact should be reduced and new pecking order in F1 not to happen, as many expected staring with Spain.
FP1 on going now, MCl39 looking good.

Yet the haters will continue to hate

[Vanja #66]

Huge difference

[sucof]

Now on F1TV live stream Alex Brundell, presenting McLaren FW said that he spoke with Rob Marshall and the outcome is like this:
AB: What changes did you do to the FW?
RM: We added one hook to the top flap. No material changes on FW.
AB: So how you mitigate the loss?
RM: What loss?

Interesting. If no material changes were needed to stiffer the FW and only one hook was needed, then the impact should be reduced and new pecking order in F1 not to happen, as many expected staring with Spain.
FP1 on going now, MCl39 looking good.

Haha, why believe anything they say??
I think it is obvious every team member will always downplay any claims about their technology or changes. Especially in this case.
They will never say, what they changed, or how. That would be silly. This is a race.

[venkyhere]

Now on F1TV live stream Alex Brundell, presenting McLaren FW said that he spoke with Rob Marshall and the outcome is like this:
AB: What changes did you do to the FW?
RM: We added one hook to the top flap. No material changes on FW.
AB: So how you mitigate the loss?
RM: What loss?

Interesting. If no material changes were needed to stiffer the FW and only one hook was needed, then the impact should be reduced and new pecking order in F1 not to happen, as many expected staring with Spain.
FP1 on going now, MCl39 looking good.

Yet the haters will continue to hate

Do you really believe what was said in that interview ? We can visually see a different carbon weave on the nose-wing junction.

[sucof]

Huge difference

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GsMnuPiWEAA ... name=large

There is some, but I do not believe the real flexing shall be at the inside part of the wing...
The flexing will be the greatest at the end of the wing.
Also looking at the rig the FIA uses to measure flexing, I think this is a joke. Wings have very different forces on them at high wind speed, than what that rig is using. Hence the teams will just work on passing that test, while still able to let the wing flex under real racing conditions.
Why not just install FIA cameras with visual reference points, so that the flexing will be perfectly visible at any stage?
(by the way, I would support letting teams having any kind of flexi wing, instead of the active wing controls coming from next year..... Flexi wings actually do the same thing, and are simpler than doing an active version of them, while still working on to making them flex just the "right way")

[Emag]

Huge difference

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GsMnuPiWEAA ... name=large

So basically, they were already compliant with the TD?

I actually saw the MCL39’s front wing was flexing a lot less than MCL38 in testing, but the MCL38 flexed by a significant amount, so I thought maybe they were just going for it step-by-step with the MCL39 launch spec.

It seems the “new” clamp has changed nothing in the rigidity at high speeds.

[Macklaren]

Huge difference

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GsMnuPiWEAA ... name=large

excellent analysis.
but should we not look at the rate of change of each wing instead? do they both have the same starting points? what if angle of attack of each wing was set differently to begin with?

[AR3-GP]

Now on F1TV live stream Alex Brundell, presenting McLaren FW said that he spoke with Rob Marshall and the outcome is like this:
AB: What changes did you do to the FW?
RM: We added one hook to the top flap. No material changes on FW.
AB: So how you mitigate the loss?
RM: What loss?

Based on the images they have made more changes than that. It's highlighted below.

(1) Different carbon weave directionality where the flap attaches to nosecone
(2) Additional flap strut
(3) modified angle adjuster bracket.