F1technical.net

This is the longest fuming in forum history. It's kind of funny, if you're not a McLaren or Ferrari fan, btw.

It's like:

- "You didn't take the cat out!"
- "You told me not to do it"
- "Yeah, but your tyres are too high, the cockpit is too windy and the plank is made of wood, for the love of Pete!".
- "Pardon me? Is that time of the month again???"

Let's hope you get there some day. Breath, breath, you guys...

You gotta love Ciro!

Well lets just hope that other teams learn how to flex their bodywork as well as Red Bull. Because otherwise Vettel will be defacto champion by July end otherwise....

JohnsonsEvilTwin wrote:Well lets just hope that other teams learn how to flex their bodywork as well as Red Bull. Because otherwise Vettel will be defacto champion by July end otherwise....

I can live with that. Championship no. 2 for Vettel!

You found out about that e-mail yet? Just interested in an explanation.

richard_leeds wrote:That's the way the formula has evolved. Much of it is arbitrary, for example why have an open cockpit, why have that size of wheel, and what is high tech about a 2 inch plank?

The rules don't aim to establish very best engineering. They simply say "here is a game we've invented, if you want to play with us then you need a car that looks like this"

Not really, Ferrari had an innovation (hole in the nosecone) perfectly legal and crashtested.
FIA banned it.
RBR makes wing that breaches some rules, FIA does nothing. Teams have to spend millions to develop a wing which probably will be banned for next year.
inconcistency imo, ferrari hole was just as safe as a regular one, it complied with the rules, why ban it?
F-duct, perfectly legal said nothing about it in the rules, deemed legal and kept until it was banned the year after.

Personally i would like to see more things flex but then don't write rules specifically in place to prevent such a thing.

HampusA wrote: ...
Not really, Ferrari had an innovation (hole in the nosecone) perfectly legal and crashtested.
FIA banned it.
...

Holy ---, a hole in the nosecone, at this day and age, no wonder FIA banned it!

Everyone involved in F1 knows that the FIA has the power to change the interpretation of a rule at anytime. You don't see anyone throwing up their arms over this type of sport management and quitting the sport. You don't see RB whining about the latest throttle overrun change. You adapt and make the most of the change. If anything this puts a premium on a team management structure that responds well to change. The complexity of this sport extends beyond the cars.

If you don't like the formula for this class, find something else to follow.

Brian

Today FIA showed the excellence and really let F1 and the world know how incompetent they really are.

Engine mapping as aerodynamic moveable device? GTFO!
Macca/RBR front wing as gap-bridgers? Of course not..

Please F1 teams, leave this mess before it´s to late.

What is your source for this?

Autosport dot com.. Where have you been? JET lead the charge.

HampusA wrote:Today FIA showed the excellence and really let F1 and the world know how incompetent they really are.

Engine mapping as aerodynamic moveable device? GTFO!
Macca/RBR front wing as gap-bridgers? Of course not..

Please F1 teams, leave this mess before it´s to late.

Sure, you konw better then the FIA and all scientists, you have proven wrong the existence of Gravity multiple times by now.

Oh wait...

^I have to agree. The mindless constant FIA bashing is boring.

How about writing to Jean Todt and asking for Charlie Whitings job?

So the FIA are wnating to stop exhaust gasses from being blown through the diffuser when the throttle is not depressed. Seems fair to me. Should increase braking zones and improve over taking (real over taking, not this DRS induced rubbish).

Rob01 wrote:Autosport dot com.. Where have you been? JET lead the charge.

Thanks Rob.

Indeed, and apart form that that system is actually illegal, you can see it as active aerodynamics. It isnt driver induced nor is it done 'by nature', that is by the law of physics.

The Flexing front wing on the other hand is driven by the physics, forces that pushes the wing down, it isnt active aerodynamics nor is it driver operated, it halls within the box set in rule 3.17 and rule 3.15 is unfollowable, since per that rule every car is illegal and no car can be made legal either, since perfectly rigid doesnt exist.

Just to keep a discussion going....

"Indeed, and apart form that that system is actually illegal, you can see it as active aerodynamics. It isnt driver induced nor is it done 'by nature', that is by the law of physics."

As of now the exhaust is allowed to flow anywhere I believe. Since most the exterior of the car has some kind of aero influence it is hard for the exhaust not to be involved in some fashion. The fact that the exhaust output is variable cannot be change. Nothing has changed to end this variabilty, only the amount of effectiveness is reduced. No one in F1 has ever considered this approach illegal.

Brian

I am sorry, but I do not know how to explain it. I will still try to do it.

The Retarted Egnition is illegal because it uses tuning to adjust the cars aerodynamics, this tuning isnt by driver input nor is it by normal physics, it is sort of similair as active suspension, where it is autoamitcly controlled by the car. Thus making it some sort of active aerodynamics

The Flexi Wing is legal becuase it fits in the 3.17 rule box, plus it isnt done by any setting nor by driver input. It is done by the physics which are pushing the wing down, not by any driver input or a special setting.