Aero naughtiness.

[loneranger]

It is pretty obvious that some F1 cars are easier to follow than others.
In other words the aero package, for the same level of downforce, can be engineered to create more problems for a following car.
This being so the teams must be doing this deliberately. If you could make it more difficult to be overtaken, you would.
Yet another reason to introduce drastically simplified aero rules and ban winglets, barge boards etc.

[loneranger]

excupra said:

loneranger said:

It is pretty obvious that some F1 cars are easier to follow than others.

Is it?

During the race on Sunday Brundle said that the Ferrari was more difficult to follow.

If you think about it they should be able to engineer the dynamics of the wake votices in a way the nullifies the aerodynamic devices on following cars to a lesser or greater degree. If they can do it they will.

[loneranger]

jamieboy said:

loneranger said:

Yet another reason to introduce drastically simplified aero rules and ban winglets, barge boards etc.

Rather than dumbing the cars down, would it not be better if the aerodynamicists applied some of their genius to making their cars behave better in dirty air?

It is obvious that they are doing so. This is war and they will exploit anything within the rules to give them a competetive advantage. Hence they would be fools not to make their cars work as well as possible in dirty air.
This is why, I think, front wings no longer have a straight leading edge. Airplanes do. The complex curves on a modern F1 front wing look precisely as if they are designed to work better in dirty air.