The Official USA Grand Prix Thread **SPOILERS**

[Derek Smith]

Galileo said:

I always thought the answer was rather simple.
Decrease the size of the wings. They don't have to be tiny, just smaller. There's enough money floating around F1, I'm sure the sponsors will get over it, especially if more people start watching. And lets face it, not much can be seen on todays wings because of the multi-elements.
Secondly, increase the size, grip levels and life span of the tyres.

No need to limit the aero, although I have to say I find the front wings particularly unappealing, and it would appear that 2014 will be even less aesthetically attractive.

The problem:

Cars cannot follow one another due to the disturbed air. Grip drops and therefore tyre wear increases dramatically. Braking has to be started earlier than the car in front. Tows are almost a thing of the past.

A solution:

Make it a requirement for the air to exit the car undisturbed.

My belief is that part of the current aero's design is to make it impossible for cars to follow closely.

I assume, although from a position of ignorance, that it will be a difficult thing to do. So, tough. Make the lack of turbulance the initial requirment.

[Crafty_]

Derek Smith said:

Make it a requirement for the air to exit the car undisturbed.

Is that even possible ? ok it could be minimised but can anything travel through the air without disturbing it ?

Someone a few posts up said about decreasing the size of wings - this has been going on for some years. Remember the pre 2012 big rear wings ? gone. The side winglets or ones on the top of the engine cover from a few years ago ? gone. Number of elements in wings ? decreased.

The problem is those dammed clever engineers keep finding ways to recoup the losses. Just look at the flexi wing tests - initially a good idea and it reduced downforce until the engineers found ways to provide enough rigidity to pass the tests and then bend like a banana just past that point.

After Senna's death they were intent on slowing cars down of safety. Fine, but I always wondered why they didn't just restrict downforce. Admittedly I don't know how this could be tested and avoid the issues with flexi wing tests but surely some bright spark somewhere could figure it out. Loss of downforce means loss of aero grip which means mechanical grip becomes even more important.

[Vaud]

Crafty_ said:

Is that even possible ? ok it could be minimised but can anything travel through the air without disturbing it ?

No it can't.

Aero is so advanced these days - the intro on Sky was fascinating in how Redbull control the vortex coming off the front wing and flowing down the car - compared to say, Ferrari.

Unless you are willing to standardised bodies and aero components, it will remain a game of regulation and then aero guys clawing it back. If they have a surface to play with, they'll create you downforce (or lack of)

[Derek Smith]

Crafty_ said:

Is that even possible ?

If it was a requirement, then most certainly.

They probably would not be able to carry the same wing as they do now. Indeed, they might not be able to design in much in the way of downforce, at least initially. By mid-season they will be able to drive of the roof of a tunnel.

[Derek Smith]

Crafty_ said:

After Senna's death they were intent on slowing cars down of safety.

I think the first intent was to protect F1. The changes brought in were 'on the table' for some time as such accidents were predicted. You are quite right in that speed, and the energy inherent in the cars, is a major factor in the cause of death but the integrity of the protective shell is the first essential.

[entropy]

Derek Smith said:

No need to limit the aero, although I have to say I find the front wings particularly unappealing, and it would appear that 2014 will be even less aesthetically attractive.

The problem:

Cars cannot follow one another due to the disturbed air. Grip drops and therefore tyre wear increases dramatically. Braking has to be started earlier than the car in front. Tows are almost a thing of the past.

A solution:

Make it a requirement for the air to exit the car undisturbed.

My belief is that part of the current aero's design is to make it impossible for cars to follow closely.

I assume, although from a position of ignorance, that it will be a difficult thing to do. So, tough. Make the lack of turbulance the initial requirment.

Wings create drag and dirty air which upsets the car behind.

This has always been the problem with open wheeled cars whether it be the dawn of aero in the 70's or flat winged Indycars.

That's why I advocate grounds effect as the drag penalty is less.

Look at RBR now: their usual trick was to run max downforce but because of the gains they found recently with the floor and diffuser they run less wing.

[rdjohn]

Vaud said:

Aero is so advanced these days

Unless you are willing to standardised bodies and aero components, it will remain a game of regulation and then aero guys clawing it back. If they have a surface to play with, they'll create you downforce (or lack of)

It is probably no less complicated than when they got rid of ground effects. You remove the surfaces to play with.
A front wing with only 2 elements each side
Likewise only 2 elements at the rear
No barge board and other appendages
A genuinely flat and continuous floor

All easily achievable and may immediately put the teams at the back on the same lap as those at the front. But the top 4 teams would be dead against anything like that, of course.