Sour Grapes or Genius
Discussion
Keep up at the back! 
It's been cleared by Charlie Whiting, the big teams will all have it soon enough. Martin Whitmarsh has said he doesn't see anything wrong so I reckon Mclaren are some way into developing their own system. Red Bull and Lotus on the other hand possibly not, since they seem particularly upset.
Didn't really help them too much anyway, they were quite equal with Mclaren on the straights in Melbourne.
It's been cleared by Charlie Whiting, the big teams will all have it soon enough. Martin Whitmarsh has said he doesn't see anything wrong so I reckon Mclaren are some way into developing their own system. Red Bull and Lotus on the other hand possibly not, since they seem particularly upset.
Didn't really help them too much anyway, they were quite equal with Mclaren on the straights in Melbourne.
And inevitably, Brawn has a dig at the other teams exhaust concepts!
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/98201
It's all gamesmanship IMHO.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/98201
It's all gamesmanship IMHO.
Have to say it can't be genius because even I thought of using the movement of the DRS system as a way of actuating something else (I'm not saying I thought of the front wing stall but it was pretty obvious someone was going to use the activation of moveable aero to do other things at the same time, such as uncovering something else, no?)
Sad/good (depending on your viewpoint) thing is, it's yet another aspect to muddy the waters over what should be a very simple task: to get ~24 cars around a track at the same time and whoever is the fastest, wins. Not taking anything away from anyone be it the flex wing guys, the EBD, the F Duct, the front wing F Duct; they're all ingenious devices.
Sad/good (depending on your viewpoint) thing is, it's yet another aspect to muddy the waters over what should be a very simple task: to get ~24 cars around a track at the same time and whoever is the fastest, wins. Not taking anything away from anyone be it the flex wing guys, the EBD, the F Duct, the front wing F Duct; they're all ingenious devices.
Edited by DrTre on Tuesday 20th March 15:32
Love the idea, but surely if, as a result of the driver's actions, a hole is uncovered that influences aero, that's not legal. That is what the FIA used to determine that F ducts were illegal wasn't it?
I think Mercedes' main issue, as I mentioned on another thread, is that neither driver is equipped to exploit it. Yet.
Malaysia has two loooong straights. Let's see what Mercedes can do there....
I think Mercedes' main issue, as I mentioned on another thread, is that neither driver is equipped to exploit it. Yet.
Malaysia has two loooong straights. Let's see what Mercedes can do there....
blanking plate and all that ..StevieBee said:
I don't think its necessarily that they are upset. The only formal way any team to can gain clarification on the legalities of a certain design feature is to lodge a protest as this forces the FIA to investigate and make a ruling.
But this type of development almost certainly involves the FIA at its inception and through its development. Protests are almost always pointless unless the FIA does a complete about turn.rubystone said:
Love the idea, but surely if, as a result of the driver's actions, a hole is uncovered that influences aero, that's not legal. That is what the FIA used to determine that F ducts were illegal wasn't it?
I think Mercedes' main issue, as I mentioned on another thread, is that neither driver is equipped to exploit it. Yet.
Malaysia has two loooong straights. Let's see what Mercedes can do there....
The drivers are only operating an FIA imposed system.I think Mercedes' main issue, as I mentioned on another thread, is that neither driver is equipped to exploit it. Yet.
Malaysia has two loooong straights. Let's see what Mercedes can do there....
I think you'll find that the FIA ruled out the F Duct by making certain design rule changes, not by using the moveable aero regs etc. The MB design is clearly well within the rules, or CW wouldn't have let them do it in the first place, would he?
DrTre said:
Have to say it can't be genius because even I thought of using the movement of the DRS system as a way of actuating something else (I'm not saying I thought of the front wing stall but it was pretty obvious someone was going to use the activation of moveable aero to do other things at the same time, such as uncovering something else, no?)
Sad/good (depending on your viewpoint) thing is, it's yet another aspect to muddy the waters over what should be a very simple task: to get ~24 cars around a track at the same time and whoever is the fastest, wins. Not taking anything away from anyone be it the flex wing guys, the EBD, the F Duct, the front wing F Duct; they're all ingenious devices.
Well, as you clearly don't know how it works or even what it is, you aren't in a position to say how clever or not it is are you? And people have millions of 'ideas' every day. The genius part is turning them into reality. Could you do that? Sad/good (depending on your viewpoint) thing is, it's yet another aspect to muddy the waters over what should be a very simple task: to get ~24 cars around a track at the same time and whoever is the fastest, wins. Not taking anything away from anyone be it the flex wing guys, the EBD, the F Duct, the front wing F Duct; they're all ingenious devices.
Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 20th March 15:32
rubystone said:
Love the idea, but surely if, as a result of the driver's actions, a hole is uncovered that influences aero, that's not legal. That is what the FIA used to determine that F ducts were illegal wasn't it?
I think Mercedes' main issue, as I mentioned on another thread, is that neither driver is equipped to exploit it. Yet.
Malaysia has two loooong straights. Let's see what Mercedes can do there....
It comes down to primary and secondary operations. The primary operation is from the driver to press the DRS button. The secondary effect comes from a hole being uncovered through the operation of the system which then allows something else to operate. Unless the secondary action is explicitly banned then it can be used.I think Mercedes' main issue, as I mentioned on another thread, is that neither driver is equipped to exploit it. Yet.
Malaysia has two loooong straights. Let's see what Mercedes can do there....
CiderwithCerbie said:
Their expensive little duct won't matter a flying f#ck if they can't stop the Merc shredding its tyres faster than the McLaren or Red Bull...
Very true, hopefully we can see them sort that out, the have MSc on the podium again regularly, and maybe Rosberg getting his first win.REALIST123 said:
The drivers are only operating an FIA imposed system.
I think you'll find that the FIA ruled out the F Duct by making certain design rule changes, not by using the moveable aero regs etc. The MB design is clearly well within the rules, or CW wouldn't have let them do it in the first place, would he?
The FIA have stated (somewhere in an interview with Charlie Whiting I think) that they didn't ban the F-duct at all they just made a rule stating the driver couldn't influence the aerodynamics of the car*.I think you'll find that the FIA ruled out the F Duct by making certain design rule changes, not by using the moveable aero regs etc. The MB design is clearly well within the rules, or CW wouldn't have let them do it in the first place, would he?
- I appreciate his head "influences" the aero but you know what I mean.
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff