F1 2012 - This whole 'stepped-nose' thing

who actually believe Newey saying the hole is just for driver cooling? :D

(admittedly he didnt say "just" but I think its fair to say thats his implication)
 
Are people wilfully mis-using the word homologation, or do they genuinely not understand that all it means is "meets the rules"? :confused:

I'd also like to suggest that crash test homologation is not the same as technical homologation, so when Gascoyne is saying a car must be homologated before the first test, he simply means that the car used by a team in that test must pass the crash test rules for F1. So Mercedes can use their 2011 car, because it's already been tested, and McLaren could make a rear wing out of paper, if they really wanted, because it would still (probably) pass crash testing.

Scarbs has already stated that there's nothing to stop a new tub being implemented mid-season, and why would homologation stop that? A new front wing has to be homologated. A new tyre compound no doubt has to be homologated. Heck, a new helmet probably etc etc...

Homologation != homogenisation
 
Spunkey said:
I asked Scarbs himself:

And straight from the horses mouth:

So, yes it's possible for a team to change the tub mid-season. But the fact still remains, NONE OF THEM WILL. McLaren have commited to the low nose concept for the last 3 years so they're not going to change to a raised nose, especially with low noses being the rules coming into force in a couple of years time. Other teams have all been using raised noses for a similar period and have a wealth of aerodynamic and suspension data which they won't want to throw away unless the rules specifically force them to.

The ONLY way a team will change this year is if the McLaren is massively ahead of the field. I'm talking 0.5-1.0s per lap quicker. Given that the high/low nose pros and cons cancel themselves out, that isn't going to happen.
Click to expand...

This is a genuine question /concern - so please be patient :)

Isnt there a chance that McLaren might be forced into a bent nose? At the end of the day Red bull's (for example) nose will pass the rules for a few years time wont it (that you refer to), or do the new rules limit height of the tub as well?

If McLaren are 1s+ behind or so in australia (or even later in the season) can they afford to not fully explore any potential bent nose gives - even if it means they have to revert back to how they are currently when the forthcoming rules come into effect in 2014 or whenever?

I realise they more than most have a lot of experience of the low nose in its current implementation..... just trying to understand any potential pitfalls (or why everyone else has done the bent nose, even though they may /will have to change to a naturla low nose in 2 seasons anyway)
 
FrankJH said:
If McLaren are 1s+ behind or so in australia (or even later in the season) can they afford to not fully explore any potential bent nose gives - even if it means they have to revert back to how they are currently when the forthcoming rules come into effect in 2014 or whenever?

I realise they more than most have a lot of experience of the low nose in its current implementation..... just trying to understand any potential pitfalls (or why everyone else has done the bent nose, even though they may /will have to change to a naturla low nose in 2 seasons anyway)
Click to expand...

Everyone else has done the bent nose thing because the whole concept of the aerodynamics of their cars is based around maximum airflow under the nose. High noses have been a trend for a number of years now. A result of this is the rather peculiar front suspension geometry that comes from having a high nosecone relative to the front wheels - the whole front suspension looks like it's on a permanent droop on the RB7 below:

5562625241_8c8dc78684.jpg


Compare that to the McLaren with its low nose - the suspension arms are noticeably more horizontal due to the lower tub and nose.



McLaren have had low noses going all the way back to 1998: compare the 1998 McLaren with the Jordan below... Their viewpoint has long been that the slight increase in air under the nose is not worth compromising the geometry of the front suspension for. Remember how the McLaren cars are renowned for being able to ride the curbs well? This is part of the reason why.

_1363669_as_hakkinen300.jpg


_45270048_damon416.jpg



With the new rules this year, 11 of the 12 teams are continuing with the "high nose" concept as all their experience, data, and recent car design knowledge is relevant to getting as much air under the nose as possible. They obviously felt the slight aero penalty of the bumpy nose and the small decrease in the air able to fit under the nose (with the 2012 regs for a lower nose height) was worth it when compared to redesigning their entire front suspension setup and the rest of their car - which is set up to work with the air available.

The other 1 team (McLaren) already have a car optimised for slightly less air coming under the nose, a front suspension set up which already works on a lower nose and had no more reason to throw all their design experience and data out the window and go high nose than any of the other teams had to go low nose.
 
Thank you very much for that detailed explanation Im sure I will refer back to it quite often :D

I know its only day 2 of pre - season, but even so the 1.5s gap between RB and McLaren (and ferrari it has to be said) is looking quite large (especially when you consider "smaller" teams are considerably closer to RB), its a little worrying lol

Im not totally ignoring Merc, but given they are running a 2011 based car with 2012 parts, their times arent directly comparable either
 
At points during testing last year I believe the williams was fastest on track by a wide margin with red bulls and ferraris a couple of seconds behind.
 
You may as well ignore testing times entirely - you have no idea what the test agendas for the teams are at any given time. Some might be out there trying to see how the tyres react to hard laps, others might be just wanting to get loads and loads of semi fast laps in to collect aero data etc.
 
FrankJH said:
Thank you very much for that detailed explanation Im sure I will refer back to it quite often :D

I know its only day 2 of pre - season, but even so the 1.5s gap between RB and McLaren (and ferrari it has to be said) is looking quite large (especially when you consider "smaller" teams are considerably closer to RB), its a little worrying lol

Im not totally ignoring Merc, but given they are running a 2011 based car with 2012 parts, their times arent directly comparable either
Click to expand...


We've learned that the Mercedes is running the complete 2011 car. No 2012 parts.
 
englishpremier said:
McLaren aren't known for being able to ride the curbs. In most the practice sessions the five live team commented on the fact that the car looked far too stiff.
Click to expand...

Last few years, a stiff car has certainly been a trait of the McLaren. Back in the late 90's they took more kerb than any other team out there, but the actual setup of the car was still incredibly stiff in comparison with the other teams.

Partially due to suspension layout, but mainly due to the pressure blow-off valve in the dampers they had at the time.

When they walloped a kerb at speed the wheel lifted a good few inches into the air as the bov operated and completely softened that dampers bump damping, the momentum of the car keeping it reasonably level and then the wheel slammed down pretty rapidly afterwards.

Errr... *cough* Apparently. ;)

Hmmm... I wonder where my Penske damper is?
 
FrankJH said:
Thank you very much for that detailed explanation Im sure I will refer back to it quite often :D

I know its only day 2 of pre - season, but even so the 1.5s gap between RB and McLaren (and ferrari it has to be said) is looking quite large (especially when you consider "smaller" teams are considerably closer to RB), its a little worrying lol

Im not totally ignoring Merc, but given they are running a 2011 based car with 2012 parts, their times arent directly comparable either
Click to expand...

None of the times are comparable surely? We don't know what setups are being run, fuel levels etc etc. I'll only really believe the time delta when it's FP3 in Australia!
 
The most useful thing about testing times is to get an average long run time, say over 10-25 laps and compare that between cars. At least that way you know fuel loads will be relatively similar.

Unfortunately all the reports have on them is a list of headline times, which is completely useless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom