2019 Aero changes...F1 lost it's mind

Remove all the aero, then maybe they can follow close!

 

Halo's, shark fins, same crappy aero.....gonna be an exciting season.

 

Totally agee Bas, you have been preaching this ever since I signed on. Also get rid of DRS too!!! (fake overtaking....kinda like fake news).

Did'nt Ferrari veto the change though???? Ross wanted to follow closely but Ferrari said NO???

 

Simple solution. 1. Put the engine back in front. 2. The body must me a single piece from front to back with no additional fins, wings, pods, or add-ons. 3. All four tires and wheels must be of the exact same size. 4. Run any engine you want...diesel, hybrid, gasoline, electric...any size or configuration. 5. Have a manual sequential gearbox without any automation. 6. Restrict instrumentation to just rpms an oil pressure. 7. No carbon fiber or ceramic material allowed in the braking system. 8. No visible body piercings or tattoos on the drivers.

 

The teams are making these "rejections" and "approvals".....

Shark fins could return to F1 next year

2018 F1 season

Image Unavailable, Please Login

‘Shark fins’ may return to cars next despite the designs being banned for the 2018 F1 season.

A proposal to revive shark fins was discussed by the Formula One Strategy Group yesterday. Some teams are understood to favour the move as it gives them more space to offer to potential sponsors and incorporate the mandatory driver name and number signage.

The Strategy Group debated other potential aerodynamic changes to the cars to come into effect after the new season.

F1 Fanatic understands a revision to the barge board regulations, proposed by McLaren, has been adopted for next year. This is aimed at making the the area more useful for sponsors and more aesthetically pleasing. A Ferrari proposal for a simpler and less expensive rear wing endplate was also approved.

However a proposal from F1’s managing director of motorsport Ross Brawn for a simpler front wing design, a model of which was shown to teams, met with strong resistance. According to sources Ferrari threatened to use its veto right over the technical regulations to block the plan, which has now been dropped.

A further suggestion of increasing the minimum number of engines from three to four next year was also rejected.

The Strategy Group also discussed imposing a minimum period of ‘gardening leave’ on any ex-FIA or FOM staff hired by teams, to prevent them bringing sensitive information about competitors with them. However it was agreed a ‘gentlemen’s agreement’ between the teams is necessary to enforce any period which is longer than that specified by the relevant local laws.

https://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2018/01/19/shark-fins-return-f1-next-year/

 

Maybe this has been discussed, but can someone explain why they dont make the rule of Single Element wing front and rear and be done with it?
it seems so easy to do, cars look great, tougher, cheaper to mfg, can run nose to tail and no more DRS needed. Can anyone explain this to me?

 

Forgot about this one too.....jeez

TECHNIQUE F1 2018: T Wing "legal" also in 2018...Only the position was changed?




Going into more detail, and focusing on the part of the article about the now famous T-Wing, seen in more variations in the past season, these are the words that the Italian team used:

"[...] while the positioning of the transversally mounted T-wing, which all the teams used in 2017 to better direct air flow towards the rear wing has been reviewed." "[...]

As we all know, the innovative and hopefully successful design of a F1 car must be based on a great and detailed knowledge of the technical regulation, which often presents holes, gray spots, or limited indications, which in the past have strongly stimulated the imagination of designers and engineers in inventing effective solutions to improve the performance of the cars.


Just a year ago, for example, we found ourselves in the presentations of the new F1 cars with perforated noses (Red Bull), fins with particular shapes, and above all the presence of the now famous T-Wing. Presented by Mercedes on February 23rd in Silverstone's shakedown and then seen on the renderings of the Ferrari SF70-H the next day, that wing evolved successively in C-Wing, and in some cases in E-Wing by the introduction of different supports, had proved to be very useful both to channel the flow of air that, coming from the complex central portion of the car, went to the rear wing, both to provide different aerodynamic alternatives in the generation of load in the rear area, as occurred precisely in the case of the Maranello car.

During the last season, however, in the meetings for the revision of the technical regulation, the idea was not only to eliminate the famous fin which extended the cover of the bonnet but also the T-Wing, so hated from Ross Brawn. The decision, which towards the end of the championship seemed to lead to an initial maintenance of the solutions (for veto imposed by the teams), had an unexpected ending with McLaren's decision to break the agreement and accept the removal of these components.



Therefore, as stated in the new regulation, the article 3.5.1 a) limits the dimensions of the engine bonnet, intact compared to the version of technical regulation 2017, imposing, or rather adding, through the article 3.5.1 point c) the absence of bodywork above 650 mm from the reference plane in an area bounded by a vertical line located at 1000 mm from the rear axle (RWCL) and from the rear axle itself.

What does this involve? A goodbye to the fin? Unfortunately for the teams that had already started the development convinced they could keep the solution, yes. A goodbye also to the T-Wing? Not exactly. Not at least according to the concept we were used to. In the past season, in fact, the regulatory hole, which involved a greater portion than that used for example by the two dominant teams, led to many solutions that we would not necessarily stop to see again this year. Let's start with an example: the double Sauber solution.



The T-Wing at the top can no longer be used due to the introduction of part c) to article 3.5.1 while the bottom one, which some teams have baptized with the name "Deck Wing", will still be perfectly legal (below 650 mm and at a distance of no more than 50 mm from the rear axle).



A similar solution was brought to the track by the Williams Team with a second bow T Wing mounted in the lower part of the fin, although in this case perhaps should be slightly revised the position in height (difficult to check if the profiles are under 650 mm imposed from the 2018 technical regulation).

Now, if we thought more generally about the regulatory changes, which have also caused the disappearance of the monkey seat among other things, the 2017 solutions of Sauber and Williams could be considered very much interesting. They are not only legal, but also potentially useful "technically" to maximize the downforce created by the rear wing trying to accelerate the flow of air in the back of the rear wing and, secondary effect but not to forget, also improving the extraction air from the speaker thus overcoming the lack of a component, the monkey seat, which Team like Ferrari have used for the majority of the 2017 season.

https://motorlat.com/notas/tecnica/3654/technique-f1-2018-t-wing-legal-also-in-2018only-the-position-was-changed#.WmItPb5HE2F.twitter

 

OH MY GOD!!!!!!!! How can they all be so out of touch with what is needed and wanted? I just can't even think about it anymore. It makes me so pissed. It's getting to the point that only good think about F1 is the grid girls ... see post titled Grid Girls elsewhere here in the F1 section.

My GOD! For F Sake!!!!!!!!!!!! Just stupid.

 

So Ross Brawn wanted simpler front wings? If this is the case I suspect Jean Napoleon did some meddling against such alongside Ferrari.

The amount of shi*e on a current front wing makes Hamilton's dress sense look elegant.

 

Well, the current regulatons were made to make the cars look better and go faster around the corners. Many folks here complained about that back in the day. Personally I think that a change in looks was needed: the 2009-2016 cars were probably the ugliest I´ve seen. It was quite obvious that wider cars and more downforce would make passing harder, but that doesn´t mean neccesarily a worse show. Back in the late 90s early 2000s cars were a lot more spectacular and we saw better fights, although there was less passing than now.

Maybe you don´t like what they have now, but if you thought that they were going to rewrite the aero rules after only one year you were being naive. The teams had spent too much money in these cars to start from zero again. Removing the fin or simplifying the front wing wouldn´t mean a lot, as a radical change is needed. Then it´s just a matter of what fits to each team: if McLaren has a problem with the fin or Ferrari has found something in the front wing, they´ll veto whatever suits them.

I don´t want to look back: front engine, manual gearbox, steel brakes... That´s out of place in a race car. I think it´s more a matter of cleaning up the flow. Less wing, more venturi tunnel and (oh, blasphemy!) covering the wheels. The front wings are so complex today because they try to minimize the impact of the uncovered wheels and suspension.

 

The Ferrari veto needs to go......If Ferrari leave because of that I wouldnt care. Ferrari not always have best intentions for F1 or fans. With halo and the useless new engine rule, if F1 loses fans no loss. If F1 dies its just a long suicide by them. I wont miss it. The entire situation is laughable now. Its more political drama than racing. Racing is now the 'side-show' in relation to the off-track situation and politics. In a serious note maybe its time to realize with tech and auto's changing F1 is now on the road to being anything but relevant in the larger scheme.

I would like to be wrong about all this.....

 

Meanwhile McLaren is trying to figure out how to get out of their "papaya" problem.

 

Agreed, they even threatened to mess with the Grid Girls! OMG it's insane.

I really thought Ross B would sort out the mess ..but it goes on and on and on.

 

Not that winning or placing on the podium should be more of a concern LOL

 

Appear Jean Todt is having discussions about the veto ending that for Ferrari. Long over due. Its a team sport with more than 1 team. Appears to be a consideration for the future - http://en.f1i.com/news/290413-jean-todt-may-soon-bad-news-ferrari.html

 

F2 races are far more exciting to watch than F1 in this hybrid era....and there's not a whole lotta tech (aero/PU) involved in F2.

 

The comparison is not fair: all the cars are the same!

 

F1 is becoming less and less enjoyable by the day!!

 

F1 sucks. Before the hybrid era I would watch every session of every race weekend.

I haven't watched practice in years. I haven't watched a single race beginning to end in the last 2-3 seasons. I might have them on. But I'm always doing something else at the same time.

The races are not interesting.

IMHO, mandated reliability is the worst part. During Schumacher's dominance,... I never turned off a race. You were on the edge of your seat praying the car would reach the flag. Cars designed and run on the limit is exciting. Fast Prius that are nearly as reliable as a commuter car... not so much.

Imagine LeMans w/o incidents,... mechanical or otherwise. It would be over at 90 minutes.

F1 sucks. The leadership needs to stop visually inspecting their own prostates daily.

 

Yeah, F1 is taking a nose dive.

Bas is right. Ross needs to call their bluff; and if Mercedes, Ferrari, and Renault leave....so what!! You have about 3 manufacturers wanting to join in for a much simpler and cheaper (mainly the PU) F1. Manufacturers like Porsche, VAG......heck even Ford expressed of joining a simpler and cheaper F1. Honda would then definitely be a player going forward. You also have a couple of engine manufacturers too that would join.

Start on a semi clean slate with regards to aero, PU, and fuel flow rates etc. etc.

Ferrari would then either suck it up and stay or come back if they left. It's in their blood.