USF1 -- F1's All-American Challenger

[f1ar]

Lopez confirmed as USF1 driver:

EDIT usf1 link:

http://www.usgpe.com/news/us-f1-team-an ... eason.html

[WhiteBlue]

DP, dammit

[WhiteBlue]

DP

On the USF1 effort an interesting testimony from Dan Gurney

[WhiteBlue]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYM8MpkL ... r_embedded[/youtube]

On the USF1 effort an interesting testimony from Dan Gurney, born April 1930. I looked up his age when he spoke about Peter Windsor as a young man.

[pipex]

Last-minute:
From rumours in Argentina we know that a condition in "Pechito" Lopez contract is that Argentinean engineer and F1Technical fellow Belatti must go to work as Lead Senior Designer for USF1.
"Pechito" said in a interview: "Belatti is the only one who could finish the car on time for Bahrain, i have total faith in him".

[mx_tifoso]

DP, dammit

DP

On the USF1 effort an interesting testimony from Dan Gurney

And I've also heard that Belatti/Pechito rumour, what a coincidence.

[pipex]

The rumour is gaining traction...

[DaveKillens]

I also checked the regulations, and the only relevant parts were

10.2.2 Any powered device which is capable of altering the configuration or affecting the performance of any part of the suspension system is forbidden.
10.2.3 No adjustment may be made to the suspension system while the car is in motion.

http://argent.fia.com/web/fia-public.ns ... 0CLEAN.pdf

As a side note, I hate the deliberate vagueness of the regulations. They really need to be cleaned up. For instance, does "powered device" include human power? Hmmmmm.

I question whether any deviation from what is considered traditional use in Formula One is wise for a brand-new team. If everyone else is using one specific method for an application, it almost is always chosen for good reasons. If USF1 choose to use some gimmick for marketing purposes, then how serious they are becomes questionable. Are they in this game to compete, or do they have other motives and agendas?

[WhiteBlue]

As a side note, I hate the deliberate vagueness of the regulations. They really need to be cleaned up. For instance, does "powered device" include human power? Hmmmmm.

No, power steering and other powered controls means that the manual or pedal force is amplified by electric or hydraulic means or actuators.

[marcush.]

to me those set of regulations seem to try and close loopholes ...but in the end with this approach you will close hole and opene up a barndoor behind you,the biggest travesty being the bit where you are oblged to publish your invention in case your new interpretation was not deemed legal....

-no suspension adjustment when car is in motion-..that is a practical joke...you adjust steering angle continously when driving the car as the first simple example.

[marcush.]

but back on topic ,
I cannot see the logic behind copying what all the others do when you have not hired the brains who developed these tried and trusted solutions.So you will tend to design
and build what you have or think you have understood.
We must not forget that we are only in the second year of the new regulations and face another big step with tyre size and refueling gone -enough for williams to dumb their best work for a long time to start afresh with a new concept...
so to go against the flow will teach you a lot more than trying to copy and not understanding why it works or not.
If you could buy the Toyota as a complete package and would have the funds and recources to campaign it -this would of course be the ideal solution for a startup in 2010, but looking into the future of F1 ...this will lead to big pains later on.

[DaveKillens]

As a side note, I hate the deliberate vagueness of the regulations. They really need to be cleaned up. For instance, does "powered device" include human power? Hmmmmm.

No, power steering and other powered controls means that the manual or pedal force is amplified by electric or hydraulic means or actuators.

I agree with your interpretation WB. But if this regulation was ever disputed in a court, then the lack of clear and specific wording leaves it open to countless and pointless arguments by teams of lawyers.


I also agree with your train of thought marcus, you can't win a race by following the footsteps of the leader. My argument was based on a brand new team, where I assumed that respectable performance derived from traditional methods was preferable to introducing radical concepts. If your radical concept works, everyone looks like a genius. But if it bombs, it may jeapordize the team. Hey, I could be wrong, but that's how I would do it.

[marcush.]

the question will be :is it possible to understand what let to the layout of the cars
you are going to copy is it useful to take aspect from a car and not knowing the story behind the decision that led to them doing what they did.
You will in fact loose a lot of time trying to figure out just how and why the other guy did it like he did instead of taking the task and create your own thing .
To my mind it is most important to have a clear idea what your machine and eequipment has to preform and go from there.
then you will find along that way that some solutions you find on other cars will be quite useful to integrate into your concept...
So for a start ...with the Cosworth engine you might have different cooling layout /needs ,fuel calculations may need adressing ,shape of the oiltank influences your fueltankdesign ,the new tyre size will put all the front wing arrangements at least
under doubt ,as well as possible weight distribution knowledge .so in fact copyingt any of the 2009 machines will leave you stranded at a third distance of the race ..
(of course this is meant to be funny a bit but in reality it is exactly hitting the point..)

[CMSMJ1]

I like the sudden optimism that because USF1 are doing something different it must be better.

I follow F1 as a whole - no teams or drivers - it is all equally fantastic to me.

Not wishing to pee on the parade I can see USF1 getting annihilated by the grandees and beaten soundly by the other new starters.

The man on the street knows that downforce is king. You won't win anything with a transverse gearbox or coil spring suspension - they are not big enough performance differentiators.

Looking forwards to Bahrain - woohoo..not long now!

[xpensive]

I'm not as concerned with Lopez, when starting out Like Lotus with two established drivers is an anomality in F1,
as I am with prioritizing design and build of your own gearbox in the first season as a 40 MUSD back-to-basics team.
This being a transverse unit, it is difficult to see the "standard" Ricardo/Xtrac gearbox as a fallback option either?

If you believe the "resource-cap" stories, come 2011-12, Formula One might be in the shape of today's USF1 anyway.

But why can't USF1 simply gag this babbling m***n, they hired a pay driver, so would I, what's the big deal?

http://www.usgpe.com/news/us-f1-team-an ... eason.html

These ramblings over the Argentinian racing history, only comes across as brain-dead namedroppings.