Adjustable Rear Wing (DRS)

[Pingguest]

Well, seg, the problem as I see it comes from the conflicting reasons given for this development.

On one hand, you have to make the cars "road relevant". Thus, you try to give them fuel economy (whatever that means in an F1 car). There is an stated goal, approved by ALL teams of 50% less drag and 50% less down force.

On the other hand, you have to make the cars "entertaning", which means you have to do that, while keeping top speed and lap times. This is the second goal.

Can you figure out any other solution? This one sounded pretty clever to me, back in 2007 when it appeared. It gives you both goals.

Although it was established this was going to be included among 2011 rules, nobody complained back then.

I cannot imagine an alternative. I hope somebody do.

Thanks, Lurk, I haven't thought of drag braking. Good point. Rosberg´s remarks are logical, thanks also for your quotes, pretty explanatory.

I agree that Formula 1-cars should be entertaining. But doest it imply that cars should maintain their current lap times? Would the vast majority of the fans complain with slower lap times while the cars slide a lot more and thereby require much more input from the driver?

[raymondu999]

Hey guys. I've just been thinking how the 7th gear probably won't be anywhere near 18,000 rpm when the cars are on the straight and the rear wing is not activated. With engines having different peak power, torque curves, power curves etc, would it not be possible for an engine to be less disadvantaged by this issue? What do you all think?

[Pingguest]

The adjustable rear wing is not going to fix the lack of overtaking, says Fernando Alonso.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/89479

"If the car ahead of you runs only one tenth slower than you, then the moveable wing is not enough." Ouch. It puts a rather interesting perspective on the on-going standardization of Formula 1.

[Ciro Pabón]

Of course, Pingguest. I think that's a tautology.

At 200 kph (and that's a fast curve), you are going at 56 m/sec.

Thus, in one tenth of a second you move 5 or 6 m.

That's less than the "regular gap" between cars competing for position, which I estimate at 7 or 8 meters (unless you´re "bumper to bumper", NASCAR style).

So... you need two tenths of a second. Or perhaps 0.15 seconds. Or, you could try to enhance your chances by starting to accelerate a bit before the car ahead you (my favorite). Or you could wait for a faster curve (for suicidal people), where one tenth gives you more distance (although things do not work like that, as far as I know).

It has always been like that, since meters and seconds were invented...

It's not the fault of the ARW. I believe that its theory is to equalize the cars, not to give advantage to the one in second place. What would be the interest of overtakings if you do not have to "earn them" and you get a pass because of a gadget? Same reasoning applies to KERS.

Of course, this will not convince a majority of fans. It was John Adams who said: “In politics the middle way is none at all” and I believe he was right.

[Richard]

It has always been like that, since meters and seconds were invented...

So that's why racing in the USA is unfathomable to metric eyes.

[CyleB]

What is the regulation with respect of the new rear wings i.e
what angle deflection is the wing allowed to move?

i believe it 50 degrees, but in not completely sure

[RichardHH]

What is the regulation with respect of the new rear wings i.e
what angle deflection is the wing allowed to move?

i believe it 50 degrees, but in not completely sure

Now the rear wing flap can pivot near its rear most point and open the slot gap from 10-15mm to up to 50mm. Opening this gap unloads the flap and reduced both downforce and drag.

http://scarbsf1.wordpress.com/2010/12/1 ... explained/

... You gotta love Scarbs!

[Mandrake]

I just had a quick though: Assuming the RedBulls have the same amount of more downforce like last year, being to able to take Turn8 flatout in Turkey for example, wouldn't KERS and the ARW benefit them even more?

Imagine this situation, RedBull, usually a bit slower on the straights but mighty in the corners, is able to keep the gap / close up in a corner. On the exit they can use KERS to get into the 1second gap to use the ARW which will enable them to finally pass the car in front.

It wouldn't work out quite as well the other way round because the cars behind cannot follow as closely as the RedBull can. As seen last year in Turkey as well.

[raymondu999]

That's an interesting thought. But wouldn't the Bulls lose more downforce behind other cars too anyways?

[Mandrake]

Of course they would, I'm far from an expert in that area but in my head it would look like this (warning: illustrative figures):

McLaren 150 Downforce
Redbull 180 Downforce

Loss when driving behind = 50 Downforce

So the RedBulls lose the same amount, but still be closer to what McLaren has with clean air (sort of). This is just a shot into the dark, no idea if the laws of physics work like this

[raymondu999]

I'd have believed it better if you went for a percentage loss. Assuming say maybe 50% loss, then it's (with your arbitrary figures) 75 vs 90 units

[Mandrake]

Yea you're right, percentages defo work better here I was just trying to write down my thoughts.

Would be nice if any of the experts could shed some light onto this topic.

[Richard]

What redbull may be doing is having a different wing speed for qualifying than in the race.

If changing that setting is allowed.

[marekk]

Are they allowed to actively regulate the speed of DRS actuator (a traction control sort of) depending on, lets say, throttle/brake pedal movements. Or even with one more dial on steering wheel?
Is DRS deployment time regulated ?

[CyleB]

Are they allowed to actively regulate the speed of DRS actuator (a traction control sort of) depending on, lets say, throttle/brake pedal movements. Or even with one more dial on steering wheel?
Is DRS deployment time regulated ?

When the brake is pressed or the driver were to let of the throttle, the DRS is to return to full downforce.