+1 what i've said all along.N12ck wrote:You want as much downforce as possible, but not at the expense of a massive drag penalty, the concept of the car has to be as least draggy as possible with a lot of downforce, if you had a season of Monaco's then yes you would bolt on as many wings as possible, but taking into account Monza and Spa, you wouldn't want to build a massively draggy with alot of downforce car
+2..I TOTALY agree with you guys..jordangp wrote:+1 what i've said all along.N12ck wrote:You want as much downforce as possible, but not at the expense of a massive drag penalty, the concept of the car has to be as least draggy as possible with a lot of downforce, if you had a season of Monaco's then yes you would bolt on as many wings as possible, but taking into account Monza and Spa, you wouldn't want to build a massively draggy with alot of downforce car
Nah, the smaller scale* turbulence kills the wing's ability to generate downforce.RB7ate9 wrote:Considering the volume and speed of the flow through the radiators, getting it wide across the beam wing would be ideal.
Bingo!BorisTheBlade wrote:Gosh... this place gets worse every day. If you folks would actually read the posts of others and if you had spent some time before posting b*llsh*t then you'd probably know, that kilcoo knows what he's talking about.
There are a lot of "new" guys in here having 10x more posts than me but proving day and day again that this is the wrong place for them - at least for posting.
P.S.
Sorry Mods, just my personal feelings after reading in the past several weeks.
I think what is part of the issue is that the L/D argument doesn't consider that the pursuit of maximum drag force excludes any streamlining of the car. With the majority of the downforce created at the front wing, rearwing, and floor/diffuser, the rest of the car is design for maximum smooth airflow to these elements to create the maximum downforce as per the track's needs.shelly wrote:The point is that even if they hurt drag, it would not be a problem.
L/D is a mith in today's f1 aero: the design target is max downforce.
It is a shame seeing people questioning that, even if this is to some extent unavoidable given that there is very little good info source for f1 aero.
But on this forum a good source of technical info like kilkoo is not recognised for what it is, and instead questioned and argued. Very sad.
Im not saying its not about max downforce, as it is, however if you take into account monza, spa and canada, drag does matter which was my whole point, I didnt argue, I just stated my viewshelly wrote:The point is that even if they hurt drag, it would not be a problem.
L/D is a mith in today's f1 aero: the design target is max downforce.
It is a shame seeing people questioning that, even if this is to some extent unavoidable given that there is very little good info source for f1 aero.
But on this forum a good source of technical info like kilkoo is not recognised for what it is, and instead questioned and argued. Very sad.
jordangp, amozounoris, n12ck, paul: you do not know what you are talking about- because you have not had access to the correct and relevant info.
If you really want to learn something about f1 aero, listen to kilkoo, pnsd and the others instead of arguing with them without any knowledge base.
Those are certain tracks where the balance shifts considerably where if you don't make adjustments you will be a sitting duck in the race. Nobody is saying drag is irrelevant, but the balance is so heavily in favour of DF over Drag for nearly all tracks on the calendar that you can say these things aren't much of a concern for a designer.N12ck wrote:Im not saying its not about max downforce, as it is, however if you take into account monza, spa and canada, drag does matter which was my whole point, I didnt argue, I just stated my viewshelly wrote:The point is that even if they hurt drag, it would not be a problem.
L/D is a mith in today's f1 aero: the design target is max downforce.
It is a shame seeing people questioning that, even if this is to some extent unavoidable given that there is very little good info source for f1 aero.
But on this forum a good source of technical info like kilkoo is not recognised for what it is, and instead questioned and argued. Very sad.
jordangp, amozounoris, n12ck, paul: you do not know what you are talking about- because you have not had access to the correct and relevant info.
If you really want to learn something about f1 aero, listen to kilkoo, pnsd and the others instead of arguing with them without any knowledge base.
Exactlykilcoo316 wrote:Where does the air that (1)doesn't go through the brake duct and (2)does go through the brake duct, go?Blackout wrote:Williams proves that drag is mega important; look at their super thin front brake ducts
(1) to the sidepod and diffuser deck.
(2) through the wheel, wreaking havoc on the air from the front wing endplate that you want to help feed the diffuser deck.
The main reason for skinny brake ducts is not drag related.
