Teams agree to cover up ugly noses for 2013

[Lurk]

Because the tip is still lower, so the impact point stays the same. Plus the cover will be design to not harm the driver.

http://scarbsf1.com/blog1/2012/10/01/20 ... n-changes/

[Chazmando]

Good.

[donskar]

Newey will conjure up some way to get an advantage out of this change. The man is a magician. I am certain he has sold his soul to Aeolus.

[i70q7m7ghw]

Because the tip is still lower, so the impact point stays the same. Plus the cover will be design to not harm the driver.

http://scarbsf1.com/blog1/2012/10/01/20 ... n-changes/

Thanks Lurk, it makes a lot more sense to me now

[raymondu999]

Just wondering - would this have any disadvantages from a nose CofG standpoint? I'd think the CofG would go higher, even if by negligible amounts.

Also, does anyone know if the panl will be included within the minimum weight? Or does it have to be minimum weight without the panel attached?

Also - does anyone foresee any further complications in terms of switching noses out when someone's lost their front wing?

[bhall]

It's my understanding that the rules essentially revert nose cones back to pre-2012 form, but with added caveats that the crash structure within them must adhere to 2012 standards, and any bodywork above the crash structure must be comprised only of a very thin laminate (the material for which might even be specified). Otherwise, it's all business as usual. It will factor into a car's weight, and it will come with a CoG penalty, albeit a miniscule one.

[raymondu999]

Ah. Interesting. So it doesn't have to be a separate panel per se then, if what Ben is saying is true. It could basically be a half-hollow nose with a 2012 crash in it.

[bhall]

It will be a separate panel inasmuch as it won't be constructed of the same material as the rest of the nose. But it's not going to be like a sort of convertible top or umbrella for the nose, which seems to be the impression left by remarks from commentators and pundits (and bears, oh my).

EDIT:

With the exception of an optional, single piece, non-structural fairing of prescribed laminate (whose precise lay-up may be found in the Appendix to the regulations) which may not be more than 625mm above the reference plane at any point, no bodywork situated more than 1950mm forward of rear face of the cockpit entry template may be more than 550mm above the reference plane.

[Nando]

5 bucks Newey will make it flex !

[raymondu999]

So here's me wearing my conspiracy cap. How about parc ferme? I suspect having the panel on will be fixed as per parc ferme regs - but could you then bring alternate noses to weekends? Have a low-drag modesty-panel for Monza, and have maybe some higher downforce solution for Monaco.

Also, what of changing front wings? Would you be allowed, in an in-race pitstop, to switch between a panel-covered and non-covered step nose? Or if... you know... one of the latchings fails and the panel falls off in the race, while being there in quali.

[bhall]

It can be as aerodynamic or as un-aerodynamic as a team wants it to be. It's not even required to be affixed to the nose. If it is, however, it has to conform to the restrictions I listed before. Otherwise, it really is business as usual.

If a team wants to use more than one fairing throughout the course of a weekend, they can. But, as always, they have to race with whatever solution they use in qualifying. (They'll likely be permanently bonded to the structural nose anyway.)

"Fairing" is such a poor word choice here, because it doesn't really reflect the reality of the "component" in question. We're not talking about a "nose hat" or something of that nature. The "modesty panel" will simply be a non-structural part of the nose. That's it.

Is it making sense now?

[FrukostScones]

F1 cars need no make-up. I hope many teams don't go with the "nose-cover" that has no function and is a waste of ressources.

And for some eyes the stepped "gator"- or "platypus"- noses looked more intersting than "normal" noses. Of course the Ferrari Lego extreme was a bit hard to swallow, but I found it amazing nevertheless.

So here's me wearing my conspiracy cap. How about parc ferme? I suspect having the panel on will be fixed as per parc ferme regs - but could you then bring alternate noses to weekends? Have a low-drag modesty-panel for Monza, and have maybe some higher downforce solution for Monaco.

Also, what of changing front wings? Would you be allowed, in an in-race pitstop, to switch between a panel-covered and non-covered step nose? Or if... you know... one of the latchings fails and the panel falls off in the race, while being there in quali.

good points, it is not nessesary and could get things complicated, all in all big joke only to please the eyes of they grey mass that probably has no taste at all. This may sound arrogant but the looks of F1 are not related to road cars and they don't have to look in a certain way other than the rules allow, they just have to be F1 cars designed to get the most out of the regs.

[WhiteBlue]

Modesty panel will be a one season solution anyway. From 2014 the noses will come down to 185 mm from 550 mm now and then the high nose design will be history, unless they change it last minute of course.

[Javert]

Modesty panel will be a one season solution anyway. From 2014 the noses will come down to 185 mm from 550 mm now and then the high nose design will be history, unless they change it last minute of course.

You called it

[turbof1]

It's my understanding that the rules essentially revert nose cones back to pre-2012 form, but with added caveats that the crash structure within them must adhere to 2012 standards, and any bodywork above the crash structure must be comprised only of a very thin laminate (the material for which might even be specified). Otherwise, it's all business as usual. It will factor into a car's weight, and it will come with a CoG penalty, albeit a miniscule one.

The CoG penalty will be far less then the 2011 noses. If I am correct they can make the panel as thin as they want, reducing the very small disadvantage even further. And any disadvantage will be offset by the better flow over the nose, which was quite a concern.