2014 Design

[turbof1]

A big thumbs up for Thomba giving Blanchimont proper credits for the atypical nose. Blanchimont indeed was the first non-team person to realise that possibility.

I wished the acadamic world was as sincere as this.

[Schifty]

Ouch, that nose looks woeful!!

Hehehe, blown monkey seats are going to be fun!!!

Ok first of all, that stupid nose will never saw the sun light. F1 team care of aerodynasmism yes but also the general look of the car. The will be just lower thats it.... no tiny ''dick'' will get out of the nose to be ''legal'' on 2014 regulation.

[Giando]

Ouch, that nose looks woeful!!

Hehehe, blown monkey seats are going to be fun!!!

Ok first of all, that stupid nose will never saw the sun light. F1 team care of aerodynasmism yes but also the general look of the car. The will be just lower thats it.... no tiny ''dick'' will get out of the nose to be ''legal'' on 2014 regulation.

Are you sure? Stepped nose were an example of teams taking care of general look, then? Uhm...

We don't have any evidence about anything yet, so i wouldn't exclude the possibility of the ugly one to see the sunlight.

[turbof1]

Adrian Newey is known to highly value aesthetics, and even he said recently that performance will always be the first priority, sacrificing good looks for laptime.

If they can get that nose through the crashtests, they'll run it.

[Schifty]

Ouch, that nose looks woeful!!

Hehehe, blown monkey seats are going to be fun!!!

Ok first of all, that stupid nose will never saw the sun light. F1 team care of aerodynasmism yes but also the general look of the car. The will be just lower thats it.... no tiny ''dick'' will get out of the nose to be ''legal'' on 2014 regulation.

Are you sure? Stepped nose were an example of teams taking care of general look, then? Uhm...

We don't have any evidence about anything yet, so i wouldn't exclude the possibility of the ugly one to see the sunlight.

Steped nose had a reason to been there, in general look, its really look good, but you saw also they have a aerodynamism logic. This nose you all think they will use, just in look, no aero advantage to put on a car, how this nose let the air flow go well on the car?

Ok, the basic of all the changes of the regulation is to come back to mid 90 design, simple, less cost and everything. Since few last years FIA and Ecclestone tried to decrease the amonth of cash a team need to run a season. V6 Turbo is not there to be more green. Just hink about it, and think not to far about a design. GP2 car had a lower nose, have they use a nose like Scarb did? People here dream too much and just think about Williams.

This one had a steped back nose like Scrab design. The difference, Scarb had a tiny dick to let the nose came lower. So this Williams nose, what happen after few race?

[Schifty]

Corection on the last image

[Giando]

Steped nose had a reason to been there, in general look, its really look good, but you saw also they have a aerodynamism logic. This nose you all think they will use, just in look, no aero advantage to put on a car, how this nose let the air flow go well on the car?

Ok, the basic of all the changes of the regulation is to come back to mid 90 design, simple, less cost and everything. Since few last years FIA and Ecclestone tried to decrease the amonth of cash a team need to run a season. V6 Turbo is not there to be more green. Just hink about it, and think not to far about a design. GP2 car had a lower nose, have they use a nose like Scarb did? People here dream too much and just think about Williams.

This one had a steped back nose like Scrab design. The difference, Scarb had a tiny dick to let the nose came lower. So this Williams nose, what happen after few race?

I am sorry to disagree.

If you remember, McLaren and Marussia didn't have a stepped nose. The first one introduced a modification to the nose in Barcelona wich was a curved-stepped nose, since it was the more efficient solution.
As confirmed this year by RB and Lotus.
But stepped nose wasn't the intention of the FIA at all.

Same for the di*k nose in 2014. By analysing the rules, there could be the possibility to go that way.
I don't understand how you can be so sure about the fact it won't see the light.

[Schifty]

Simply because to get this weird tiny nose let not aero advantage. No analyst to saw that....

Steped nose was used to get a bit more downforce.

Anything on aero need to be fluid. When the air touch the junction of tiny nose and the rest of the nose, a big friction will appear... Not only on the top, but everywhere

[Giando]

Simply because to get this weird tiny nose let not aero advantage. No analyst to saw that....

Steped nose was used to get a bit more downforce.

Anything on aero need to be fluid. When the air touch the junction of tiny nose and the rest of the nose, a big friction will appear... Not only on the top, but everywhere

Are you sure?

I have a very different pov on this... which is to have a smaller section of the nosecone not more downforce!

[turbof1]

Steped nose had a reason to been there, in general look, its really look good, but you saw also they have a aerodynamism logic. This nose you all think they will use, just in look, no aero advantage to put on a car, how this nose let the air flow go well on the car?

To each his own taste I guess... . Stepped noses btw themselves don't have an aero logic. At all. The air behind the step moves slowly, creating a thick boundary layer, which induces drag and air seperation. The stepped noses was a consequence of dodgy ruling and teams wanting to pump as much air as possible beneath the nose. It's why Sauber and Red Bull looked into using ducts between the nose and front bulkhead to minimise air seperation and clean up the boundary layer.

If teams wanted, they could get downforce out of it, yes. The fact that 8 out of 11 teams used a vanity panel to hide the step, and the 3 others not only because of the weight penalty, surely tells they aren't doing that. They can create more then enough front downforce; more and the aero balance is too much front biased.

Ok, the basic of all the changes of the regulation is to come back to mid 90 design, simple, less cost and everything. Since few last years FIA and Ecclestone tried to decrease the amonth of cash a team need to run a season. V6 Turbo is not there to be more green. Just hink about it, and think not to far about a design. GP2 car had a lower nose, have they use a nose like Scarb did? People here dream too much and just think about Williams.

The V6 Turbo, and auxiliary power units, is costing MASSIVE amounts of money. There's nothing about it that makes F1 cost less. The same with the nose: teams need to redesign everything. The FIA did introduce the rules about the nose to avoid cars T-boning eachother. It also was the cause of the stepped nose: the FIA wanted a lower nose tip because else it could potentionally harm an other driver's head, but the teams didn't want to build a complete new chassis due being very expensive. The result was that the rules applied on the nose, not part of the chassis, but not on the front bulkhead. Due dimension ruling of the front and rear bulkheads we had these akward shaped noses.

[Schifty]

Simply because to get this weird tiny nose let not aero advantage. No analyst to saw that....

Steped nose was used to get a bit more downforce.

Anything on aero need to be fluid. When the air touch the junction of tiny nose and the rest of the nose, a big friction will appear... Not only on the top, but everywhere

Are you sure?

I have a very different pov on this... which is to have a smaller section of the nosecone not more downforce!

Someone here had a CFD analyst on this design and the conclusion was this, the design of Scarb never been tested and i'm pretty sure wont happen.

In 2007 a lot of you didnt remember mostly nose was lower, McLaren had a tiny nose tip but everything match with general nose

[Giando]

Simply because to get this weird tiny nose let not aero advantage. No analyst to saw that....

Steped nose was used to get a bit more downforce.

Anything on aero need to be fluid. When the air touch the junction of tiny nose and the rest of the nose, a big friction will appear... Not only on the top, but everywhere

Are you sure?

I have a very different pov on this... which is to have a smaller section of the nosecone not more downforce!

Someone here had a CFD analyst on this design and the conclusion was this, the design of Scarb never been tested and i'm pretty sure wont happen.

In 2007 a lot of you didnt remember mostly nose was lower, McLaren had a tiny nose tip but everything match with general nose

Sorry i give up.

I have doubts on my own but dialogue becomes almost impossible with people who feels so sure about their ideas.

Apologize.

[Schifty]

Sorry i give up.

I have doubts on my own but dialogue becomes almost impossible with people who feels so sure about their ideas.

Apologize.

You are all so sure about the design of Scarb, but nobody tell me what advantage a F1 can have with this design, if someone can explain me... i will listening, but nobody have argument about it...

[Giando]

Sorry i give up.

I have doubts on my own but dialogue becomes almost impossible with people who feels so sure about their ideas.

Apologize.

You are all so sure about the design of Scarb, but nobody tell me what advantage a F1 can have with this design, if someone can explain me... i will listening, but nobody have argument about it...

Ok: the main advantage would be to mantain the main section of the nose quite high!
And therefore increase the quantity of air flowing under the chassis (or at least to mantain it much closer to 2013 values). The vortexes generated by the thin nose extension could be controlled by the pylons and the turning vanes.

I am not sure about the elephant nose... not at all but i think it could be a clever solution.
And i don't see why a team should not at least try this design in the windtunnel.

[Schifty]

Sorry i give up.

I have doubts on my own but dialogue becomes almost impossible with people who feels so sure about their ideas.

Apologize.

You are all so sure about the design of Scarb, but nobody tell me what advantage a F1 can have with this design, if someone can explain me... i will listening, but nobody have argument about it...

Ok: the main advantage would be to mantain the main section of the nose quite high!
And therefore increase the quantity of air flowing under the chassis (or at least to mantain it much closer to 2013 values). The vortexes generated by the thin nose extension could be controlled by the pylons and the turning vanes.

I am not sure about the elephant nose... not at all but i think it could be a clever solution.
And i don't see why a team should not at least try this design in the windtunnel.

I dont have all changes of regulation but its the only way to push more air flow under the car ?