McLaren MP4-29 Mercedes

[Thunder]

Guys this Suspension has it's own Thread.

http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... =6&t=17815

[Avocado]

What I wonder is why so much duct tape everywhere?

I'm sure it's not the final version.

Guys this Suspension has it's own Thread.

http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... =6&t=17815

It's about legality.

[PhillipM]

The tape in this picture would suggest the shape was otherwise. Even if there is a "gurney", it's nowhere near as big as has been suggested

The tape is covering some wiring on the front flat section. The shape is still clearly what he posted above. It's even visible on the picture he used to show you.

[RZS10]

the tape obviously bends upwards (marked with yellow) indicated by the reflections that show it's not just cut off tape(green) ... tried to sketch it on the rigth looking from the other side (it's hidden behind the wing mount on the other picture)

[Alexgtt]

The answer to why run it from day 1 is simple. The longer they run it the more data and knowledge they get to develop. If teams are going to copy there's nothing they can do about it other than have far more knowledge. That's the trade off but the data and know how is a far greater advantage. And lets not forget, there's nothing like track time.

Besides, I think there's more going on here than just aero. I'm convinced there's also so very clever flexible geometry loading stuff happening. Don't ask me how, I'm no genius, just a hunch.

I'm also interested in the comparative lack of storm over this from other technical directors. The blustering over double diffusers, F ducts, etc. I think they all know McLaren have pulled something off here and they're all slightly pissed. AN in particular who hinted at drag/fuel inefficiency just to throw a bomb. It's obviously going to work fuel wise for McLaren or they wouldn't have done it. There will be a trade off, of course but one they've calculated, just like AN did very cleverly with KERS/packaging/cooling on previous Red Bulls.

[PhillipM]

I hope they have, because the entire sidepod philosophy and internal cooling flow is designed around having those there

[Alexgtt]

I hope they have, because the entire sidepod philosophy and internal cooling flow is designed around having those there

Indeed, so it'll be quite a job for teams to copy and all the more reason to roll it out and test immediately.

[i70q7m7ghw]

Conclusive how?
That's just the way you're perceiving it, I can quite clearly see the 'mushroom' shaping myself in both those photographs.

Given you can see that the front of the arms is much narrower than the rear, and that there's a concave profile on the top surface, I'm not sure why you keep insisting they're square.

I'm challenging it so we can get some more detailed images, or even better, a video. I'm more than happy to be proven wrong, I welcome it!

[i70q7m7ghw]

http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1413 ... 1ja231.jpg
the tape obviously bends upwards (marked with yellow) indicated by the reflections that show it's not just cut off tape(green) ... tried to sketch it on the rigth looking from the other side (it's hidden behind the wing mount on the other picture)

In that case the "lip" is a lot smaller than previous illustrations, like the one of the site's front page.

[PhillipM]

I'm challenging it so we can get some more detailed images, or even better, a video. I'm more than happy to be proven wrong, I welcome it!

Well, given every photo shows a mushroom shape, and everyone at testing who's actually seen it shows a mushroom shape...

[i70q7m7ghw]

I'm challenging it so we can get some more detailed images, or even better, a video. I'm more than happy to be proven wrong, I welcome it!

Well, given every photo shows a mushroom shape, and everyone at testing who's actually seen it shows a mushroom shape...

It's not clear in any photo I've seen here.

IMO - it's more like this (very crude drawing):-



Ps- RZS10 was pretty close, but I still think the flap is smaller than his illustration.

[turbof1]

I'm challenging it so we can get some more detailed images, or even better, a video. I'm more than happy to be proven wrong, I welcome it!

Well, given every photo shows a mushroom shape, and everyone at testing who's actually seen it shows a mushroom shape...

It's not clear in any photo I've seen here.

IMO - it's more like this (very crude drawing):-

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/610 ... rofile.png

Ps- RZS10 was pretty close, but I still think the flap is smaller than his illustration.

I think this is pretty much correct. The gurney (or whatever it is...) looks to have a very soft edge.

[RZS10]

I'm challenging it so we can get some more detailed images, or even better, a video. I'm more than happy to be proven wrong, I welcome it!

Well, given every photo shows a mushroom shape, and everyone at testing who's actually seen it shows a mushroom shape...

It's not clear in any photo I've seen here.

IMO - it's more like this (very crude drawing):-

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/610 ... rofile.png

there are plenty decent images, even the one in the article on the front page...

the crash structure is more or less horizontal, draw a line on it as reference (3), then parallel lines on top of the profile where the "fin" is (4) one where the "main" part of the profile is (5)... then you can see that the height of the fin (1) is approximately 40-50% the size of the main profile (2) depending on the picture you take ... the right one is better however

[turbof1]

I don't think it's that important to know how super duber exactly it is shaped, just to know that it is a gurney flap. Both your shapes are also converging to eachother, so the truth is somewhere in the middle.

[i70q7m7ghw]

Well, given every photo shows a mushroom shape, and everyone at testing who's actually seen it shows a mushroom shape...

It's not clear in any photo I've seen here.

IMO - it's more like this (very crude drawing):-

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/610 ... rofile.png

there's plenty visual evidence, even the picture in the article on the front page...

the crash structure is more or less horizontal, draw a line on it, then parallel lines on top of the profile where the "fin" is one where the "main" part of the profile is ... then you can see that the height of the fin (1) is approximately one third to half the size of the main profile (2) depending on the picture you take ...

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/141 ... hrooms.jpg

You've lost me there, you are drawing lines on things that aren't even visible in the photo.