What are X wings?

[Belatti]

Sorry Belatti, but please don't pretend to know what I want to see on an F1 car...

OK, you are right.

So... I want F1 cars, not science fiction wheeled spaceships!

Please consider I grew up watching early 90´s F1 cars, in those times they dazzled me! They were the first "not bulky" designs, (unlike early 80´s although I consider them pretty, too) simpler than nowdays cars (no T-wings, no X-wings, no 1,000 fins, etc) just smooth-looking cars (although maybe not very aero effective)

Take the 1991 McLaren, the 1992 Ferrari and Williams (slower Ferrari ever, fastest Williams ever ) and maybe the 1994 and 1995 Ferraris, they are to me the most beautiful F1 cars ever.




An arrow vs a mess

[Conceptual]

I guess everyone watches for their own reasons. You watch to see elegant machines finessed around a circuit at top speed, I watch to see the bending of physical laws by technological machines in objective reality.

We are both passionate about F1 however, and neither have ANY rational input on the technical regulations, so we can always dream, right?

Anyways, thanks for the pics and info on this subject. I appreciate it as always!

Chris

[modbaraban]

I remember TV comentator called that "ashtrays"

Well in some slavonic languages (incl. Ukrainian and Russian) these are called candelabra! Seriousy!

@ Conceptual - I'll keep trying with the pics.

As for the tastes. I like most of the modern aero tweaks, but in 90's they looked quite ugly, boxy etc. (X-wings for instance). The modern interpertation would look much nicer I think. As for the 2009 regs I do not mind seeing simpler cars but what I do mind is the growing resemlence of the grid And it will only increase with the number of banned developments. Sad. I love to see different teams choosing their unique path to achieve within the rules. But now the rules are too tight and are to be tightened further.

[Conceptual]

I remember TV comentator called that "ashtrays"

Well in some slavonic languages (incl. Ukrainian and Russian) these are called candelabra! Seriousy!

@ Conceptual - I'll keep trying with the pics.

As for the tastes. I like most of the modern aero tweaks, but in 90's they looked quite ugly, boxy etc. (X-wings for instance). The modern interpertation would look much nicer I think. As for the 2009 regs I do not mind seeing simpler cars but what I do mind is the growing resemlence of the grid And it will only increase with the number of banned developments. Sad. I love to see different teams choosing their unique path to achieve within the rules. But now the rules are too tight and are to be tightened further.

That is why I prefer the regulations based upon % splits, instead of standardizing components through exact regulating.

Lets not waste the top 1% of engineering talent on this planet on developing 10% of a car. I'd rather see the innovative ideas of these people on 100% of the car.

Thanks for the pic, it is very well done. It would be great to see a few different perspectives however. Does anyone else have some clear shots of the X-wings and the viking horn cars?

Thanks!


Chris

[Saribro]

For the person that said that the BMW wings are about as wide as is allowed in that area, can you please point out the regulation that limits that space?

3.8.1 Other than the rear view mirrors, each with a maximum area in plan view of 12000mm², no bodywork situated more than 330mm behind the front wheel centre line and more than 330mm forward of the rear wheel centre line, which is more than 600mm above the reference plane, may be more than 300mm from the centre line of the car.
3.8.2 No bodywork between the rear wheel centre line and a line 800mm forward of the rear wheel centre line, which is more than 500mm from the centre line of the car, may be more than 500mm above the reference plane.

Or in short: no stuff right above the sidepods. :D

[modbaraban]

I prefer the regulations based upon % splits

What do you mean? Any examples?

[G-Rock]

I have to agree with Bellati on his subjective view of the beauty of F1 cars. The 90's definitly had more beautiful designs than now..an esthetic beauty if you will. Todays cars are functionally beautifull but can get pretty ugly (BMW) Ferrari are borderline but are helped by their monotone red colour which smooths things up a bit. If I had the money to put an F1 car on display in my future glass garage, it would definetly be an early to mid nineties Ferrari though. A 1995 (512?)of Jean Alesi perhaps, last of the V12s?

[Shi Ruan]

Personally I find the organic interplay of shapes, the sheer complexity of modern F1 cars to be intrinsically beautiful. I know I'm in the minority there, but find modern cars to be oddly(and perhaps paradoxically) elegant (the F1.08 maybe a bit of an exception, but I still think it is a gorgeous car in it's own way).

[Conceptual]

I prefer the regulations based upon % splits

What do you mean? Any examples?

What I mean by % splits is that the max amount of downforce generated by the air moving OVER the car is directly limited by how much is generated UNDER the car.

So, if there is like a 50/50 split, whatever the MAX underside downforce generation, the top must be equal. And since the bottom side maxes out MUCH SOONER than what the top side is capable of producing, it would be self limiting on aero downforce.

But I have been told that it is unsafe by another board member for some reason that wasnt explained. Until the idea is defeated by some rational explaination however, I still think it is a good idea.

Chris

[Conceptual]

Speaking of mounting X-Wing flipups on other parts of the car, what about on the leading edge of the outboard mirrors? They are mounted on stalks and are mounted directly to the sidepod. Looking at Toyota's new-old mirror position, it is easy to see that it could be sculpted into a flipup wing.

Chris

[modbaraban]

Speaking of mounting X-Wing flipups on other parts of the car, what about on the leading edge of the outboard mirrors? They are mounted on stalks and are mounted directly to the sidepod. Looking at Toyota's new-old mirror position, it is easy to see that it could be sculpted into a flipup wing.

Have a closer look at FIF1 VJM01. They are using mirror mounts as wings.

[Conceptual]

Speaking of mounting X-Wing flipups on other parts of the car, what about on the leading edge of the outboard mirrors? They are mounted on stalks and are mounted directly to the sidepod. Looking at Toyota's new-old mirror position, it is easy to see that it could be sculpted into a flipup wing.

Have a closer look at FIF1 VJM01. They are using mirror mounts as wings.

Look at that picture.

If the mirror is flat, and at the end closest to the driver, why couldnt the other side be scooped towards the front, just like flipups?

I dont know if it violates regs either, so maybe I should read...lol

Chris

[ss_collins]

you shouldn't look at any aero part in isolation - they all interact so just creating as much DF off everything will probably not work. Some parts on the front of the cars actually create lift in isolation but overall DF is increased

[PNSD]

Besides, wouldnt shaping the mirror mounting how concep says detatch the flow over the sidepod?