A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter do not belong here.
No need to check anything, already did it a few days ago.
To continue with this discussion is pointless, in my view. Those who believe mirror fairings are there to bend the airflow into top inlets (in spite of laws of aerodynamics) have the right to do so, but please don't bring down the level of discussion with (more) pointless arguments.
So both are virtually in the same place as last years car, and the distance relevant to each other?
It was people a lot brighter than i am that came up with the concept i believe, i just happen to agree.
WOW...it comes to this, insults...i`m speechless..
Vanja, the quality of your posts are great but I think it's a bit of a shame to finish one by suggesting that if other's views on the matter aren't the same as your own, that it is bringing down the level of discussion. It is not like we are bickering over whose driver is better.
Muse, first of all - thank you for your kind words.
To argue something is doing something different when it stands in the same place as before (when it didn't do anything) multiple times and base your thesis almost exclusively on this statement is a pointless argument and it is bringing down the level of discussion. These kind of discussions happen from time to time and can take a very long time and always end without any conclusion or new findings. It can often come to the point of trolling, arguing for the sake of arguing and dragging more people into it. People start avoiding a thread very quickly and that sucks. Just to be clear, my views on this are my own and I am not insulting anyone, I am simply trying to prevent this from happening because it's already getting up to speed.
I love the idea that was brought about mirrors and top inlet. Sadly, I don't think it's happening. I've put up some facts to support this, as have many others. I'm not saying there couldn't be something else going on there, we have no clue (yet) about possible internal ducting of mirror bracket. All I am stating is there are clear obstacles for this to happen, as well as negative effects on car performance (cooling) if this happened. For me, this is enough to make an idea very unlikely to be true.
I think I wasn't quite making my thoughts clear yesterday, I don't think I explained using the right words. Forgetting entirely about sidepod intakes, my question is: Could these mirrors be enabling some sort of ducting down the inside of the mirror support arms to another location on the car? Even for something as simple as driver cooling?
Like I said above, we have no clue for now if there are or if there aren't some ducts in mirror brackets, so we would be wrong to both assume this and reject it. For all we know, the air could go both trough the brackets and trough slots around actual mirrors. That would be an even better use of mirror fairing, because it is then doing multiple things...
WOW...it comes to this, insults...i`m speechless..
There were no insults, neither personal (and I wasn't talking to you personally in that paragraph, by using "Those who believe..." I have addressed multiple forum members) neither towards a wider group. Please do be so kind to read carefully next time, before you accuse someone else of insulting you. You can call my arguments pointless and I won't take it as an insult, ever. It is simply your opinion on something I stated. You haven't told me that my posts are pointless (which is also fine, but harsh), that I (as a member) am pointless or anything else in this sense. An argument can be pointless and your's - in my view - is. For the record, I don't think you are doing this on purpose and i don't think you are trolling anyone, but your argument is bringing down the level of discussion because multiple forum members have replied to you with solid counter arguments you (intentionally or unintentionally) ignored. Please, let us agree to disagree and move on.
There may be a different way to regard these mirrors, and I am now harking back to the year dot when i was taught science in school.
If you take the black section as being the actual mirror and could have been used without the red cover, then you have to consider the reason for the red cover. The glass part appears to be inset quite a bit, so the red part is now there to create a venturi, speeding up the airflow around the actual mirror with the rear lip pushing this faster airflow downwards and onto the top of the sidepods, possibly forcing slower air into the horizontal intake or else allowing it to flow below the rear wing to assist a cleaner airflow over the top of the wing.
I might not be explaining this possibility very clearly, but we have to look beyond the simple idea that it is just there to feed an intake.
It's possible the "Halo" showed some dirty air on the driver. (like gravel, sand, and rain) The braces could be tuning devices for nothing more than driver comfort. I've noticed the companies associated with roadcars have a little more creature comforts in all weather conditions like Ferrarri , Mercedes, and even Mclaren.
"In design terms nothing new stood out on the Ferrari, the internal ‘winged’ mirrors (LINK) were open for more scrutiny and the air ducted in from the frontal slots exiting above and below the mirror glass, but not to the side. While far from certain, the initial hypothesis that the mirrors are downwash generators, pushing the airflow down towards the sidepods still seems the most feasible. While the mirror position may not allow the wake from the mirror to go directly down into the upper sidepod inlet, they certainly contribute to flow going into the cooling duct and helping airflow attach to the flat sidepod surface behind the inlet".....not my words.
This pic also clearly shows there is no bottom slit on the extreme bottom of the mirror housing, so that was a reflection afterall. Already Stone chip on the inside though
WOW...it comes to this, insults...i`m speechless..
Guys, don't get into insults on Mirrors! Come on. If it was a super special diffuser or other big trickery that could be a game changer I would still somehow understand it. But Mirrors? Worth 0,001s at best?
It is rather sad to see that there seems to be no more remarkable feature on the SF71H that would be worth discussing. I hope they found at least some additional cavallinos in the back. If not I'm starting to get worried.
the mirror 'tubing' / aerodynamics ferrari is using now might improve flow / aero for the entire area to the back.
that is not something 'just' worth 0.001 secs at best. hell, even if it would be 'just' less drag in total, and worth 'just' 0.001 secs, that could at the end of the day result in being @p2 or @p1 at Q3 which could be the difference between winning and losing. but i'm sure it's part of a whole which is worth more than that, and could actually end in being an advantage bringing 0.01 or even 0.05 seconds [ a lap ]. The mirrors itself might help in cooling one way or the other even - if that is the goal - which helps in a bigger whole in being able to wrench the most out of the Ferrari v6, and thus could mean (in a season of reliability), once again, the difference between winning and losing.
everything counts, and it seems like Ferrari built something the others don't have, which could give them an advantage.
if super-thin camera pods didn't bring a benefit, then mercedes, rb, etc. wouldn't have constructed them like they did. but it does, and thus they did. And so, the mirrors provide a benefit for Ferrari.
It's really simple.
If it didn't bring them a benefit, they wouldn't have constructed / engineered it like that.
Really, it can't get any clearer than that.
Just think about all the engineering that had to get done to design these mirrors, all the effort on CAD, all the effort on (aero) calculations, simulations, making it work on the entire car and see the net effect at the very end of the 'aero chain', weight, rigidity, rules, if there are tubing how to build that AND keep tub integrity, making scale models, and then making the actual object to see it work in real life and even bringing it in as early as in testing having the 'risk' that it's gonna get copied - or probably not as it's probably part of a whole like the f-duct was and not so 'easy' to copy-paste.
for real, it brings a benefit, or it wouldn't be there - especially on Ferrari who wants to come back stronger after last season and this time win
if it's even 'just' 0.007 seconds of improvement, on 50 laps, that means it brings them a third of a second during a race, which would mean at the end of the race, Vettel can get in DRS range of Hamilton and overtake him, whereas without these (aero) mirrors, he'd stay outside of DRS range and thus unable to overtake Ham in the final lap(s) of a race (or more than 1 race). And, again, if HAM puts a 1:23.429 in Q3, and VET a 1:23.427, then he has grabbed pole by 2 thousands of a second, which means without those mirrors, he would have been 5 thousands of a second behind pole.
offcourse, that is, if the mirrors are 'worth' 0.007 seconds (one way or the other).
"Explain the ending to F1 in football terms"
"Hamilton was beating Verstappen 7-0, then the ref decided F%$& rules, next goal wins
while also sending off 4 Hamilton players to make it more interesting"
1.2 Concept of the Jet Mirror
The new concept mirror using jet flow control [4,5,6] is aimed at reducing the drag of
conventional mirrors by using a passive flow jet control technique similar to those used
for high lift slotted airfoils of aircraft [13].
Page 7 and 8 of the thesis include images of a mirror similar to the Ferrari mirror (page 19/89 of the PDF document).
Edit: This has been mentioned earlier here this thread by @graham.reeds .
Last edited by Powy on 04 Mar 2018, 00:14, edited 3 times in total.
