![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_e_smile.gif)
Regards
That would be a good. Actually that shows the problem is far from being only technical; No team has any interest in making a cleaner wake so you would need to put something into sporting regs to make it worth.pipex wrote:I don't know if this is right or wrong, but i've been wondering if the car "air disturbance" could be treated as a objective in the design of the car (not only as a side effect) to prevent overtaking (i.e. make difficult for other cars to be behind mine). Could this be possible?
No and it would be of no use as the central section of the front wing do not produces downforce thus do not produce an upwash.sunny1304 wrote:is the ferrari nose whole is allowed per rule for 2009 ??
Im still getting used to the high & narrow rear wing but luv the clean design and big low front wing! I cant wait for the 2009 cars to start testing so we can drool over the sleek new designs!!!Ogami musashi wrote:The F2009 render from autosport, i quite love the design, the rear of the car seems so slipstreamed:
The technology in the aerodynamics is exactly the same as this year, it's just being limited even more.Conceptual wrote:I think the front wing in that render looks retarded.
Why do I feel like F1 is being beaten back to the stone age with this stuff?
I will watch the start of the season no doubt, but if I start reading interviews with engineers that say the regs regressed the technology significantly, I wont be around for the end of the season...
Maybe they should just start re-running the 80's and 90's races, and kill F1 all together. That way there will be a ZERO carbon footprint, and the prehistoric technology will be acceptable.
Well, I remember from reading the rules that there minimum radius for all bodywork that may come in touch with tyres.modbaraban wrote:The front wing endplateds are now perfectly positioned to puncture other cars' tyres in the first corner. Bravo!