Red Bull RB5

[ISLAMATRON]

Newey has already stated he put a lot under the fuel tank. Bias can also be changed by the length of the car, where the cockpit is and the wheelbase.
Being that it's under the fuel tank and near the COG I can see why no ballast is needed in the nose section.

All teams have the KERS batteries under the fuel tank nothing new... the main difference is they have the motor/generator connected at the front of the engine as opposed to a couple teams who have decided to attach it to the gearbox. all the Magnetti Mirelli teams have the motor/generator attached to the engine. I believe MCMerc(and so FIF1), Williams & BMW have theirs attached to the gearbox. Toyota has sworn off KERS, probably to their detriment.

[Conceptual]

Newey has already stated he put a lot under the fuel tank. Bias can also be changed by the length of the car, where the cockpit is and the wheelbase.
Being that it's under the fuel tank and near the COG I can see why no ballast is needed in the nose section.

All teams have the KERS batteries under the fuel tank nothing new... the main difference is they have the motor/generator connected at the front of the engine as opposed to a couple teams who have decided to attach it to the gearbox. all the Magnetti Mirelli teams have the motor/generator attached to the engine. I believe MCMerc(and so FIF1), Williams & BMW have theirs attached to the gearbox. Toyota has sworn off KERS, probably to their detriment.

Newey said moving weight forward with the new slicks was imperative, and he said that Webber will not have much ballast to play with due to his size.

I would look to Toyota to run a Williams solution for the KERS if their car is competitive, but lose ONLY because of the KERS. If they are simply getting passed by boosting cars, they will have no choice but to do SOMETHING, and it isnt like they haven't used Williams technology before since they ran their gearbox in 06 or 07...

[djos]

A great result for the new RB5, 63 Laps and still the fastest '09 car on only its it 2nd day on track! =D>

1. Sebastien Buemi Toro Rosso STR3 1.19:660 - 104 laps
2. Sebastian Vettel Red Bull RB5 1.22:177 +2.517 - 63 laps
3. Nico Hülkenberg Williams FW31 1.22:443 + 2.783 - 82 laps
4. Heikki Kovalainen McLaren MP4-24 1.22:634 + 2.974 66 laps
5. Nelson Piquet Jr Renault R29 1.23:313 + 3.653 - 35 laps

Renault still the slowest by 1.2 seconds.

[Moanlower]

A great result for the new RB5, 63 Laps and still the fastest '09 car on only its it 2nd day on track! =D>

1. Sebastien Buemi Toro Rosso STR3 1.19:660 - 104 laps
2. Sebastian Vettel Red Bull RB5 1.22:177 +2.517 - 63 laps
3. Nico Hülkenberg Williams FW31 1.22:443 + 2.783 - 82 laps
4. Heikki Kovalainen McLaren MP4-24 1.22:634 + 2.974 66 laps
5. Nelson Piquet Jr Renault R29 1.23:313 + 3.653 - 35 laps

Renault still the slowest by 1.2 seconds.

Looks like you're having a blast. I don't care even if it was 3 seconds since it's irrelevant. It would be a different story if it was at Melbourne though. And if there's one team that can make up arrears it's Renault and at the moment thats not applicable. :^o

[Agerasia]

Newey has already stated he put a lot under the fuel tank. Bias can also be changed by the length of the car, where the cockpit is and the wheelbase.
Being that it's under the fuel tank and near the COG I can see why no ballast is needed in the nose section.

All teams have the KERS batteries under the fuel tank nothing new... the main difference is they have the motor/generator connected at the front of the engine as opposed to a couple teams who have decided to attach it to the gearbox. all the Magnetti Mirelli teams have the motor/generator attached to the engine. I believe MCMerc(and so FIF1), Williams & BMW have theirs attached to the gearbox. Toyota has sworn off KERS, probably to their detriment.

Newey said moving weight forward with the new slicks was imperative, and he said that Webber will not have much ballast to play with due to his size.

I would look to Toyota to run a Williams solution for the KERS if their car is competitive, but lose ONLY because of the KERS. If they are simply getting passed by boosting cars, they will have no choice but to do SOMETHING, and it isnt like they haven't used Williams technology before since they ran their gearbox in 06 or 07...

Yes, but they must be satisfied with the weight distribution to have built the car the way they have, especially that front end.
I'm wondering if they are not going to run KERS to be honest. The car looks like it was designed without it in mind.

[tk421]

First, a question regarding all this front-end ballast stuff...Can anyone definitively say that the proper amount of ballast will not fit in this area? Some people have said that the only reason the Williams and Renault noses are so big is because they are stuffed with ballast. Personally I believe that the skinny-nosed teams like Red Bull and Toyota (even Ferrari and McLaren) can fit all the ballast they need in their noses. I think the big-nosed teams have big noses for reasons unrelated to ballast. IMO of course...

On an unrelated topic....I know it's not a real issue, and I know that the drivers have always had poor sightlines over the nose (they're essentially laying down inside the cockpit after all), so I guess this post just expresses my amazement at what these drivers do. The picture won't post for some reason, so I'll just give you the link.
http://f1.gpupdate.net/en/photolarge.ph ... catID=3772
You can really see how diminished the sightline is on the RB5. The highest point on the nose is at least as high as the driver's eyes...These drivers are brilliant!

Another reason why they should incorporate helmet cameras!!

[mini696]

I do wonder where RBR is putting that weight in the front ? Thats the main reason why the nose of the Renault, Williams and BMW is that wide...

I doubt that very much, the physical size of the ballast is tiny, and does not need huge areas to place it on the car.

[tk421]

Exactly my point.

[djos]

I'm wondering if they are not going to run KERS to be honest. The car looks like it was designed without it in mind.

Redbull have KERS in the RB5 but switched off atm according to Horner.

[Moanlower]

I do wonder where RBR is putting that weight in the front ? Thats the main reason why the nose of the Renault, Williams and BMW is that wide...

I doubt that very much, the physical size of the ballast is tiny, and does not need huge areas to place it on the car.

Well, I can't find it back atm, but I read that a Renault employee explained that the nose give them extra room for shifting ballast which is an advantage with the extra KERS weight.

For example, how much weight can you get rid in the tiny RB5 nose? I predict the tiny RB5 nose will give them trouble at tight street circuits.

[tk421]

Well, I can't find it back atm, but I read that a Renault employee explained that the nose give them extra room for shifting ballast which is an advantage with the extra KERS weight. For example, how much weight can you get rid in the tiny RB5 nose? I predict the tiny RB5 nose will give them trouble at tight street circuits.

Again, I believe that the fat noses are fat because of reasons other than ballast...Look at the developments thus far: Renault and Williams, two of the fat-nosed teams, have both developed skirts on the underside of their fat noses for aero reasons because their noses are aero-based, not ballast-based. In other words, the new skirts further emphasize the aero of the fat nose, not the ballast of the fat nose. And as 'mini' stated, a huge amount of weight can be acheived in a small amount of area. I dunno, folks, my self is convinced that it's aero that dictates the nose shape, not ballast, and nobody except Sam Michael or Pat Symonds will convince me otherwise I'll believe it when I hear it from them

[Moanlower]

Well, I can't find it back atm, but I read that a Renault employee explained that the nose give them extra room for shifting ballast which is an advantage with the extra KERS weight. For example, how much weight can you get rid in the tiny RB5 nose? I predict the tiny RB5 nose will give them trouble at tight street circuits.

Again, I believe that the fat noses are fat because of reasons other than ballast...Look at the developments thus far: Renault and Williams, two of the fat-nosed teams, have both developed skirts on the underside of their fat noses for aero reasons because their noses are aero-based, not ballast-based. In other words, the new skirts further emphasize the aero of the fat nose, not the ballast of the fat nose. And as 'mini' stated, a huge amount of weight can be acheived in a small amount of area. I dunno, folks, my self is convinced that it's aero that dictates the nose shape, not ballast, and nobody except Sam Michael or Pat Symonds will convince me otherwise I'll believe it when I hear it from them

Fine with me chief. I don't need your conviction since I heard it from the source. Pat is also too busy to clarify your doubts. Ever thought it could be both aero and ballast based ?

[jwielage]

Fine with me chief. I don't need your conviction since I heard it from the source. Pat is also too busy to clarify your doubts. Ever thought it could be both aero and ballast based ?

A fine point....

Could it be conceivable that Renault's design philosophy would benefit from more nose placed ballast, but the design was taken to an extreme when they thought they found an interesting aero solution?

We'll see when the season starts, before then we are all just arm chair engineers (unless you are an engineer, don't want to insult anybody)

[Agerasia]

I have to agree that fat nose = ballast is pure conjecture.

[xpensive]

The very reason for ballast on an F1 as I understand it, is to lower the CG and adjust weigh-distribution. Ballast should as a consequence be placed as low as possible and preferably within the wheel-centerlines for less inertia.
This should make the raised nose not the very best choice of location. Or so I would figure anyway.