Ferrari F10

[donskar]

ecapox, autogyro, puh-leez. Your posts would be nice if they were smarter. I recommend to use this before posting for the umpteenth time what the forum with one voice tells you it's not true: http://www.google.com

I apologize if I sound impertinent but it's the third report I get because of "crappy posts" (and the first time I see that reason for reporting!).

+1. Not "impertinent" at all -- merely sensible.

Sorry if I'm being cynical, but it seems some people simply post to run up their score(?) (And what's the point?) Some posts sound like, "Yes, I know I'm wrong, but I think I'm right anyway." The site is being devalued by such posts IMVHO.

[Mr.G]

The F10’s development programme continues apace: Turkey should see the debut of an evolution of the software controlling the blown rear wing and other important advances will be introduced by the end of June

Should it be only some signalization for driver? Somethning like "when to shift" but for the blow-wing? Measuring the air flow/speed and signalize - OK now it will be efective - and driver can cover the controling hole?

[timbo]

Oh, come on. It was all cleared now

Read last couple of paragraphs here.
http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2010/05/m ... y-ferrari/

[autogyro]

OK the Ferrai guys want to put this issue to sleep, fair enough.
I promise not to bring it up again so long as someone can confirm that Ferrari did not use 'an electric, computer controlled switching system' for the rear wing while testing at Monaco.
It is a logical way to test such a system before a full blown duct is instaled, considering the restrictions on testing.
I will not bring it up again.

[flynfrog]

OK the Ferrai guys want to put this issue to sleep, fair enough.
I promise not to bring it up again so long as someone can confirm that Ferrari did not use 'an electric, computer controlled switching system' for the rear wing while testing at Monaco.
It is a logical way to test such a system before a full blown duct is instaled, considering the restrictions on testing.
I will not bring it up again.

here is a thought. How about you find proof that they were using it then come back.

[timbo]

OK the Ferrai guys want to put this issue to sleep, fair enough.
I promise not to bring it up again so long as someone can confirm that Ferrari did not use 'an electric, computer controlled switching system' for the rear wing while testing at Monaco.

That system is against the rules. Also, ECU is common for all teams and covers pretty much anything, so it would not take a genius to figure out that there's something else.
What point testing it?

It is a logical way to test such a system before a full blown duct is instaled, considering the restrictions on testing.
I will not bring it up again.

OK if you're THAT stubborn, please tell, how a system installed without "full blown duct" (i.e. wihout a system that would have actual effect on car's aero) can cause a crash??

Oh, and...
what dope you use?

[autogyro]

The mention of software and the rapid cover up in the media makes me suspicious.

[flynfrog]

The mention of software and the rapid cover up in the media makes me suspicious.

Ferrari control the media now too.

I'm sure the mention of software had nothing to do with lap simulators and CFD. I think your tinfoil hat is on a little tight mate. Now please take this crap out of the car technical threads.

[segedunum]

It smells a bit I grant you and I'm still not convinced Alonso could go off where he did hard enough to write off an entire chassis, but we have nothing concrete to go on.

It's not really the first unexplained off Ferrari have had. Raikkonen had a weird one under braking at Monza I think.

[timbo]

It's not really the first unexplained off Ferrari have had. Raikkonen had a weird one under braking at Monza I think.

That was explained by scarbs in detail. They worked on inerter back then, and there was failure somewhere in suspension.

[Jon]

I apologize if I sound impertinent but it's the third report I get because of "crappy posts" (and the first time I see that reason for reporting!).

We can now report posts based on their crappyness?? And you'll take notice? Excelent!!

I think you might be receiving a bit more of that from now on.

Thanks for the tip Ciro.

[WhiteBlue]

.. it's the third report I get because of "crappy posts".

We can now report posts based on their crappyness?? And you'll take notice? Excelent!!

Oops, si tacuisses!

[Ciro Pabón]

Yeah, yeah. I would have seemed a philosopher...

I apologize to ecapox: I misread your post.

Of course you can report anything. We prefer that to empty baseless discussions.

We surely can erase low quality posts, it's our duty, now that we (or, better yet, I) have stopped posting.

[Intego]

Check the image of the crashed car yourself and see if they have the ducted engine cover:

What I see here is that Ferrari was testing the new broken front wing. Remember Rob Smedleys words to Massa in Spain: "Ok half a second quicker with a broken front wing, I think we've found the solution!"

[raymondu999]

That Ferrari would've been flying then. It would've blitzed the bulls by a second, judging by how much endplate is left