BrawnGP

[ESPImperium]

PAUSE! Espimerium, I have to confront you on this one! I am not a pretty good at the whole spelling and Grammar thing myself, but this has been troubling me for some time... You like to type "shure" instead of "sure." It is like a trademark of yours now.

I get 912 results when I google shure and your username. Are you a Guitar/music enthusiast?

That's all..

Yup, you got me. Im a guitarist, so i am in the habit of typing shure over sure as there is a Pro Audio company called Shure. This place is now my second Message board, a guitar message board is my main one. I know i have poor grammar, and suck at spelling, but am just too lazy to put a spell checker add-on onto my IE8.

Please live with it, most of the other boards im on can live with it.

[Keir]

PAUSE! Espimerium, I have to confront you on this one! I am not a pretty good at the whole spelling and Grammar thing myself, but this has been troubling me for some time... You like to type "shure" instead of "sure." It is like a trademark of yours now.

I get 912 results when I google shure and your username. Are you a Guitar/music enthusiast?

That's all..

Yup, you got me. Im a guitarist, so i am in the habit of typing shure over sure as there is a Pro Audio company called Shure. This place is now my second Message board, a guitar message board is my main one. I know i have poor grammar, and suck at spelling, but am just too lazy to put a spell checker add-on onto my IE8.

Please live with it, most of the other boards im on can live with it.

But you're prepared to add an extra letter to a word which doesn't require it? Stop me if I'm wrong but that seems to be the opposite of lazy.

Not criticising, just observing ...

[ISLAMATRON]

looks like Ross is letting it out of the bag a little:

There is a frothy outside but there is a steel core to it, which he has demonstrated. This will be a fantastic experience for him and I will expect to have a much stronger driver in the future.

Isnt Ross (and the article) referring to Button, being a better driver now that he has been a "consistent" winner & WDC this year?

[Fil]

Virgin's Nick Wirth lashing out at Brawn's fake sob story..

link

In essence, Honda developed a 'F1.09', a 'TF109' & a BGP001, and chose the best one

Goliath vs Goliath!

[Pandamasque]

6 to 10 million wind tunnels were in operation. This is not a David vs. Goliah story it's a world conspiracy! Wirth is already making excuses before he even failed.

[Terrible3]

Virgin's Nick Wirth lashing out at Brawn's fake sob story..

link

In essence, Honda developed a 'F1.09', a 'TF109' & a BGP001, and chose the best one

Goliath vs Goliath!

Its funny I called out exactly the same thing all year long on this forum about the Brawn car. Also I think Wirth knows he will be fighting it out with the rest of the cosworth cars rather than the giants.

[axle]

6 to 10 million wind tunnels were in operation. This is not a David vs. Goliah story it's a world conspiracy! Wirth is already making excuses before he even failed.

I don't think he is - he's just pointing out the falicy that is the Poor-us Brawn story...at the end of the day, once the car was able to race the money (£.5billion) invested shoved them to the front. Yet they claimed to be a small team.

[Confused_Andy]

They drastically downsized at the start of the season and was a small team throughout the rest, and the money began to run out...

[scarbs]

it’s fair to say Brawns aero design was funded massively by Honda. I think the number of tunnels and development is slightly overblown, Aguri were looking at 2009 development early as they had the old Honda chassis to race in 2008. But they when bust early, no doubt the aero data was passed on, but there was no DDD at this stage.

I wouldn’t doubt other manufacturer teams also used the full resources available from the parent manufacturer, I doubt Hondas actual manpower was proportionally that much greater than theirs. What Honda\Brawn did do right is find the best solutions; McLaren, BMW and Renault both diverted their full resources in 2008 to 2009 development and look at the cars they came out with!

The team were then left to hastily redesign the car around the Merc engine, then go racing and developing for season with greatly reduced resources. Perhaps that’s where the sob story came in…

[Fil]

...Aguri were looking at 2009 development early as they had the old Honda chassis to race in 2008. But they when bust early, no doubt the aero data was passed on, but there was no DDD at this stage.

There have been multiple murmurs around in '09 that the DDD was created at Super Aguri, with certain engineers moving on with this knowledge to the 3 teams that started the season with it.

Are you potentially discrediting this?

[scarbs]

...Aguri were looking at 2009 development early as they had the old Honda chassis to race in 2008. But they when bust early, no doubt the aero data was passed on, but there was no DDD at this stage.

There have been multiple murmurs around in '09 that the DDD was created at Super Aguri, with certain engineers moving on with this knowledge to the 3 teams that started the season with it.

Are you potentially discrediting this?

As I understand it the rumour was the DDD came from the team in Tochigi, I know it wasn't from SAF1 as Mark Preston (their tech director) told me it wasn't.

When SAF1 broke up Ben Wood and some of the rest of the team joined Honda, one person went to toyota, while Bigois joined Honda from Williams. Each of these teams had a DDD, but the chronology of the hirings doesn't lead to a single point where they were all together.

It's possible the DDD concept came from several different teams at the same time, Williams, Brawn and Toyotas DDD were all different in execution. Plus I know Force India looked at it, but never thought the feed under the car was legal. As did Red Bull Technology but only briefly, who instead followed the less contraversial extended rear wing endplate for more diffuser area.

[BreezyRacer]

Scarbs
Here's another posting about the diffuser issue and source ..
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=7580

Can you comment on any of it? You obviously have some pretty good contacts. I would like, in particular like to know who/how that diffuser wording came about from the overtaking working group. Can you shed some light? If so that could be the source of the designer ..

[scarbs]

All of the floor\diffuser wording is based on what went before, most of the wording comes from when the stepped under floor rule came in c1995. There was a fairly simple and loose wording on how the step and transition from it to the diffuser are formed. The ‘height when viewed from beneath’ wording being relatively new when the 125mm side tunnel rule came in (IIRC in 2006).

Teams kept tight to the these rules until 2006, when they started to add little extra channel above the side channels, these extra channels were prevalent last year before the new rules came into effect. That effectively set a precedent that tested the ‘viewed from beneath’ wording. When the rules changed every team wanted to re-exploit this, but a literal interpretation of the steps transition rules prevented it. Most teams stopped investigations there. However the three original DDD teams re-interpreted this wording and found a way to legally open up a window in the floor to feed the diffuser.

I don’t see any conspiracy, just teams doing what they always do and stretching the wording of a loose rule set.

[WhiteBlue]

Well, that is understood. But there is also the story that Ross Brawn was opposed to the wording proposed by the OWG because it was ambiguous. It is probably more difficult to substantiate this.

[scarbs]

Well, that is understood. But there is also the story that Ross Brawn was opposed to the wording proposed by the OWG because it was ambiguous. It is probably more difficult to substantiate this.

In fact the opposite was the case, Ross Brawn went on record as suggesting a revised and clearer wording that no one else in the OWG wanted to follow.