Sketch of Caterham CT04
Discussion
This is a sketch of Caterham CT04 based on the test videos: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=6051273962...
Surely the front wing won't look like it's attached to a dildo?
F1 cars have been heading in this direction for over a decade. Essentially, they are becoming a kind of high powered wheelchair, with all the weight and motive power concentrated at the rear. The front of the car is essentially a boom onto which is attached the front wheels and the the front end aerodynamics.
If it wasn't for the necessity for part of the front of the car to accommodate the drivers legs and feet, the "boom" would probably be a solid carbon fibre rod with the various accoutrements simply bolted on.
If it wasn't for the necessity for part of the front of the car to accommodate the drivers legs and feet, the "boom" would probably be a solid carbon fibre rod with the various accoutrements simply bolted on.
2014 weight distribution is about 55% rear and 45% front and so somewhat different from what Eric envisages.
“4.2 Weight distribution :
For 2014 only, the weight applied on the front and rear wheels must not be less than 311kg and 366kg respectively at all times during the qualifying practice session. If, when required for checking, a car is not already fitted with dry-weather tires, it will be weighed on a set of dry-weather tires selected by the FIA technical delegate."
“4.2 Weight distribution :
For 2014 only, the weight applied on the front and rear wheels must not be less than 311kg and 366kg respectively at all times during the qualifying practice session. If, when required for checking, a car is not already fitted with dry-weather tires, it will be weighed on a set of dry-weather tires selected by the FIA technical delegate."
It seems though that the rule makers are setting specifications to ensure that not too much weight goes towards the back. You can see what the designers would like to do but are being restrained by the rules.
As ever with F1 these days, the rules are there to PREVENT the designers doing things rather than to ALLOW them to do things.
If they had their way, the cars would be as I described.
As ever with F1 these days, the rules are there to PREVENT the designers doing things rather than to ALLOW them to do things.
If they had their way, the cars would be as I described.
The rulemakers want cars to have a low nose but you have the bulkhead of the safety cell of the nose/drivers' legs and then you have the trend of the designers wanting a high nose section to feed good air for the splitter and sidepod region.
It's the way the rules are written. The rulemakers can't envisage what the teams will do to get round the regs - similar with the step noses because the teams are doing what it takes to keep the high nose concept.
It's the way the rules are written. The rulemakers can't envisage what the teams will do to get round the regs - similar with the step noses because the teams are doing what it takes to keep the high nose concept.
Some Gump said:
Kthe rule,alers can envisage that. Hell, journalists like craig scarbrough did after about 3 days, an f1 engineer presumably needed 1 or 2...
The rule makers are actually the F1 car designers, which is why we end up with these silly solutions. If we left cheery old men in blazers to do it the designs would be much freer. It must be hilarious in those meetings, everyone trying to work out what loophole Newey is trying to build into the rules without anyone noticing, while trying to do the same themselves.
davepoth said:
The rule makers are actually the F1 car designers, which is why we end up with these silly solutions. If we left cheery old men in blazers to do it the designs would be much freer.
It must be hilarious in those meetings, everyone trying to work out what loophole Newey is trying to build into the rules without anyone noticing, while trying to do the same themselves.
The teams have a say but correct me if I'm wrong but the FIA has greater power.It must be hilarious in those meetings, everyone trying to work out what loophole Newey is trying to build into the rules without anyone noticing, while trying to do the same themselves.
More on comedy noses: http://somersf1.blogspot.com/2013/11/looking-ahead...
Eric Mc said:
It seems though that the rule makers are setting specifications to ensure that not too much weight goes towards the back. You can see what the designers would like to do but are being restrained by the rules.
As ever with F1 these days, the rules are there to PREVENT the designers doing things rather than to ALLOW them to do things.
If they had their way, the cars would be as I described.
Quite a bold statement there but no they wouldn't. They'd be very different but certainly nothing like you describe. Creating a low polar moment of inertia in a chassis is one thing but when you introduce variable aero loadings, the aeros sensitivity to the slip angle of the chassis and how these affect the effective centre of gravity of the chassis at speed (especially with regards the ban on active aero bar DRS) it becomes clear why there is a design requirement to retain an amount of weight forward of the centre line and why an excessivly low moment of polar inertia would be a negative trait. The corner weights and weight distribution seen on the 11/12/13 cars was pretty close to optimum given the aero available.As ever with F1 these days, the rules are there to PREVENT the designers doing things rather than to ALLOW them to do things.
If they had their way, the cars would be as I described.
k?TomSr3 said:
I would expect somewhere like the Red Bull X2010?
Exactly, the X2010/2010B/2014 are really interesting technical investigations by what is arguably the best guy in the business. If the regs went out the window it's almost exactly what you'd see! There is a reason why a full model of it exists in the actual proper sim, not just in GT5/GT6 
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff