<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 2009 F1 rules make rear wings tiny</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/09/18/2009-f1-rules-make-rear-wings-tiny/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/09/18/2009-f1-rules-make-rear-wings-tiny/</link>
	<description>F1 Fanatic - The Formula 1 Blog with F1 news, pictures, video, comment and analysis</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 12:11:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: connor</title>
		<link>http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/09/18/2009-f1-rules-make-rear-wings-tiny/comment-page-4/#comment-248941</link>
		<dc:creator>connor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Apr 2009 14:59:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/?p=9655#comment-248941</guid>
		<description>I wish that f1 was more about the driver skill than the car too. It obviously is at least 80% down to the car, with lewis Hamilton not performing to his usual standard and Jenson Button winning every race so far* If it was down more to the driver f1 would be the most exciting sport on the planet!


*my comments are correct at the time of wrighting. I apologise for any mistakes!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wish that f1 was more about the driver skill than the car too. It obviously is at least 80% down to the car, with lewis Hamilton not performing to his usual standard and Jenson Button winning every race so far* If it was down more to the driver f1 would be the most exciting sport on the planet!</p>
<p>*my comments are correct at the time of wrighting. I apologise for any mistakes!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: connor</title>
		<link>http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/09/18/2009-f1-rules-make-rear-wings-tiny/comment-page-4/#comment-248940</link>
		<dc:creator>connor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Apr 2009 14:53:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/?p=9655#comment-248940</guid>
		<description>About the shark fins. do they actually improve downforce? If they do then surely they are the way to go?(even if they are rather ugly!) I wonder if the size of the shark fins make any difference?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>About the shark fins. do they actually improve downforce? If they do then surely they are the way to go?(even if they are rather ugly!) I wonder if the size of the shark fins make any difference?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Igor</title>
		<link>http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/09/18/2009-f1-rules-make-rear-wings-tiny/comment-page-4/#comment-225928</link>
		<dc:creator>Igor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 15:30:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/?p=9655#comment-225928</guid>
		<description>here is pictures of 2009 cars


http://auto.lenta.ru/photo/2008/11/20/foneaero/02.htm</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>here is pictures of 2009 cars</p>
<p><a href="http://auto.lenta.ru/photo/2008/11/20/foneaero/02.htm" rel="nofollow">http://auto.lenta.ru/photo/2008/11/20/foneaero/02.htm</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cme2c</title>
		<link>http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/09/18/2009-f1-rules-make-rear-wings-tiny/comment-page-4/#comment-223772</link>
		<dc:creator>cme2c</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2008 01:19:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/?p=9655#comment-223772</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve been an F1 fan for 40 years.  I&#039;ve watched the development and enjoyed most of it other than the grooved tires and the new computer generated courses.  Going back in time with these wing changes and what appear to be pathetic cars trying to look like IRL or Indy cars, I&#039;ve stopped watching Indy because of their changes with tires, fuel, wings and now all have the same engine.  F1 seems to be going in this same direction.  I hope Max and Bernie let all the engine manufacturers develop as they have done in the past and set the standard for world motor racing for everyone else to follow.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve been an F1 fan for 40 years.  I&#8217;ve watched the development and enjoyed most of it other than the grooved tires and the new computer generated courses.  Going back in time with these wing changes and what appear to be pathetic cars trying to look like IRL or Indy cars, I&#8217;ve stopped watching Indy because of their changes with tires, fuel, wings and now all have the same engine.  F1 seems to be going in this same direction.  I hope Max and Bernie let all the engine manufacturers develop as they have done in the past and set the standard for world motor racing for everyone else to follow.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Somers</title>
		<link>http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/09/18/2009-f1-rules-make-rear-wings-tiny/comment-page-4/#comment-222455</link>
		<dc:creator>Somers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Oct 2008 15:59:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/?p=9655#comment-222455</guid>
		<description>Hi

Don&#039;t slam me too hard as this is my first post but i&#039;m a long devoted F1 fan and have been looking around a few websites to find some insightful banter in regards to F1 especially the new rule changes.

People saying that the flexible front wing approuch not making any difference would do well to cast their minds back a couple of seasons ago (I think 06) when Ferrari used a flexy front wing (while it wasn&#039;t allowed) and was achieving good results in slower corners and then gaining an advantage on the straights (around 7kmh if memory serves) Then they got told to remove it.

The rear wing situation is going to be compounded by other factors from aero being messed around with so I believe the cars will behave quite differently to the current crop.  Bear in mind however minute the affect of grooved tyres over slicks in aero terms the grooved tyres will still have an aero effect.

On the F1.com site there is an interview with the Bridgstone director of motorsport and I point at this &#039;How a grooved tyre interacts with the road is different from the way in which a slick tyre works and for the drivers it was a new sensation&#039;  Was this derived from purely the tyre, it&#039;s aero effect or the fact the cars were dimensionally narrowerer to decrease downforce.  Just as happened in &#039;98&#039; it appears that multiple adjustments will give us differing results that as a viewer of the spectacle may be unquantifyable to one specfic area.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t slam me too hard as this is my first post but i&#8217;m a long devoted F1 fan and have been looking around a few websites to find some insightful banter in regards to F1 especially the new rule changes.</p>
<p>People saying that the flexible front wing approuch not making any difference would do well to cast their minds back a couple of seasons ago (I think 06) when Ferrari used a flexy front wing (while it wasn&#8217;t allowed) and was achieving good results in slower corners and then gaining an advantage on the straights (around 7kmh if memory serves) Then they got told to remove it.</p>
<p>The rear wing situation is going to be compounded by other factors from aero being messed around with so I believe the cars will behave quite differently to the current crop.  Bear in mind however minute the affect of grooved tyres over slicks in aero terms the grooved tyres will still have an aero effect.</p>
<p>On the F1.com site there is an interview with the Bridgstone director of motorsport and I point at this &#8216;How a grooved tyre interacts with the road is different from the way in which a slick tyre works and for the drivers it was a new sensation&#8217;  Was this derived from purely the tyre, it&#8217;s aero effect or the fact the cars were dimensionally narrowerer to decrease downforce.  Just as happened in &#8217;98&#8242; it appears that multiple adjustments will give us differing results that as a viewer of the spectacle may be unquantifyable to one specfic area.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adrian</title>
		<link>http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/09/18/2009-f1-rules-make-rear-wings-tiny/comment-page-4/#comment-218452</link>
		<dc:creator>Adrian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Oct 2008 09:56:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/?p=9655#comment-218452</guid>
		<description>Man if I worked for the Overtaking Working Group that came up with these rules I&#039;d be more than a little annoyed if I read some of these posts.

They used McLaren&#039;s simulator to test the results and data from Ferrari&#039;s tests where they had 1 car follow another so I think they have actually done a lot of work on these. They weren&#039;t just thought up by Max&#039;s men off the top of their heads.

Personally I&#039;m of the opinion that the best way to introduce better racing would be to free up the technical regulations so engineers can do their thing and work out new ways to do things, but limit the spending of the teams so that the top teams don&#039;t just throw billions at winning..!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Man if I worked for the Overtaking Working Group that came up with these rules I&#8217;d be more than a little annoyed if I read some of these posts.</p>
<p>They used McLaren&#8217;s simulator to test the results and data from Ferrari&#8217;s tests where they had 1 car follow another so I think they have actually done a lot of work on these. They weren&#8217;t just thought up by Max&#8217;s men off the top of their heads.</p>
<p>Personally I&#8217;m of the opinion that the best way to introduce better racing would be to free up the technical regulations so engineers can do their thing and work out new ways to do things, but limit the spending of the teams so that the top teams don&#8217;t just throw billions at winning..!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: aswino</title>
		<link>http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/09/18/2009-f1-rules-make-rear-wings-tiny/comment-page-4/#comment-218296</link>
		<dc:creator>aswino</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Oct 2008 14:39:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/?p=9655#comment-218296</guid>
		<description>i bet F1 car in 2009 will look ugly with those stupid regulations.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i bet F1 car in 2009 will look ugly with those stupid regulations.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: the limit</title>
		<link>http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/09/18/2009-f1-rules-make-rear-wings-tiny/comment-page-4/#comment-216545</link>
		<dc:creator>the limit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Sep 2008 03:14:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/?p=9655#comment-216545</guid>
		<description>It looks very early 1990s to me, with Derek Warwick wearing a blue helmet. 


  I have faith that the techs will tamper as much as possible with the rules, in order to gain some advantage. We must all withold our judgements until after we have seen the news cars race ofcourse. Whatever the design, a nice, fat V12 engine would surely make that car a whole lot more beautifull. Oh, and give us thirty of them instead of the usual, lame twenty. Thankyou Bernie!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It looks very early 1990s to me, with Derek Warwick wearing a blue helmet. </p>
<p>  I have faith that the techs will tamper as much as possible with the rules, in order to gain some advantage. We must all withold our judgements until after we have seen the news cars race ofcourse. Whatever the design, a nice, fat V12 engine would surely make that car a whole lot more beautifull. Oh, and give us thirty of them instead of the usual, lame twenty. Thankyou Bernie!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Beamer</title>
		<link>http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/09/18/2009-f1-rules-make-rear-wings-tiny/comment-page-4/#comment-216367</link>
		<dc:creator>John Beamer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Sep 2008 13:19:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/?p=9655#comment-216367</guid>
		<description>Let me add a couple of things Rob as well. 

Aerodynamics largely an art (as you insinuate) - in many instances teams don&#039;t know why something works but see an improvement in handling/stability/speed whatever ... CFD definitely helps understanding. Though this remains an engineering discipline rather than a theoretical physics discipline.

The CDG wing is a fine idea on paper, and is sound - instead of producing upwash you produce downwash, which help maintain pressure on the front wing of a following car. The CFD - available on the web - didn&#039;t show a huge benefit but I think the theory is reasonably sound.

The other, far bigger, issue is that teams obviously don&#039;t want to talk about this stuff. What you are left with are people who know what they are talking about based on a) prior experience or b) theoretical knowledge or c) amateur enthusiasm!

In fact students working for teams etc etc etc will be so focused on one small part of the car that I suspect that won&#039;t be able to tell you much about the overall 2009 regs. I&#039;d trust someone on F1tech.net over some of them ...

At the end of the day until the 09 cars are on the track we are all in the realm of speculation. Nothing wrong with that is there!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let me add a couple of things Rob as well. </p>
<p>Aerodynamics largely an art (as you insinuate) &#8211; in many instances teams don&#8217;t know why something works but see an improvement in handling/stability/speed whatever &#8230; CFD definitely helps understanding. Though this remains an engineering discipline rather than a theoretical physics discipline.</p>
<p>The CDG wing is a fine idea on paper, and is sound &#8211; instead of producing upwash you produce downwash, which help maintain pressure on the front wing of a following car. The CFD &#8211; available on the web &#8211; didn&#8217;t show a huge benefit but I think the theory is reasonably sound.</p>
<p>The other, far bigger, issue is that teams obviously don&#8217;t want to talk about this stuff. What you are left with are people who know what they are talking about based on a) prior experience or b) theoretical knowledge or c) amateur enthusiasm!</p>
<p>In fact students working for teams etc etc etc will be so focused on one small part of the car that I suspect that won&#8217;t be able to tell you much about the overall 2009 regs. I&#8217;d trust someone on F1tech.net over some of them &#8230;</p>
<p>At the end of the day until the 09 cars are on the track we are all in the realm of speculation. Nothing wrong with that is there!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert McKay</title>
		<link>http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/09/18/2009-f1-rules-make-rear-wings-tiny/comment-page-4/#comment-216363</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert McKay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Sep 2008 12:29:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/?p=9655#comment-216363</guid>
		<description>&quot;It really annoys me hearing people on this forum talking as if they are experts on the subject of aerodynamics! I think I believe the opinion of university graduates working in F1 teams and the FIA rather than people in this forum who think they know better.

If there is anyone in this forum who is an expert in the field, feel free to comment as much as you like. 
&quot;

It&#039;s an absolutely fair point. But two things here: (1) the fact the CDG wing concept was dropped suggests the FIA themselves don&#039;t entirely understand aerodynamics - it is a complex problem, to be fair - and (2) some teams are already coming out and saying &quot;we don&#039;t know how these changes will affect the racing&quot;. There&#039;s a bit of guesswork going on here.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;It really annoys me hearing people on this forum talking as if they are experts on the subject of aerodynamics! I think I believe the opinion of university graduates working in F1 teams and the FIA rather than people in this forum who think they know better.</p>
<p>If there is anyone in this forum who is an expert in the field, feel free to comment as much as you like.<br />
&#8221;</p>
<p>It&#8217;s an absolutely fair point. But two things here: (1) the fact the CDG wing concept was dropped suggests the FIA themselves don&#8217;t entirely understand aerodynamics &#8211; it is a complex problem, to be fair &#8211; and (2) some teams are already coming out and saying &#8220;we don&#8217;t know how these changes will affect the racing&#8221;. There&#8217;s a bit of guesswork going on here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: basic
Database Caching 11/24 queries in 0.096 seconds using disk: basic
Object Caching 476/480 objects using disk: basic

Served from: www.f1fanatic.co.uk @ 2012-02-10 12:11:21 -->
