Comments on: Abu Dhabi Grand Prix technical analysis – and a look ahead to 2010

By: essgee

essgee — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 10:15:22 +0000

Max. The gland is a “Prostate.”
your word is…..
Pros´trate
a. 1. Lying at length, or with the body extended on the ground or other surface; stretched out; as, to sleep prostrate.

Could apply to F1 I guess, as in Grovel

By: Adrian

Adrian — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 13:40:34 +0000

Thank you Max for that piece of insightful analysis…

By: Adrian

Adrian — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 12:59:03 +0000

Ah, a radically different car…where have I heard that before? Oh yes, the RA107…

By: Max Mosley

Max Mosley — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 04:30:58 +0000

I think they have to ban front wings, just like during the early 80’s.

By: Max Mosley

Max Mosley — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 04:29:17 +0000

That is a very good suggestion. They could also try the old honda & renault engines from the 80’s & 90’s.

By: Max Mosley

Max Mosley — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 04:27:28 +0000

Shape of prostrate gland?

By: Max Mosley

Max Mosley — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 04:26:02 +0000

The Article was too complicated for my dimwit brain, but enjoyed reading it though.

By: max Mosley

max Mosley — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 04:08:03 +0000

why have the FIA made the front tyres narrower??

That is because people in the FIA are dumb & have very little understanding of the sport

By: The Sri Lankan

The Sri Lankan — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 03:09:26 +0000

i hope they try out both Toyota and the cosworth engines. imagine the feedback from that

By: John H

John H — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 22:14:28 +0000

Thanks. Much appreciated $:)

By: Hallard

Hallard — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:37:20 +0000

I dont think that there is any single way forward. My guess is that ferrari shifted all development to the 2010 car early because of fundamental flaws that they had with the F60, which meant that there wasnt much mor development they could do. I have read elsewhere that the F60’s double diffuser is one of the most compromised of the field due to the rear suspension layout constraints. Ferrari is probably thinking that they need to do a fundamental redesign on the mechanical side of things. McLaren, on the other hand, was able to develop the MP4-24 very extensively throughout the season, leading one to believe that the car simply had more potential for development and fewer fundamental flaws. We should see a radically different car from ferrari next year, whereas I imagine the McLaren could be largely similar to this year’s(at least as far as aero goes).

By: John Beamer

John Beamer — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 18:58:01 +0000

It’s about weight distribution. The aero changes as well as removal of groves meant teams must have front weight distribution at all costs. That makes the cars oversteer and the rear tyres are worked too hard – remember many teams had rear tyre issues this year.

A narrower front tyre will address that issue.

Here is a helpful primer: http://www.racecar-engineering.com/articles/f1/321860/f1-to-run-narrow-front-tyres-next-year.html

By: John Beamer

John Beamer — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 18:54:22 +0000

I think this is a case of less aero freedom this year – it means that there is more gain from doing aero work around the brake ducts whereas is previous years it would have been on the bargeboards or various vanes. Also fairings had a bigger impact than the ducts so that was a logical place to start development.

As I recall in 2007/8 some teams were absolutely experimenting with the ducts – just not as aggressively as this year.

By: Hallard

Hallard — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 17:24:01 +0000

Some drivers didnt use them, but a lot of drivers did use them. I think both Button and Barichello said they used them on every lap.

By: BT52/B

BT52/B — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 17:03:57 +0000

I think Williams will be involved at the Jerez test, so Hulkenberg can start getting some laps in an F1… that’s what I heard from brazilian press anyway, who stated that Barrichello will go to watch his rookie teammate.

By: Adrian

Adrian — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 16:44:57 +0000

Personally I think that the approach McLaren have taken is the better one.

Yes the cars will be different next year, but the aero regs are the same, so what is learnt this year is still relevant next year and if it has been run on this yearsr car already then you have a baseline to work from.

If you think back to the Schumi/Brawn days at Ferrari, all their successful cars were evolutions of the previous years, even when there were changes to the regs such as the raised front wings in (IIRC) 2005…

Starting with a clean sheet can sometimes work, but equally can lead to an uncompetitive car (just ask anyone who saw the Honda RA108 or the McLaren MP4-18).

I think Ferrari will be up there next year, but as someone else has said, it will be thanks to their drivers rather than having a class beating car.

By: Ciaran

Ciaran — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 16:33:23 +0000

I’m not sure about this one. I don’t think the drivers were using them anyway.

By: Adrian

Adrian — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 16:06:51 +0000

The fuel tank must be a single rubber bladder…

Of course there’s nothing there to stipulate what shape the single rubber bladder must take…!!

By: John H

John H — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 13:26:34 +0000

Thank you John for that fantastic article.

I have a question – why have the FIA made the front tyres narrower?? As you mention, this reduces mechanical grip and gives more oppurtunitues for aero having more effect… how does this tie into any OWG recommendations at all?

Thanks.

By: Brian

Brian — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 13:12:56 +0000

I have a feeling that Ferrari will be competetive next year due to their drivers, but I don’t think that their car will be that great. I can’t see them finishing ahead of Red Bull, Brwan or McLaren in the standings.