Page 2 of 3
Posted: Thu Aug 24, 2006 4:44 pm
by JayVee
Redhead wrote:The reason this has only just come up is that although the stewards have been aware of the device for a long time, it has only just come to their attention that it could influence the aerodynamics. Who it was that brought it to their attention and why they didn?t twig to it earlier is a matter for conjecture, the most commonly mentioned culprit I have heard is McLaren.
Yes there are many other moving bits on the car that influence aerodynamics, such as tyres, but there are also a lot of specific rules for those components.
Renault submitted at the hearing that the TMD only had a slight influence on the aerodynamics, and they were probably telling the truth. My understanding is that the primary function of these devices is to settle the front of the car down as it bangs over the kerbs in chicanes and tight corners. I believe the Michelins have a more flexible sidewall than the Bridgestones, and as such the oscillation as the inside tyre hits the kerb would be greater. The vertical inertia induced by these oscillations would feed through the front of the car to the outside tyre disturbing the vertical load and having a deleterious effect on grip and driveability and therefore corner exit speed, which on chicanes and slow corners leading onto long straights is critical.
If this is correct and I?m happy to be proved wrong, it would explain why it would affect the Renault more than Ferrari, but Macca?s are also on Michelins?
Good post Redhead.
I don't know much about aerodynamics to contribute however this decision by the FIA clearly shows their incompetence regardless of who the culprit is (which in my view has to be Ferrari as they are the only ones fighting for the championship with Renault).
On the tyres, I think a few years ago Bridgestone and Michelin had very different tyres but I think this year they are very similar as Bridgestone have become more Michelin like.
Posted: Thu Aug 24, 2006 4:48 pm
by gkaytaz
I wonder if this issue would have come up the same way if Bridgestone were the sole supplier this year.
Posted: Thu Aug 24, 2006 4:49 pm
by jacfan
Posted: Thu Aug 24, 2006 4:51 pm
by Julian Mayo
[quote="gkaytaz"]I wonder if this issue would have come up the same way if Bridgestone were the sole supplier this year.[/quot
Probably sooner, cos the "slight" aero advantage would have been more noticeable
Posted: Thu Aug 24, 2006 4:54 pm
by gkaytaz
Julian Mayo wrote:
Probably sooner, cos the "slight" aero advantage would have been more noticeable
Posted: Thu Aug 24, 2006 4:59 pm
by jacfan
Oops this was meant for JM.
Perhaps the FIA should make this kit mandatory on all F1 cars
Posted: Thu Aug 24, 2006 5:10 pm
by gkaytaz
jacfan wrote:Oops this was meant for JM.
No worries no offense taken
Posted: Thu Aug 24, 2006 5:16 pm
by Kapel
Why cant X-technical ppl worked for an F1 team be hired by the FIA permanently to monitor these technicalities,this would stop making a fool of themselves atleast in this departments.
Ron Dennis/Mclaren were the ones to complain.Only Mclaren couldnt gain any advantage with the dampers & they wouldnt fit properly.
Ferrari were the first one to adopt it this year (Renault ofcourse had them in 2005)after Imola & did make progress with it.but i think their form is more due to tyres than dampers...
N when the mass dampers issue came up,Renault had won 4 on the trot & lost 1(USGP)...so JayVee,Ferrari was not even close to being championship contender.
I think Bernie & FIA are the main culprits here...
Posted: Fri Aug 25, 2006 2:30 am
by GhoGho
JayVee wrote:Redhead wrote:The reason this has only just come up is that although the stewards have been aware of the device for a long time, it has only just come to their attention that it could influence the aerodynamics. Who it was that brought it to their attention and why they didn?t twig to it earlier is a matter for conjecture, the most commonly mentioned culprit I have heard is McLaren.
Yes there are many other moving bits on the car that influence aerodynamics, such as tyres, but there are also a lot of specific rules for those components.
Renault submitted at the hearing that the TMD only had a slight influence on the aerodynamics, and they were probably telling the truth. My understanding is that the primary function of these devices is to settle the front of the car down as it bangs over the kerbs in chicanes and tight corners. I believe the Michelins have a more flexible sidewall than the Bridgestones, and as such the oscillation as the inside tyre hits the kerb would be greater. The vertical inertia induced by these oscillations would feed through the front of the car to the outside tyre disturbing the vertical load and having a deleterious effect on grip and driveability and therefore corner exit speed, which on chicanes and slow corners leading onto long straights is critical.
If this is correct and I?m happy to be proved wrong, it would explain why it would affect the Renault more than Ferrari, but Macca?s are also on Michelins?
Good post Redhead.
I don't know much about aerodynamics to contribute however this decision by the FIA clearly shows their incompetence regardless of who the culprit is (which in my view has to be Ferrari as they are the only ones fighting for the championship with Renault).
On the tyres, I think a few years ago Bridgestone and Michelin had very different tyres but I think this year they are very similar as Bridgestone have become more Michelin like.
Good post Redhead. I too have heard that McLaren are the ones complaining. Ron said that they had tested the system without any success. With BIG sponsorship deals at stake any team seen to be improving against the Renaults could inluence a sponsors decision. Therefore it could be any team looking for sponsorship that lodged the complaint.
Renault are also not the only team to run the system, DC said in an interview that RBR had been using the system off and on through the season, with mixed results depending on the circuit. Ferrari alegedly also had a similar system being used off and on throught the season.
I dont believe that the system gives a huge advantage, with renaults poor performance in Germany being more due to a revised rear suspension which didnt work as expected and tires which didnt suit the revised car properly. I expect Renault will still be at the front with or without the system in place.
Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 3:53 pm
by jacfan
Interesting article by Alan Baldwin, motor racing correspondent, on the mass dampers controversy.
Part of the article says
How much of an effect it will have is anyone's guess.
Not much, according to Renault's world champion Fernando Alonso, but perhaps more if you listen to his Ferrari rival Michael Schumacher.
"If they didn't believe in this system, they wouldn't have put it in," said the German at the Turkish Grand Prix.
Does not sound like Ferrari was using this system to me.
If you wish to read the whole article you can at
http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/article ... COLUMN.XML
Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:18 pm
by Kapel
Michael statement doesnt signify that they didnt use it..it only implifies that Renault maximise its use & they were the most beneficiary..
Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 10:31 pm
by Julian Mayo
Kapel wrote:Michael statement doesnt signify that they didnt use it..it only implifies that Renault maximise its use & they were the most beneficiary..
Why are we in Wiiiiiiiiidddddeeeeee format ?
Implies to me that Ferrari couldn't make it work......remember that one extra or fewer layers of kevlar on the tub, before it goes into the oven determines what you can hang off it for the whole season
Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 10:39 pm
by Kapel
Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 10:47 pm
by Julian Mayo
are we on topic ?
looks furtively, to all sides.....
Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 11:04 pm
by Kapel
yes yes v r...i hope
U were saying something abt mass dampers? dampening renault performance,does look like from the quali ...do u think they r light?
