Last lap they showed Lewis was going back in the box slowly so I wouldn't expect porpoising to be there then. It improved a bit but still jumping around quite a bit and unstable out of slow corners.NathanOlder wrote: ↑10 Mar 2022, 10:10Looked like the porpoising has been fixed, just saw the car on straight and didnt seem to be doing it with the small rod attatched to the edge of the floor
A lot of the cars have looked tail happy. A portion of that is probably because the track is green, and teams are still working on setup.dialtone wrote: ↑10 Mar 2022, 10:16Last lap they showed Lewis was going back in the box slowly so I wouldn't expect porpoising to be there then. It improved a bit but still jumping around quite a bit and unstable out of slow corners.NathanOlder wrote: ↑10 Mar 2022, 10:10Looked like the porpoising has been fixed, just saw the car on straight and didnt seem to be doing it with the small rod attatched to the edge of the floor
I guess one could say that Mercedes has strongly reduced the gray area in their design
The more I'm looking at this design, the more problematic it seems. The aerofoil around the side impact structure looks massive, angled and decently cambered - that's a lot of lift and drag just with that one element. However, this would also draw a bit more air to the rear and beam wings. I'm sure the team wouldn't make this kind of effort if it wasn't worth it in the end, but there are a lot of compromises and they don't look that small to me.PlatinumZealot wrote: ↑10 Mar 2022, 10:08I think what they achieved here is to reduce the impact of the upper wake as Kyle engineers would say ans also that side pod lift should be elimianted.
The side pod at it's widest is not all that narrow. You can still see the lower crash structure is not protruding. But you can bet that the draggiest parts of the side pod are no more.
She should rely fly down the straights that's for sure. I'm worried about reliability and balance.
Could this be the emrgeance of two philosophies, one seeks to reduce or eliminate side pod lift (Ferrari) the other is to work as sealing the floor the increase its effectiveness to forcefully overcome and lift issue around the Centre of the car (McLaren & Mercedes)???Vanja #66 wrote: ↑10 Mar 2022, 10:24The more I'm looking at this design, the more problematic it seems. The aerofoil around the side impact structure looks massive, angled and decently cambered - that's a lot of lift and drag just with that one element. However, this would also draw a bit more air to the rear and beam wings. I'm sure the team wouldn't make this kind of effort if it wasn't worth it in the end, but there are a lot of compromises and they don't look that small to me.PlatinumZealot wrote: ↑10 Mar 2022, 10:08I think what they achieved here is to reduce the impact of the upper wake as Kyle engineers would say ans also that side pod lift should be elimianted.
The side pod at it's widest is not all that narrow. You can still see the lower crash structure is not protruding. But you can bet that the draggiest parts of the side pod are no more.
She should rely fly down the straights that's for sure. I'm worried about reliability and balance.
Yeah noticed that 2 from behind the halo its flat nowAeroDynamic wrote: ↑10 Mar 2022, 10:21The mercedes centre-line packaging has got bulkier per the comparison.
The sidepods are further back for sure via the comparison
Actually, all 3 cars have 3 very different aero philosophies. And then there's RB/AT as 4, Williams as 5 and other teams as 6.mzivtins wrote: ↑10 Mar 2022, 10:26Could this be the emrgeance of two philosophies, one seeks to reduce or eliminate side pod lift (Ferrari) the other is to work as sealing the floor the increase its effectiveness to forcefully overcome and lift issue around the Centre of the car (McLaren & Mercedes)???
