mwillems wrote: ↑10 Mar 2022, 12:46
Is there a too much? Have Mercedes already asked the FIA about where the line might be drawn? Do the FIA even care?
I think they will see the racing first and decide later if clarification is required!
There seems to be a lot of competition politics creeping into this car thread!
NB: I don't know what I am talking about, this is really one for AeroGandalf and Vanja #66.
I guess the crux of the matter is:
1) The minimum radius rule for the sidepod bodywork does
not apply to the crash structure, notwithstanding it is in the forward bodywork area which allows 25mm convex radius rather than the sidepod area? (Is that correct?) And/or the FIA do not require the crash structure to enclosed by the 'main' bodywork of the car?
2)
Should the minimum radius rule apply to the crash structure, or rather did the FIA intend for it to apply?
If (2) is negative then not only is it legal, but also the FIA
won't act to change the wording for 2023 and I suspect everyone will consider such a design for 2023 if this design is effective?
Regulation 13.5 about the Side Impact Structure doesn't mention much about bodywork as far as I can tell, while the bodywork section doesn't mention anything about side impact structures...
So the FIA intend for the teams to have free reign on how the SIPS are clad with bodywork? I.e., there is no rule that SIPS must be fully enclosed in what you might call the "main" bodywork however that would be defined, so Mercedes are well within their rights to clad the SIPS in bodywork of not less than 25mm convex radius which resembles a winglet?
13.5.1 (b) The two side impact structures must be fully enclosed by bodywork, and hence no
part of them should be exposed to the external air stream.
The mirror mount volume regulation is similarly vague and seems to allow as many vanes to be put into that volume as the teams may wish, however dubiously such vanes may function as a "mount" for the mirror.
Forming the SIPS cladding and mirror mounts into a combination of winglet and turning vanes is therefore a logical outcome of the regulations. One wonders how other teams either missed it or why they decided against it!
https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files ... -02-19.pdf