Yes, static two or one plane wings are both fine – you're allowed at most 2 planes, and the rearward and upper ward one must be shorter than the other. The DRS flap is defined to be the rearward and upper ward one, because of that, you can't have a single DRS flap (because it would be longer than the non-existent other flap), but you could have a single static wing.raymondu999 wrote:But a simple static two-plane RW would be, no? Or a simple static single wing for that matter.
I don't get how Lewis could say after the race they had too much df on when their wing was super skinny
I think he's saying "Hey, the red bulls were wayyyyyy faster down the straight than us", and assumed that they were faster in the middle sector too. In fact, the McLaren was generally about 0.5 to 1 seconds faster in the middle sector. The problem they have is that that looked like about the least downforce/drag you could make the McLaren actually have. At Monza, they need less drag, so they might have a problem.richard_leeds wrote:I think he's saying that he'd have like more straight line speed. Not sure he'd be happy with the resulting loss of traction. Clearly the combined package was better than Ferrari so perhaps this is just a driver who didn't win saying he wanted a faster car.
Could also be because of the blown exhaust, with their particular solution sapping more HP from the engine. Their car was quickest through sector 2 in qualifying, and Button's car look absolutely planted in the race, so they definitely seemed to have more down force than the others.richard_leeds wrote:I did notice the McLaren lower top speed, it could be due to the gearing as well as drag.
I think he means "give it a shorter chord and a shallower main plane" wait... that's what they did >.>raymondu999 wrote:What do you mean by make the normal DRS "flatter?"
They can't within the rules. The size of the gap between the two planes is limited - the shorter chord of the top flap is what is allowing it to move through a greater angle within that allowed distance. So you can either have a long chord flap and have it only move a few degrees, or you can have a short chord and have it rotate further.astracrazy wrote:i think they should try and scrap this short drs. It doesn't seem to work for them. Try and make the normal drs much flatter?
did even watch the live timings? at no point was lewis or jenson 0.5-1sec faster in the middle sector.beelsebob wrote:I think he's saying "Hey, the red bulls were wayyyyyy faster down the straight than us", and assumed that they were faster in the middle sector too. In fact, the McLaren was generally about 0.5 to 1 seconds faster in the middle sector. The problem they have is that that looked like about the least downforce/drag you could make the McLaren actually have. At Monza, they need less drag, so they might have a problem.richard_leeds wrote:I think he's saying that he'd have like more straight line speed. Not sure he'd be happy with the resulting loss of traction. Clearly the combined package was better than Ferrari so perhaps this is just a driver who didn't win saying he wanted a faster car.
Yes, yes I did, and yes they were. The only driver to get within 0.5 seconds of Hamilton's Q3 middle sector was vettel, and even he was slower. This was also the first time that any driver had got within 0.5 - vettel's other laps had significantly slower middle sectors. Vettel made all his time on Hamilton in the first sector. http://www.fia.com/en-GB/mediacentre/f1 ... ectors.pdf. During the closing laps, button was closing 0.1 on Alonso in the first sector, 0.3 in the final sector, and between 0.7 and 1.1 in the middle sector.ell66 wrote:did even watch the live timings? at no point was lewis or jenson 0.5-1sec faster in the middle sector.
fact is lewis ran to much df and got mugged at he start of the race. jeson hd an ideal set up and i think theyl be just fine for monza.