Mercedes AMG F1 W03 (pre-launch speculation)

[PlatinumZealot]

its a pain.

I'll have to create a twitter account to post one pic....

No.

Use Photobucket. Works the best. Simple clean photo linking.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Im sure the W03s whiskers will be more aerodynamic!

Edit: @Raptor

What Nsmikle said.....^^^^^

[xpensive]

Most interesting to learn, how much of the mercury-hydraulics were run at Jerez and how much is kept for the first race?

[dren]

F-duct aero test completed!

As you can tell from the split nose the duct provides fantastic air flow and downforce to the Mercedes!

The downforce is lopsided...his right eye looks to be creating more of it.

[Hail22]

F-duct aero test completed!

As you can tell from the split nose the duct provides fantastic air flow and downforce to the Mercedes!

The downforce is lopsided...his right eye looks to be creating more of it.

Omg your killing me! hahahaha.

Brawn has more Aero effeciency than most of the F1 cars (sarcasm).

[dren]

Most interesting to learn, how much of the mercury-hydraulics were run at Jerez and how much is kept for the first race?

Agree. I wonder if they even ran any of it, assuming they didn't have anything on the W02 last year. It looks like the Fvckmegood-Front Wing was put through the paces.

[dren]

There are many more contributing factors to that gain

A whole season of running on Pirelli rubber, learning the sweet spot for the cars setup, the cannon blown diffuser, not to mention general aero tweaks.

Around 1 second gain over testing last year. Probably around 2 second development gain over the year. This leaves some time for temperatures/track conditions. Also, the new tires likely produce better times (a guess).

[dren]

Returning to some W03 speculation.

It look afe to assume that the LoRDiSM suspension and the FSFW will be integral technologies on W03, there other technologies that I've thought of besides the U shaped rear ride pod shape.

SOme reports in German papers are suggesting the airbox is split in two and won't be above the drivers head. So I started scratching my chn around this one and I'm wondering if they are putting the engine ahead of the airbox....?

Lets consider that the current engine inlet airbox has been around since the late 1980's there could be some opportunity to gain some downfoce by thinking outside of the box in this area. Lets say the central "fin" remains but only to incorporate the roll hoop but behind that it narrows down to a thn blade running the length of the engine bay. The air box could be flattened considerably (since its just a ram inlet) and the inlets incorporated into two airfoil shaped horns either side of the blade.
Now if these horns are positioned such that the airfoil section is placed in the exhaust stream with the inlets just to the outside of that stream, would they be able to take advantage of increased inertia of the intake air via the transfer of momentum from the exhaust stream...? hmmm...
The inlet wings would also direct airflow to the rear wing in a beneficial way

Having a very narrow blade behind the driver makes for a massive airflow to the rear wing with plenty of scope to channel and shape the flow to the rear wing.


If we can have forward facing exhausts, why not a rearward mounted (but forward facing) engine inlet?

maybe too fanciful

Well perhaps this idea would work better with the rear wing the W02 has since the DRS activation is in the side supports. Maybe the intake will be incorporated into the sidepods for the engine? I think there was a sketch of this in the Mclaren thread.

[shelly]

In the field of fantasythey could place the engine inlets near the floor(there is no regulation about that, isn't it?) or in other very unconventional positions (like on benetton b189) to influence external aero.
In the end ebd has established priority for aero effects of the engine over engine pure power performance...

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

@ Shelly

I really dont see this taking off.....looks....bulbous. Im just thinking of the total surface area exposed to air, seems alot more with this idea.

[shelly]

Imagine those inlets being on the side of the sidepod, near the maximum width pit for example: they would help closing in streamlines i a top view isn't it? Then the hypotetical advantage should be weighted against the loss of ram effect.

But I am not serious on this.

[dren]

Plus I think that shape produces lift (I read that from a ringo post maybe?)

If Mercedes can shrink their sidepods, there might be room in them for air intakes to the engine.

[MercAMGF1Fans]

wow.. so merc might go for that?

[dren]

Like this maybe?

[shelly]

Do not think so. But the idea fo engine inlet not facing to the front, but instead facing the sides, and calling in the flow from the sides, it is funny to toy with.

@dren: I took the b189 example just to think about separate inlets lower than usual, but I m thinking of something still different,and I think in the end unfeasible
Anyway, Byrne quickly abandoned the concept in 1990, even if the b189 was good enogh to win (ok,a fia gifted win) in suzuka 1989. Cannot see the image now - m post is not related to the image you posted