- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
He's staying with Red Bull, and I think he could be part of some extra engineering business that they might create - similar to Williams' Advanced Engineering thing...Lycoming wrote:Wonder what he'll move onto. Something interesting, no doubt. I hope he doesn't go into aerospace or defence and work on some project that takes 20 years of development before it sees the light of day, but I'd heard that he doesn't like that sort of thing anyways.
I´d like to know that too. From what i can see the actual magazine shown just has snippets of information from each subject.Juzh wrote:Anyone read the entire issue? I'm really curious as to what he considers his top 6 cars.
Yes, its more than 110 pages in it's entirety.SectorOne wrote:I´d like to know that too. From what i can see the actual magazine shown just has snippets of information from each subject.Juzh wrote:Anyone read the entire issue? I'm really curious as to what he considers his top 6 cars.
It's pretty much in the open that he wants to be involved with Sir Ben Ainslie's Americas Cup challenger. Designing the boat would keep him busy & it's just the kind of high profile event that Red Bull likes to be associated with.Ali F1 wrote:He's staying with Red Bull, and I think he could be part of some extra engineering business that they might create - similar to Williams' Advanced Engineering thing...Lycoming wrote:Wonder what he'll move onto. Something interesting, no doubt. I hope he doesn't go into aerospace or defence and work on some project that takes 20 years of development before it sees the light of day, but I'd heard that he doesn't like that sort of thing anyways.
Id like to see a more equal focus on all areas of the cars. Now its a reasonable split between engine and aero.MOWOG wrote:I think only realized just how much the current cars are aero-dependent a few weeks ago when it was said in another thread that when the driver lifts at maximum speed, the aero alone accounts for fully 1 G of deceleration. That's insane. These aren't cars, they are land bound aircraft.
As much as I think Newey is one of the greatest race car designers ever, I cannot get comfortable with his obsession with aero. Personally, I think there should be even less emphasis on aero and more on allowing power train development.
As an aside, I do not comprehend the constant bleating about keeping costs down when the top teams refuse to share the financial fruits of the F1 game equitably. What possible interest can Ferrari have in reining in costs when it gets $100,000,000 off the top while Caterham and/or Marussia get none? That simply makes no sense to me.
And for those who missed it, the odds are strong right now that Newey will be involved with Red Bull's America's Cup team.
The problem with f1 in the past is due to the lack of scope for engine development, hence team end up putting too much focus on aero. Aero will and should always remain a critical part of F1 as power is useless without traction and down force, and its striking the balance between aero and engine development that we need to make F1 more exciting and less predictable.MOWOG wrote:I think only realized just how much the current cars are aero-dependent a few weeks ago when it was said in another thread that when the driver lifts at maximum speed, the aero alone accounts for fully 1 G of deceleration. That's insane. These aren't cars, they are land bound aircraft.
As much as I think Newey is one of the greatest race car designers ever, I cannot get comfortable with his obsession with aero. Personally, I think there should be even less emphasis on aero and more on allowing power train development.
As an aside, I do not comprehend the constant bleating about keeping costs down when the top teams refuse to share the financial fruits of the F1 game equitably. What possible interest can Ferrari have in reining in costs when it gets $100,000,000 off the top while Caterham and/or Marussia get none? That simply makes no sense to me.
And for those who missed it, the odds are strong right now that Newey will be involved with Red Bull's America's Cup team.
At the start of this season, a large number of people on this forum were complaining that F1 was too slow - nearly as slow as GP2. That's because the fastest way around a race track is to use downforce and recent rule changes had reduced downforce. If F1 dumps even more aero and goes down the engine route suggested by some, it will become slower than GP2.MOWOG wrote: As much as I think Newey is one of the greatest race car designers ever, I cannot get comfortable with his obsession with aero. Personally, I think there should be even less emphasis on aero and more on allowing power train development.
Shrieker wrote:"You have 70 liters of fuel to work with. Bring in any engine you want."
I see nothing wrong with that. We'd not have had to suffer the sorry sound either. Even my dad (who doesn't give a s***) complained about the sound this last race... So yes, nothing wrong with F1 becoming too engine oriented - if there ever is such a thing.
What makes you think current engines are not "true racing"? Only sound alone? IMO they are "truer" than V8s except for the sound. Drivers have to control their right foot again, we had Kimi spinning on exit for f***s sake!xpensive wrote:Not that I believe that the GP2 cars have much more downforce, but F1 needs true racing engines and decent tires.