Team: Toto Wolff (Executive Director - Business), Paddy Lowe (Executive Director - Technical), Andy Cowell (Executive Director of Mercedes AMG Powertrains), Niki Lauda (Chairman), Bob Bell (TD), Aldo Costa (ED), Geoffrey Willis (Technology Director), Ron Meadows (SD), Andrew Shovlin (CRE), Simon Cole (CTE), Matthew Dane (CM)
Drivers: Lewis Hamilton (44), Nico Rosberg (6)
Team name: Mercedes AMG F1 Petronas
Please refrain from outlining all the new parts people, you are just obstructing the part everyone wants to look at.arahman_93 wrote:yeah they have wrapped the bodywork around the exhaust more closely. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B-xgVkLWwAABw5C.jpg:large
as well as add vertical vane to the floor where as before it was just like a slot.
Define an "arm". Note - I'm not trying to be obtuse - I'm trying to point out the difficulty in writing this kind of a rule. The rule needs to be able to handle all nose shapes, and accurately define what's not allowed. Otherwise the team could do exactly what Merc is doing and just claim "our nose is that shape".Mattchu wrote:I`d say it looks shorter and lower...PlatinumZealot wrote:Shorter exhaust pipe too.arahman_93 wrote:yeah they have wrapped the bodywork around the exhaust more closely. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B-xgVkLWwAABw5C.jpg:large
as well as add vertical vane to the floor where as before it was just like a slot.
With regards to the cameras personally i think the FIA should make a regulation/directive stating all position 2 cameras/housings must be directly attached to the side of the nose without any arms.
You can specify an area Xmm above the reference plane and Ymm from the wheel centerline to be completely flat and that the camera housings must always be placed flush against that.Moose wrote:Define an "arm". Note - I'm not trying to be obtuse - I'm trying to point out the difficulty in writing this kind of a rule. The rule needs to be able to handle all nose shapes, and accurately define what's not allowed. Otherwise the team could do exactly what Merc is doing and just claim "our nose is that shape".
That's exactly what they've done. Merc have positioned them there, and their nose has a stalk on it.SectorOne wrote:You can specify an area Xmm above the reference plane and Ymm from the wheel centerline to be completely flat and that the camera housings must always be placed flush against that.Moose wrote:Define an "arm". Note - I'm not trying to be obtuse - I'm trying to point out the difficulty in writing this kind of a rule. The rule needs to be able to handle all nose shapes, and accurately define what's not allowed. Otherwise the team could do exactly what Merc is doing and just claim "our nose is that shape".
http://i.imgur.com/MYBmrbE.jpg
Doing it like that it would be no different then max length of front wing, max height of rear wing or the dimensions of the impact structure around the driver´s heads.
So, are you saying that the original horns were counted as part of the nose and hence breached the upper surface limit for the nose? In other words these new side stalks poke outwards first clearing the regulated nose volume, then swing up above the same upper limit for nose - but since they are outside the regulated nose volume they are legal?Moose wrote:That's exactly what they've done. Merc have positioned them there, and their nose has a stalk on it.SectorOne wrote:You can specify an area Xmm above the reference plane and Ymm from the wheel centerline to be completely flat and that the camera housings must always be placed flush against that.Moose wrote:Define an "arm". Note - I'm not trying to be obtuse - I'm trying to point out the difficulty in writing this kind of a rule. The rule needs to be able to handle all nose shapes, and accurately define what's not allowed. Otherwise the team could do exactly what Merc is doing and just claim "our nose is that shape".
http://i.imgur.com/MYBmrbE.jpg
Doing it like that it would be no different then max length of front wing, max height of rear wing or the dimensions of the impact structure around the driver´s heads.
Haha!
It´s quite obviously not that way they have done it given Mercedes horns and subsequent update of these horns both fail to be positioned flush against the designated area marked on the car.Moose wrote:That's exactly what they've done. Merc have positioned them there, and their nose has a stalk on it.
You're right, a new little bump inlet on the outside.Bredd wrote:New front brake ducts.
FIA appear to be happy with them - they appear to meet the letter of the technical regulations.gilgen wrote:i wonder if the fin mouldings that support the camera stalks are legal? they have a direct aero influence, but camera mounts are supposed to be aero neutral
No probs Moose, as i was writing it thought about how such a regulation could be worded so as to be very specific and not allow situations like this to occur.Moose wrote: Define an "arm". Note - I'm not trying to be obtuse - I'm trying to point out the difficulty in writing this kind of a rule. The rule needs to be able to handle all nose shapes, and accurately define what's not allowed. Otherwise the team could do exactly what Merc is doing and just claim "our nose is that shape".
