Technical Regulations for 2009-2015

[andrew]

Gilgen, if you make a claim you should back it up with facts rather than making wild comments that make you look as if you a trolling when that may not be your intention.

And I have done a quick Google and Wikipedia search and have not found anything.

[xpensive]

Andrew, I can assure you there was adjustable rear wings by Ferrari in 1968-69, but I can't find the evidence on the web either!

[andrew]

I would just like Gilgen to post facts rather than just point out others mistakes (We have enough like that already on the MrM thread!! ). The 312 was quite a tidy looking car and I will have a proper root around tonight to see if I can shed some light on adjustable wings from the 60s.

[aral]

I would just like Gilgen to post facts rather than just point out others mistakes (We have enough like that already on the MrM thread!! ). The 312 was quite a tidy looking car and I will have a proper root around tonight to see if I can shed some light on adjustable wings from the 60s.

Oh dear! I just googled the subject and found a number of entries on the subject, including James Allens website! Lotus 49B had a flattening rear wing, operated by a bowden cable and a foot pedal. I came across photos of the system, but don't know how to transfer these to this site. Brabham BT26 had a system but operation is not specified. And it appears that the March 711 had an adjustible front ovoid wing, designed by Frank Costin. The dates were from 1968 to 1971. I am sure that there are others who can shed more light on these, but it is definite. Movable wings have been used before. Ask James Allen if you don't want to believe me.

[andrew]

Found this showing a Gunston 49. You can see the mechanism for moving the wings on the uprights.



Lotus 49:

[aral]

Found this showing a Gunston 49. You can see the mechanism for moving the wings on the uprights.



Lotus 49:

HOORAY! Apology accepted!

[andrew]

No apology need to be given. If you had posted these details to start with, there would have been any of the subsequent pulling of teeth to get anywhere.

[aral]

No apology need to be given. If you had posted these details to start with, there would have been any of the subsequent pulling of teeth to get anywhere.

You were the one who stated categorically that NOBODY had used adjustable wings before. I just pointed out your error, but did not expect to have to spoon feed you. You even went on to say that there was NOTHING on google about it. But I would at least have expected you to acknowledge that I was being truthful!

[xpensive]

And here is the Ferrari 312, in text only, but anyway!

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/ferrari-f18.htm

Excerpt;
"It did win the following year, but just once: Jacky Ickx’s victory in France. The Ferrari 312 F1 now ran four-valve heads that helped make it the first F1 Ferrari with more than 400 horsepower. Perhaps the season’s most noteworthy Ferrari moment came in June at the Belgium Grand Prix, where Maranello introduced an aerodynamic aid that caught everyone’s attention.

A number of cars had experimented with small wings on the nose and rear, but Ferrari mounted an aerofoil on supports high above the gearbox, just behind the cockpit. By September, at Monza, the wing could be controlled by the driver."

[strad]

Jeeeez what babies..
Yes I was wrong..there have been movable wings..and they were dropped like hot potatoes. Because they were dangerous

Early experiments with movable wings and high mountings led to some spectacular accidents, and for the 1970 season regulations were introduced to limit the size and location of wings.

[aral]

And here is the Ferrari 312, in text only, but anyway!

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/ferrari-f18.htm

Excerpt;
"It did win the following year, but just once: Jacky Ickx’s victory in France. The Ferrari 312 F1 now ran four-valve heads that helped make it the first F1 Ferrari with more than 400 horsepower. Perhaps the season’s most noteworthy Ferrari moment came in June at the Belgium Grand Prix, where Maranello introduced an aerodynamic aid that caught everyone’s attention.

A number of cars had experimented with small wings on the nose and rear, but Ferrari mounted an aerofoil on supports high above the gearbox, just behind the cockpit. By September, at Monza, the wing could be controlled by the driver."

Thanks, Xpensive. It is nice to know that there are some knowlegable people on this site. As wings were changing daily at that time, it is difficult to find these items in the cars specifications.

[andrew]

No apology need to be given. If you had posted these details to start with, there would have been any of the subsequent pulling of teeth to get anywhere.

You were the one who stated categorically that NOBODY had used adjustable wings before. I just pointed out your error, but did not expect to have to spoon feed you. You even went on to say that there was NOTHING on google about it. But I would at least have expected you to acknowledge that I was being truthful!

I stated that I could not find anything and asked a couple times for you to point us all in the right direction but you chose to troll instead. Not my problem if you can't divulge sources to back up what you claims to be fact. It help to cite references where possible.

[WhiteBlue]

It is hard to understand the fuss being kicked up about the movable wing history. Obviously neither the material science (composites) on the mechanical side nor the control systems were up to the job in the sixties.

On the other side spoilers on aircraft wings have been operated for decades safely and we had several generations of aircrafts which have used thrust vectoring or even tilt engines. The most advanced systems can be seen on a V-22 Osprey and a F35-B Marine version. If these systems are safe the deployment of movable wings in F1 should not be a serious technical challenge.

In my view the fundamental question for F1 is how to allow affordable continuous development - which makes the sport interesting for the viewers - and find a sensible way to cut back the performance gains created by the continuous development.

Obviously active or adaptive wings and active suspension are performance enhancers that were difficult to govern in an age that had no suitable performance cutting mechanism. A sliding scale restrictive fuel budget is the perfect mechanism to provide the performance curbs we need. With the introduction of that principle many technologies that were restricted for a long time start to make sense again. The list is impressive.

• tubo charging
• variable intake and exhaust geometries
• direct injection
• alternative valves like rotaries
• alternative combustion geometries and configs
• alternative fuels including multi fuel
• multiple engines
• dual torque (electric and ICE)
• CVT
• unlimited KERS
• AWD
• AWS
• adaptive aero
• active aero
• active suspension

Most technologies can be allowed and still require the driver to apply the brake, throttle pedal and gear change unassisted. The list of restrictions should be freed up under the considerations of the cost impact. Strict supply rules for new systems to the whole grid need to be set up to avoid too big advantages of teams with access to unlimited development resources.

[strad]

While I am not in favor of the idea,,Especially as proposed.
AS for safety I have to admit that today's drivers already cope with playing with more controls than even Hall or Gurney could have envisioned and after all hydroplane drivers fly their boats with movable wings already,,,,, ooops...of course that's often with disastrous results but what the heck.

[Ogami musashi]

I'm a bit puzzled at the idea of favoring straigthline overtaking and not trying to reduce more the wake effects, that said i'm pretty happy adaptive aero are on their way as they are a simple solution to at least efficiency and much more could be done.

I want to wait to see what it gives for 2011 knowing that anyway in 2013 a new formula will come.

That said, this year's aero situation seems correct.