FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[Gaz]

Not really clear no. You keep repeating this "hollier than thou" thing Im not hollier than anyone, Im not religious. And lewis is a male...you struggle with this dont you.

The only thing I have struggled with is determining your gender

ok so you make this comment....

You act like your some impartial f1 guru yet your just a Ferrari fan boy throwing your toys out of the pram.

Hey when you actually hit purberty let me know so I can look for a mature comment from you .

and say this and i'm immature?

hahaha funny.

But i'm correct tho tex you act like you are totally impartial and support no team. Because you feel it gives you some moral high grown on all the Mclaren vs Ferrari disccusions around here. Yet at every chance you get your taking shots at Mclaren and its drivers.

[scotty]

Change the broken records and get back on topic plz! This honestly is your only warning.

[Forza_Rosso]

Lots of angry off topic posts going on, I'm reporting you guys to the mo... oh wait.

Maybe we should start a "Just Arguments" thread.

That would be really entertaining

[FIAarri]

'With the exception of the parts necessary for the driver adjustable bodywork, any car system, device or procedure which uses driver movement as a means of altering the aerodynamic characteristics of the car is prohibited from 2011.'

I seem to recall drivers tilting their heads to allow airflow over the cockpit and into the airbox, that would fall into the above category - driver movement altering airflow.......

[Fodda]

Well said Scotty.

After Webber's horrific accident this year, I'm not sure moveable rear wing elements is such a great idea. Slick tyres and no wings has always been my mantra... They've got us slicks again...

[Jabberwocky]

Well said Scotty.

After Webber's horrific accident this year, I'm not sure moveable rear wing elements is such a great idea. Slick tyres and no wings has always been my mantra... They've got us slicks again...

might as well be touring cars then

[Fodda]

Well said Scotty.

After Webber's horrific accident this year, I'm not sure moveable rear wing elements is such a great idea. Slick tyres and no wings has always been my mantra... They've got us slicks again...

might as well be touring cars then

LOL... Fair point, and considering my last posting in the Success Ballast thread, I doff my cap to thee and accept I said a silly thing. I'm just romantic for the cars of 1967... Anglo American Racing... Lotus... Brabham... Not a wing in sight until a year later.

[vaptin]

Ted has news, Ted what can you tell us?

The moveable rear wing, Whitmarsh admitted, was an idea drawn up in reaction to the lack of overtaking and the comparatively dull race we saw at the first event in Bahrain.

The thing is, many races since have been entertaining, with plenty of overtaking and good battles down the field. The moveable rear wing may be a solution for a problem that no longer exists.

Whitmarsh confirmed that if all the teams agree, the rule will be removed from next year's regulations and F1 will continue with standard rear wings.

We learned how the moveable rear wing is going to work.

The main plane (i.e. the flattest part) will be the part that moves up and down, being controlled by the driver and the curved upper plane (the bit that the sponsors logos are attached to) will remain fixed.

As a safety feature, if the moveable part of the wing fails, it will fail in the fully 'down' position, meaning that drivers will not suddenly lose all downforce.

It sounded like an idea in progress. "If it doesn't work, we'll take it off", said Whitmarsh.

The Fota chairman also confirmed that there will be a tyre test with one car from each team staying on after the final race in Abu Dhabi this year to test the first batch of Pirelli tyres.

[LifeW12]

Bahrain was crap because of the new section

The Fota chairman also confirmed that there will be a tyre test with one car from each team staying on after the final race in Abu Dhabi this year to test the first batch of Pirelli tyres.

[EwanM]

Moveable rear wing = FAIL

[ivey]

The venues just suck, that's all. I don't know how hard it is to make a track where drivers could realistically overtake, but one thing's for sure - it can't be a tight one like Singapore or Valencia.

I think they shouldn't bring moveable rear wings if the drivers don't want it

[racechick]

Moveable rear wing = FAIL

I think its a very bad idea. Its gadgets over drivinig again and it will detract from the drivers who really can overtake. We dont want a level playing field. We want a field where driving makes a difference! Sort out the aero /downforce problems and you wont need to invent silly rules.

[f1ea]

Moveable rear wing = FAIL

I think its a very bad idea. Its gadgets over drivinig again and it will detract from the drivers who really can overtake. We dont want a level playing field. We want a field where driving makes a difference! Sort out the aero /downforce problems and you wont need to invent silly rules.

Finally you are making sense!

And allow newer teams to get some experience before hitting the track with a half finished machines.
should be easy.

[Fred_C_Dobbs]

The FIA have not yet published finalised regs but a number of the "pundits" are in general agreement how they will read:

Change to Pirelli tyres.

Spec weight to increase from 620 to 640 kg.

KERS presumably unchanged from 2009/2010, its use still optional.

Shadow diffuser: banned.

Driver-adjustable front wing: banned.

Flexy front wing: not further addressed.

No driver-adjustable aerodynamic characteristics apart the rear wing (i.e., the F-duct is banned).

Optionally, the rear wing can have driver-implemented, computer-arbitrated control of angle of attack, AKA the "invisible passing assist scheme." To be available before the green flag and after the second lap, whenever in trail of another car by less than one second. Applying the brakes switches it off. The "one second" bit is expected to be tweaked over the course of the season resulting from driver input. Luca di Montezemolo already has a burr under his saddle over the vagaries of this rule and the potential for certain opportunistic but nameless engineers (whose initials are Adrian Newey) to exploit it.

The return of the 107% rule. No car may start the race unless able to post a qualy time of 107% of the fastest time posted in Q1 or less.

[texasmr2]

Sorry FCD I just could not resist .
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8784&hilit=adjustable+rear+wings