Interesting Item on New Chassis in Indy Star (Merged)

[JagtechOhio]

Climb,

No doubt that public statements and press releases are show bizz, and the real decisions are made behind closed doors.

In some cases, there is more at stake then idle speculation or chat "for entertainment purposes only". There are a number of people with skin in the game, and others awaiting the outcome of major decisions...and watching the trends that might predict them before plans can be formulated.

The best example is the position of a potential sponsor, or an indiviual trying to negotiate with one. Another is an engine builder who has a product which fits within a vague set of regulations, but still may not gain acceptance when the format for consideration is finalized.

So smart people have to wait until answers are carved in stone. I'm not that smart.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

From what I have found out the Delta-Wing uses Torque Vectoring, in otherwords the differential can be used to assist with steering.

In one respect it is a very bold move and very radical ideas can be scoffed at. When Sir Jack Brabham entered Indy in 1961 everyone laughed; he finished 9th on the lead lap and the rest as they say, regarding rear engined race cars at Indy, is history.

The biggest problem it faces is the wheels are partially enclosed and therefore it is not open-wheel.

You are ight many new ideas are scoffed at, and prove their worth.
However in this case I think it is all junk and spin.

Brabham produced the car and raced it to prove its worth.
Let Bowlby produce the Delta thing and lets see it go!
Lets see how that narrow front track lets it weave in and out of traffic - I don't think so!

Sorry it just violates every principle of a racing car handling where Brabham's rear engined car violated none!

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by wnut

You are ight many new ideas are scoffed at, and prove their worth.
However in this case I think it is all junk and spin.

Brabham produced the car and raced it to prove its worth.
Let Bowlby produce the Delta thing and lets see it go!
Lets see how that narrow front track lets it weave in and out of traffic - I don't think so!

Sorry it just violates every principle of a racing car handling where Brabham's rear engined car violated none!

I have to agree with you on this, though I would like to see it in action.

[JagtechOhio]

That's the best argument wnut...the innovations had to be proven in competition as superior. Then accepted as practical and affordable. In later years, proven to advance safety as well.

The Delta, as brilliant as the design concepts may be, has proven none of that. If selected, it will have no competitor and will simply have to prove it can run.

[wnut]

Wouldn't the first step be to build a crude prototype to test the concept and prove it.

If you built a crude space frame and configured it to the general principles of the Delta it would be able to show if there was any merit in the layout and whether or not vector thrust/ warp drive or whatever worked on a skid pan. (Has anyone seen the wind tunnel data and looked at yaw and recovery figures?)

I am pretty comfortable it would prove it did not work and everyone could move on having lost very little!

Giving them a multi-million dollar contract to prove it is a failure is nuts!

[JagtechOhio]

Bowlby's proof of concept was to purchase and modify a radio-controlled model car into a three-wheeler, and start turning hot laps in the parking lot.

The full scale model is a block of foam, wind tunnel tested without front wheel openings to permit steering, no cockpit cowling, body seams, external mirrors, or a simulated driver to monitor buffeting.

The working prototype was announced for August, and construction never commenced for lack of funding.

It is an innovative and theoretical exercise. Perhaps brilliant: but the foam model, computer simulations, the first few sets of front tires, and the marketing department are all that exist.

As climb inferred, that doesn't mean a thing if it has the political clout behind it to gain approval, or the continued support of most of the team owners. Otherwise the first one never turns a wheel.

Chip wants to see that happen, Penske says he does too. But neither of them is paying for it.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by JagtechOhio

Bowlby's proof of concept was to purchase and modify a radio-controlled model car into a three-wheeler, and start turning hot laps in the parking lot.

The full scale model is a block of foam, wind tunnel tested without front wheel openings to permit steering, no cockpit cowling, body seams, external mirrors, or a simulated driver to monitor buffeting.

The working prototype was announced for August, and construction never commenced for lack of funding.

It is an innovative and theoretical exercise. Perhaps brilliant: but the foam model, computer simulations, the first few sets of front tires, and the marketing department are all that exist.

As climb inferred, that doesn't mean a thing if it has the political clout behind it to gain approval, or the continued support of most of the team owners. Otherwise the first one never turns a wheel.

Chip wants to see that happen, Penske says he does too. But neither of them is paying for it.

Therein lies the rub.

[JagtechOhio]

Hamlet?

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by JagtechOhio

Hamlet?

Spot on; I think it's somewhat appropriate.

[JagtechOhio]

Thanks, I think. Now I have more homework to do. Iambically speaking.

[bjohnsonsmith]

You write poetry?

[JagtechOhio]

Permutated into song lyrics, for the most part. Another side job that doesn't pay...

[bjohnsonsmith]

You write songs; so are a musician and/or lyricist?

I'm a muscian my self but that's on hold at the moment as I'm recovering from a broken ankle. So no British GP for me this year.

[JagtechOhio]

Yikes, another gimpy chap to send well wishes to!

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by JagtechOhio

Yikes, another gimpy chap to send well wishes to!

Cheers Jag.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by JagtechOhio

Bowlby's proof of concept was to purchase and modify a radio-controlled model car into a three-wheeler, and start turning hot laps in the parking lot.

The full scale model is a block of foam, wind tunnel tested without front wheel openings to permit steering, no cockpit cowling, body seams, external mirrors, or a simulated driver to monitor buffeting.

The working prototype was announced for August, and construction never commenced for lack of funding.

It is an innovative and theoretical exercise. Perhaps brilliant: but the foam model, computer simulations, the first few sets of front tires, and the marketing department are all that exist.

As climb inferred, that doesn't mean a thing if it has the political clout behind it to gain approval, or the continued support of most of the team owners. Otherwise the first one never turns a wheel.

Chip wants to see that happen, Penske says he does too. But neither of them is paying for it.

Much as I suspected, nice marketing exercise, Chip and Rog don't believe it either but will go along for the ride until the wheels fall off.

Hope your ankle is better soon BJ!
Care to elaborate on what happened, other than it got bust!

[djb]

Originally Posted by wnut

Care to elaborate on what happened, other than it got bust!

he was carrying groceries through a parking lot and tripped over a speeding weird looking RC car that some damn kid must have been playing with....

[climb]

Originally Posted by JagtechOhio

Climb,

...

So smart people have to wait until answers are carved in stone. I'm not that smart.

ditto

[JagtechOhio]

djb,

not to laugh at bjohn's expense, but that was pretty good

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by djb

he was carrying groceries through a parking lot and tripped over a speeding weird looking RC car that some damn kid must have been playing with....

Lol. I like that.

[Flyin Ryan]

Originally Posted by JagtechOhio

That's the best argument wnut...the innovations had to be proven in competition as superior. Then accepted as practical and affordable. In later years, proven to advance safety as well.

The Delta, as brilliant as the design concepts may be, has proven none of that. If selected, it will have no competitor and will simply have to prove it can run.

It wouldn't even have proven that. The unequal car width from front to rear brings up considerable questions just on the simple aspect of passing another car once you take into account most passes occur going into a corner and how the overtaker and overtakee react to said pass. It might be a brilliant design concept but that means zero toward active competition which is the entire point of all this racing business. The computer sims of the Delta Wing with two cars racing that were previously shown as most have stated are pretty unrealistic. As a test session to approximate the full field of Indycar drivers, let's see this car competing with Dixon, Castroneves, Scheckter, Fisher, and Duno on a track together...with no blue flags, and see how it turns out.

I'm an engineer but I realize that my occupation has a very narrow view of things that sometimes is right in the design sense but completely wrong in reality because we ignore too many other extenuating factors by coming up with solutions that sound good but are just not practical, and I think Bowlby's car here falls to that engineer's fallacy of "book smart but not street smart", Bowlby as far as I know has never driven a racecar in competition or gotten T-boned. His boss has, but it was a long long time ago for him.

Not to mention I want zero to deal with steering assist, traction control, computers helping a driver turn, etc. It should all be in the driver's hands.

[cds_uk]

Originally Posted by djb

he was carrying groceries through a parking lot and tripped over a speeding weird looking RC car that some damn kid must have been playing with....

Thats bloody priceless.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by djb

he was carrying groceries through a parking lot and tripped over a speeding weird looking RC car that some damn kid must have been playing with....

Beauty

[ptclaus98]

Originally Posted by djb

he was carrying groceries through a parking lot and tripped over a speeding weird looking RC car that some damn kid must have been playing with....

Brilliant. Take care BJ.

[JagtechOhio]

Here's the new Honda 2.8L V6 twin turbo. This engine exists, Ryan Briscoe wrote that he had seen it on the dyno about a month ago. At first I thought the new IRL engine would be similar...maybe, maybe not.

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/06/11/h...cars/#comments

By ACO/ ALMS regulation, this engine is based on a stock block. I didn't see that mention in the IRL announcement for their 2.4L spec.

And it's a twin turbo (the side you can't see is identical to the side view). I don't recall the IRL mentioning the term "twin" in their descripton. If anybody can sort these points out, please do.

So we could see this same engine de-bored and/or de-stroked down to 2.4L, or something completely different. The IRL engine might be a proprietary racing block, and the decision to make it a stressed member has been stressed by Berkman of Honda. That's the "expensive jewel of a racing engine" that Berkman described some months ago.

The annual lease will be no less than $700K, down a stated maximum of 25%. IRL says there will be a mandated price for the manufacturer lease, and Berkman says it might cost even more than he projected.

Another goal is to lengthen service life for reduced rebuild costs. Still, if you break one or watch it burn up in a fire, you will have to pay the additional replacement cost.

Some progress, huh?

As a stock block, the engine as pictured has an adapter plate (black, magnesium or aluminum) bolted to the front. Add a drysump with the two lower mounting points as shown, and there is your stressed/semi stressed installation.

That's how the GM Ecotec, Ford Duratec or Mazda MZR-R would bolt onto the back of a current Dallara tub. See post #655, second photo (sorry, you'll have to enlarge it).

Unlike some of the objections raised here, there isn't much doubt that this semi-stressed installation would be acceptable for rigidity and safety. That's why the IRL invited auto manufacturers to bring a 4 cyl. to the party, and did not require the chassis designs to accept a non-stressed engine. Or require the engine to be a proprietary stressed block.

IRL and Honda had made the stressed V6 the standard all along, and BAT didn't draw their car to accept anything else. The other designers will accept either engine platform, and Swift has stated so explicitly.

As always, Delta is the exception. They have stated their chassis will accept non-stressed engines, although the Mazda they selected is semi-stressed. It will take a lot of work to re-draw the car around the Honda V6. Bowlby says it is no big deal, but I'd bet he sees no reason to do it. He doesn't need the power, and wouldn't want the added size or weight.

If there has been a peep out of any auto manufacturers interested in competing with Honda, please let me know. Barnhart stated that the engines will be manufacturer-supplied on a lease basis. That leaves any independent supplier out of the game, now or later.

It would take one of the manufacturers that Baretzky alludes to. Complete their development plan, proof the construction to the IRL with a requested "reference engine", submit an acceptable lease plan and start cranking them out. Provided they can be fit to whatever chassis is accepted, and if there is anyone interested in gambling against the spec Honda V6.

Don't count on it.