The 2009 F1 car (pics and comments)

[Bononi]

With the new rules a lot of things will change.

We can post here pics about this chances for each team.

I googled it but only could come up with those, which seems to a design of how it might be.





Do we have already pics of the real cars anyway ?

[Adam43]

Williams tested a '2009' car recently, but it was more an intial study of 2009 aerodynamics rather than a definitive 2009 car. It was clearly a test hack. However there are some piccies in thread:
http://tentenths.com/forum/showthrea...highlight=2009

I'm hoping for a bit of variety as we have a big change. The aero has changed, the emphasis will change with the slick tyres and maybe KERS will through something else into the equation. These could all result in different solutions. Although I suspect that you'll still have to look close to see differences.

[Bononi]

Well, this guy says we're in for a "sight shock" next season :
http://www.f1sa.com/index.php?option...587&Itemid=219

[tonful]

I'm all for what they are trying to achieve with the new rules but I think the cosmetic side needs a bit more work. That rear wing has got to go.

Tony

[Taprobane]

The rear wing on that Williams is horrible!

Although all wil be forgiven on the visual aspect if the damn things can race!

[Lotusonpole]

Overall, it looks good to me.
True when I first saw the Williams with the 'bookcase/orange crate' rear wing it was a bit of a shock, but having seen it a few times now, it looks sort of okay. Although I would prefer somethiing a little more aesthetic.
As for the smoother (no aero flips and winglets etc) bodywork between front and rear wings, I like it. (But I would being of that age )
The front wing looks a might too wide but I can live with it.

Any news on barge boards and floors etc as questioned on bononi's second pic?

How much leeway does it give the designers to come up with different solutions (As mentioned by Adam)?

Cheers
Peter

[dazbaz_99]

This weeks copy of Autosport shows a computer designed guess at what the new regs will produce. It's a ferrari split down the middle, showing 08/09 comparison. From what they show-I quite like the cars aesthetically. Reminds me of the cars from the 2001-2002 seasons.

I can't scan in the image from Autosport sadly.

[f1manoz]

Quite frankly, all the winglets and stuff were ugly. Get those smooth lines back.

[Sodemo]

Two things...

- They should have widened the chassis to 2000mm or 2200mm
- They should have raised the rear wing, reduced the number of elements, but not narrowed it.

I have no idea why they decided to veto the chassis widening they had planned to do, anyone know?

The rear wings just look horrid. THey should have made them around the same shape and size as a car from 1991...

[Super Hans]

Originally Posted by f1manoz

Quite frankly, all the winglets and stuff were ugly. Get those smooth lines back.

Agreed.

The teams were spending small-fortunes designing all those little flicks and winglets, for a disproportionate gain.

[bodgit]

I'm glad all of the little winglets have dissapered, they made the cars look horrible and cost a lot to be designed, but I think the small rear wing makes the cars look even worse that they did with all the little winglets on them.

[RaiseYourFist]

The cars next year will look like the first picture posted on this thread but I don't think they will use shark fins and there will be bargeboards but they will be smaller and smoother then what we have now.

Unfortunately the cars will look closer to each other next year then now because there are less possibilities for the front wing and also the nose has to fit a very specific range for its height

[Bononi]

Back to basics.

[ScotsBrutesFan]

Originally Posted by RaiseYourFist

Unfortunately the cars will look closer to each other next year then now because there are less possibilities for the front wing and also the nose has to fit a very specific range for its height

Wasn't there a suggestion of a standardised section of the nose for the cockpit adjustable section of the wing?

[duke_toaster]

Surely instead of making the rear wings skinnyer it would have been possible to make them a control item like the ECU and tyres? The same with the front wing too.

[Marbot]

I seem to remember posting the same picture as Bononi's a while back,so a bit surprised that others haven't bothered to do other impressions of 2009 cars.

That front wing still looks very vulnerable.

[Ogami musashi]

The F2009 impression is correct.

If you want to see the real OWG configuration buy the november issue of RCE, the drawings are directly from the OWG.
(But again the F2009 impression is conform).

Williams in the eurosport-joined program called "The factory" (aviable on the eurosport website, see episode 8) showed a CAD of a 2009 williams which is, not surprisingly identical to the RCE and F2009 drawings.
Last, BWM released via motorsport total a top view drawing similar to williams (and so does look the same than all the other impressions).

The 3D CAD by smirkoff (from F1Technical.net) spots only one main error, the central section of the front wing is a lifting section with a symetrical profile (with a positive AOA) and is at the 75cm height.

As for the rear wing, the dimension (narrow, high and cambered) were essential in cleaning the flows behind and assuring that drag would not drop to low (still the total drag is to be 10% less than this year).

[ivanalesi]

How is the mechanism which changes the attack angle of the front wing going to work? I've seen similar mechanism on some supercars(the SLR), but they seem too bulky and I doubt if they are very precise.

[Ogami musashi]

There's no mandatory technology except that it must failsafe.

From what i've seen actuators are place in the front wing around the center section where the outerboard flaps begin.

[bigted]

having just been to the donnington Mueseum, it reminded me of how gp cars were, smooth, un complicated with lots of downforce generated easily. Sounds like a good way of encoraging overtaking if you ask me

[Dead-Eye]

I'm not sold on the look of the rear wing...couldn't they have accomplished something similar with a simpler wide one?
All in all, I quite like the current cars. Not the silly stick-on bits obviously, but if they disappear I believe we'll end up with some seriously good looking machines.

[FPV GTHO]

As ogami musashi said above, what the 2009 rear wing does which isnt achieved though a wider simpler wing is keep drag levels at a similar level to 2008 machinery. Despite a predicted 50% loss in downforce theres apparently only a predicted 10% loss in drag

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by Dead-Eye

I'm not sold on the look of the rear wing...couldn't they have accomplished something similar with a simpler wide one?
All in all, I quite like the current cars. Not the silly stick-on bits obviously, but if they disappear I believe we'll end up with some seriously good looking machines.

I am not sold on the look of the rear wing either..I would have hoped for another solution to the turbulence problem..

The rest of the car looks good though, simple and uncluttered, I like the low wide front wing..

[ivanalesi]

Someone above mentioned the video on The Factory program from Eurosport, here are some screenshot. Just remember the aspect ratio is from normal TV feed, so on photo the car would look that tall.


Please just link to the video...

[Ogami musashi]

Originally Posted by FPV GTHO

As ogami musashi said above, what the 2009 rear wing does which isnt achieved though a wider simpler wing is keep drag levels at a similar level to 2008 machinery. Despite a predicted 50% loss in downforce theres apparently only a predicted 10% loss in drag

Actually the 50% loss of downforce will never be there and in fact was never intended to be there.

the OWG cut the downforce by a half because they knew their design changes would be clawed back.
So in order not to finish with the same downforce/tyre grip ratio than now (which is unblanced, almost everything being from downforce) they started from 50% of the 2006 levels. Now their hopes were more in the vincinity of 20-30% losses and it seems it will be the case (around 20) which is quite a good thing.

The OWG worked hard on design rather than a simple cut in downforce as they found out that cut could lead to even more sensitivity.

For example it was fundamental to preserve a high downforce rear wing.

But as they cut the dimensions (for wake structure related matters) and pulled away appendages they found out drag levels too low, so they had to re cut the rear wing and make it more cambered to achieve the same drag levels. However the final data showed 10% less than desired.


If there's a problem with it, please do remove it, but someone on autosport's forum posted the complete F2009 rendering, i think it looks cool actually: