Delta Wing Discussion ONLY

[Jimmy Magnusson]

And the problem is you couldn't make the DW into a spec series because it's whole raison d'etre is innovation and pushing technology forwards. To run it as a spec race car would be an oxymoron. I know it was going to be one in Indycar, but that's not what they're talking about any longer.

[AGD]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

But I don't accept it as a change for the better - not yet anyway - for the simple (perhaps naive or even stupid) reason that the last thing I want is to see a grid full of DWs at Le Mans. If the technology is successful and can be delivered in a real sportscar (and yes, I use the term advisedly, as that's as much in the eye of the beholder as the beauty of a GTOne or a 962), then that's fine by me - as long as it sounds like a real sportscar (sorry, but I do still have some scruples..... ).

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

So, if it fails, it is a laughable failed project. If it succeeds, it is a laughable spec category. Ok, a bit judgemental. Let's see a raise in hands of people who would like to see the LMP-DW spec category at LM, or in the ALMS?

Excatly. What they said.

Originally Posted by Jimmy Magnusson

To run it as a spec race car would be an oxymoron.

It's running because Don Panoz and a few others want to make money off the silly thing. That's all. Spec car classes are easy money. Well, in theory of course. I'm not sure how much money has been made off the URC.

Originally Posted by Graham Goodwin

Why continue with the concept when there will be hybrids on the grid in 2012? Well maybe, just maybe there might be something better round the corner! Again that's surely the point.

And I'm sure Audi, Toyota, and whoever else will be there to deliver a new set of green enhancements in 2013. And 2014. And 2015. So on and so forth. They have to stay on the cutting edge because they are trying to win. The Wang, on the other hand, is nothing more than a spec car demonstration. It would be another story if we're talking about a Q9 or something like that, but we're talking about an out of class modified Indycar spec car.

In addition, few (if any) programmes of note are not happening because Deltawing IS happening - It is keeping good, clever and able people in employment at a very tricky time.

Highcroft didn't have a budget for racing before Deltawing remember, and as for Panoz are you REALLY telling me you'd rather he spent the money on the Abruzzi?

Don't make this about jobs. Teams that lose out on going to Le Mans may lose jobs as well. If Duncan Dayton does not want to spend the money to field a legal car, well, next man up. There are teams with employees and legal cars who would like their chance. We've seen 56 cars in 2010 and 2011. It's not like there has to be a special car for there to be 56 aside from ACO stupidity.

As for what Panoz should do with his money, yes, I'd rather see the Abruzzi over the Wang. Most of all, as Fogelhund said, I'd rather see the money invested in the ALMS series itself or in cars that actually create excitement amongst the fanbase.

[miatanut]

Has auto racing been reduced to nothing more than entertainment?

If it has, then I find that sad.

I got to enjoy the late 1960's and the 1970's when the cars had all sorts of interesting stuff that has been legislated out of existence. Some of it has been legislated out in the interest of safety, including keeping speeds down. Other things, like requiring no more than four wheels, like requiring the engines to all be piston engines, have taken most of the fun out of it. Why not let designers innovate? If a kooky new idea is a flop, then fine. Somebody tried something and it didn't work. If a kooky new idea puts all the field to shame, that's great. Now everybody else knows they need to copy it or come up with something better.

I'm glad the ACO is open to a kooky new idea, and has decided there should be an on-going place reserved for kooky new ideas. I hope they loosen up the overall rules package so kooky new ideas can run within the normal class structure. And occasionally put the rest of the field to shame.

[AGD]

Originally Posted by miatanut

I'm glad the ACO is open to a kooky new idea, and has decided there should be an on-going place reserved for kooky new ideas.

That's fine, but you don't go to an NBA basketball game expecting to see hockey players playing basketball. You go to see basketball players playing basketball. If the IRL wants to allow kooky Indycars, fine. That's their problem and I'm not going to worry about it. When kooky Indycars end up in a sports car race, well, that is a problem. I'm sure Indycar fans would be quite riled up if an R18 tried to qualify for Indianapolis. Of course, that is a more intriguing situation than the Wang coming to Le Mans IMO. Still, it would be odd.

It's even more of a problem when the intention behind the kooky Indycar is that if it runs well, it will be sold as a spec car to run in a spec "sports car" class.

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by AGD

That's fine, but you don't go to an NBA basketball game expecting to see hockey players playing basketball. You go to see basketball players playing basketball. If the IRL wants to allow kooky Indycars, fine. That's their problem and I'm not going to worry about it. When kooky Indycars end up in a sports car race, well, that is a problem. I'm sure Indycar fans would be quite riled up if an R18 tried to qualify for Indianapolis. Of course, that is a more intriguing situation than the Wang coming to Le Mans IMO. Still, it would be odd.

It's even more of a problem when the intention behind the kooky Indycar is that if it runs well, it will be sold as a spec car to run in a spec "sports car" class.

I think it's an artificial distinction. If anything, I would say it's the "prototypes" that don't belong there. They aren't prototypes for anything. If you want to be a purist, Le Mans is a proving ground for manufacturers to demonstrate the capabilities of the sportscars they sell to the general public. The DW is just another prototype, except if it gets turned into a spec series, it means the manufacturer will sell a heck of a lot more of them than has happened with any Le Mans prototype in years.

Racing cars used to not have wings. There have been F1 cars with fenders. Now, in any series except Formula Student/FSAE, the cars are all a bunch of clones, or are at least very similar.

It would be fair to say a car needs to be able to seat two if it's going to compete at Le Mans. With the DW, they would need to make it two people in tandem because it blows the whole concept if it's two people side-by side, but running P2 times using half the fuel would be the most innovative thing that's happened at Le Mans in a long time.

[AGD]

Originally Posted by miatanut

If anything, I would say it's the "prototypes" that don't belong there. They aren't prototypes for anything.

You probably have a point there, but there is no point in making the situation even worse. If you allow Wangs, why not just allow F1 cars? We had a single seater WR sit on pole some years ago, why not just allow single seater F1 cars at Le Mans? If anything goes, then why not let anything go?

The DW is just another prototype, except if it gets turned into a spec series, it means the manufacturer will sell a heck of a lot more of them than has happened with any Le Mans prototype in years.

Nah, it would probably be the LMPC car of tomorrow. LMPCs have been a sales sensation. Of course, if MTB's comments are correct, there may be more factory interest in providing engines for the Courage LMPCs than for the Wang!

but running P2 times using half the fuel would be the most innovative thing that's happened at Le Mans in a long time.

It would be a bad comparison because the P2 cars are heavily restricted in terms of development and probably carry around a lot of ballast just to make minimum weight. The ACO can't or refuses to get turbo regs right for P2 cars. The Wang, on the other hand, has it's own rulebook that isn't a rulebook.

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by AGD

You probably have a point there, but there is no point in making the situation even worse. If you allow Wangs, why not just allow F1 cars? We had a single seater WR sit on pole some years ago, why not just allow single seater F1 cars at Le Mans? If anything goes, then why not let anything go?

If the rules were sufficiently open, I'd be OK with that. When I was a kid, the prototypes did faster lap times at Spa during the Spa 24 hours than the F1 cars did in the GP. A Ford GT40 was used as a camera car DURING the GP at Spa under the 1.5L formula. Phil Hill behind the wheel.

Originally Posted by AGD

Nah, it would probably be the LMPC car of tomorrow. LMPCs have been a sales sensation. Of course, if MTB's comments are correct, there may be more factory interest in providing engines for the Courage LMPCs than for the Wang!

Considering it's expected to do lap times comparable to the P2's I don't seen how it would be a LMPC, but if it was, it would be a fabulous deal. "Beat the P2's with our LMPC!"

Originally Posted by AGD

It would be a bad comparison because the P2 cars are heavily restricted in terms of development and probably carry around a lot of ballast just to make minimum weight. The ACO can't or refuses to get turbo regs right for P2 cars. The Wang, on the other hand, has it's own rulebook that isn't a rulebook.

You could argue the P1's are heavily restricted and carry a lot of ballast. I think ALL series are heavily restricted. If the primary limit was how much energy you had to go the distance and tons of freedom in other areas, we would see all kinds of interesting things popping up, and it would also align Le Mans closer with what the manufacturers are trying to do with their road cars. Go farther on less fuel.

[AGD]

Originally Posted by miatanut

Considering it's expected to do lap times comparable to the P2's I don't seen how it would be a LMPC, but if it was, it would be a fabulous deal. "Beat the P2's with our LMPC!"

They would probably be restricted just like how the LMPCs are restricted.

You could argue the P1's are heavily restricted and carry a lot of ballast

This is true, but P1s certainly aren't cost-capped liked P2 cars. But, yes, they have ballast and restrictors as well.

[helgi]

As an old joke says, if it was a horse it'd better be shot now. There's no sense in that carrot-o-mobile. There's no connection with real life. While you have some very interesting and useful innovations (Audi's TDI, Porsche's Flywheel, Toyota's supercapacitor) that already are (or would be) at conveyor, this strange red vehicle is just an attempt to save some money from fault with Indycar version. Do you realy think it has any bright ideas under that ugly body except headlights beaming right into it's own rear mirrors. Rather small engine that gives enough power to be as fast as LMP2? Hm. Have that vehicle driven at last one lap in reality? How we can say that it's going to be fast enough? We can only belive. You belive that it can, I belive not.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by miatanut

Ha If a kooky new idea puts all the field to shame, that's great. Now everybody else knows they need to copy it or come up with something better.

No, not for me. Not every kooky new idea is automatically brilliant just because it works. As I say, the DW could turn out to be utterly brilliant, but if I thought there would be 20 of them on the grid at Le Mans in 2013, I fear I'd be missing from my grandstand seat....

Anyhow, a really good sensible debate guys!

[Graham Goodwin]

I hear what a number of people say about not wanting another spec class - and I don't necessarily disagree.

As I see it there are various schools of thought ranging from the "Hate the way it looks", via "Can't see the point", through "Should have spent the money some other way that I approve of" and including, and never forgetting "It'll never work."

I keep, in my own mind coming back to the point that if it DOES work then the same clever peoplke responsible for developing it have already made it clear that the concept has lessons for road cars - lighter, more efficient etc etc

Frankly that's where the bigger wins, and the bigger bucks lie and that's what the principle of introducing new tech through the 56th entry really should be about - relevance.

Strip all of that out and the "Don't make this about jobs" remark made earlier seems ill-judged at best.

On the Panoz LMP1 issue - I agree, I'd love to have seen that too - But it's Don's money and he chose not to do that - Having had the opportunity to chat to him in June last year privately it is VERY clear that he makes those kinds of decisions with icy focus - not on a whim.

Look at it this way guys - You can marshal plenty of points to back up your own point of view - Please don't ignore and/ or dismiss those that inconveniently offer a worthwhile response. - whichever way you see the issue.

I agree Ayse btw - a good debate

[AGD]

Originally Posted by Graham Goodwin

I keep, in my own mind coming back to the point that if it DOES work then the same clever peoplke responsible for developing it have already made it clear that the concept has lessons for road cars - lighter, more efficient etc etc

Frankly that's where the bigger wins, and the bigger bucks lie and that's what the principle of introducing new tech through the 56th entry really should be about - relevance.

The Wang is about the most irrelevant thing the ACO could have chosen in terms of street car relevancy. What, is it news to automotive designers that smaller/lighter is more efficient? I highly doubt that. Even the biggest yokel on the farm knows that. Are customers going to demand Wang-shaped cars after seeing it on the track? Again, I highly doubt it. It's not like the factories have been adoring the Wang since it came out as an Indycar concept. At least something like the GreenGT might have some relevance in terms of fuel technology at some point down the road. The Wang, well, not so much.

On the Panoz LMP1 issue - I agree, I'd love to have seen that too - But it's Don's money and he chose not to do that - Having had the opportunity to chat to him in June last year privately it is VERY clear that he makes those kinds of decisions with icy focus - not on a whim.

Don can do whatever he wants, but the fans will do whatever they want to do as well. It seems to me that many fans are increasingly not wanting to follow the ALMS. Panoz did some marvelous things some years back and that granted him a grace period from criticism for a while after things stopped being so marvelous, but that grace period has more than expired by now. The amount of neglect of the series has faced over the last few years while Panoz has chased absolutely frivolous projects is almost criminal. Maybe the ALMS can be saved from being a spec car/BoP car cesspool, but it won't happen until Don and company pull their heads out of their Abruzzis.

You may want to tell Don the next time you see him that he ought to start giving the ALMS fans what they want to see instead of seeing "environmentally conscious" CF genitalia and other works of abstract art on the track. You may want to remind him that nobody is going to ALMS tracks to see "green racing," they come to the track to feel the rumble of a Corvette V8 and stuff like that. The factories know that and that is why the ALMS has been mega fail the past few years. There was a point in time where Don seemed fully aware of this, but I don't know what has happened the last few years. We sit here hoping to see good news, but all we get are more LMPCs, URC, UNC Abruzzis, and the Wang.

[Javi]

Some people dismiss this kind of cars just because they look "different" or are not what they want "their series" to be. But, thinking this way, we would have never seen the big GT1´s in the nineties ("The1996 Porsche GT1 is outside the spirit of the rules..."!) , we would have never seen the little Lola LMP675 ("it´s killing the ´675 class, it´s too expensive!!") fighting the Audis, we would have never seen the diesel battle between audi and peugeot "...diesel does not belong to sportscars"..., and, maybe looking back, there would have never been a Porsche 917 "... breaking the rules by building 25 cars..."
If the DeltaWing fails as a concept, we have lost nothing, if it suceeds..., well, there may be lessons to learn from that. I think the DeltaWing concept makes Le Mans 2012 a little more technically interesting...

[DistortedSmile]

Originally Posted by Javi

Some people dismiss this kind of cars just because they look "different" or are not what they want "their series" to be. But, thinking this way, we would have never seen the big GT1´s in the nineties ("The1996 Porsche GT1 is outside the spirit of the rules..."!) , we would have never seen the little Lola LMP675 ("it´s killing the ´675 class, it´s too expensive!!") fighting the Audis, we would have never seen the diesel battle between audi and peugeot "...diesel does not belong to sportscars"..., and, maybe looking back, there would have never been a Porsche 917 "... breaking the rules by building 25 cars..."
If the DeltaWing fails as a concept, we have lost nothing, if it suceeds..., well, there may be lessons to learn from that. I think the DeltaWing concept makes Le Mans 2012 a little more technically interesting...

Yes, but the DW looks like this:




While the 993 GT1 looks like this:






Some might think it's stupid or petty to shoot down the DW just because of how it looks (not even gonna comment on the ''innovative'' technical aspects of the car since AGD pretty much said exactly what I think), but at least in my case, how the cars look was the reason I started following sportscar racing in the first place and I still consider it to be a big aspect of the sport.

[m1fcf]

Originally Posted by miatanut

It would be fair to say a car needs to be able to seat two if it's going to compete at Le Mans. With the DW, they would need to make it two people in tandem because it blows the whole concept if it's two people side-by side, but running P2 times using half the fuel would be the most innovative thing that's happened at Le Mans in a long time.

Have you seen the latest pictures of the car? That is the DW car being built on an old AMR-One LMP1 *two-seater* tub. So it is already a side-by-side car, in the same way as all the other LMP1 cars are side-by-side.

[Javi]

Some might think it's stupid or petty to shoot down the DW just because of how it looks (not even gonna comment on the ''innovative'' technical aspects of the car since AGD pretty much said exactly what I think), but at least in my case, how the cars look was the reason I started following sportscar racing in the first place and I still consider it to be a big aspect of the sport.[/QUOTE]

I agree it´s a pretty ugly car... But, imagine for a moment that the concept proves to be, somehow, quick... (altough I would not bet on it) You cannot tell a manufacturer like Audi, Peugeot, Porsche... not to imitate it, they want the quickest possible car, and do not care much about the looks... (1998 Porsche GT1 was far more ugly than 1996 or 1997´s one, but won the race, Bentley´s 2003 car was uglier than 2002´s... etc).
I don´t like the looks of the DeltaWing! But I thinks it´s fair for them just trying it!

[knighty]

I'm more than willing to accept that everyone is entitled to an opinion, and I'm not going to try to convince anyone that their opinion is wrong........my opinion is based on the fact that I work in advanced automotive powertrain design at a time when road car powertrains are undergoing extreeme change in the form of downsizing and working in harmony with motor-generator systems, basically a time of "outside of the box" thinking for mainstream auto makers, weather its an engine, gearbox or a vehicle.......therefore I think that the ACO have done something great here, to show the world that we need to accept change in order to reduce emissions and running costs with a sensible business case overall........

This is just the sort of thing that will attract forward thinking vehicle manufacturers to endurance racing and prove that they dont need to spend hundreds of millions on a disasterous F1 programme that is not road relevant.

Once the DW starts competing I think it will soon win everyone over, a bit like a jackrussel having a fight with a doberman, whereby the Jackrussel will put up an equal fight despite being less than half the size.......in the UK everyone loves the underdog who puts up a good fight.........personally I think it will sound great too........have you heard the latest WRC cars.....music

[Tim the Grey]

Would it have that Anti-Lag System that spits fire and brimstone everywhere?
To nick a phrase from on here a while back..
"It's like an Apache Gunship strafing a fireworks factory..."
At which point, I think I could get to like it!

[AGD]

Originally Posted by knighty

This is just the sort of thing that will attract forward thinking vehicle manufacturers to endurance racing and prove that they dont need to spend hundreds of millions on a disasterous F1 programme that is not road relevant.

I'm guessing this absolutely won't be the case. There's no reason for manufacturers to embrace the Wang. It's not a relevant design at all for manufacturers (in fact, it would probably gain ridicule for looking like obscene ala the grille of the Edsel) and there's nothing revolutionary about the engine. The P1 hybrids are far more advanced in that regard. Factories did not embrace the Wang as an IRL concept and they are seemingly not interested in embracing it now either if the rumors are correct. With the current situation, the entry cost of being involved with the Wang is low and still nobody is saying yes if the rumors are correct.

The GreenGT and Courage concepts have some interesting fuel technology that may be interesting to factories, but they were not chosen over the Wang.

Once the DW starts competing I think it will soon win everyone over, a bit like a jackrussel having a fight with a doberman, whereby the Jackrussel will put up an equal fight despite being less than half the size.......in the UK everyone loves the underdog who puts up a good fight.........personally I think it will sound great too........have you heard the latest WRC cars.....music

The Wang isn't an underdog, it's a hotdog. Or a lucky dog. Lucky that it has a high profile supporter in Panoz who could get it in the big show even though it has no business being in there.

Some people are associating the resistance to the Wang as being a resistance to new ideas. That's not the case for most I don't think. For example, I'm not aware of any resistance to the hybridization of P1. Some people don't like diesels because of the noise issue and some of the fuel equivalence issues, but that is understandable as a lot of people go the races to feel the noise and power of the cars. Stuff like homologation specials are naturally controversial. So on and so forth.

[knighty]

Originally Posted by Tim the Grey

Would it have that Anti-Lag System that spits fire and brimstone everywhere?
To nick a phrase from on here a while back..
"It's like an Apache Gunship strafing a fireworks factory..."
At which point, I think I could get to like it!

I think the old style of bang-bang anti-lag is even frowned upon in rallying these days, I dont think its allowed anymore for noise reasons, turbo lag on 1600cc WRC cars is now controlled by what is termed a fresh air valve, which during an off throttle moment, allows the intake plenum air to bypass the engine and purge through the exhaust turbine in order to keep the turbo shaft spinning......but otherwise it should sound just like a 1600cc WRC car which will be just perfect in my book........overall I'm not sure how the ACO noise regs compare to the WRC noise regs???....

[Tim the Grey]

Boo. Hiss. Shame.
Spoilsports!

[Flyin Ryan]

Originally Posted by Graham Goodwin

I keep, in my own mind coming back to the point that if it DOES work then the same clever peoplke responsible for developing it have already made it clear that the concept has lessons for road cars - lighter, more efficient etc etc

Frankly that's where the bigger wins, and the bigger bucks lie and that's what the principle of introducing new tech through the 56th entry really should be about - relevance.

I don't see where a person can think the car has relevance.

1. It's essentially a three-wheeler. No automaker is going to release a three-wheeler or one with such a narrow front wheelbase compared to the rear. A lot of the car's proposed improved aerodynamic efficiency is due to something that would never be implemented into road car use.
2. Cars that are lighter use less energy. Are you trying to say that automakers don't know this already? What carmaker in the world does not understand that point?
3. It's going to use ground effects. Yes, that makes a car sleeker and they use less energy. What carmaker in the world does not understand aerodynamics?
4. This is one that really gets on my nerves because it's something the race folks that think the raison d'etre for the sport should be a technology experiment don't get. I work everyday as an engineeer on an engine for road and industrial use that in my opinion is a more technologically advanced diesel engine than anything Audi or Peugeot have ever put on the track at Le Mans.
5. In light of the car getting waivers on minimum weight and other things, why are they being allowed to enter a car that no one else could? Hey, I can make the same points they can with a piece of junk I can create. I'll manufacture the World's Fastest Indian like Bert Munro did.

[Félix]

I don't see where a person can think an LMP Audi R18 has relevance.

1. It's essentially a single seater. No automaker is going to release a single-seater or one with a passenger seat full of electronic boxes. A lot of these cars' proposed improved aerodynamic efficiency is due to something that would never be implemented into road car use.
2. Cars that are lighter use less energy. Are you trying to say that automakers don't know this already? What carmaker in the world does not understand that building a car out of carbon fiber gives something that is more "Ultra Lightweight" than a road car with a metal chassis?
3. It has advanced aerodynamics. Yes, spending years in a windtunnel gives better aerodynamics. What carmaker in the world does not understand that cubic dollars make better racecars?
4. This is one that really gets on my nerves because it's something the race folks that think the raison d'etre for the sport should be a technology experiment don't get. He works everyday as an engineeer on an engine for road and industrial use that in his opinion is a more technologically advanced diesel engine than anything Audi or Peugeot have ever put on the track at Le Mans.
5. In light of the car getting waivers on diesel engine displacement and boost, why are they being allowed to enter a car and technology that no one else could? Hey, I can win all races with a car inspired by Darth Vader on which tens of millions of dollars are spent. Why should that be allowed to compete - with FOUR LM entries - when the rest of the field is very well balanced with engines that make a great noise?

[AGD]

Originally Posted by Félix

I don't see where a person can think an LMP Audi R18 has relevance.

The R18 has BHHls. Big Honkin' Headlights. Big Honkin' LED Headlights to be more precise. Apparently headlights are the centerpiece of Audi's marketing campaign. Well, I'm at least led to believe that seeing how they spent a lot of hard cash on a Super Bowl ad promoting their bright headlights.

Based on other VAG ads during Super Bowl XLVI, it seems that VAG also likes Darth Vader. The R18 makes perfect sense then.

I guess the Wang has relevance to any car company who wants to center their marketing campaign around the talents of Ron Jeremy. Or Richard Simmons.

[Flyin Ryan]

4. This is one that really gets on my nerves because it's something the race folks that think the raison d'etre for the sport should be a technology experiment don't get. He works everyday as an engineeer on an engine for road and industrial use that in his opinion is a more technologically advanced diesel engine than anything Audi or Peugeot have ever put on the track at Le Mans.

Hey Felix, did the Audi or Peugeot powerplants use exhaust gas recirculation, selective catalytic reduction, or aftertreatment? Because that's where just about every on-road diesel currently is or is going.