F1 stepped nose?

[joetruckv8]

So whatys the safety point any having a stepped nose again?
I really hope is serious, because the look of it is horrible! 👎

 

[Dotini]

This has been covered elsewhere, so it's possible this thread could be locked.

But the stepped nose is driven by a need for greater safety. The high noses are high enough to ride over the cockpit side in a T-bone collision, and spear a driver in the head. This almost happened to Schumacher last year, and the sport needs no such horrible accident to blight its current high profile image.

IMO, the noses aren't low enough, but it's a start.

Respectfully,
Steve

 

[tribolik]

And to prevent what happened to Webber in valencia in 2010... the nose touched the top of the rear rear tyre and the car became airborne.

 

[Paulie Walnuts]

IMO, the noses aren't low enough, but it's a start.

Indeed a start:

"This reduction in height starts in 2012 with the nose limited to a 55cm height and then in 2014 the nose tip must fit into a zone just 25cm high."

http://scarbsf1.wordpress.com/2011/10/27/2012-nose-height-regulations/

I saw this mockup somewhere (which looks lower than 25 cm):

 

[Ardius]

Could we see the return of the low noses again one day? I'd much prefer it over this silly midway between a raised nose and a low one. Wouldn't mind the engine configuration of one of the last low-nose cars to make a return too while were at it:

 

[nitrorocks]

Seems interesting. Im keen to see what the engineers would come up with.

 

[J-PaP]

Always preffered the low nose f1 used to have.

 

[niky]

This has been covered elsewhere, so it's possible this thread could be locked.

Possible, but better having this than having the question come up in every single launch thread... even though it will. So it stays open, for now.

 

[GTPorsche]

How hard would it have been for the teams to do a low nose just like they had in years passed?

Those look much better than the stepped noses for this season.

 

[joetruckv8]

Indeed a start:

"This reduction in height starts in 2012 with the nose limited to a 55cm height and then in 2014 the nose tip must fit into a zone just 25cm high."

http://scarbsf1.wordpress.com/2011/10/27/2012-nose-height-regulations/

I saw this mockup somewhere (which looks lower than 25 cm):

2 Questions:

#1 - How did you get that pic, since i've already seen the toro rosso unveiling i expected the RB chassis to be close the same?

#2 - like everything else in formula 1, beat this might make the cars faster on accident again?

 

[Barra333]

How hard would it have been for the teams to do a low nose just like they had in years passed?

Those look much better than the stepped noses for this season.

There is a reason designers started jacking up the noses of the cars, so now that the regs say they have to get lower, they are trying to maintain the benefits of the higher nose, while still being low enough for the regulations.

2 Questions:

#1 - How did you get that pic, since i've already seen the toro rosso unveiling i expected the RB chassis to be close the same?

Since he said 'mockup', I am going to say that it is a photoshop of what cars could look like with old school low noses

 

[Grand Prix]

 

[niky]

How hard would it have been for the teams to do a low nose just like they had in years passed?

Those look much better than the stepped noses for this season.

Low noses don't generate significant downforce. An underbody splitter given clean air that comes in underneath a high nose gives you lots of it. A no-brainer there, if you're limited in how much wing you can run by regulations. Even better, as we see in current car designs, that underbody tray can be used to channel air around to the rear diffuser, which is even more useful now that rear wings are so small.

 

[RTSolvalou]

Hopefully they will become low enough again to put the CAR NUMBER back where it belongs. Currently drivers are identified by the color of the T bar, the helmets can be a little harder to pick for younger players so I'd say that's slightly secondary. The numbers are there but they're tiny, because of sponsor demands. (Sponsors also killed/banned the winner's wreath)

 

[hawkeye122]

I think the lower nose would be helpful aesthetically if we go to using closed cockpits...

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Could we see the return of the low noses again one day? I'd much prefer it over this silly midway between a raised nose and a low one.

I have heard that low noses will be back from 2014-ish.

 

[Seismica]

Hopefully they will become low enough again to put the CAR NUMBER back where it belongs. Currently drivers are identified by the color of the T bar, the helmets can be a little harder to pick for younger players so I'd say that's slightly secondary. The numbers are there but they're tiny, because of sponsor demands. (Sponsors also killed/banned the winner's wreath)

There we go

 

[HKS racer]

And to prevent what happened to Webber in valencia in 2010... the nose touched the top of the rear rear tyre and the car became airborne.

I can't see how this incident won't happen again with a nose lower than 10 / 15 cm. This is just a compromise requested by teams not wanting to trash their projects for this year and start from scratch, which is understandable. If in future FIA really want to imrpove safety they should create a regulation with no loop-holes and make mandatory low noses like early 90's.

PS. I know you are just reporting FIA interpretation.

Low noses don't generate significant downforce. An underbody splitter given clean air that comes in underneath a high nose gives you lots of it. A no-brainer there, if you're limited in how much wing you can run by regulations. Even better, as we see in current car designs, that underbody tray can be used to channel air around to the rear diffuser, which is even more useful now that rear wings are so small.

You're right so they can come back to bigger rear wings as well.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

If in future FIA really want to imrpove safety they should create a regulation with no loop-holes

This is impossible (short of making Formula 1 a spec series). In order to close every loophole in the rules, the FIA would need to think of every possible interpretation of the rules. And then they would need to write the rules in such a way that there is no (or at least very little) room for further interpretation. At which point they would need to reassess the rules and think of every possible interpretation that a) they missed the first time around, and b) which arises from the re-writes of the rules. Even if they made a perfect rulebook, designers will always make more money exploiting loopholes than they would closing them, and so someone would find a way to come up with something new.

 

[niky]

The whole point of smaller rear wings was to slow the cars down. They only clawed back the rear downforce with the diffusers.

I've always thought it should be the other way around. Let the cars have big rear wings and limit the front wings, to make them understeer more...

 

[RTSolvalou]

There we go

That actually works well, I likey.

 

[Hun200kmh]

The whole point of smaller rear wings was to slow the cars down. They only clawed back the rear downforce with the diffusers.

I've always thought it should be the other way around. Let the cars have big rear wings and limit the front wings, to make them understeer more...

But then you would have processional races because a small front wing coupled with a huge wake from the car in front would mean the impossibility of following close a car through a series of corners.

EDIT - Added quote for clarity.

 

[Pupik]

Ah yes, the crude but ineffective Ensign N179. The double-radiator nose didn't last long.

 

[Dotini]

Let the cars have big rear wings and limit the front wings, to make them understeer more...

This is actually a very thoughtful idea with significant implications. When combined with anti-wheel interlock features (fenders, etc.) it amounts to dumbing down the cars, meaning that more people, such as sexy women, rich amateurs, movie idols and aging racers can actually drive them, like in Indy Car and NASCAR.

It will greatly improve the show and the bottom line, and the sponsors will be very happy. Unfortunately, ace drivers like Gilles Villenueve and Ayrton Senna will not be anywhere near as valuable.👎

Respectfully submitted,
Steve

 

[HKS racer]

This is impossible (short of making Formula 1 a spec series). In order to close every loophole in the rules, the FIA would need to think of every possible interpretation of the rules. And then they would need to write the rules in such a way that there is no (or at least very little) room for further interpretation. At which point they would need to reassess the rules and think of every possible interpretation that a) they missed the first time around, and b) which arises from the re-writes of the rules. Even if they made a perfect rulebook, designers will always make more money exploiting loopholes than they would closing them, and so someone would find a way to come up with something new.

Write unequivocal regulations at least for some parts of the car is much easier than you may think. But they don't want to, that's the problem.

If the Regulation state:
- Mandatory: For safety reasons front nose MUST have THIS shape with THESE demensions. You will receive 3D CAD data with the exact shape and dimensions. If your car for whatever reason won't mach 100% what we request, your team will NOT be allowed to race.

Sounds clear to me, problem is money is more important than regulations, that's why BS happen.

 

[Ardius]

The whole point of smaller rear wings was to slow the cars down. They only clawed back the rear downforce with the diffusers.

I've always thought it should be the other way around. Let the cars have big rear wings and limit the front wings, to make them understeer more...

The cars were given small rear wings and big front wings in an attempt to reduce the wake while following a car in the corners, so they can stay closer and hence produce more overtaking opportunities. The turbulence created by the car in front takes away front downforce and makes the car understeer, meaning they have to slow down the closer they get to the car in front...which makes it difficult to really pull off an overtake when you have to back off in the high-speed corners.
Making them understeer is only going to make it worse....surely we want cars that oversteer!?

The real solution to this was to instead change cars so they make use of ground effects - so that they are not reliant on wings for downforce and hence less susceptible to wake and turbulence. But everyone was scared of the idea for money and resource reasons and so now we have DRS and these ugly cars.

 

[Pupik]

The real solution to this was to instead change cars so they make use of ground effects - so that they are not reliant on wings for downforce and hence less susceptible to wake and turbulence.

I thought one of the biggest reasons for the demise of ground effects was their unpredictable behavior if they became unsettled during cornering, which led to some horrific accidents. Granted, track safety, preparation, and car construction is much safer since the early-1980s, but I wonder if that will always be a bit of a "dirty word" to the FIA for those reasons.

 

[stig's helmet]

Mclaren has the best looking car this year all because the nose looks better.

 

[Hun200kmh]

I thought one of the biggest reasons for the demise of ground effects was their unpredictable behavior if they became unsettled during cornering, which led to some horrific accidents. Granted, track safety, preparation, and car construction is much safer since the early-1980s, but I wonder if that will always be a bit of a "dirty word" to the FIA for those reasons.

Yep, ground effect cars were banned - firstly with the ban on the skirts used to contain the low pressure area, later with the requirement for a 'stepped floor' - because they were considered too dangerous. If air managed to enter the underbody the car would simply "take off".

This had major consequences because it made the aero devices that work above the car's floor all too important. Hence the "processional" racing we met a few years ago.

 

[Dotini]

With the available talent pool of Newey and the other engineers, plus CFD technology, it should be possible to fashion a new spec Handford device such that the front end of a closely following car would actually receive additional stabilization. The front aero could be optimized, by rule, to work best in sync with rule-defined rear-end aero.

Respectfully submitted,
Steve