I just watched the Aussi Grand Prix practice on the
 Speed Channel.
 That is the dumbest rear wing ever mounted on a race car.
 It is near pure drag. A total waste of fuel. Really stupid.

 They should of used a piece of plywood mounted perpendicular
 to the air stream. It would have done as well.

 Paul Lamar

 Ah come on Paul!  They left Montréal to earn more money somewhere
 else.  These guys are real... :))

 Marc Joseph


Come on Paul.  Are you trying to tell us that FI racing has become a
total drag?  And that you are board with the racing?  Wood you please
explain yourself?   Thanks.
jd


Honda Chassis with a Mercedes engine and a couple of geezers
driving are one two in  Aussi Grand Prix qualifying.
Jenson Button and Rubens Barrichello the most experienced driver
in the sports 59-year history. This is his 17th year in Formula 1.
These geezers were nowhere last year in Honda chassis with Honda engines.
Geezer power :)

Paul Lamar

Hi Paul,

I watched the qualifying sessions as well and I agree with you that
these wings are far from optimal when thinking as an aeronautical or
aerodynamics engineer.

However Formula 1 is a playground for engineers that want car to go
faster and faster.
The FIA on the other hand tries to limit the speed (for safety reasons)
and wants the race to be a show with lots of overtaking.
Unefficient wings are part of the set of measures for that. And as long
as you can put advertisement on it, there is money coming in.
And that in turn is part of keeping the sport "sustainable". Without
money it is GAME OVER.

A plywood mounted perpendicular publicity board would not look F1 style.
But have you noticed how the teams increased the publicity area on the
cars? have a look from the side and compare with 3 years ago.

With considerations for fuel economy , the environment , climate etc
etc. What do you think of a rule that limits the value of Cd*S and let
the rest free in terms of aerodynamics? Let the engineers find out how
to create downforce. Probably they will all look like LMP cars then
unless they keep the rule for open wheels.

As for the KERS, let's see how the race will go tomorrow. I am very
curious but certainly hope they will not kick it out after Melbourne.

And I would like to end with a Big Bravo for Brawn!
The front row in white and yellow tomorrow, fantastic for the first
participation of a "new" team.

Randolph Toom
Managing Director
heat2power

The way to get "passing" is less restrictive rules not more. There is nothing more
boring than a spec car race. If you must limit speed and fuel consumption,
restrict HP by cutting RPM each year. Not by adding aerodynamic drag
and worse... pitching moment!!!! THAT IS STUPID BEYOND BELIEF !!!!

This year they went from 19,000 RPM to 18,000. The cars are faster this year
than last. The engines are now required to last three races instead of only two.
A positive thing. Not enough reduction in RPM IMHO. That would also have the
effect of making the engines last longer yet and cutting engine cost.

Limiting wind tunnel use will also cut cost. Last year some
teams were renting three wind tunnels simultaneously 24/7.  Limiting wind
tunnel use would put a premium on aerodynamic creativity and CFD program
creation and CFD jobs. Better CFD programs would benefit the entire engineering
world including everything that moves through the air and water. Limiting
testing would also cut cost enormously and result in "passing" as the
engineers made mistake without finding them in testing.

Apparently the only way to make KERS pay off is increase the minimum weight
of the car. Another really stupid move. Low weight is the be all and end
all of efficiency. Efficiency should be the engineers and Formula 1 religion.

Paul Lamar