There's a story on Autosport's website with Ross Brawn saying that he thinks Renault's forward blowing exhausts will have a bigger impact than the split level diffusers did in 2009. This story has surprised me a little for a couple of reasons. Firstly, Brawn dominated 2009 with the double diffuser whereas Renault, whilst looking quick, don't look at all like being dominant, so I don't see how the innovation will be more significant. Secondly, the teams seem in no great rush to implement the design, Brawn himself said at the first test in Valencia that it was an area Mercedes had explored and then abandoned. Personally I like Red Bull's solution of feeding the exhaust gases into the side of the diffuser, a design which was quickly copied by Ferrari. Brawn also said whilst the system is legal now, there may be rules to control it in the future. I think from 2013 the FBEs should be made mandatory; apparently the Renault really screams because of it, so when the change is made to four cylinder engines I'd like to see the teams using FBEs to recover some of the sound. Thoughts?
The williams and Toyota had the DD too at the start but they were not dominating at the front. The Brawn had more than the DD to it that gave them the championship.
Brawn must have added something of his own knowledge on top of the DD to make it work so well, thats why the guy is well respected. As well as working with the same machinery as the other teams (DD) he can improve it to be unique, this is what makes him the man he is.
The Key in 2009 was KERS where the expected top teams (Mclaren, Ferrari, Renault and BMW) were struggling where as teams like Red bull and Brawn who had highly regarded members of staff working for them didnt bother and created a car based around aero. You have to think where would the car be if it was run by Honda with the Honda engine and Honda KERs (if they had one). better or worse?
If Mercedes have explored the idea and subsequently abandoned it (at least for the time being), one can conclude that they either felt impractical to introduce at such a late stage or that they saw little advantage in it. One must remember that the science of aerodynamics is very much holistic and that when one's design has been implemented, the introduction of new, perhaps extraneous ideas, may detract from one's own concept. However, if the concept takes account of the radical idea in the first place, it is already integrated as part of the whole. To put it more simply, borrowing part of someone else's whole design, is just as likely to detract from their own concept as give a net benefit. It is a very complicated process which makes it very difficult to add to an existing design which manufacturing has already taken account of. Meanwhile, it may be quite reasonable to give a nod to the development of someone else's concept, especially if it has been incorporated as a fundamental part of it in the first instance, which may well have a bearing on future design unless regulations interfere - for whatever reason.
Even Virgin explored the idea of the front exhausts before abandoning the idea. It's clearly very difficult to successfully implement and only if Renault turn up at Melbourne with the fastest car, should teams use front exhausts. If Renault are 3rd-4th quickest (as they look in testing), then teams should not waste valuable development time on this concept (as Ferrari did with the F-Duct). If the FIA don't ban it next year, I would expect to see most of the teams using the idea on their 2012 cars. AbsolutelyGlorious, I also prefer the Red Bull solution - When Massa got into the updated Ferrari at Barcelona, he spoke of how he felt a big increase in downforce. I don't know how effective each exhaust solution is, but I am sure that Red Bull, Ferrari and Mercedes will not be looking to copy the Renault design.
I agree, and there are a couple of reasons. As the brawn car has been mentioned, I think it would be worth saying the main innovation on the car was the front wing, and the way it controlled the air flow over and under the car, and more specifically around the front wheels that made the car so good, not simply the dd. This shows that it is never a simple matter of one component. Another point, the McLaren of last year was a good race car near the start of the season, partially at the expense of qualifying pace, I think this is down to the wheelbase, and the effect it had on the balance of the car as the fuel runs down. The team lost it when they followed the ebd route which was clearly a piece which the car was never designed for. I am sure the team had a plan for a stream of improvements, which was diverted to the new direction, effectively losing momentum. This indicates that you should stay true to your philosophy, unless the philosophy is flawed. So, the renault exhaust may work with the renault, the red bull exhaust will work with the red bull, but I think teams would only introduce a well integrated solution, that works with the philosophy of the car.
Just as an aside, the Honda kers system was purported to be simply stunning, especially in terms of the efficiency of the motor (well ahead of all the others). And iirc, the engine was allowed to be upgraded to be in line with the others. Add that to the fact that the car was designed with all this in mind, and Honda backing to develop the car through the season, I think it would have been a rout.
Bubbles is right, just dug this out, http://www.f1technical.net/news/15792 which is pretty interesting reading! A far more radical idea than I imagine Mclaren had that season, or any team this year, unless mercedes have adopted it?
Yes Canary. Honda's innovation was very very well conceived. Of course, it's obvious when it's in front of our eyes but I am surprised no-one else saw the potential benefit to overall car balance from using the bulk of the extra mass at the front of the car. - It could further increase driver protection. The best ideas are often those which achieve more than one objective. - Two birds with one stone what!ââ¬Â¦
Yes Canary. Honda's innovation was very very well conceived. Of course, it's obvious when it's in front of our eyes but I am surprised no-one else saw the potential benefit to overall car balance from using the bulk of the extra mass at the front of the car. - It could also further increase driver protection. The best ideas are often those which achieve more than one objective. - Two birds with one stone what!ââ¬Â¦
The Honda system looks brilliant. Imagine how dominant they'd have been if they'd stayed in, that KERS package on the Brawn. Toyota did the same thing last year, they had the blown floor on their car from the start. They showed a lot of their aero data to the top teams last season and they were all very impressed, a few features of their car have been used this season, most prominent are the very high noses which almost all teams have gone for this season. Last season would've been Toyota's best in their history IMO, and they pulled out. You'd have thought they'd have learnt Honda's lesson from the year before. Ironically, Renault might have done a similar thing this year.
