F14-T- Development & News

[PadGeT]

Ya, it getting a bit old. Need to change that. But, I do love that song.

"Ya we ran two diff versions of monkey."

that second one just looks beautiful so it must be faster

Actually, The single-tired one is meant for low D/F set up and its curliness is alot similar to RW bottom flap curvature leading to more smoother transition

[ALO]

BlowNut.jpg

The winglet changes with the Wheel Nut Type ALO has blown so air moves around that area differently.

[NickEice]

I know a good result tomorrow will be tough, but i'm hoping they at least race all the new bits. Please Ferrari just give it a gamble. There's not much to lose.

[Nero Horse]

So did we use all the new parts in quali this time?

[PadGeT]

So did we use all the new parts in quali this time?

Ya we did..
Regarding updates, Alonso said:

Definitely the new parts that we ran in Canada and here, they seem to work fine. In Canada, the track or layout or whatever was not good for us, so we didn’t to have a good race, but the new parts were better than the old ones.

Here, again, we tested some more. They seem mostly positive, so hopefully we’re moving in the right direction. We know that there’s still a long way to go.

[RedPassion]

We have a brand new diffuser too(probably already used in Canada):
OLD:C0YxqFV.jpg(all rights go to NEXTGEAUTO.COM)
NEW:Satmx3E.jpg
Look how the central area has massively changed,much steeper channel,shorter and higher fin and longer side fin with RB vortex generators at the bottom.
Toghether with new rear and front brake ducts,new sidepods bargeboards and new engine cover make quite a massive update
Maybe its the reason why our understeer has grown even worse,we still need to introduce the new FW,that by the way ís further being modified near the endplate area.

[PadGeT]

Analysis of new engine cover by F1.com

One of the biggest areas of development we have seen this season is with cooling, and the various locations for cooling exit ducts. Airflow that is used to cool the various components on the car is airflow that cannot be used to create downforce, so the more efficient the cooling package the more downforce the car will produce - and the more grip it will have. Ferrari have an interesting cooling solution. Along the spine of their engine cover they have an opening which can be completely open (fairly inefficient), or have a louvred panel fitted (medium efficiency), or be completely blocked off (most efficient). Which setting to use depends on the conditions - from blocked off in cooler conditions to fully open in hot conditions.

[PadGeT]

FP2 flow-viz around bargeboard-splitter-turning vane

[Kristof_F40]

Does anybody know more about the use of our new windtunnel?

I was wonderring: the F14 T was developed in the Toyota windtunnel from what I heard, LdM said this will be the last car, new car will be in the new windtunnel. But what about the parts for the F14 T? Which parts have been developed in the new windtunnel? It seems to me that the parts that we introduced in the last 2 GPs were working good, and the team was saticefied about that, which is an improvement. Is it because of new windtunnel?

[Alonso14]

Does anybody know more about the use of our new windtunnel?

I was wonderring: the F14 T was developed in the Toyota windtunnel from what I heard, LdM said this will be the last car, new car will be in the new windtunnel. But what about the parts for the F14 T? Which parts have been developed in the new windtunnel? It seems to me that the parts that we introduced in the last 2 GPs were working good, and the team was saticefied about that, which is an improvement. Is it because of new windtunnel?

I don't know (not aware if this info is public) but it would make some sense if this is the case. Designing new parts is a lengthy process so it makes sense if at least a portion of this upgrades in the initial races were designed in the Toyota windtunnel.

[Alfa159]

Does anybody know more about the use of our new windtunnel?

I was wonderring: the F14 T was developed in the Toyota windtunnel from what I heard, LdM said this will be the last car, new car will be in the new windtunnel. But what about the parts for the F14 T? Which parts have been developed in the new windtunnel? It seems to me that the parts that we introduced in the last 2 GPs were working good, and the team was saticefied about that, which is an improvement. Is it because of new windtunnel?

Developed in the Toyota Wind Tunnel and I think they accidentally downloaded the data of a Toyota Corolla cause it's probably the most similar performing car at the moment.

[stefa]

Developed in the Toyota Wind Tunnel and I think they accidentally downloaded the data of a Toyota Corolla cause it's probably the most similar performing car at the moment.

[Nehno]

Developed in the Toyota Wind Tunnel and I think they accidentally downloaded the data of a Toyota Corolla cause it's probably the most similar performing car at the moment.

[Kristof_F40]

Developed in the Toyota Wind Tunnel and I think they accidentally downloaded the data of a Toyota Corolla cause it's probably the most similar performing car at the moment.

Do you also know when we will be seeing parts that are designed in the new tunnel?

[FerrariF60]

Do you also know when we will be seeing parts that are designed in the new tunnel?

probably next season; as the parts that are developed for this year are manufactured ahead of time.
so next year's car will be developed in teh NEW wind tunnel and so will the parts for the new car

[Kristof_F40]

probably next season; as the parts that are developed for this year are manufactured ahead of time.
so next year's car will be developed in teh NEW wind tunnel and so will the parts for the new car

True, but windtunnel is open since last year oktober/november? So it should be possible to already use it, no? Indeed updates are planned ahead, but by now updates could be comming from new windtunnel no?

[FerrariF60]

True, but windtunnel is open since last year oktober/november? So it should be possible to already use it, no? Indeed updates are planned ahead, but by now updates could be comming from new windtunnel no?

we should hope so...we'll see; ferrari said tath they will be bringing updated (aero ones' ) to every race weekend, so we'll how well they work

as far as if they are built using the NEW wind tunnel, no one knows except FERRARI

[Nero Horse]

At the start of this season Ferrari said that the wind tunnel is fixed and working properly, so I really think that all the updates that are now coming on the car have been tested in that Ferrari's own wind tunnel in Maranello, or at least I hope so.

[Kristof_F40]

At the start of this season Ferrari said that the wind tunnel is fixed and working properly, so I really think that all the updates that are now coming on the car have been tested in that Ferrari's own wind tunnel in Maranello, or at least I hope so.

The question is, from which point.. Like I said, update from last 2 races were working and doing the job, is this coincidense or is it the new windtunnel and James Allison?

[Duderino]

“It's interesting because if we would have discussed before the race weekend who was going to be a favourite for the track you would have said OK definitely power unit in the first sector – up the hill it is pretty steep – but that second and third sector is an aero track,” Wolff said. “And the teams out in front were different from what we expected before the weekend.

Race Best Sector Times 2nd and Third
Capture.PNG

[Hunkelberg]

Just take a look at the F14-T head on. Be truthful, do you see the squished, molten ugly slab there ?

No proper windtunel will produce such awkward and funny nosecone. No grace. At all. As if they used a hammer to straighten carbon fiber...it just does not look anything like that has to do with aerodynamics, avionics, etc. For the contrast, take a look at the RB10's. Head on, profile, three quarters, whatever, it just looks so proportionally aesthetically pleasing. It really looks a beaut. Now go back and look at that ugly red car. Ugh....can you see it ?

It might look a bit silly and over-simplistic to judge aero by aesthetics. But I dare to counter that by this example from nature: take a look at what evolution does over billions of years to underwater creatures. Do you see beluga as fast, agile, speedy creature ? Sailfish, Swordfish, Marlin, Wahoo on the other hand...You know, there is nothing to sneeze about that as Nature provides much of the motivational examples that humans unashamedly borrow some of their designs from.

If what little I know about math, symmetry, rates and proportions is any good, then there is a good deal of reason to believe that fast things have certain looks to them. If marine examples do not cut it for you take a look at fighterjets. None of the fast ones have head on features isomorphic to what red team produced in its 2014 racer.

So yeah, it is ugly as sin. And therefore it does not work :)

[Kiwi Nick]

Just take a look at the F14-T head on. Be truthful, do you see the squished, molten ugly slab there ?

No proper windtunel will produce such awkward and funny nosecone. No grace. At all. As if they used a hammer to straighten carbon fiber...it just does not look anything like that has to do with aerodynamics, avionics, etc. For the contrast, take a look at the RB10's. Head on, profile, three quarters, whatever, it just looks so proportionally aesthetically pleasing. It really looks a beaut. Now go back and look at that ugly red car. Ugh....can you see it ?

It might look a bit silly and over-simplistic to judge aero by aesthetics. But I dare to counter that by this example from nature: take a look at what evolution does over billions of years to underwater creatures. Do you see beluga as fast, agile, speedy creature ? Sailfish, Swordfish, Marlin, Wahoo on the other hand...You know, there is nothing to sneeze about that as Nature provides much of the motivational examples that humans unashamedly borrow some of their designs from.

If what little I know about math, symmetry, rates and proportions is any good, then there is a good deal of reason to believe that fast things have certain looks to them. If marine examples do not cut it for you take a look at fighterjets. None of the fast ones have head on features isomorphic to what red team produced in its 2014 racer.

So yeah, it is ugly as sin. And therefore it does not work :)

Do you mean to imply that the fact that the F14T looks radically different than any other F1 car might be a clue to its poor performance?

[PadGeT]

Just take a look at the F14-T head on. Be truthful, do you see the squished, molten ugly slab there ?

No proper windtunel will produce such awkward and funny nosecone. No grace. At all. As if they used a hammer to straighten carbon fiber...it just does not look anything like that has to do with aerodynamics, avionics, etc. For the contrast, take a look at the RB10's. Head on, profile, three quarters, whatever, it just looks so proportionally aesthetically pleasing. It really looks a beaut. Now go back and look at that ugly red car. Ugh....can you see it ?

It might look a bit silly and over-simplistic to judge aero by aesthetics. But I dare to counter that by this example from nature: take a look at what evolution does over billions of years to underwater creatures. Do you see beluga as fast, agile, speedy creature ? Sailfish, Swordfish, Marlin, Wahoo on the other hand...You know, there is nothing to sneeze about that as Nature provides much of the motivational examples that humans unashamedly borrow some of their designs from.

If what little I know about math, symmetry, rates and proportions is any good, then there is a good deal of reason to believe that fast things have certain looks to them. If marine examples do not cut it for you take a look at fighterjets. None of the fast ones have head on features isomorphic to what red team produced in its 2014 racer.

So yeah, it is ugly as sin. And therefore it does not work :)

No theoretical basis for your conclusion. I would love to see you explain our FW philosophy. Hint- Try to focus on effective wing span.
Will be happy to further discuss, once you make a reasonable explanation.

[Nero Horse]

Just take a look at the F14-T head on. Be truthful, do you see the squished, molten ugly slab there ?

No proper windtunel will produce such awkward and funny nosecone. No grace. At all. As if they used a hammer to straighten carbon fiber...it just does not look anything like that has to do with aerodynamics, avionics, etc. For the contrast, take a look at the RB10's. Head on, profile, three quarters, whatever, it just looks so proportionally aesthetically pleasing. It really looks a beaut. Now go back and look at that ugly red car. Ugh....can you see it ?

It might look a bit silly and over-simplistic to judge aero by aesthetics. But I dare to counter that by this example from nature: take a look at what evolution does over billions of years to underwater creatures. Do you see beluga as fast, agile, speedy creature ? Sailfish, Swordfish, Marlin, Wahoo on the other hand...You know, there is nothing to sneeze about that as Nature provides much of the motivational examples that humans unashamedly borrow some of their designs from.

If what little I know about math, symmetry, rates and proportions is any good, then there is a good deal of reason to believe that fast things have certain looks to them. If marine examples do not cut it for you take a look at fighterjets. None of the fast ones have head on features isomorphic to what red team produced in its 2014 racer.

So yeah, it is ugly as sin. And therefore it does not work :)

Weird...you sound exactly like a former member of this forum, that "Bubbles" who already got banned once, deja vu moments all over the place when reading your comments.

And the F14-T is not ugly at all, that's just your opinion. I personally find the F14-T to be a very beautiful and awesome looking car, and I'm not just saying that because I'm a Ferrari fan.

[tifosi1993]

Just take a look at the F14-T head on. Be truthful, do you see the squished, molten ugly slab there ?

No proper windtunel will produce such awkward and funny nosecone. No grace. At all. As if they used a hammer to straighten carbon fiber...it just does not look anything like that has to do with aerodynamics, avionics, etc. For the contrast, take a look at the RB10's. Head on, profile, three quarters, whatever, it just looks so proportionally aesthetically pleasing. It really looks a beaut. Now go back and look at that ugly red car. Ugh....can you see it ?

It might look a bit silly and over-simplistic to judge aero by aesthetics. But I dare to counter that by this example from nature: take a look at what evolution does over billions of years to underwater creatures. Do you see beluga as fast, agile, speedy creature ? Sailfish, Swordfish, Marlin, Wahoo on the other hand...You know, there is nothing to sneeze about that as Nature provides much of the motivational examples that humans unashamedly borrow some of their designs from.

If what little I know about math, symmetry, rates and proportions is any good, then there is a good deal of reason to believe that fast things have certain looks to them. If marine examples do not cut it for you take a look at fighterjets. None of the fast ones have head on features isomorphic to what red team produced in its 2014 racer.

So yeah, it is ugly as sin. And therefore it does not work :)

How can you judge, only by looking at it, if a nose/fw/rw/diffuser is messed up or extremely good?

I comment and speculate as well, but I'm careful not to take it too far as I'm not an F1 engineer.

[Hunkelberg]

Weird...you sound exactly like a former member of this forum, that "Bubbles" who already got banned once, deja vu moments all over the place when reading your comments.

And the F14-T is not ugly at all, that's just your opinion. I personally find the F14-T to be a very beautiful and awesome looking car, and I'm not just saying that because I'm a Ferrari fan.

intredasting. you seem to have nightmares, where "Bubbles" is the villain. Poor you, can not recall who it was and who it was I resemble. You seem confused. But that is your problems.

But how is the stuff you uttered above has anything to do with the topic

[Nero Horse]

intredasting. you seem to have nightmares, where "Bubbles" is the villain. Poor you, can not recall who it was and who it was I resemble. You seem confused. But that is your problems.

But how is the stuff you uttered above has anything to do with the topic

Looks like I hit a nerve there LOL

Confused? Don't think so..."Bubbles"

It is you who seem to be confused, as you seem to think that you're somekind of a aerodynamics expert when you try to make such final conclusions about the F14-T.

[Winter]

Just take a look at the F14-T head on. Be truthful, do you see the squished, molten ugly slab there ?

No proper windtunel will produce such awkward and funny nosecone. No grace. At all. As if they used a hammer to straighten carbon fiber...it just does not look anything like that has to do with aerodynamics, avionics, etc. For the contrast, take a look at the RB10's. Head on, profile, three quarters, whatever, it just looks so proportionally aesthetically pleasing. It really looks a beaut. Now go back and look at that ugly red car. Ugh....can you see it ?

It might look a bit silly and over-simplistic to judge aero by aesthetics. But I dare to counter that by this example from nature: take a look at what evolution does over billions of years to underwater creatures. Do you see beluga as fast, agile, speedy creature ? Sailfish, Swordfish, Marlin, Wahoo on the other hand...You know, there is nothing to sneeze about that as Nature provides much of the motivational examples that humans unashamedly borrow some of their designs from.

If what little I know about math, symmetry, rates and proportions is any good, then there is a good deal of reason to believe that fast things have certain looks to them. If marine examples do not cut it for you take a look at fighterjets. None of the fast ones have head on features isomorphic to what red team produced in its 2014 racer.

So yeah, it is ugly as sin. And therefore it does not work :)

When I catch a Sailfish, Swordfish or a Marlin with four tires on their sides, I'll agree with your Darwin F1 theory, untill that I have some doubts..

[Hunkelberg]

besides, I have to tell, this place is a bit rough around edges. There is no one on here who is posting anything original. Just same old stuff borrowed from plain old places....copy pasted nth time and more

Never mind the thread topic, any topic, as there is hardly anyone here versed and grounded in technology behind racing that is posting anything about the car and on topic. Just some hearsay. .

Also, insecurity, naiveness and plain stupidity of some is just staggering. For instance, someone is asking for the theory behind some post. Well, if a conjecture gets taken as theory then you know that there could be no argument. Not worth it.
For real? A technically sound argument on TSN is being demanded. This is surely insane. This place is no f1technical and never will never be. The talent pool is to shallow. But pretenders number is vast.

And then there is an establishment, that is deluded to think that it has this seniority that needs to be dealt with, no matter how worthless, substanceless and boring their posts are. Basically, all their contribution is waste of space.

then there is the big brother. This place has never seen a thread worthy of rereading. It has no substance, the parties are as clever as bots, but claim to be very knowledgeable and respected. How could there be a sane argument here where there is zero tolerance against alternative views to the party line. Guys, do you realize this place sucks? You guys suck...

[Nero Horse]

Aaah yes, same old "Bubbles" ^^