70
Michael Andretti says he is still hoping to be on the grid in 2025, but still waiting for conversations with F1/FOM to even begin.
this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2023
70 points (96.1% liked)
Formula 1
9013 readers
1 users here now
Welcome to Formula1 @ Lemmy.world Lemmy's largest community for Formula 1 and related racing series
Rules
- Be respectful to everyone; drivers, lemmings, redditors etc
- No gambling, crypto or NFTs
- Spoilers are allowed
- Non English articles should include a translation in the comments by deepl.com or similar
- Paywalled articles should include at least a brief summary in the comments, the wording of the article should not be altered
- Social media posts should be posted as screenshots with a link for those who want to view it
- Memes are allowed on Monday only as we all do like a laugh or 2, but donโt want to become formuladank.
Up next
2024 Calendar
| Location | Date |
|---|---|
| ๐บ๐ธ United States | 18-20 Oct |
| ๐ฒ๐ฝ Mexico | 25-27 Oct |
| ๐ง๐ท Brazil | 01-03 Nov |
| ๐บ๐ธ United States | 21-23 Nov |
| ๐ถ๐ฆ Qatar | 29 Nov-01 Dec |
| ๐ฆ๐ช Abu Dhabi | 06-08 Dec |
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
What amount is their wind tunnel and CFD allowance then? ๐
Hint: The FIA has not allocated wind tunnel and CFD time to Andretti because they aren't competing.
Don't know what you're deliberately being obtuse. The implications of Andretti building a model to F1 spec is pretty clear.
The car specs aren't an answer to why not using a GM wind tunnel. https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/fia_2023_formula_1_technical_regulations_-_issue_1_-_2022-06-29.pdf does not have any chapter of wind tunnel legality.
Again you're being deliberately obtuse.
If there are rules regarding wind tunnels and you want to show you can build an F1 car to spec, why use a wind tunnel that doesn't follow those rules.
There is no way you can see Andretti build a model to F1 spec and test it in a wind tunnel used by F1 teams. And not understand the significance of that.
I've linked to the PDF of the rules. There are no wind tunnel rules.
That's because those rules are in the sporting regulations. Appendix 7
There's quite a bit about it in there. You should read it some times. https://www.fia.com/regulation/category/110
GM's wind tunnels meet those regulations. So why were those not used?
Didn't know you have intricate knowledge of GM wind tunnels. It also wouldn't meet those regulations. Appendix 7 Article 3.
You claim to know with your "intricate knowledge" why they were not used, so...
There are detailed tours of the facilities which I looked up and you clearly didn't when claiming that GM's don't conform to regulations and still can't point out why they don't...
GM's meet those.
"Only wind tunnels that use air at atmospheric pressure as the test fluid are permitted." โ๏ธ They use regular air.
"Other than rotations of the RATG and model or ground plane about the yaw axis, designs which attempt to create curved flow conditions relative to the RATG are not permitted." โ๏ธ Floor is flat.
"No RWTT may be carried out using a scale model and RATG which is greater than 60% of full size" โ๏ธ That's a limitation of the model size, not the tunnel itself
"during restricted wind tunnel testing the magnitude of the rate of change of the wind tunnel air speed measured relative to the scale model and RATG must be less than 4.5m/sยฒ" โ๏ธ They can regulate the speed
"Only one model and RATG may be used per run." โ๏ธ Again not a limitation of the tunnel itself
"The only permitted degrees of freedom of the model and RATG during a run of RWTT are..." โ๏ธ Again not a limitation of the tunnel itself
"Where non-rigid wind tunnel tyres are used for RWTT these may only be produced by the appointed tyre supplier." โ๏ธ Again not a limitation of the tunnel itself
Edit: I forgot to thank you for linking those regulations. Didn't think to look at sporting regs instead of technical regs. Reading through them confirmed that GM's wind tunnels conform to the regs.
Again I will direct you to Appendix 7 Article 3. Literally the first sentence.
But also on the Toyota wind tunnel. It's specifically set up for Motorsport. It's the Gazoo Racing facilities. McLaren used it, Force India used it, There's probably countless other smaller teams that use it. It also features a rolling road and fancy laser sensors.
Meanwhile the first search for GM wind tunnel, shows one that takes clay models on a stationary platform.
Even someone as obtuse as you could make the connection they're using the Toyota tunnel.
"The following restrictions apply during RWTT: Only wind tunnels that use air at atmospheric pressure as the test fluid are permitted." That's the first sentence in 2023 rules to which the model has been built and I already wrote that they use regular air.
That's not a reason why GM's don't conform to the rules as you repeatedly claimed without ever going into detail.
Btw. I'm well aware of the facilities relatively close to where I live. I don't need introduction to Toyota's Cologne facilities.
That's your research into GM's wind tunnels? Not surprising that you cannot point to where the car company that owns several wind tunnels, incl the world's biggest automotive wind tunnel, doesn't comply.
You're again resorting to insults without being capable to point to specifics. What happened to you that you act this way?
I'm calling you obtuse, because if I called you thran you'd have to look it up. And you'd still end up with the wrong definition
You are so caught up in this GM partnership. That you are missing the forest for the trees.
Why would Andretti, a team trying to show they can compete in f1. build a f1 spec model and then test it at an approved wind tunnel facility that other teams have used in the past. It doesn't take a genius to work out why.
McLaren have been using the Toyota wind tunnel because the one they own isn't up to the job. And if McLaren didn't have one up to spec, there is no chance GM would have a wind tunnel up to spec. Someone with your claims should know that.
A discussion is fine but please refrain from insulting other members.
Then stop being thran.
If you want a discussion, then have a discussion, but that's not possible if you are so insistent on creating an issue where there isn't one.
I am not the one you had a discussion with and i am kindly asking you to stop insulting members of this community.