We know what to look for that gives performance.
I can look on a rb6 and a piece of crap HRT and tell you which one is the better car. However i wouldn't say it cannot be done meaningfully by anyone here we don't know who's using those pictures posted on the site. It's humanly possible but most can't do it to even 50% accuracy, but we still can draw some vague conclusions, such as if this works well or that is causing this to happen. I will still call BS on 99% of the aerodynamic claims cooked up by this forum in the next month when the new vehicles are released. Yes I was party to the discussion and I still maintain my stance Ĭan you theoretically characterise a car's aero based on its appearance? YESĬan anyone on this forum do this with any kind of accuracy? NO My point is, no one can 'know', but some can guess better then others. You couldn't look at the MP4-25 and know it had the F-Duct at launch. You can't look at the RB6 and know that it has a trick front wing (or whatever it was) that can flex around the rules. Maybe there is aero trick in the diffuser we can't see that trumps the loss you perceive. Maybe the chunky rear is there for a reason.
I'm not doubting your aero knowledge would give you an edge on telling which car _might_ be better than another ringo, but when the entire field is separated by just a second (not counting new teams of course) in qualifying at some races and you can't see the floor for example, it's too tight a call for even human to know it can't win a race from a limited set of pics. The cars were so massively different on the track, how could anyone look at both cars and tell me which one would actually be quicker, without knowing of course the B team would be slower.? They both came from the same mind, built in the same shop. Both cars looked almost identical at launch, but were far from equal on the track.
0 kommentar(er)
