The wierdest Wings I've seen yet (you never know what comes next)

And they hope to identify the root of their problems while going this way:

http://www.autosport.com/images/upload/1178191166.jpg

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/58478

They even took their time to paint that awful livery on it.

Another pic:

http://www.suttonimages.com/fotoweb/...89E732DCAFB20D

'Dumbo Wings' :laugh: :laugh:

The number of different aero appendages appearing on all the cars is really a joke.

I always thought that a sound aero design of the body can achieve the same effect as all these itsy-bitsy tiny thingies we see all over the cars.
Can't they design an efficient car without this sh!t all over it?!

Urgh! :s

Here's a question for you.

Formula One cars are the product of a multi-million pound design budget, with some of the sharpest minds in the business working on them, right?

They're designed to be as quick as possible while at the same time generating the maximum downforce in as efficient manner as possible. The airflow over the whole car needs to be efficient to avoid wasting engine power and fuel. The tiniest change could find or lose fractions of a second, which could be the difference between winning a race or staring ruefully up at the podium.

So far so good.

Right.

Commercial airliners are the product of a multi-billion pound design budget, with some of the sharpest minds in the business working on them, right?

They're designed to be as quick as possible while at the same time generating the maximum lift in as efficient manner as possible. The airflow over the whole 'plane needs to be efficient to avoid wasting engine power and fuel. The tiniest change could have a massive impact on the craft's efficiency and running costs, which could be the difference between offering cheap fares and being regarded as envionmentally friendly, or ruefully watching your rival airline steal your passengers.

So, here's the question. Why don't aircraft have all these stupid winglets and flipups all over them? :crazy:

That wing sort of reminds me of what Arrows tried to use at Monaco in 2001

They must be pretty off-putting for the driver. Maybe a couple of countries got annoyed about not being visible on the livery so Honda decided to give them their own space!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Brockman

Urgh! :s

Here's a question for you.

Formula One cars are the product of a multi-million pound design budget, with some of the sharpest minds in the business working on them, right?

They're designed to be as quick as possible while at the same time generating the maximum downforce in as efficient manner as possible. The airflow over the whole car needs to be efficient to avoid wasting engine power and fuel. The tiniest change could find or lose fractions of a second, which could be the difference between winning a race or staring ruefully up at the podium.

So far so good.

Right.

Commercial airliners are the product of a multi-billion pound design budget, with some of the sharpest minds in the business working on them, right?

They're designed to be as quick as possible while at the same time generating the maximum lift in as efficient manner as possible. The airflow over the whole 'plane needs to be efficient to avoid wasting engine power and fuel. The tiniest change could have a massive impact on the craft's efficiency and running costs, which could be the difference between offering cheap fares and being regarded as envionmentally friendly, or ruefully watching your rival airline steal your passengers.

So, here's the question. Why don't aircraft have all these stupid winglets and flipups all over them? :crazy:

---

Because of the constant acceleration and deceleration and constant change of direction, I should think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Brockman

Urgh! :s

Here's a question for you.

Formula One cars are the product of a multi-million pound design budget, with some of the sharpest minds in the business working on them, right?

They're designed to be as quick as possible while at the same time generating the maximum downforce in as efficient manner as possible. The airflow over the whole car needs to be efficient to avoid wasting engine power and fuel. The tiniest change could find or lose fractions of a second, which could be the difference between winning a race or staring ruefully up at the podium.

So far so good.

Right.

Commercial airliners are the product of a multi-billion pound design budget, with some of the sharpest minds in the business working on them, right?

They're designed to be as quick as possible while at the same time generating the maximum lift in as efficient manner as possible. The airflow over the whole 'plane needs to be efficient to avoid wasting engine power and fuel. The tiniest change could have a massive impact on the craft's efficiency and running costs, which could be the difference between offering cheap fares and being regarded as envionmentally friendly, or ruefully watching your rival airline steal your passengers.

So, here's the question. Why don't aircraft have all these stupid winglets and flipups all over them? :crazy:

---

You might have forgotten one thing, airplanes aren't meant to handle 4G turnng forces on the tarmac. :p :

And an airplane is full of small winglets and flipups, just that the dimensions are rather different, plus, they area allowed to have moveable aero. :D

..............and maybe because airplanes don't have those relatively huge wide wheels which have a forward velocity at the highest points of twice the speed of the car.

Just the same, I think those wings are kinda cute. I also think the relatively large ears of my chihuahua (when compared with his body) are kinda cute. His name is Benny. :)