They are desperate (Fred) but i´m afraid that he won´t get another WDC next year. Interesting.
Printable View
They are desperate (Fred) but i´m afraid that he won´t get another WDC next year. Interesting.
There's a good explanation of Massa's dilemma from Adam Cooper here:
Massa
Revert to the old "safe" wing and start from the pitlane, or try another flappy-dappy-hope-don't-snappy version and risk not finishing the race?
Looks like the snappy wing didn't snap contrary to the snappy suspension!
Anyway, as I said yesterday, flexible parts don't break easily. Adam Cooper should take some physics lessons.
The BBC commentary suggested that they changed Massa's wing because it was flexing to the point that the FIA would have called them in, so maybe Adam Cooper and others have a bit more insight than you give them credit for.
Nice try turning words around.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave B
If the FIA told them to take it off is because they were bending, or do you have information that the FIA knew that the front wing was dangerous?
Or maybe you want to rewrite the laws of physics trying to prove me wrong?
Anyway, laughable tries Dave.
Not at all laughable, when I clearly used the words "suggested" and "maybe". Unlike you I don't claim to know all the facts or make wild assumptions. What I do know is that Ferrari changed Massa's wing when it started oscillating again, which they wouldn't have done for no reason. It's a moot point anyway, as Massa failed to learn from his qualifying error and destroyed another suspension on the kerbs.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
The vibration would be the worry rather than the static flex I think.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
CorrectQuote:
Originally Posted by ioan
They're not flexing the right way. The load is resonating the front wing.
Analysis: Ferraris Front Wing Flutter « Scarbsf1's Blog
That didn't stop you from taking the usual high horse while basing your claim on a journo's claim.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave B
And unlike you and your journo I do have a lot of scientific knowledge in material science, but then again when has knowledge meant anything around here.
So an article that uses phrases like "What might have happenned", "I can't explain", "I'm no expert", "my limited knowledge" is taken as proof, but Adam Cooper's opinion must be dismissed. Fair enough, if that's the standard of debate I have to deal with.Quote:
Originally Posted by wedge