Silly Formula Uuh Question

[Die Frau]

I imagine there is something in the rules about this, although I tried searching and could not find ANY information about it.

Is there anything in the rules that state that steering must be accomplished by the wheels? It would seem to me that the effects of a rudder would be so much more substantial and safe. Either off of the rear wing, or maybe even directional vertical stabilizers that turn in tandem with the front wheels. It would work better in the rain and especially in the event of the tires coming off the pavement or the very least the car becoming un-weighted. I know it would not be as effective at low speeds, but at the most dangerous speeds it could be highly effective.

In a sport that relies so heavily on aerodynamics, I would think this has been discussed or attempted, but I don’t find and examples of this. I know that there are lots of rules in regards to aero, especially when it comes to the rear wing.

I know that the use of vertical stabilizers has become quiet popular over the last few years, which has helped the cars stay straight. Any thoughts or sites with info about this?

[palmer]

I think that might fall under the "active aerodynamics" section of the rules. Basically, the aero aid can't move is the impression I get so I don't think you could have it.

Neat idea though.

[Die Frau]

That seems to make sense...

I just don't understand why most governing racing bodies reaction to new technology is to ban it, and therefore killing the r&d to make the sport more competitive or safe, like the fan car.

Instead of making it possible for any team to use and improve, they ban the idea. I understand that there is a level of purity that comes into play, and also you get to a point where cars would simply become way to fast. But 'active aerodynamics' seems like a no brainer.

[mimalmo]

Ferrari had aero that moved under braking a couple years ago. They said it wasn't intentional, the FIA disagreed.

[JPB]

That seems to make sense...

I just don't understand why most governing racing bodies reaction to new technology is to ban it, and therefore killing the r&d to make the sport more competitive or safe, like the fan car.

Instead of making it possible for any team to use and improve, they ban the idea. I understand that there is a level of purity that comes into play, and also you get to a point where cars would simply become way to fast. But 'active aerodynamics' seems like a no brainer.

"safety" is a convenient sacred cow for regulating innovation.
Mercedes/McLaren has beryllium engine internals (or whatever that alloy was), Renault had their damper system on the front suspension.... Then the more ambiguous loophole interpretations like "double diffusers" and creative blown exhausts.
The FIA have to look at sporting regulations from the angle of competition. When one team uses a technology that the others can't quickly adapt, the season can become a farce.
The governors of the sport have to make a decision (rightly or wrongly) to allow or disallow it. There's never an objective decision made, really, which is why Ferrari and McLaren like to cry about conspiracies and perceived slights.

[JUSTION337]

Like when the Audi R10 TDI started dominating ALMS because the didn't have to stop for fuel as much, so they changed the amount of fuel diesel cars could carry.

[Die Frau]

I understand them putting a temporary ban for the duration of the season - but they should put it under review and let all teams know that in the next year or two years, x-technology is going to be permited and these are the new rules regarding it.

I guess the issue I have is that there is a lot great technology that is being supressed and inovation that is simply ignored, and since a lot of the racing technology of today ends up in our cars tomorrow, it's really too bad.

I mean squeezing 700hp out of a 3L @ 15000 RPM is sweet and might have some trickle-down effect on my 2020 automobile purchase, but there is more to cars than just engine and transmission technology.