F1 » Back to the drawing board for Newey


Adrian Newey admits that ban on blown diffusers has led to a change in approach for 2012

Sort Comments: Oldest | Newest

richard

December 17, 2011 9:14 PM

sunny. what you say is basically correct, but you also have to allow for the fact that the brits had a head start in gp racing after the war, whereas the countries that were beaten had to start from scratch again, as few of the old cars remained. i think in recent times that an auto union or two have been discovered in what was eastern germany, and also a number of ferraris and/or alfas were also found eastwards. and in reality, in gp racing, it was not until cooper pioneered rear engines and light cars, that britain began winning again. (and ok, i know the au's were rear engined)

107SS2009

December 17, 2011 9:48 PM

Yes it was by the introduction of the rear engine Copper that Britain started winning races.
But I could never understand how copper was and still is credited as the pioneer and or the one that introduced rear/mid engine race cars.

107SS2009

December 17, 2011 10:23 PM

Matt, re the Merlin xx, you do most probably know but just in case not it might interest you to know that, in January 1982 I specifically attended the Model engineer's exhibition at Wembley conference centre UK to see with my own eyes Mr Barry Hares running his made/machined out of the solid 1/5th scale Rolls Royce Merlin xx.

spaghettieddie

December 18, 2011 2:32 PM

All comments concerning the dvlpmnt of the Mustang are correct. But....I would much rather have been in a Mustang towards the end of the war then a Spit, the development on the Mustang continues even today (air races). Plus i'm a yank so I am a bit biased!:) Be well all! Ed

fast911ray - Unregistered

December 18, 2011 3:19 PM

Actually I believe that Tony Vandervell's 'Vanwall' and Aston Martin were both highly successful using front engine F1 cars in the 1950's. In fact, if memory serves me correctly, Vanwall did secure a World Championship.

On the Spitfire vs. P-51 subject, although I am a USAer, my vote must go in favour of Mitchell's magnificent Spitfire. Several months during the wee morning hours ago I stumbled upon a 1942 British film about his life and work at Supermarine. The movie gave a detailed account of how watching seagulls soaring overhead during a beach day inspired his Vanderbilt Trophy Race design for Supermarine, and eventually the Spitfire's wing shape. It was a 'keeper' but sadly my DVR decided it..and 150+ other films had to go. Sorry I cannot remember the film's title, although I belive Leslie Howard was cast as Mitchell. A must see for any WWII aircraft devotee.

richard

December 18, 2011 8:13 PM

fast911. you do know that vanwall was actually a ferrari, and ferrari were quite successful in the 50s. the rear engined revolution was in the 60s.
actually they should be called mid engined. unlike your 911 which is rear engined.

Ptolomy - Unregistered

December 19, 2011 12:06 AM

I'm an American and loved the beautiful lines of the Spitfire. Spent a whole summer perfecting a Balsa and Silkspan flying model of it. I knew and remember the time that went into sanding the graceful elliptical wing. But to be fair, the Mustang was vastly superior. But only with the British engine! A famous American pilot said that the Mustang and Spitfire were similar in most respects, but what the Spitfire could do for an hour, the Mustang could do for 8 hours. The most important factor he was talking about was the Mustang's vastly superior range. Therefore it wins this contest as the "better" combat aircraft. I think Newey would have loved both!

Page 4 of 7
« 1 2 3 4 5 6 7  »

Join the conversation - Add your comment

Please login or register before adding your comments.

Although the administrators and moderators of this website will attempt to keep all objectionable comments off these pages, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the poster, and neither Crash Media Group nor Crash.Net will be held responsible for the content of any message. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. If you find a message objectionable, please contact us and inform us of the problem or use the [report] function next to the offending post. Any message that does not conform with the policy of this service can be edited or removed with immediate effect.

© 1999 - 2014 Crash Media Group

The total or partial reproduction of text, photographs or illustrations is not permitted in any form.