Ferrari hoping to keep nose in front.

i wonder if we are being told the "hole" truth about this nose. is it possible to have a variable orifice for different positions on track, or would this be considered a movable aerodynamic device? how could this be monitored?

rich ard

I think that by "moveable aerodynamic device" they mean something that flexes, bends or stretches while a car is running which has an effect on the car's aerodynamics and not necessarily parts that can be adjusted from race to race. That's why most of the teams have different configurations for their cars to suit specific tracks with some parts appearing for one race and gone the next. And if i'm not mistaken i think every car has close to 100(or even more) sensors(including cameras) that monitor performance of specific parts. Plus some more checks by way of scrutineering like crash testing, weighing, and flexibility tests for floorboards and wings.

Rich ard, this isn't a movable device. It's not like the dimensions of the hole can be altered in realtime at different points on the track. It's a fixed-dimension slot, and all it does is improve the car's overall aerodynamics.

It's probably a slight step up in terms of aero improvement on the F2008. I'm sure Macca and BMW have also made significant progress for Barca and beyond, but because the F2008 is something that's never been seen before (unlike say, a new winglet, or a newly designed bargeboard), it's getting so much media attention.

ghost, externally it is not a movable device but what i was trying to say is that INTERNALLY there COULD be an adjustable throat affecting the amount of air passing through and affecting the balance of the front. this COULD be controlled automatically or from within the car, to alter grip for different parts of track. would this now be considered a movable aerodynamic device, and if so how would FIA monitor it??

Is it not possible that a reduction in the high pressure (inducing a low pressure zone instead) beneath the front end of the car could be a return to a partial ground effect of yesteryear? Certainly you'd think it would contribute to greater front end stability and grip. Perhaps a bit of overtaking?

triumph, this is the whole object of the excercise. my feeling is that if a variable venturi was used, this would be akin to the famous fancar of brabham, but without the lawnmower engine. Question! did BE own brabham at that time?

Rich ard, I understood what you were saying - but think about it - these cars have to go though some pretty intense scrutiny every race. And they had to have the part cleared by the FIA for structural integrity, safety, and rule compliance.
I think it would be petty evident if there were any internal moving parts that could adjust the size of the throat, i think they would be pretty evident in a part of this nature.

I could be wrong... but thats how i see it. I think its quite a good innovation, and I hope its on the up and up. If it is, then expect it to see it on the Maccas, Beemers, Toyotas and Hondas very, very soon.

Well, from the immediate past, scrutineering isn't all it could be. Witness the moveable floor episode from Melbourne last year, and the fuel temperature episode. The rules set by the FIA do not always have a test suitable to ensure compliance.

calvin, exactly, include the fuel tank of honda, hidden electronic programmes, and possily mass dampers. like everything else, if a person WANTS to disguise something, then ANYTHING is possble.this is not to say there is anything wrong. but my initial question is "would this be a movable aerodynamic device?"

rich ard- Just seen a photo of the nose with something sticking out of the top opening (possibly a pitot tube or is it something else?). Certainly the ground effect cars were passive (the Brabham was probably an active system). If it is a pitot tube, which can allow measurement of both static and velocity pressure, you might ask why?