Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash test

Forum rules
Please read the forum rules
Post Reply
Alex777
Posts: 168
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 3:27 am

Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash test

Post by Alex777 »

Mercedes could pull even further clear of the field in Shanghai, after readying for its debut arguably the most expensive new front nose in F1 history. Actually, the dominant Brackley squad wanted its ultra-short nose to be fitted to the silver W05 in Melbourne, but it had failed the mandatory FIA crash test. Read Full story - http://thisisf1.com/2014/04/17/mercedes ... h-attempt/

Image

User avatar
Toby.
Posts: 2834
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:09 am
Location: Perth, Australia

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by Toby. »

Don't know why the journalist said "arguably the most expensive new nose in F1 history". I get that they had to tweak the design but that claim has no figures behind it.

It'll be interesting to see what it does for the look of the front of the car.
Image

User avatar
RickM
Posts: 2706
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 9:20 am
Location: Herts, UK

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by RickM »

That's a terribly written article, with no source for the price at all (or any other prices to compare it to)...but what is interesting is this:

“The car will be easier to balance with this solution,” said designer Aldo Costa.

Team boss Toto Wolff explains: “The car was designed for the short nose. What we have had until now has been only a stopgap.”


An already dominant car has been using a temporary 'sub-standard/low performing' nose whilst the better one was being sorted out...looks like Merc shall be puling even further away. Gotta hand it to them, they've pulled off an amazing car this year.
Image

CanadianDan
Posts: 204
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 9:22 pm

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by CanadianDan »

I thought there were FIA regs that said the nose had to be a certain height and distance off the floor and from the front of the car? Hence all the Ant Eater noses... maybe i have misinterpreted the regs...
2015 Predictions
1) Williams to win a Race (probably at the hands of Bottas)
2) Jenson Button to beat Fernando Alonso... but only just
3) McLaren to score at least 1 point... but to spend the season fighting with Manor-

hd23
Posts: 776
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2012 3:33 pm

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by hd23 »

lol at merc doing the opposite of those penis noses

stevey
Posts: 1610
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 8:31 am

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by stevey »

Holy crap that nose looks agressive as hell, the front wing looks barely attached - hopefully the wing stays on!!

RaggedMan
Posts: 4825
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 1:00 pm

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by RaggedMan »

stevey wrote:Holy crap that nose looks agressive as hell, the front wing looks barely attached - hopefully the wing stays on!!

The attachment of the wing has looked dicey all along, and even had one seaprate at that point in testing.
{Insert clever sig line here}

Jeepkhana
Posts: 464
Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2013 8:12 pm

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by Jeepkhana »

Toby. wrote:Don't know why the journalist said "arguably the most expensive new nose in F1 history". I get that they had to tweak the design but that claim has no figures behind it.

It'll be interesting to see what it does for the look of the front of the car.


Cuz that's what they do. They write things and sometimes unfounded claims to encourage reading.

CanadianDan wrote:I thought there were FIA regs that said the nose had to be a certain height and distance off the floor and from the front of the car? Hence all the Ant Eater noses... maybe i have misinterpreted the regs...


Yes, of course there are extremely strict regulations. Do you have hard facts on which to base your suspicion that this design doesn't conform to the regulations? The "ant eater" noses are not a requirement per se, as we've seen many different designs.

User avatar
RickM
Posts: 2706
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 9:20 am
Location: Herts, UK

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by RickM »

stevey wrote:Holy crap that nose looks agressive as hell, the front wing looks barely attached - hopefully the wing stays on!!

That was the initial problem with their other nose too. They had to have one reinforced and flown out during the first test when it broke. Hopefully they wont have that issue this time around as they'll be too far away to get a handful of replacements send over.
Image

lamo

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by lamo »

They only have one of them and its going to Lewis. Forum would have a meltdown if those Red Bull tactics occured.

User avatar
Laura23
Posts: 8767
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 3:56 am
Location: London

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by Laura23 »

hd23 wrote:lol at merc doing the opposite of those penis noses

And winning.
1994 1995 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Get well soon Schumi.

No one call anyone a moo-pickle...

User avatar
Laura23
Posts: 8767
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 3:56 am
Location: London

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by Laura23 »

lamo wrote:They only have one of them and its going to Lewis. Forum would have a meltdown if those Red Bull tactics occured.

Well he's won the last two races and if his car hadn't let him down in Oz he'd be leading the WDC. So he's earned it.
1994 1995 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Get well soon Schumi.

No one call anyone a moo-pickle...

User avatar
HawaiiF1Fan
Posts: 1705
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 7:56 pm
Location: Hawaii

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by HawaiiF1Fan »

RaggedMan wrote:
stevey wrote:Holy crap that nose looks agressive as hell, the front wing looks barely attached - hopefully the wing stays on!!

The attachment of the wing has looked dicey all along, and even had one seaprate at that point in testing.



Yuppers looks like they are just going to jettison that front wing at the first sign of danger. I wonder if the wing is designed to droop at the front under high velocities?

CanadianDan
Posts: 204
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 9:22 pm

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by CanadianDan »

Jeepkhana wrote:
CanadianDan wrote:I thought there were FIA regs that said the nose had to be a certain height and distance off the floor and from the front of the car? Hence all the Ant Eater noses... maybe i have misinterpreted the regs...


Yes, of course there are extremely strict regulations. Do you have hard facts on which to base your suspicion that this design doesn't conform to the regulations? The "ant eater" noses are not a requirement per se, as we've seen many different designs.


Sorry i think you have misinterpreted my comment. I am not sayings its legal or not, i was just after clarity of the regs. To me, a laymen, it doesnt look to conform to the regs (when you compare it to the likes of an anteater of double tusk). But i am far from a technically minded genius... i can only look at something and go "one of these things is not like the other"...

Hence i am asking people more in tune with this than me to help me understand :)
2015 Predictions
1) Williams to win a Race (probably at the hands of Bottas)
2) Jenson Button to beat Fernando Alonso... but only just
3) McLaren to score at least 1 point... but to spend the season fighting with Manor-

User avatar
Clarky
Posts: 4588
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 4:09 pm
Location: LONDON...!

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by Clarky »

Image

See a bit more here

Chunky
Posts: 843
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 12:46 pm

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by Chunky »

I'm more interested in the holes on the top surface rather than whether people think it is or isn't legal.

The holes look like part of a blown wing on high end sailplanes and latest generation fighter aircraft, but they are very, very big. I wonder what the heck they are supposed to be there for?

.

JohnnyGuitar
Posts: 1622
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 10:37 am

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by JohnnyGuitar »

CanadianDan wrote:
Jeepkhana wrote:
CanadianDan wrote:I thought there were FIA regs that said the nose had to be a certain height and distance off the floor and from the front of the car? Hence all the Ant Eater noses... maybe i have misinterpreted the regs...


Yes, of course there are extremely strict regulations. Do you have hard facts on which to base your suspicion that this design doesn't conform to the regulations? The "ant eater" noses are not a requirement per se, as we've seen many different designs.


Sorry i think you have misinterpreted my comment. I am not sayings its legal or not, i was just after clarity of the regs. To me, a laymen, it doesnt look to conform to the regs (when you compare it to the likes of an anteater of double tusk). But i am far from a technically minded genius... i can only look at something and go "one of these things is not like the other"...

Hence i am asking people more in tune with this than me to help me understand :)


It looks to me as though the wing supports are slightly bulbous. Could that be where the structure that complies with the low nose is? A similar concept to Lotus' tusk nose?

sandman1347
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by sandman1347 »

That thing looks flimsy as hell!

halsted
Posts: 94
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 8:12 pm

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by halsted »

The FW is set so far out in front that it looks like even slight contact will send the entire wing breaking off under the car...

RaggedMan
Posts: 4825
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 1:00 pm

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by RaggedMan »

Chunky wrote:I'm more interested in the holes on the top surface rather than whether people think it is or isn't legal.

The holes look like part of a blown wing on high end sailplanes and latest generation fighter aircraft, but they are very, very big. I wonder what the heck they are supposed to be there for?

.

By regulation they all have an opening in the very front of the nose.
{Insert clever sig line here}

lamo

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by lamo »

So it has lost the over hanging part and also looks a little higher, old picture here for reference;

Image

User avatar
Blackhander
Posts: 1849
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 1:22 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by Blackhander »

CanadianDan wrote:
Jeepkhana wrote:
CanadianDan wrote:I thought there were FIA regs that said the nose had to be a certain height and distance off the floor and from the front of the car? Hence all the Ant Eater noses... maybe i have misinterpreted the regs...


Yes, of course there are extremely strict regulations. Do you have hard facts on which to base your suspicion that this design doesn't conform to the regulations? The "ant eater" noses are not a requirement per se, as we've seen many different designs.


Sorry i think you have misinterpreted my comment. I am not sayings its legal or not, i was just after clarity of the regs. To me, a laymen, it doesnt look to conform to the regs (when you compare it to the likes of an anteater of double tusk). But i am far from a technically minded genius... i can only look at something and go "one of these things is not like the other"...

Hence i am asking people more in tune with this than me to help me understand :)


The regulations call for the centre of the nose to be 185mm high max. So it's not measured off the bottom edge or top edge but the centre point of a cross section of the nose impact structure 50mm behind the most forward point. Ant-eater noses it's fairly easy to visualise, if you took a slice 50mm from the tip and found the centre point of that slice that point must be bellow 185mm above the reference plane.

Merc and Ferrari noses take advantage of the wording, especially merc. Nowhere does it actually state that the centre point has to be WITHIN the nose, if you measured the centre point of the merc nose you have to imagine the nose as a box. The wing mount pylons are only the 20mm or so just before the wing mounts onto the nose. The thicker sections of the 'pylons' are still part of the nose. Draw a line from the bottom right corner to top left and bottom left to top right and where they cross over is the centre of the nose. Looking at the merc nose the centre would be around 30mm bellow the physical top centre section so the vague wording has allowed them to lift their nose 40-50mm higher than the teams who took a more literal interpretation of the rules.
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
Podiums: 1st Spa '16, 1st Bahrain '15, 1st China '14, 1st Malaysia '14
Championship position 2014: 13th | | 2015: 10th (heading the right way)
PF1 Autosport GP Predictor 2014: Second 2015: Second

j man
Posts: 3497
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 8:48 pm
Location: UK

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by j man »

Blackhander wrote:The regulations call for the centre of the nose to be 185mm high max. So it's not measured off the bottom edge or top edge but the centre point of a cross section of the nose impact structure 50mm behind the most forward point. Ant-eater noses it's fairly easy to visualise, if you took a slice 50mm from the tip and found the centre point of that slice that point must be bellow 185mm above the reference plane.

Merc and Ferrari noses take advantage of the wording, especially merc. Nowhere does it actually state that the centre point has to be WITHIN the nose, if you measured the centre point of the merc nose you have to imagine the nose as a box. The wing mount pylons are only the 20mm or so just before the wing mounts onto the nose. The thicker sections of the 'pylons' are still part of the nose. Draw a line from the bottom right corner to top left and bottom left to top right and where they cross over is the centre of the nose. Looking at the merc nose the centre would be around 30mm bellow the physical top centre section so the vague wording has allowed them to lift their nose 40-50mm higher than the teams who took a more literal interpretation of the rules.

:thumbup:

It's a clever interpretation of the rules and means that it looks like Merc have the best front end solution on the grid. The 'official' tip of the nose as it is defined in the reglations is in the empty space underneath the actual nose. I don't think even Ferrari have done this as it looks like the flat end of the nose is within the height regulations; it is much lower than what Mercedes have. I expect the others to be copying this in the future.

martyF1
Posts: 126
Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 6:45 pm

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by martyF1 »

Hard to shake the feeling that if redbull did this a lot of posters would be complaining about this interpretation not being in the spirit of the rules, and cheating.

Volantary
Posts: 1821
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2011 10:21 pm

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by Volantary »

martyF1 wrote:Hard to shake the feeling that if redbull did this a lot of posters would be complaining about this interpretation not being in the spirit of the rules, and cheating.


And a lot of posters would be wrong, what's your point? Being wrong is being wrong, no matter which team is involved.
Official Kamui Kobayashi Fanboy

User avatar
Covalent
Posts: 10157
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by Covalent »

halsted wrote:The FW is set so far out in front that it looks like even slight contact will send the entire wing breaking off under the car...

Frank Williams?

Volantary
Posts: 1821
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2011 10:21 pm

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by Volantary »

Covalent wrote:
halsted wrote:The FW is set so far out in front that it looks like even slight contact will send the entire wing breaking off under the car...

Frank Williams?


Free Willy.
Official Kamui Kobayashi Fanboy

User avatar
Laura23
Posts: 8767
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 3:56 am
Location: London

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by Laura23 »

Volantary wrote:
Covalent wrote:
halsted wrote:The FW is set so far out in front that it looks like even slight contact will send the entire wing breaking off under the car...

Frank Williams?


Free Willy.

No Merc are one of the few that don't appear to have a willy set free...
1994 1995 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Get well soon Schumi.

No one call anyone a moo-pickle...

User avatar
Pimpwerx
Posts: 311
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2004 5:10 am

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by Pimpwerx »

martyF1 wrote:Hard to shake the feeling that if redbull did this a lot of posters would be complaining about this interpretation not being in the spirit of the rules, and cheating.

Penis nosed cars weren't in the spirit of the rule either. No one could nor should complain. Merc certainly has the most aesthetically pleasing solution this year. PEACE.

F1Krof
Posts: 225
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 7:46 pm

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by F1Krof »

Chunky wrote:I'm more interested in the holes on the top surface rather than whether people think it is or isn't legal.

The holes look like part of a blown wing on high end sailplanes and latest generation fighter aircraft, but they are very, very big. I wonder what the heck they are supposed to be there for?

.


Which holes man? If you're referring to the black dots in the middle plain plate, I'm pretty sure they're bolts. Unless you see something that I didn't.

Chunky
Posts: 843
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 12:46 pm

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by Chunky »

F1Krof wrote:
Chunky wrote:I'm more interested in the holes on the top surface rather than whether people think it is or isn't legal.

The holes look like part of a blown wing on high end sailplanes and latest generation fighter aircraft, but they are very, very big. I wonder what the heck they are supposed to be there for?

.


Which holes man? If you're referring to the black dots in the middle plain plate, I'm pretty sure they're bolts. Unless you see something that I didn't.

You may be right. But it's awfully strange that they're not colour coded to match the silver arrows theme. The only thing no-one has yet found a way to paint is a hole.

Also, it looks like there's a removable panel in the top of the centre section. You can see it's edges in the link posted by the OP. It can't be for strength purposes (quite the oppposite), so I'm intrigued about exactly what's going on.

.

Ennis
Posts: 1824
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 3:22 pm

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by Ennis »

Despite the bizarre design, I think the Merc is a very nice looking car. 2nd to only the Red Bull, although if you include liveries rather than just shape I'd make it FI before Merc before Red Bull.

5ANDYm
Posts: 369
Joined: Sat Aug 24, 2013 8:08 pm

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by 5ANDYm »

lamo wrote:They only have one of them and its going to Lewis. Forum would have a meltdown if those Red Bull tactics occured.


that may be a cost thing or a development issues as they would want to see what is better over a race my bet is the lewis wont the bet
People have short memory's these days and want spoon fed, Do your own research.

justmoi
Posts: 389
Joined: Thu Jul 04, 2013 5:03 am

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by justmoi »

5ANDYm wrote:
lamo wrote:They only have one of them and its going to Lewis. Forum would have a meltdown if those Red Bull tactics occured.


that may be a cost thing or a development issues as they would want to see what is better over a race my bet is the lewis wont the bet


Actually both cars are running the new nose iirc. Be careful what you take as 'fact' from what is written on this forum..

User avatar
linkinstreet
Posts: 166
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 6:49 am

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by linkinstreet »

Blackhander wrote:
CanadianDan wrote:
Jeepkhana wrote:
CanadianDan wrote:I thought there were FIA regs that said the nose had to be a certain height and distance off the floor and from the front of the car? Hence all the Ant Eater noses... maybe i have misinterpreted the regs...


Yes, of course there are extremely strict regulations. Do you have hard facts on which to base your suspicion that this design doesn't conform to the regulations? The "ant eater" noses are not a requirement per se, as we've seen many different designs.


Sorry i think you have misinterpreted my comment. I am not sayings its legal or not, i was just after clarity of the regs. To me, a laymen, it doesnt look to conform to the regs (when you compare it to the likes of an anteater of double tusk). But i am far from a technically minded genius... i can only look at something and go "one of these things is not like the other"...

Hence i am asking people more in tune with this than me to help me understand :)


The regulations call for the centre of the nose to be 185mm high max. So it's not measured off the bottom edge or top edge but the centre point of a cross section of the nose impact structure 50mm behind the most forward point. Ant-eater noses it's fairly easy to visualise, if you took a slice 50mm from the tip and found the centre point of that slice that point must be bellow 185mm above the reference plane.

Merc and Ferrari noses take advantage of the wording, especially merc. Nowhere does it actually state that the centre point has to be WITHIN the nose, if you measured the centre point of the merc nose you have to imagine the nose as a box. The wing mount pylons are only the 20mm or so just before the wing mounts onto the nose. The thicker sections of the 'pylons' are still part of the nose. Draw a line from the bottom right corner to top left and bottom left to top right and where they cross over is the centre of the nose. Looking at the merc nose the centre would be around 30mm bellow the physical top centre section so the vague wording has allowed them to lift their nose 40-50mm higher than the teams who took a more literal interpretation of the rules.

I've spent 30 minutes reading this and I still have no idea what this means

Gothalamide
Posts: 940
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 7:01 am

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by Gothalamide »

Chunky wrote:
F1Krof wrote:
Chunky wrote:I'm more interested in the holes on the top surface rather than whether people think it is or isn't legal.

The holes look like part of a blown wing on high end sailplanes and latest generation fighter aircraft, but they are very, very big. I wonder what the heck they are supposed to be there for?

.


Which holes man? If you're referring to the black dots in the middle plain plate, I'm pretty sure they're bolts. Unless you see something that I didn't.

You may be right. But it's awfully strange that they're not colour coded to match the silver arrows theme. The only thing no-one has yet found a way to paint is a hole.

Also, it looks like there's a removable panel in the top of the centre section. You can see it's edges in the link posted by the OP. It can't be for strength purposes (quite the oppposite), so I'm intrigued about exactly what's going on.

.


My guess it they are bolts that hold on an access hatch to enable the team access to any sensors they have in the FW... Otherwise, they'd have to change the wing if the sensors failed...

:D :D :D

User avatar
Alienturnedhuman
Posts: 3900
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by Alienturnedhuman »

linkinstreet wrote:
Blackhander wrote:
CanadianDan wrote:
Jeepkhana wrote:
CanadianDan wrote:I thought there were FIA regs that said the nose had to be a certain height and distance off the floor and from the front of the car? Hence all the Ant Eater noses... maybe i have misinterpreted the regs...


Yes, of course there are extremely strict regulations. Do you have hard facts on which to base your suspicion that this design doesn't conform to the regulations? The "ant eater" noses are not a requirement per se, as we've seen many different designs.


Sorry i think you have misinterpreted my comment. I am not sayings its legal or not, i was just after clarity of the regs. To me, a laymen, it doesnt look to conform to the regs (when you compare it to the likes of an anteater of double tusk). But i am far from a technically minded genius... i can only look at something and go "one of these things is not like the other"...

Hence i am asking people more in tune with this than me to help me understand :)


The regulations call for the centre of the nose to be 185mm high max. So it's not measured off the bottom edge or top edge but the centre point of a cross section of the nose impact structure 50mm behind the most forward point. Ant-eater noses it's fairly easy to visualise, if you took a slice 50mm from the tip and found the centre point of that slice that point must be bellow 185mm above the reference plane.

Merc and Ferrari noses take advantage of the wording, especially merc. Nowhere does it actually state that the centre point has to be WITHIN the nose, if you measured the centre point of the merc nose you have to imagine the nose as a box. The wing mount pylons are only the 20mm or so just before the wing mounts onto the nose. The thicker sections of the 'pylons' are still part of the nose. Draw a line from the bottom right corner to top left and bottom left to top right and where they cross over is the centre of the nose. Looking at the merc nose the centre would be around 30mm bellow the physical top centre section so the vague wording has allowed them to lift their nose 40-50mm higher than the teams who took a more literal interpretation of the rules.

I've spent 30 minutes reading this and I still have no idea what this means

The centre point of a 2 dimensional shape is the point where if you draw a line through it there is an equal area of it either side. For a circle, oval, square or rectangle, it is the centre of the shape:

Code: Select all

OOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOO*OOOOO
XXXXX*XXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXX

At the centre point of that rectangle (marked by the two * in a column) there are an equal number of Xs below and Os above. Looking at what Mercedes have done:

Code: Select all

OOOOOOOO
OO    OO
OO ** OO
XX ** XX
XX    XX
XX    XX
XX    XX

Here, the shape (the Os and Xs only) has the centre point (in the middle of the four asterixs) lies outside of the shape. There are an equal number of Xs below and Os above.

Irbis
Posts: 571
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 1:28 pm

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by Irbis »

Pimpwerx wrote:Penis nosed cars weren't in the spirit of the rule either. No one could nor should complain.

What, physical tip of the nose is not in the spirit mandating cross section of physical tip? x(

Every time I read the forums it baffles me how strong doublethink can be. Merc openly flouts and breaks both spirit and content of the regulations, yet some people still think black helmets and empty spaces are just environmental concerns, bah :thumbdown:

User avatar
Pimpwerx
Posts: 311
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2004 5:10 am

Re: Mercedes W05 ultra-short nose passed the Fourth crash te

Post by Pimpwerx »

Irbis wrote:
Pimpwerx wrote:Penis nosed cars weren't in the spirit of the rule either. No one could nor should complain.

What, physical tip of the nose is not in the spirit mandating cross section of physical tip? x(

Every time I read the forums it baffles me how strong doublethink can be. Merc openly flouts and breaks both spirit and content of the regulations, yet some people still think black helmets and empty spaces are just environmental concerns, bah :thumbdown:

Perhaps you should get on the Batphone to scrutineering and tell them about the violations you saw on your TV. PEACE.

Post Reply