<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
    xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
    
    <channel>
    
    <title>SPEEDtv.com Forums</title>
    <link>http://www.speedtv.com/forums/</link>
    <description>SPEEDtv.com Forums</description>
    <dc:language>en</dc:language>
    <dc:rights>Copyright 2009</dc:rights>
    <dc:date>2009-12-12T11:21:41-05:00</dc:date>
    <admin:generatorAgent rdf:resource="http://expressionengine.com/" />
    

    <item>
      <title>Question about modeling assumptions</title>
      <link>http://www.speedtv.com/forums/viewthread/477072/</link>
      <guid>http://www.speedtv.com/forums/viewthread/477072/#When:20:48:11Z</guid>
      <description>I was wondering about some of the assumptions made when modeling the aerodynamics of the F1 cars. As near as i can tell in the CFD models used to model the cars the car is stationary and the air moves over the car. That is the same with wind tunnels, the air is moved over the car. I understand that it is reasonable to assume that the car will behave the same whether moving through the air or remaining stationary when the air moves over the car. However i would really doubt that that it is a perfect assumption. Also i think that it would be a much worse assumption when the air that the car is moving through is not uniform in flow and density. I think that the air around an F1 track during a race is probably not anywhere near uniform. Particularly right behind another car. So my question is since F1 is so competitive why arent the teams modeling the cars moving through the air instead of the other way around. Or do they already do that? I&apos;m particularly interested in the modeling stuff since i am an engineering student and would really love to work for a formula one team someday. I think that more and more complex models are the way of the future.</description>
      <dc:date>2009-11-19T20:48:11-05:00</dc:date>
    </item>

    <item>
      <title>Engine Freeze</title>
      <link>http://www.speedtv.com/forums/viewthread/478065/</link>
      <guid>http://www.speedtv.com/forums/viewthread/478065/#When:22:47:30Z</guid>
      <description>Does anyone else really dislike the engine freeze? I really hate it. It seems to against all of the things that make Formula One so great. I understand that it is in place with all of the other regulations, like the max rpm limit and limits on the configuration of the engine, are there to reduce costs, improve reliability, and even the playing field. But this seems like a terrible way to do it. First of all the limit on the number of engines a car can use per season should be enough to encourage the teams to improve reliability. And i understand that having a level playing field can make for exciting racing. I do enjoy watching Nascar occasionally. But Formula one is supposed to be about more than just the racing. The development of the car, and engine too, are a huge part of the competition and we are being cheated out of that by the freeze on development. I understand that there is a need to reduce costs but i really dont think that this engine freeze will help any. the teams that have large budgets simply put that money towards something else. I dont know of any one perfect solution to these problems however i think that unfreezing the engine development, reducing the regulations on the engine, and maybe instating some kind of budget cap would be a far more interesting solution than the current way. A problem with this is that the engine power would probably increase which may pose a safety hazard so to prevent that i would suggest reducing the maximum displacement if it becomes a problem. I think it would be great to have different teams with radically different engine designs again. Its not at all unlikely that that would result in more of a spread in the performance of the  cars across the field and may reduce passing during the race. But i think that the race to develop the best engine would be much more interesting than the slight reduction in excitement in the actual race. And most importantly i would simply love to hear a v&#45;12 spin over 20 grand or maybe even a Wankel rotary on the track. What do you guys think?</description>
      <dc:date>2009-12-02T22:47:30-05:00</dc:date>
    </item>

    <item>
      <title>Tyre Warming</title>
      <link>http://www.speedtv.com/forums/viewthread/478693/</link>
      <guid>http://www.speedtv.com/forums/viewthread/478693/#When:06:30:13Z</guid>
      <description>Ok on many websites,  information about 2010 rules, it is said that Tyre warming is banned.  But at the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.fia.com&quot;&gt;http://www.fia.com&lt;/a&gt; site, the official sporting rules for the 2010 Season that was posted in July clearly states that for 2010 teams can use a heat&#45;element type blanket for tyre warming only.  So, why is it widely reported that they are banned 2010?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;b&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;25) SUPPLY OF TYRES IN THE CHAMPIONSHIP AND TYRE LIMITATION DURING THE EVENT&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
     25.3 Control of tyres :&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
          f)The only permitted type of tyre heating devices are blankets which      use resistive heating elements.&lt;/blockquote&gt; &lt;/b&gt;</description>
      <dc:date>2009-12-12T06:30:13-05:00</dc:date>
    </item>

    <item>
      <title>1961 Ferrari</title>
      <link>http://www.speedtv.com/forums/viewthread/478413/</link>
      <guid>http://www.speedtv.com/forums/viewthread/478413/#When:16:31:57Z</guid>
      <description>A photo of the Shark Nose Ferrari I just saw reminded me of the gold&#45;colored cylinder at the back of its transmission.  Is there any other 50+ year F1 fan who remembers what that device was?</description>
      <dc:date>2009-12-08T16:31:57-05:00</dc:date>
    </item>

    <item>
      <title>Admittedly Silly, but&#8230;.</title>
      <link>http://www.speedtv.com/forums/viewthread/473644/</link>
      <guid>http://www.speedtv.com/forums/viewthread/473644/#When:19:59:50Z</guid>
      <description>Okay, so watching the Rain in Spain Fall Mainly on Brazil today, I had a lot of time to think silly thoughts....&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The exhaust pressure coming from an F1 engine must be pretty epic.  And if, somehow, that exhaust could be vented out of the nose of the car onto the tarmac ahead, it could conceivably clear much of the standing water prior to the front wheel&apos;s arrival.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If, structurally, one could make these ducts run from back to front, there would be no weight penalty for what amounts to a void. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
You would just need a movable piece to route the exhaust to the front.  It would remove horsepower, but in the wet it wouldn&apos;t matter so much.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Could such a thing be legal?  Practical?</description>
      <dc:date>2009-10-17T19:59:50-05:00</dc:date>
    </item>

    <item>
      <title>F1 Motor Oil&#63;</title>
      <link>http://www.speedtv.com/forums/viewthread/471026/</link>
      <guid>http://www.speedtv.com/forums/viewthread/471026/#When:23:27:06Z</guid>
      <description>What engine oil is used in F1?  Any different than say in IRL?  Is it even close to the synthetic oil we purchase?  They probably use some kind of 1W&#45;1 ultra low viscosity/friction type, since it only has to last a few race weekends.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I wonder if something like that (a new additive) could explain an extra X number of added HP over the course of, oh…, say a Mercedes season.  That’s a good way to sandbag: start the season with tractor oil and slowly lean it out to gain an advantage.  I wonder what the oil pressure is in an F1 engine too?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;img src=&quot;http://cens.com/cens/supplier/17811/product/61460/BIG.jpg&quot;  width=&quot;350&quot; height=&quot;350&quot;  alt=&apos;BIG.jpg width=350 height=350 &apos; /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
(Growing up I’ve always been fascinated by how many motor oil commercials we’ve been exposed to.  Thousands and thousands and thousands of them.  How much do people spend on motor oil a year?  I have no idea how all the marketing pays for itself.  I’ve never once purchased anything but one brand.  …Which of course – now that I think about it – is exactly the reason why it’s so important to spend, to convert people early.)</description>
      <dc:date>2009-09-26T23:27:06-05:00</dc:date>
    </item>

    <item>
      <title>Was KERS really a green technology as it was used in Formula 1&#63;</title>
      <link>http://www.speedtv.com/forums/viewthread/476792/</link>
      <guid>http://www.speedtv.com/forums/viewthread/476792/#When:12:30:59Z</guid>
      <description>I know KERS is now a dead issue, but I was curious. Does anyone know if KERS really saved gas, considering the way the drivers used it? I would believe that it would give better gas mileage if the drivers were, say, on a straight section of track, and they pressed the KERS button while maintaining the same speed. But every time I saw it being used was for increased acceleration, like a turbocharger. When used in this way, with the engine already on maximum acceleration, it seems there wouldn&apos;t be any gas savings. If this is the case, KERS wasn&apos;t green or environmental. I wasn&apos;t against KERS and it added an interesting element to F1 racing, but it seemed requiring it so that it would be good for the environment when it may not have been would have been an unnecessary cost.</description>
      <dc:date>2009-11-17T12:30:59-05:00</dc:date>
    </item>

    <item>
      <title>gas tank</title>
      <link>http://www.speedtv.com/forums/viewthread/475820/</link>
      <guid>http://www.speedtv.com/forums/viewthread/475820/#When:09:15:31Z</guid>
      <description>With the new &quot;no refuelling&quot; rule, would it not make sense to have two fuel tanks (front and back) to shift weight as needed? Or do the regs rule that out?</description>
      <dc:date>2009-11-07T09:15:31-05:00</dc:date>
    </item>

    <item>
      <title>F1 Gears</title>
      <link>http://www.speedtv.com/forums/viewthread/476908/</link>
      <guid>http://www.speedtv.com/forums/viewthread/476908/#When:13:23:05Z</guid>
      <description>&lt;span style=&quot;font&#45;size:14px;&quot;&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:blue;&quot;&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
I have a gear question for tech folks. Given FIA guidelines for a max rpm of F1 engines, and given the power&#45;to&#45;weight ratio of the cars..with the aero surfaces for minimal wind resistance, I am looking at extreme top speed possibilities of a current F1 car, well beyond 200mph. Given that you can see the cars hold at a max rpm level on long straights, and that the cars stay around 200mph max, the FIA must have a final gear ratio rule in place...correct??&lt;span style=&quot;font&#45;size:14px;&quot;&gt;&lt;/span&gt;</description>
      <dc:date>2009-11-18T13:23:05-05:00</dc:date>
    </item>

    <item>
      <title>Self&#45;starters for F1 cars&#8230;NOT a good idea!</title>
      <link>http://www.speedtv.com/forums/viewthread/474386/</link>
      <guid>http://www.speedtv.com/forums/viewthread/474386/#When:15:46:44Z</guid>
      <description>During the Brazil practice session, our illustrious commentators were discussing the virtues of an F1 self&#45;starting car. Although, I wish my F1 heroes had the feature in previous championships, I&apos;m not in favor of it. I put the self&#45;starting feature in the same category as traction control. When an F1 driver is paid a multi&#45;million dollar salary, he should be able to keep the engine fire alive, even under adverse situations. I&apos;m afraid that there will be a tendency for the driver to be less careful about off track excursions just because he will be able to restart on demand. For this reason, self&#45;starters should be disallowed. It separates the champions from the rest of the field!</description>
      <dc:date>2009-10-23T15:46:44-05:00</dc:date>
    </item>

    
    </channel>
</rss>
