Jump to content


Photo

Moveable parts on the Brawn front wing?


  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

#1 rdebourbon

rdebourbon
  • Member

  • 1,353 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 17 April 2009 - 17:11

Not trying to start a war or anything, but I have been looking at the front wing of the Brawn, and have noticed that the "supports" for the frontmost endplate seem to change direction based on the loads the car is undergoing. It may be a setting that they change in the pits, I am not sure - but definately the Brawn supports are not always in the same position.

All of these pics were taken at China, have a look at the highlighted supports.

Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image

Advertisement

#2 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,805 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 17 April 2009 - 17:15

You reckon the purple things are illegal?

#3 Madras

Madras
  • Member

  • 3,911 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 17 April 2009 - 17:16

I cant see a difference, all the pictures are from different angles

#4 ButtonFan

ButtonFan
  • New Member

  • 11 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 17 April 2009 - 17:17

You will find that the don't move. If you look at head on picture the Support is Straight. The reason it doesn't look like that on other photos is just the angle the picture was taken.

#5 rdebourbon

rdebourbon
  • Member

  • 1,353 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 17 April 2009 - 17:19

Originally posted by ButtonFan
You will find that the don't move. If you look at head on picture the Support is Straight. The reason it doesn't look like that on other photos is just the angle the picture was taken.


If you look at the full pics, even when the angles of the car seem similar, the supports do seem to have different angles to them..

LOL - at first I thought I was going crazy, and may well be, but I've looked and looked again.. and they do look like they adjust.. at times you can see a "fold" in the support...

#6 Chubby_Deuce

Chubby_Deuce
  • Member

  • 5,951 posts
  • Joined: July 04

Posted 17 April 2009 - 17:19

Uh oh, is their engine cover transparent as well? :cry:

#7 Dragonfly

Dragonfly
  • Member

  • 4,496 posts
  • Joined: July 04

Posted 17 April 2009 - 17:20

Originally posted by ButtonFan
You will find that the don't move. If you look at head on picture the Support is Straight. The reason it doesn't look like that on other photos is just the angle the picture was taken.

And perhaps they are not perpendicular to the plane of the main wing, so different angles of the photos, different looking supports.

#8 rdebourbon

rdebourbon
  • Member

  • 1,353 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 17 April 2009 - 17:20

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
You reckon the purple things are illegal?


Not necessarily illegal - but perhaps adjustable to play with balance...

#9 Madras

Madras
  • Member

  • 3,911 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 17 April 2009 - 17:21

Originally posted by Chubby_Deuce
Uh oh, is their engine cover transparent as well? :cry:


:lol:

#10 wewantourdarbyback

wewantourdarbyback
  • Member

  • 6,358 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 17 April 2009 - 17:21

Originally posted by rdebourbon


If you look at the full pics, even when the angles of the car seem similar, the supports do seem to have different angles to them..

LOL - at first I thought I was going crazy, and may well be, but I've looked and looked again.. and they do look like they adjust.. at times you can see a "fold" in the support...

Looking at the nose sponsorship you've got pics from at least two different weekends there.

#11 rdebourbon

rdebourbon
  • Member

  • 1,353 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 17 April 2009 - 17:24

Originally posted by wewantourdarbyback

Looking at the nose sponsorship you've got pics from at least two different weekends there.


They're all from shanghai - f1live - some could be carried over, or before the MGI vinyl was applied. Definately all shanghai - made sure of that..

Like I said - I thought I was going crazy, so I've checked and re-checked...

#12 Madras

Madras
  • Member

  • 3,911 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 17 April 2009 - 17:25

Originally posted by rdebourbon



Like I said - I thought I was going crazy, so I've checked and re-checked...


And you are?

#13 rdebourbon

rdebourbon
  • Member

  • 1,353 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 17 April 2009 - 17:25

Perhaps it is an optical illusion - maybe I am just going nuts - but I would swear they adjust...

LOL

#14 ForeverF1

ForeverF1
  • RC Forum Host

  • 6,580 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 17 April 2009 - 17:26

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
You reckon the purple things are illegal?



Originally posted by rdebourbon


Not necessarily illegal - but perhaps adjustable to play with balance...


I heard the whoooshing sound of that too.... :lol:

#15 senna da silva

senna da silva
  • Member

  • 4,449 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 17 April 2009 - 17:30

Originally posted by rdebourbon
Perhaps it is an optical illusion - maybe I am just going nuts - but I would swear they adjust...

LOL


The supports are angled front to back. The top of the support is further forward on the car than the bottom of the support, therefore the optical illusion. ;)

#16 rdebourbon

rdebourbon
  • Member

  • 1,353 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 17 April 2009 - 17:31

*shrugs* - if they are vertical, then its one hell of an optical illusion..

I'll crawl back into my hole now :D

#17 Madras

Madras
  • Member

  • 3,911 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 17 April 2009 - 17:33

Originally posted by rdebourbon
*shrugs* - if they are vertical, then its one hell of an optical illusion..

I'll crawl back into my hole now :D


They all look the same to me.

#18 rdebourbon

rdebourbon
  • Member

  • 1,353 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 17 April 2009 - 17:35

Looking at it, and thinking about a front to back angled "vertical" support, I can see now how it would be an optical illusion...

Mental Note: get eyes checked.

:rotfl: :lol:

#19 Eastern

Eastern
  • Member

  • 1,596 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 17 April 2009 - 17:36

I don't think you need to crawl into your hole, rdebourbon - I also think that they move. It looks to me as if the lateral force on the wing as the car corners is pushing the entire wing sideways, and those attachments flex as they counteract that movement. Seen from left and right cornering, the supports change angle accordingly. I am sure they are simply doing their job of minimising sideways movement and are not "adjustable" in the sense of gaining an advantage.

But then I am not a technical guy, I am into F1 more for the zen experience.....

Advertisement

#20 ForeverF1

ForeverF1
  • RC Forum Host

  • 6,580 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 17 April 2009 - 17:41

This is an optical delusion

Posted Image

#21 MaxScelerate

MaxScelerate
  • Member

  • 4,335 posts
  • Joined: January 02

Posted 17 April 2009 - 17:53

Hell, who would have thought of that?? A wing support that flex at the camera.

- "Do you like my profile better this way, or that..? (ohhh, please make it so my big nose isn't too apparent...)"
:smoking:

#22 Mark Bennett

Mark Bennett
  • Member

  • 256 posts
  • Joined: September 03

Posted 17 April 2009 - 17:57

Originally posted by senna da silva


The supports are angled front to back. The top of the support is further forward on the car than the bottom of the support, therefore the optical illusion. ;)


Exactly. Vertical from the front. Angled from the side.

#23 MWM

MWM
  • Member

  • 426 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 17 April 2009 - 17:57

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
You reckon the purple things are illegal?

:lol:

#24 RoutariEnjinu

RoutariEnjinu
  • Member

  • 2,359 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 17 April 2009 - 17:57

LOL!

People are awesome :D

I will admit I saw one picture of the front wing and wondered why the supports seemed to be angled to one way asymmetrically. Then I realized they were actually sweeping back.

That's what you get when a 3D scene is compressed in to two dimensions though :blush:

A perfectly still, one eyed person might make the same mistake at a GP :D

Posted Image
This one is my favourite. Visual perception is really freaky when you look in to it. So much if it is inferred.

#25 rdebourbon

rdebourbon
  • Member

  • 1,353 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 17 April 2009 - 17:58

Originally posted by Mark Bennett


Exactly. Vertical from the front. Angled from the side.


Anyone got a pic from a decent angle to show that this is the case?

#26 djellison

djellison
  • Member

  • 1,726 posts
  • Joined: September 04

Posted 17 April 2009 - 18:00

Originally posted by Madras
I cant see a difference, all the pictures are from different angles


Quoted for truth.

#27 Gemini

Gemini
  • Member

  • 3,394 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 17 April 2009 - 18:18

Originally posted by ForeverF1
This is an optical delusion

Posted Image



please can someone explai how it works, I mean how it cheats my eyes/brain

or should I really gave up doing that acids any longer :lol:

#28 pRy

pRy
  • Member

  • 11,008 posts
  • Joined: March 99

Posted 17 April 2009 - 18:19

Originally posted by rdebourbon


Anyone got a pic from a decent angle to show that this is the case?


http://www.autosport...o.php/id/126219

#29 Slick

Slick
  • Administrator

  • 3,334 posts
  • Joined: March 00

Posted 17 April 2009 - 18:29

I looked at the pictures before reading the rest of the thread and it wasn't until I got to the last photo I realised what was going on, from straight on they would look like a vertical line | from the 90degs either side they would look like or / but any point inbetween and the 2D photo does make them look like they are at different angles.

#30 BrawnsBrain

BrawnsBrain
  • Member

  • 201 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 17 April 2009 - 19:45

Some good optical illusions on here :eek:

I am also still trying to get my head around Brawn being half a second faster than everybody else. :)

The circle optical illusion depends on where you focus your attention. I think you divert more brain power to just one point of focus at any one time. The rest of the scene is processed not from real life but from memory, and your memory get's it wrong which results in the rotating motion.

#31 Ivan

Ivan
  • Member

  • 6,646 posts
  • Joined: March 99

Posted 17 April 2009 - 20:40

Originally posted by ForeverF1
I heard the whoooshing sound of that too.... :lol:


:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

#32 Dmitriy_Guller

Dmitriy_Guller
  • Member

  • 4,106 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 17 April 2009 - 21:03

Originally posted by RoutariEnjinu

Posted Image
This one is my favourite. Visual perception is really freaky when you look in to it. So much if it is inferred.

Wow, I actually went to Paint to confirm it. It's really freaky, and unsettling in a way.

#33 RoutariEnjinu

RoutariEnjinu
  • Member

  • 2,359 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 17 April 2009 - 21:07

Originally posted by BrawnsBrain
Some good optical illusions on here :eek:

I am also still trying to get my head around Brawn being half a second faster than everybody else. :)

The circle optical illusion depends on where you focus your attention. I think you divert more brain power to just one point of focus at any one time. The rest of the scene is processed not from real life but from memory, and your memory get's it wrong which results in the rotating motion.


It's not from memory, it's in real time. A lot of perception that is not in your direct focus is assumed for you by your brain. The act of this pattern moving over your retina is assumed as rotation by your subconscious.

#34 RoutariEnjinu

RoutariEnjinu
  • Member

  • 2,359 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 17 April 2009 - 21:09

Originally posted by Dmitriy_Guller

Wow, I actually went to Paint to confirm it. It's really freaky, and unsettling in a way.


I did exactly the same thing, then accused MSPaint of dishonesty :lol:

It's awesome.

#35 wewantourdarbyback

wewantourdarbyback
  • Member

  • 6,358 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 17 April 2009 - 22:21

Originally posted by RoutariEnjinu


I did exactly the same thing, then accused MSPaint of dishonesty :lol:


Those bastards *shakes fist*

#36 BrawnsBrain

BrawnsBrain
  • Member

  • 201 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 17 April 2009 - 23:57

I plan to present this checker shadow graphic to a friend of mine at the weekend, betting him that the B square is the same shade as the A square.

I have a tenner coming my way.... :)

Astonishing stuff.

#37 HP

HP
  • Member

  • 14,381 posts
  • Joined: October 99

Posted 18 April 2009 - 00:41

Originally posted by pRy


http://www.autosport...o.php/id/126219

:up:

If just each and every doubt could be removed that easy..

#38 rye&ginger

rye&ginger
  • Member

  • 231 posts
  • Joined: June 05

Posted 18 April 2009 - 01:12

Originally posted by pRy


http://www.autosport...o.php/id/126219


Based on this one, I think its an illusion. The vertical bar is square when oberved from the front, but from the side it is not vertical. So when you view it from any angle but straight on, you will see some of the side profile of the support.


All the smart comments, not sure why because at first look at the pictures it does look a bit funny.