The Delta Wing Project

not sure about the look ugly ... thing

i not watched Indy in years so don't know if this is a good/bad idea.

Worst racecar design I've ever seen. Coming from someone who worked in Champ Car, that thing is horrible

When you do things the right way, you put yourself in a position for good things to happen. Conceptually speaking, I think IRL on are on the right track given their standing in the world of motorsports, and I'm particularly intrigued by the new global engine concept. The idea has been floating around for awhile, but the structuring of the IRL makes it easier for them to transition to new engine technologies. They simply issue a request for proposal and interested manufacturers submit bids.

What if Indy decide to adopt an 81mm 1000cc I-4 engine? It would open up lots of doors for MotoGP and IndyCar b/c it would probably double the list of possible engine manufacturers for both series. Privateers in MotoGP would no longer have trouble finding engine suppliers. The engines would need to be different for turbo and NA, but the conversion would be easier than designing an entirely new engine.

Doubt it will happen b/c the manufacturers prefer keeping things in the 1.5L+ range.

However, racing is about passion, and these concepts are a disappointment. It's like being told that engineers are working on the world's greatest woman they unveil something that looks like Rosie O'Donnell. Your vanity and your instincts will never permit you to accept their creation as anything other than ordinary. It's even more disappointing after Honda teased us with their fantastic 2012 concept vehicle.

I appreciate the 2012 car as a conceptual pursuit, but IRL have done themselves a huge disservice by overhyping the latest creations. Marketing is about racing. Racing is about passion. The new 2012 concepts are nearly entirely about engineering (form follows function). Does anyone see a problem?

IRL really should have done a better job of managing expectations. Perhaps they had no idea what they were going to get when they made their engineering demands?

And with the final swoop, American Open Wheel Racing is dead.

Number 23 (second image) in the article of Swifts designs are better ideas.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/81362

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mr. Shupe @ Feb 11 2010, 06:07 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Actually, the story is Brian Barnhardt was informed of the ideas and proposed specs behind Delta Wing, cut and pasted them into a request for proposal, then sent RFPs to other manufacturers. The powerful teams were apparently really behind Delta Wing, and ICS management let the cat out of the bag so other makers could steal its thunder.

Bowlby stated his desire was to see the fuel-flow-limited concept, not the Delta Wing as a spec chassis. Although the series might require one for a few seasons as the economies of the world and the sport improve.

I think you are right about the passion aspect. If fans cannot accept this, then the relevance and innovation won't matter one bit.

Yeah, I heard ICS screwed Delta Wing, but I was simply trying to refer to the act of issue an RFP. They don't use RFPs in F1 or MotoGP, for instance. The existing manufacturers decide what they want, and it is the job of the commercial rights company (Dorna, FOM) to make deals with the participating manufacturers.

The more I read about the Delta Wing the more I like it (aside from the looks of course). I certainly like the idea of fuel-flow-limited engine design, drastically reduced costs and engine service intervals. I like low drag as well. However, I'm unconvinced by ICS' positioning of Indy Car in the global marketplace. The Delta Wing Concept is clearly designed to benefit small racing outfits so why is ICS posturing like they can't wait to add a bunch of "blue chip" engine manufacturers?

I love Indy Car racing especially seeing as an Aussie is at or near the front!!!

The Delta Wing is ...... unfortunate looking and I bet will have very poor turn in on a street circuit with such a narrow front.

The Swift looks the goods to me. Futuristic but still attached to the roots. Is it different enough though to be called innovative? Perhaps.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mr. Shupe @ Feb 11 2010, 06:07 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Actually, the story is Brian Barnhardt was informed of the ideas and proposed specs behind Delta Wing, cut and pasted them into a request for proposal, then sent RFPs to other manufacturers. The powerful teams were apparently really behind Delta Wing, and ICS management let the cat out of the bag so other makers could steal its thunder.

Bowlby stated his desire was to see the fuel-flow-limited concept, not the Delta Wing as a spec chassis. Although the series might require one for a few seasons as the economies of the world and the sport improve.

I think you are right about the passion aspect. If fans cannot accept this, then the relevance and innovation won't matter one bit.

I forgot to mention how perfect the fuel-flow-limited engine concept would be for MotoGP. I have long dreamed of finding a way to equalize many different engine configurations. Fuel-flow-limitations are about as close as we are going to get. It puts too much emphasis on friction and pressure, but that is a minor gripe.

Anyway, it's hard for me to get my hopes up about international racing. The FIA have discussed fuel-flow-limiting in F1 for several years now, but even if they adopt it, the manufacturers will still own the sport lock-stock-and-barrel. Same thing is true for MotoGP. Besides finding ways to preserve engine creativity, I've always hoped that racing could be a commercially viable engineering activity that would function as an entertainment property like any other sport. Currently, racing is trying to serve two masters. The commercial rights people want it as an entertainment property. The manufacturers want racing to exist as an advertising campaign. Those two objectives have been in a very tenuous relationship for the last 3 decades and it is killing racing.

Racing once made manufacturers like Scuderia Ferrari and Porsche. I really wonder if ICS and Bowlby really understand what they have. It seems like everyone in racing automatically turns to the manufacturers every time they come up with new technical regulations to see if they approve. Indy Car already functions without the manufacturers so I have no idea why they would take this fantastic concept and then let the manufacturers mess with it.

It's almost like Bowlby is fighting to grasp the concept himself. On one hand he's says the fuel-flow-limiting will help with the establishment of a global racing engine. On the other hand, he implies the global racing engine will not be necessary b/c fuel-flow-limiting allows for many different engine configurations to be equal. Bowlby mentions how wonderfully efficient and inexpensive the car is and he hopes the manufacturers will see the production relevance.

I also find one other major problem in Bowlby's interpretation of modern race cars. He says the cars need to have better drag coefficients and less horsepower b/c human kind must address the issue of scarcity. Even though we allocate resources based upon scarcity, we are always trying to eliminate scarcity. We created the oil industry to eliminate energy scarity. We are pursuing solar and wind energy to eliminate oil scarcity. We are making algae fuels to eliminate energy scarcity and clean-air scarcity. We have desalinization facilities to eliminate fresh water scarcity. We created farms to eliminate food scarcity. We build skyscrapers to eliminate work-space scarcity. Preparing for scarcity is smart, but its not the wave of the future. The future is finding the next available abundant resource.

Production cars need to prepare humanity for short term scarcity, but Indy Car should be free to pursue whatever formula they find most interesting and most valuable to the fans.

Okay, they are trying to open-source Indy Car. It all makes sense now. Open sourcing is actually very common in the automotive industry, they've been open sourcing certain technologies amongst themselves since the birth of the auto industry.

Open sourcing is a pretty fascinating concept. It works really well for cost suppression b/c no one wants to give away their highest technology; the Japanese, Germans, and Americans particularly don't want their R&D data falling into the hands of the Chinese. However, open-sourcing doesn't necessarily guarantee close racing or low-prices. Perhaps the schematics and materials will be published, but that doesn't guarantee that other teams will be able to duplicate a product.

What is carbon-fiber blend C108.7? Well I made it up, but would I have to reveal the formula and the manufacturing process? or just the name of the material?

How do you build titanium pistons with a crown thickness of 2mm and then run them at 15,000rpm for 500 miles? Would a team be required to divulge the manufacturing technique to strengthen titanium.

Open source is awesome, but it can get really messy. I hope they go for it.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mr. Shupe @ Feb 13 2010, 10:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Where did you get that "open-sourcing" is the goal? I didn't see that (not saying you're wrong).

LINK

I was googling the Delta Wing project and I found this article. I don't normally read Speed, but they've got a lot of stuff about the new Indy Car.

It's a pretty interesting situation, it sounds like nearly everyone has different ideas for how open sourcing will work. It also sounds like Delta Wing and the team owners are proceeding with indifference towards the ICS. They all want open-sourcing of some kind. How much creativity and change will be allowed during the course of the season will probably be the sticking point. The team owners claim that all designs will have to be approved by the league so they can control costs.