1970 carset preview--wings in GPL!

Try this link for a preview: http://www.bearchive.com/pinups/1970GPL.jpg Nik

Cool. Is there anyway to give the wings any more dimension/depth? Did the 1970 cars have vertical fins on the wing ends. ("Canard fins", if I recall correctly, somebody help me out here...) The cars look good to me.

I think "Canard fins" is correct but i dont think the 1970 cars had em. I know 69 didnt and in 71 some cars didnt have em either so im guessing that MAYBE cars like the gold leaf Lotus and other state-of-the-art cars did but others didnt. Tough call. Anyone have a definitive answer? Chris

Looks Great... Now to really test you, lets see the six wheeled monster (Wiliams??), that would be a weird one to drive

err...that would be the elf/tyrrell p34 which ran the '76 and '77 seasons with 2 sets of tiny 10" front wheels. Williams and March did practice 6 wheeled cars - 2 sets of rears - but they were outlawed before being allowed to race. -don

After a quick scan of Rainer Schlegelmilch's amazing book, "Grand Prix - Fascination Formula 1" it looks like Chris is right :-) As far as I can tell, no one had canards on their front wings in 1970, at least in the pictures I found here. There are good shots of the Brabham, Ferrari, BRM, March and Lotus and I can't detect a vertical fin in the bunch. 1971 is a different story however, as all the teams were experimenting with this new "black art" of aerodynamics. Tyrrell and BRM had designed wide, almost sports car like noses and March had a most bizarre oval shaped affair that looked like a surfboard mounted sideways and elevated above the car's nose. There is a wonderful photograph in the book of the start of the 1970 Spa race with Stewart on pole in a March Elf Ford, Rindt next to him in a Gold Leaf Lotus Ford and Chris Amon from outside the fron row in another March Ford with STP sponsorship. He has caught the exact moment the flag drops and all three cars are spinning their wheels. GPL racers will appreciate it.... BTW...get this book. It is a 400 page celebration of Grand Prix racing from 1969 to 1993 and is a must-have for any motorsports fan's library. There are thousands of photographs, all in color and of the highest quality. Schlegelmilch has another book out which may be of even greater interest to the GPL fan, "Portraits of the 60's - Formula 1". This book is all black and white, so it's not much use to budding designers of GPL carsets, but it is a good close look at the cars and drivers we've come to know and love by somone with an amazing sensitivity for the sport. -don

They never raced in F1, but you can see the 6-wheel Williams racing in hillclimb events to this day. In any case, the Williams had four rears whereas the Tyrrell had four fronts. Cheers! John

Adriano Cimarosti's _The Complete History of Grand Prix Motor Racing_ (1990, [1986]), has a clear picture of Andretti in the (4WD) Lotus 63 at the Nurburgring, 1969 (p. 253). The read wing is "canarded," though the front is not. As well, the rear wing was fitted to the chassis rather than to the uprights, due to new regs. after the debacle in Spain. The Lotus 63 apparently debuted at France. During the year, McLaren, and Ferrari and (according to Cimarosti), Cosworth were also working on 4WD cars. Cimarosti quotes at some length the journalist Paul Frere, who considered the advantages and disadvantages of 4WD for F1 in _Automobile Year_ at the end of 1969. Frere concluded that 4WD's advantages outweighed its disadvantages. Indeed, glancing back a few pages (to p. 249), a shot of the start of the 1968 Italian GP shows Surtees' Honda RA301 with a modestly canarded rear wing. The wing is the old-style high wing, mounted on the rear suspension arms. By 1970, Matra, Brabham, Tyrrell, BRM, Lotus and the others seems to have moved to canards, many using them on the front wings as well. ciao, David >>>Did the >>>1970 cars have vertical fins on the wing ends? ("Canard fins", if I recall >>>correctly, somebody help me out here...) >>I think "Canard fins" is correct but i dont think the 1970 cars had em. I >>know >>69 didnt and in 71 some cars didnt have em either so im guessing that MAYBE >>cars like the gold leaf Lotus and other state-of-the-art cars did but others >>didnt. Tough call. Anyone have a definitive answer? >>Chris >After a quick scan of Rainer Schlegelmilch's amazing book, "Grand Prix - >Fascination Formula 1" it looks like Chris is right :-) As far as I can tell, >no one had canards on their front wings in 1970, at least in the pictures I >found here. There are good shots of the Brabham, Ferrari, BRM, March and Lotus >and I can't detect a vertical fin in the bunch. 1971 is a different story >however, as all the teams were experimenting with this new "black art" of >aerodynamics. Tyrrell and BRM had designed wide, almost sports car like noses >and March had a most bizarre oval shaped affair that looked like a surfboard >mounted sideways and elevated above the car's nose. >There is a wonderful photograph in the book of the start of the 1970 Spa race >with Stewart on pole in a March Elf Ford, Rindt next to him in a Gold Leaf >Lotus Ford and Chris Amon from outside the fron row in another March Ford with >STP sponsorship. He has caught the exact moment the flag drops and all three >cars are spinning their wheels. GPL racers will appreciate it.... >BTW...get this book. It is a 400 page celebration of Grand Prix racing from >1969 to 1993 and is a must-have for any motorsports fan's library. There are >thousands of photographs, all in color and of the highest quality. >Schlegelmilch has another book out which may be of even greater interest to the >GPL fan, "Portraits of the 60's - Formula 1". This book is all black and white, >so it's not much use to budding designers of GPL carsets, but it is a good >close look at the cars and drivers we've come to know and love by somone with >an amazing sensitivity for the sport. >-don

>Try this link for a preview: >http://www.bearchive.com/pinups/1970GPL.jpg Looks cool. Is it just s graphical enhancement, or do they actually affect downforce? Joe

A "canard" arrangement is associated with two sets of aerofoils, a forward set and a rearward set. In a canard configuration the SMALLER of the two sets is at the front, with the LARGER of the sets at the rear. This is opposite to what is/was the conventional arrangement for aeroplanes, where the horizontal tail is/was smaller than the main wing. So what a canard arrangement does is to place the tail (smaller aerofoil) foremost. In aircraft this arrangement assists in the reduction of stalling.

Quoted text (77 lines)

> Adriano Cimarosti's _The Complete History of Grand Prix Motor Racing_ (1990, > [1986]), has a clear picture of Andretti in the (4WD) Lotus 63 at the > Nurburgring, 1969 (p. 253). The read wing is "canarded," though the front > is not. As well, the rear wing was fitted to the chassis rather than to the > uprights, due to new regs. after the debacle in Spain. The Lotus 63 > apparently debuted at France. During the year, McLaren, and Ferrari and > (according to Cimarosti), Cosworth were also working on 4WD cars. Cimarosti > quotes at some length the journalist Paul Frere, who considered the > advantages and disadvantages of 4WD for F1 in _Automobile Year_ at the end > of 1969. Frere concluded that 4WD's advantages outweighed its > disadvantages. > Indeed, glancing back a few pages (to p. 249), a shot of the start of the > 1968 Italian GP shows Surtees' Honda RA301 with a modestly canarded rear > wing. The wing is the old-style high wing, mounted on the rear suspension > arms. > By 1970, Matra, Brabham, Tyrrell, BRM, Lotus and the others seems to have > moved to canards, many using them on the front wings as well. > ciao, > David > >>>Did the > >>>1970 cars have vertical fins on the wing ends? ("Canard fins", if I > recall > >>>correctly, somebody help me out here...) > >>I think "Canard fins" is correct but i dont think the 1970 cars had em. I > >>know > >>69 didnt and in 71 some cars didnt have em either so im guessing that > MAYBE > >>cars like the gold leaf Lotus and other state-of-the-art cars did but > others > >>didnt. Tough call. Anyone have a definitive answer? > >>Chris > >After a quick scan of Rainer Schlegelmilch's amazing book, "Grand Prix - > >Fascination Formula 1" it looks like Chris is right :-) As far as I can > tell, > >no one had canards on their front wings in 1970, at least in the pictures I > >found here. There are good shots of the Brabham, Ferrari, BRM, March and > Lotus > >and I can't detect a vertical fin in the bunch. 1971 is a different story > >however, as all the teams were experimenting with this new "black art" of > >aerodynamics. Tyrrell and BRM had designed wide, almost sports car like > noses > >and March had a most bizarre oval shaped affair that looked like a > surfboard > >mounted sideways and elevated above the car's nose. > >There is a wonderful photograph in the book of the start of the 1970 Spa > race > >with Stewart on pole in a March Elf Ford, Rindt next to him in a Gold Leaf > >Lotus Ford and Chris Amon from outside the fron row in another March Ford > with > >STP sponsorship. He has caught the exact moment the flag drops and all > three > >cars are spinning their wheels. GPL racers will appreciate it.... > >BTW...get this book. It is a 400 page celebration of Grand Prix racing from > >1969 to 1993 and is a must-have for any motorsports fan's library. There > are > >thousands of photographs, all in color and of the highest quality. > >Schlegelmilch has another book out which may be of even greater interest to > the > >GPL fan, "Portraits of the 60's - Formula 1". This book is all black and > white, > >so it's not much use to budding designers of GPL carsets, but it is a good > >close look at the cars and drivers we've come to know and love by somone > with > >an amazing sensitivity for the sport. > >-don

-- Regards, Bruce. ---------- HMRC Web site address is:- http://www2.tpg.com.au/users/brucek/hmrc/index.htm ----------

My apologies--I had accepted the incorrect usage of the term "canard" offered earlier in the thread about vertical end-plates. My post is concerned with those. Bruce's definition of what exactly a canard arrangement is (with respect to vehicle aerodynamics), is of course entirely correct. In shame, then, I will end by offering another use of the term "canard," from my _Oxford English Dictionary_ (which handily predates the modern definition, by the way), to wit: "to make a harsh sound, like the cry of a duck, on a wind instrument" example, from _Fraser's Magazine_ XXXiii, 399 (1842): "a ragged straveling, canarding on a clarinet" sssSSSQQQQEEETTTCCHHHHH H H H H ! ! ! quack, DK PS Both terms, by the way, derive from the duck usage--the aeroplane which uses a canard arrangement looks a bit more like a duck in the air than one which does not. >A "canard" arrangement is associated with two sets of aerofoils, a >forward set and a rearward set. In a canard configuration the SMALLER >of the two sets is at the front, with the LARGER of the sets at the >rear.

I believe the vertical end plate is referred to as a "fence." > My apologies--I had accepted the incorrect usage of the term "canard" > offered earlier in the thread about vertical end-plates. -- Marc J. Nelson SimRacing Online - http://www.simracing.com * No animals were harmed in the making of this e-mail *

Yeah, in typical knee-jerk FIA reactions. Bring back the slicks! Av/Mikey >>Looks Great... Now to really test you, lets see the six wheeled >>monster (Wiliams??), that would be a weird one to drive >err...that would be the elf/tyrrell p34 which ran the '76 and '77 seasons with >2 sets of tiny 10" front wheels. Williams and March did practice 6 wheeled cars >- 2 sets of rears - but they were outlawed before being allowed to race. >-don

Hey. I'm a Mechanical Engineer so I'm treading on thin ice venturing into the world of AEs, so cut me a little slack <g>. Here's a couple of NASA's definitions: canard Pertaining to an aerodynamic vehicle in which horizontal surfaces used for trim and control are forward of the main lifting surface; the horizontal trim and control surfaces in such an arrangement. fin A fixed or adjustable airfoil or vane attached longitudinally to an aircraft, rocket, or similar body to provide a stabilizing effect. So, agreed, "nose wings" are indeed canard surfaces, and I believe that the vertical surfaces that cap those carnards might be referred to as "canard fins". Guess we need an AE to make the call. :-)

Sorry for the multiple duplicate posts! My ISP's news server is fouled up AGAIN! FYI it's BellSouth.net.

Frankly id like to see them allow innovation in F1. I know they tried to level the playing field but come on. All the cars are practically the same. I say let the car designers do more like they did with the Tyrell P34 putting six wheels on the car. Those were the real glory days of racing (before all the restrictions is what im referring to....pretty much 82 on back).

I think the term can apply to surfaces that are used for aerodynamic "trim and control" without being controllable as you suggest. My recollection, though vague, is that "canard" and "canard fins" were the terms used in the sport at the time.

...except that the wings on cars are not used for control...or were 1970 wings adjustable? In any case, the term canard seems out of context here. I guess you caould say they are for trim, however "front wings" seems fine to me. Ben

Quoted text (23 lines)

>>A "canard" arrangement is associated with two sets of aerofoils, a >>forward set and a rearward set. In a canard configuration the SMALLER >>of the two sets is at the front, with the LARGER of the sets at the >>rear. >Hey. I'm a Mechanical Engineer so I'm treading on thin ice venturing into >the world of AEs, so cut me a little slack <g>. >Here's a couple of NASA's definitions: >canard >Pertaining to an aerodynamic vehicle in which horizontal surfaces used for >trim and control are forward of the main lifting surface; the horizontal >trim and control surfaces in such an arrangement. >fin >A fixed or adjustable airfoil or vane attached longitudinally to an >aircraft, rocket, or similar body to provide a stabilizing effect. >So, agreed, "nose wings" are indeed canard surfaces, and I believe that the >vertical surfaces that cap those carnards might be referred to as "canard >fins". Guess we need an AE to make the call. :-)

Pulled out an old 1973 Colin Campbell book of mine entitled, "Design of Racing Sports Cars" . Thought I'd share a little of it relating to car aerodynamics, for you racing trivia buffs out there: "Apart from the use of horizontal stabilizing fins on land speed record cars, the first attempt to apply aerofoils set a negative angle of incidence...was seen at the Nurburgring in 1956 when Michael May used one in practice for the 1000 km Sports Car Race on a Porsche Spyder. The scrutineers rejected the device as dangerous and the next appearance of an aerofoil in an event of any significance was in the Can-Am Series [ what a great follow-on series for GPL!] of sports car races in 1966 when Jim Hall fitted a large aerofoil high above the rear end of the Chaparrel [sic Chaparral] Type 2E. As related by Hal Sharp, a member of the Chaparrel team, the need for an aerofoil grew out of the instability of the car at its top speed, but the use of the aerofoil to improve cornering power could have been in Jim Hall's mind from the start. The adjustable aerofoil which appeared in 1967 on the Type 2F was certainly used with a much higher angle of negative incidence when cornering than when running at high speed...The angle of incidence could be controlled by means of a third pedal in the***pit...Mike Spence actually tried reducing the angle of incidence in the middle of the Mulsanne Corner at Le Mans. The resulting slide convinced him that the aerofoil really did work."

LOL! Too funny, Phil!

LOL again, Phil. You're right. We propeller heads do get a little absurd sometimes!

The cars certainly look very impressive. Even the car shapes were changed, like the wedge-shaped Lotus 72 (side-boxes still missing, though). But I wonder why the wings are all in white? Some front wings look asymmetric (ha, again!?) to me. Somehow, this looks as if the wings were fitted into screenshots rather than being part of the car ... >:-> ... screenshots from other angles could remove these doubts. Another issue, independent from this car set: Why are the helmet colors in GPL so strange? White helmets look grey etc, red is dark, etc. -- _____ /_______\ .\\ a t t h e a d I XT /~~~~ I 500\_____ 1977' Yamaha XT.Rex 500 Enduro \____/\__I_I http://matthead.home.pages.de/

Called "canards" because of the way ducks use their heads as part of the control system when they're flying. Very popular design in small guided missiles and very high performance aircraft. Andy

Quoted text (17 lines)

> >A "canard" arrangement is associated with two sets of aerofoils, a > >forward set and a rearward set. In a canard configuration the SMALLER > >of the two sets is at the front, with the LARGER of the sets at the > >rear. > >This is opposite to what is/was the conventional arrangement for > >aeroplanes, where the horizontal tail is/was smaller than the main > wing. > >So what a canard arrangement does is to place the tail (smaller > >aerofoil) foremost. > >In aircraft this arrangement assists in the reduction of stalling. > Like we didn't know that already. > Phil / |o)

Quoted text (7 lines)

>A "canard" arrangement is associated with two sets of aerofoils, a >forward set and a rearward set. In a canard configuration the SMALLER >of the two sets is at the front, with the LARGER of the sets at the >rear. >This is opposite to what is/was the conventional arrangement for >aeroplanes, where the horizontal tail is/was smaller than the main

wing. >So what a canard arrangement does is to place the tail (smaller >aerofoil) foremost. >In aircraft this arrangement assists in the reduction of stalling. Like we didn't know that already. Phil / |o)

>A fixed or adjustable airfoil or vane attached longitudinally to an >aircraft, rocket, or similar body to provide a stabilizing effect. >So, agreed, "nose wings" are indeed canard surfaces, and I believe that the >vertical surfaces that cap those carnards might be referred to as "canard >fins". Guess we need an AE to make the call. :-) I canardly stand this any longer....|o) Phil

Quit it Jack....don't egg me on. |o) -- #33 Zandvoort 1.28.56 >LOL again, Phil. You're right. We propeller heads do get a little absurd >sometimes!

What idiocy. Why would you say something so stupid and negative? Obviously you've no experience modifying .3DO files or building car sets in GPL. As far as your "doubts" are concerned, I haven't time to pacify them. Talk to Paul Hoad if you want. He's quite aware that the wings are there. As far as the wing color, do you have any conception as to how the AI cars are grouped in GPL? Maybe you ought to learn something about that before opening your mouth. 7 car types. 7 car shapes. 7 wing sets. No more. 19 GPL cars. 1970 featured 9 constructors and more than 30 drivers. Do you see any conflicts there? 7 does not equal 19, Little Johnny. Try painting 19 cars and give them all different wings, bub. Ain't possible. Would you like to see red wings on a blue car? Moron. As far as side radiators go, again, unlikely, give the the cumbersome procedure used in editing car shape 3dos. You know, more cracks like that, and this set *won't* get released publically. It's punks like yourself that really discourage innovators from sharing. Totally unappreciative. Have a nice day, ass.

Nicky, would you use an H-Bomb to kill a mesquito ?

Quoted text (40 lines)

>>(side-boxes still missing, though). >>But I wonder why the wings are all in white? >>Some front wings look asymmetric (ha, again!?) to me. >>Somehow, this looks as if the wings were fitted into screenshots >>rather than being part of the car ... >:-> ... screenshots from >>other angles could remove these doubts. >What idiocy. Why would you say something so stupid and negative? >Obviously you've no experience modifying .3DO files or building car >sets in GPL. >As far as your "doubts" are concerned, I haven't time to pacify them. >Talk to Paul Hoad if you want. He's quite aware that the wings are >there. >As far as the wing color, do you have any conception as to how the AI >cars are grouped in GPL? Maybe you ought to learn something about >that before opening your mouth. >7 car types. 7 car shapes. 7 wing sets. No more. 19 GPL cars. 1970 >featured 9 constructors and more than 30 drivers. Do you see any >conflicts there? 7 does not equal 19, Little Johnny. Try painting 19 >cars and give them all different wings, bub. Ain't possible. Would >you like to see red wings on a blue car? >Moron. >As far as side radiators go, again, unlikely, give the the cumbersome >procedure used in editing car shape 3dos. >You know, more cracks like that, and this set *won't* get released >publically. >It's punks like yourself that really discourage innovators from >sharing. Totally unappreciative. >Have a nice day, ass.

No kidding! The guy's post could have been completely innocent, though not as tactful as it might have been. I don't think he was being intentionally malicious! And I thought I overreacted from time to time!

While the poster you were responding to did appear ignorant about the current state of car editing, I dont think it deserved the fairly *** response you gave it. However, I didnt get the entire post you were responding to, so maybe I'm not getting the whole picture... Brian Short

Quoted text (40 lines)

> >(side-boxes still missing, though). > >But I wonder why the wings are all in white? > >Some front wings look asymmetric (ha, again!?) to me. > >Somehow, this looks as if the wings were fitted into screenshots > >rather than being part of the car ... >:-> ... screenshots from > >other angles could remove these doubts. > What idiocy. Why would you say something so stupid and negative? > Obviously you've no experience modifying .3DO files or building car > sets in GPL. > As far as your "doubts" are concerned, I haven't time to pacify them. > Talk to Paul Hoad if you want. He's quite aware that the wings are > there. > As far as the wing color, do you have any conception as to how the AI > cars are grouped in GPL? Maybe you ought to learn something about > that before opening your mouth. > 7 car types. 7 car shapes. 7 wing sets. No more. 19 GPL cars. 1970 > featured 9 constructors and more than 30 drivers. Do you see any > conflicts there? 7 does not equal 19, Little Johnny. Try painting 19 > cars and give them all different wings, bub. Ain't possible. Would > you like to see red wings on a blue car? > Moron. > As far as side radiators go, again, unlikely, give the the cumbersome > procedure used in editing car shape 3dos. > You know, more cracks like that, and this set *won't* get released > publically. > It's punks like yourself that really discourage innovators from > sharing. Totally unappreciative. > Have a nice day, ass.

I suggest you sell it - for money, or whatever kind of appreciation gods deserve. -- _____ /_______\ .\\ a t t h e a d I XT /~~~~ I 500\_____ 1977' Yamaha XT.Rex 500 Enduro \____/\__I_I http://matthead.home.pages.de/