52 ms·

Exactly this. One of the bigger “fans” of them — Gordon Murray — is actually producing a road legal one. The T.50, which is Gordon Murray’s attempt to “revisi

by MrFoof 4y ago

Exactly this. One of the bigger “fans” of them — Gordon Murray — is actually producing a road legal one. The T.50, which is Gordon Murray’s attempt to “revisit” the McLaren F1 and do everything he couldn’t do (or hadn’t yet realized was possible) back in the 1990s: https://youtu.be/NT8PMXCMrsM https://youtu.be/NT8PMXCMrsM For those who aren’t aware, Harry Metcalfe was the founder of EVO magazine and had an outsized behind the scenes influence of Top Gear’s new format in the early 2000s. While Gordon sticks to some of his script, the two get VERY nerdy at points digging into all sorts of non-obvious minutiae and detail. 53 minutes is a lot, but by far it’s the best interview about the car by a large margin. Harry is also a very big EV and renewable electricity nerd, and loves digging into those topics with tons of research.

jackmott42 4y ago
the T.50 has a fan, and it is used for aerodynamic benefit, but it does so by helping speed up air through the under car diffuser, which allows them to use a more aggressive diffuser than would otherwise work. It all adds up to a modest downforce improvement and/or drag reduction. The McMurtry by comparison is more like the old F1 fan car, in that it is literally sucking itself down to the road, with tons of force, with a skirt and so on.
- MrFoof 4y ago
  Yep. As Gordon said about the Brabham, the McMurty is, “more of a blunt instrument.” When I watched it do the hill climb I was thinking of all the drivers they might’ve approached, and thought that if Mark Webber hadn’t hung it up a few years ago he would’ve, “noped out” of that conversation immediately given his history of flying for Mercedes in the beginning of his career.
  - rjvs 4y ago
    Plus that time when he flew his Red Bull at Valencia. Definitely the F1 driver with the most air time... so maybe the idea of a car that is actively pushing into the ground (instead of passively with wings/diffusers) would appeal.
gerdesj 4y ago
"is actually producing a road legal one" The one at Goodward FOS was cleared by DoT and is road legal. The driver announced it in an interview on TV.
- serf 4y ago
  that'd be lovely to drive behind -- you can see the dirt cloud that it's constantly sucking off the ground loom a few inches aft at all times during the Goodwood run. I presume the fans must be turned off on public roads? aside : how does one engineer a fan blade that's going to suck in rocks all day under normal use?
  - KennyBlanken 4y ago
    You don't. You design the intake or ducting with inertial separation. The inertia of any debris dense enough to cause damage can't make it to the fan. In the PT6 turboprop engine, the system forces air to go around a bend, and also opens a trap door. It's actuated by the pilot for landing/takeoff. https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/16206/how-do-intake-deflectors-work https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/16206/how-do-in...
  - Ratiofarmings 4y ago
    There is no need to run the fans at all or at least not nearly at full speed on public roads. So I would expect the dust cloud to not be there during operation on public roads. Also the output it filtered so there are no rocks or other debris thrown into the car behind. That was already the case on the prototype raced at Goodwood.
AtlasBarfed 4y ago
I know that the "spacex package tesla roadster 2.0" is a running Elon hype joke, but the discussed thrusters would be revolutionary in extreme car design. Fan cars can only suck downward, but thrust vectoring would be a whole different ballgame: it can push down, directly thrust, push counter to the g force in a tight curve, brake faster. Thrust vectoring could serve as a safety system to dynamically produce downforce in case a high speed car starts to go airborne, can counter spin-outs, etc.
- adolph 4y ago
  While not full thrust vectoring, more like unthrust vectoring, McLaren did this: One further famous example was the so-called “fiddle brake”, given its name much later by Ferrari technical boss Ross Brawn, but known within the team as “brake-steer,” that McLaren ran in the latter half of 1997 and into 1998. This simple concept allowed the rear brakes to operate on either the left or right side only, providing a clear benefit under acceleration in corners – and an instant lap time advantage. https://www.mclaren.com/racing/inside-the-mtc/mclaren-extra-pedal-3153421/ https://www.mclaren.com/racing/inside-the-mtc/mclaren-extra-...
  - metadat 4y ago
    iirc, F1 cars today all use brake steering.
    - KennyBlanken 4y ago
      As do road cars with stability control.
      - _carbyau_ 4y ago
        Along similar lines, there exists the e-diff. Basically a standard diff using brakes to shape power output. Basically a brake limited version of a limited slip diff.
    - mhio 4y ago
thrwyoilarticle 4y ago
In that video, Gordon mentions that the McLaren F1 already had fans for downforce. Paraphrasing: https://www.whichcar.com.au/news/mclaren-f1-secret-downforce-fans https://www.whichcar.com.au/news/mclaren-f1-secret-downforce...
caycep 4y ago
I think he was the one that developed the original concept for F1 racing in the '70s with Brabham, the BT46B car, I think? Supposedly to counter Lotus's lead in ground effect research on their car.

by MrFoof 4y ago

jackmott42 4y ago

the T.50 has a fan, and it is used for aerodynamic benefit, but it does so by helping speed up air through the under car diffuser, which allows them to use a more aggressive diffuser than would otherwise work. It all adds up to a modest downforce improvement and/or drag reduction. The McMurtry by comparison is more like the old F1 fan car, in that it is literally sucking itself down to the road, with tons of force, with a skirt and so on.

MrFoof 4y ago
Yep. As Gordon said about the Brabham, the McMurty is, “more of a blunt instrument.” When I watched it do the hill climb I was thinking of all the drivers they might’ve approached, and thought that if Mark Webber hadn’t hung it up a few years ago he would’ve, “noped out” of that conversation immediately given his history of flying for Mercedes in the beginning of his career.
- rjvs 4y ago
  Plus that time when he flew his Red Bull at Valencia. Definitely the F1 driver with the most air time... so maybe the idea of a car that is actively pushing into the ground (instead of passively with wings/diffusers) would appeal.

gerdesj 4y ago

"is actually producing a road legal one" The one at Goodward FOS was cleared by DoT and is road legal. The driver announced it in an interview on TV.

serf 4y ago
that'd be lovely to drive behind -- you can see the dirt cloud that it's constantly sucking off the ground loom a few inches aft at all times during the Goodwood run. I presume the fans must be turned off on public roads? aside : how does one engineer a fan blade that's going to suck in rocks all day under normal use?
- KennyBlanken 4y ago
  You don't. You design the intake or ducting with inertial separation. The inertia of any debris dense enough to cause damage can't make it to the fan. In the PT6 turboprop engine, the system forces air to go around a bend, and also opens a trap door. It's actuated by the pilot for landing/takeoff. https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/16206/how-do-intake-deflectors-work https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/16206/how-do-in...
- Ratiofarmings 4y ago
  There is no need to run the fans at all or at least not nearly at full speed on public roads. So I would expect the dust cloud to not be there during operation on public roads. Also the output it filtered so there are no rocks or other debris thrown into the car behind. That was already the case on the prototype raced at Goodwood.

AtlasBarfed 4y ago

I know that the "spacex package tesla roadster 2.0" is a running Elon hype joke, but the discussed thrusters would be revolutionary in extreme car design. Fan cars can only suck downward, but thrust vectoring would be a whole different ballgame: it can push down, directly thrust, push counter to the g force in a tight curve, brake faster. Thrust vectoring could serve as a safety system to dynamically produce downforce in case a high speed car starts to go airborne, can counter spin-outs, etc.

adolph 4y ago
While not full thrust vectoring, more like unthrust vectoring, McLaren did this: One further famous example was the so-called “fiddle brake”, given its name much later by Ferrari technical boss Ross Brawn, but known within the team as “brake-steer,” that McLaren ran in the latter half of 1997 and into 1998. This simple concept allowed the rear brakes to operate on either the left or right side only, providing a clear benefit under acceleration in corners – and an instant lap time advantage. https://www.mclaren.com/racing/inside-the-mtc/mclaren-extra-pedal-3153421/ https://www.mclaren.com/racing/inside-the-mtc/mclaren-extra-...
- metadat 4y ago
  iirc, F1 cars today all use brake steering.
  - KennyBlanken 4y ago
    As do road cars with stability control.
    - _carbyau_ 4y ago
      Along similar lines, there exists the e-diff. Basically a standard diff using brakes to shape power output. Basically a brake limited version of a limited slip diff.
  - mhio 4y ago

thrwyoilarticle 4y ago

In that video, Gordon mentions that the McLaren F1 already had fans for downforce. Paraphrasing: https://www.whichcar.com.au/news/mclaren-f1-secret-downforce-fans https://www.whichcar.com.au/news/mclaren-f1-secret-downforce...

caycep 4y ago

I think he was the one that developed the original concept for F1 racing in the '70s with Brabham, the BT46B car, I think? Supposedly to counter Lotus's lead in ground effect research on their car.