Franklin
3 Apr 2000, 22:39
Several weeks ago I read an article in Aviation Week about the Williams FXJ-2
fanjet engine. According to the article, the FXJ-2 weighs 85 pounds and
produces a thrust of 770 pounds. If a pair of these engines (one in the
nose and one in the tail) were installed in a car that looks like a 1937
Auto Union grand prix car it would be (with thrust vectoring) the most
highly maneuverable oval track car ever. It could be run for thousands
of racing miles with no maintenance other than checking the oil. It
could probably be built with a dry/empty weight of only 800 pounds and
still be as safe as existing Indy cars. Using the twin fanjet setup in a
1937 Auto Union grand prix style car, a driver in a turn could kick the
car sideways using vectored thrust then straighten out the nozzles so
that forward thrust can hold the car off the wall. Sort of like sprint
cars. Among other things, this could be a useful maneuver for a car that
has come into a turn too hot and needs to bleed off speed. You might
want gill-type inlets in the sides so that the engines can keep
breathing even if the car gets really sideways. (This is my proposal that Brock Yates discusses in his current Speedvision column as one of my responses to his Sandbox Formula concept.)
Another of my proposals that Yates mentions is the idea of using a Williams fanjet (for propulsion and thrust vectoring) in conjunction
with a 2,000+ horsepower gas turbine, four-wheel drive, steering fins (a
pair of pivoting vertical fins mounted at the center of gravity), and a
large tailfin with clamshell-type speed brake (not the little stub
tailfins they've been running). If a car starts to spin, especially at
200+ mph, a large tailfin mounted BEHIND the gearbox will prevent the
car from rotating more than about 90 degrees.
Even in current CART/F1/IRL cars, a substantial tailfin behind the gearcase would help safety a bunch,
particularly in those highspeed incidents on an oval where a car goes
through a turn and a broken oil or water line dumps fluid on the rear
tires. Not only would the tailfin help the car stay straight, if a car
did get substantially sideways the tailfin would act like a giant speed
brake.
The wing systems on CART/IRL/F1 cars are arguably stuck in 1969 Because that's about the time some
genius in the FIA decided wings should not be mounted directly to the
suspension. Since the springs don't have to support any downforce in this
set-up, when the wings are mounted directly to the suspension much
softer springs can be used.Also if the undertray were attached to the
suspension instead of the frame, the problems of maintaining ground
clearance to get consistent downforce would be largely eliminated.
In his column in the January/February issue of RACECAR, Paul Van
Valkenburgh discusses drag chutes for Indy cars. He points out that with
rocket-propelled chutes (similar to what ultralights are already using)
inflation times can be substantially reduced. However, Van Valkenburgh
leans toward an alternative to the drag chute using a spring-loaded inverted mushroom underneath the car that
would snag an arrestor cable layed out along the edge of the track. In the latest drag chute release
mechanisms, drivers don't even have to take their hand off the wheel.
All they have to do is push a button. And in some cases they don't even
have to do that. Systems have been developed where an external observer
(such as a crewman or track official) can release a chute by remote
control.
fanjet engine. According to the article, the FXJ-2 weighs 85 pounds and
produces a thrust of 770 pounds. If a pair of these engines (one in the
nose and one in the tail) were installed in a car that looks like a 1937
Auto Union grand prix car it would be (with thrust vectoring) the most
highly maneuverable oval track car ever. It could be run for thousands
of racing miles with no maintenance other than checking the oil. It
could probably be built with a dry/empty weight of only 800 pounds and
still be as safe as existing Indy cars. Using the twin fanjet setup in a
1937 Auto Union grand prix style car, a driver in a turn could kick the
car sideways using vectored thrust then straighten out the nozzles so
that forward thrust can hold the car off the wall. Sort of like sprint
cars. Among other things, this could be a useful maneuver for a car that
has come into a turn too hot and needs to bleed off speed. You might
want gill-type inlets in the sides so that the engines can keep
breathing even if the car gets really sideways. (This is my proposal that Brock Yates discusses in his current Speedvision column as one of my responses to his Sandbox Formula concept.)
Another of my proposals that Yates mentions is the idea of using a Williams fanjet (for propulsion and thrust vectoring) in conjunction
with a 2,000+ horsepower gas turbine, four-wheel drive, steering fins (a
pair of pivoting vertical fins mounted at the center of gravity), and a
large tailfin with clamshell-type speed brake (not the little stub
tailfins they've been running). If a car starts to spin, especially at
200+ mph, a large tailfin mounted BEHIND the gearbox will prevent the
car from rotating more than about 90 degrees.
Even in current CART/F1/IRL cars, a substantial tailfin behind the gearcase would help safety a bunch,
particularly in those highspeed incidents on an oval where a car goes
through a turn and a broken oil or water line dumps fluid on the rear
tires. Not only would the tailfin help the car stay straight, if a car
did get substantially sideways the tailfin would act like a giant speed
brake.
The wing systems on CART/IRL/F1 cars are arguably stuck in 1969 Because that's about the time some
genius in the FIA decided wings should not be mounted directly to the
suspension. Since the springs don't have to support any downforce in this
set-up, when the wings are mounted directly to the suspension much
softer springs can be used.Also if the undertray were attached to the
suspension instead of the frame, the problems of maintaining ground
clearance to get consistent downforce would be largely eliminated.
In his column in the January/February issue of RACECAR, Paul Van
Valkenburgh discusses drag chutes for Indy cars. He points out that with
rocket-propelled chutes (similar to what ultralights are already using)
inflation times can be substantially reduced. However, Van Valkenburgh
leans toward an alternative to the drag chute using a spring-loaded inverted mushroom underneath the car that
would snag an arrestor cable layed out along the edge of the track. In the latest drag chute release
mechanisms, drivers don't even have to take their hand off the wheel.
All they have to do is push a button. And in some cases they don't even
have to do that. Systems have been developed where an external observer
(such as a crewman or track official) can release a chute by remote
control.
