<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Anderson: FIA wrong on Double-Diffuser</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.formula1blog.com/2009/11/23/anderson-fia-wrong-on-double-diffuser/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.formula1blog.com/2009/11/23/anderson-fia-wrong-on-double-diffuser/</link>
	<description>Formula 1 Blog Journal of F1 Opinion Formula1blog.com is an online Journal of F1 opinion. The Aristarchus of F1. Auditors of F1 opinion.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 18:04:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Negative Camber</title>
		<link>http://www.formula1blog.com/2009/11/23/anderson-fia-wrong-on-double-diffuser/comment-page-1/#comment-64429</link>
		<dc:creator>Negative Camber</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 05:07:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.formula1blog.com/?p=10038#comment-64429</guid>
		<description>I agree PC.  It must be pointed out that it, as you say, is not an indictment of Brawn at all but of the FIA.  I think that was Gary&#039;s point as well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree PC.  It must be pointed out that it, as you say, is not an indictment of Brawn at all but of the FIA.  I think that was Gary&#8217;s point as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Negative Camber</title>
		<link>http://www.formula1blog.com/2009/11/23/anderson-fia-wrong-on-double-diffuser/comment-page-1/#comment-64428</link>
		<dc:creator>Negative Camber</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 05:06:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.formula1blog.com/?p=10038#comment-64428</guid>
		<description>That is always a good F1 rule of thumb.  :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That is always a good F1 rule of thumb.  :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Positive Caster</title>
		<link>http://www.formula1blog.com/2009/11/23/anderson-fia-wrong-on-double-diffuser/comment-page-1/#comment-64420</link>
		<dc:creator>Positive Caster</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 03:00:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.formula1blog.com/?p=10038#comment-64420</guid>
		<description>The FiA did not do their job properly. As has been stated other teams brought forward similar designs and were rebuffed. Its not an indictment of BrawnGP but of the governing body. Imagine Newey, McLaren, and Ferrari designing proper multi level diffuser designs and and think about what that would have done to level the playing field. That diffusers provide a significant advantage cannot be questioned. When they were declared legal the entirety of the field modified their existing designs, at significant cost during a period of economic crisis and without the benefit of on track testing, to accommodate the device. That wouldn&#039;t have happened if their benefit was questionable. And they forced it onto a less than optimal design while Brawn designed 3 cars and picked the best one. That&#039;s a heck of an advantage but the big dogs overtook Brawn from a performance perspective and made the championships somewhat interesting, at least for a while.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The FiA did not do their job properly. As has been stated other teams brought forward similar designs and were rebuffed. Its not an indictment of BrawnGP but of the governing body. Imagine Newey, McLaren, and Ferrari designing proper multi level diffuser designs and and think about what that would have done to level the playing field. That diffusers provide a significant advantage cannot be questioned. When they were declared legal the entirety of the field modified their existing designs, at significant cost during a period of economic crisis and without the benefit of on track testing, to accommodate the device. That wouldn&#8217;t have happened if their benefit was questionable. And they forced it onto a less than optimal design while Brawn designed 3 cars and picked the best one. That&#8217;s a heck of an advantage but the big dogs overtook Brawn from a performance perspective and made the championships somewhat interesting, at least for a while.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Benalf</title>
		<link>http://www.formula1blog.com/2009/11/23/anderson-fia-wrong-on-double-diffuser/comment-page-1/#comment-64404</link>
		<dc:creator>Benalf</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 21:43:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.formula1blog.com/?p=10038#comment-64404</guid>
		<description>From what I&#039;ve read on the regs, the DDD are illegal. period. It doesnt matter if only three or 9 teams came up with that idea. The DDDs are higher than allowed and so they should have re-sized them. In principle it seems a double mistake by the FIA; the came up with sloppy regs, and they favored the underdogs to break the pecking order and bring more exciment to the championship. In the end it was good but it was detrimental for most of the teams.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>From what I&#8217;ve read on the regs, the DDD are illegal. period. It doesnt matter if only three or 9 teams came up with that idea. The DDDs are higher than allowed and so they should have re-sized them. In principle it seems a double mistake by the FIA; the came up with sloppy regs, and they favored the underdogs to break the pecking order and bring more exciment to the championship. In the end it was good but it was detrimental for most of the teams.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: PeteK</title>
		<link>http://www.formula1blog.com/2009/11/23/anderson-fia-wrong-on-double-diffuser/comment-page-1/#comment-64388</link>
		<dc:creator>PeteK</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 16:20:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.formula1blog.com/?p=10038#comment-64388</guid>
		<description>It is with a very fond heart I will always remember the generally unlimited Can-AM racing car.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is with a very fond heart I will always remember the generally unlimited Can-AM racing car.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
