Falcon done?

[ChrisB]

It's being reported in this TF thread (http://66.223.17.243/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=024158) that the Falcon chassis company is done for now.

If so, then it means that IRL and CART are both down to being a "2 chassis series".

Or, more precisely, as historically happens, one chassis tends to dominate, both are a "1.25 chassis series".

It's getting to the point where both series should probably just spec one chassis (each) and solve a lot of problems. Really.

[Ziggy]

I think its against Lord Sagamore's rules to test. This is enough of a handicap in itself in racecar development.

Ziggy

[Railbird]

JMHO

The Falcon deal was suspect from day one.

New manufacturing techniques and questionable personel doomed it before it could be pushed through by the heavy hitters promoting it.


Kinda sucks from my point of view, between it's still-birth and the new Chevy being a flexi-flyer, American racing engineering takes another black eye.

Next thing you know Toyota will be showing Detroit how to build pushrod motors with carbs.

oh, that's right.

[pchall]

Originally posted by Railbird
JMHO

The Falcon deal was suspect from day one.

I've wondering about that, too. They never appeared to roll out a finished car and have apparently never turned a lap.

Their excuse about needing an order from a team with an engine deal is very suspect. If they really ever had a roller completed they should have been able to afford one or another of the available engine kits and hauled to Fontana or Phoenix. How could they even budget their program without including the expenses of putting a test mule on the track and even running the early season as a factory team?

[Hot Rod Otis]

I always figured that the Falcon was nothing more than a sham. Concocted just to keep Lola from getting the "coveted" 3rd IRL chassis constructor slot. The whole thing seemed fishy to me from day one. An experienced, solid, long time chassis constructor like Lola, rejected for a start up company like Falcon, with ZERO Indy chassis-building experience?

[mapguy]

That's a Falcon shame.

[lone_groover]

"They said it couldn't be done.

They said it couldn't be done in this country, they said it couldn't be done without an existing infrastructure, they said it couldn't be done in so little time, and they said it couldn't be done unless someone else was secretly backing it.

We did it anyway.

This friday, you get to see it: an Indycar designed and built in this country, using the most bad-ass high tech tools available anywhere in the world. That's not an idle boast, either- I'd put our capabilities up against any manufacturer or team in the world. Starting from scratch has let us look at every process and find the best possible way of doing it. There's nobody here clinging to something because "that's the way it's always been done." I can't describe to you what it's like to be a part of something where every link in the process is so seamless and smooth. It's fantastic....."

- - some yutz named Scott Bennett, November 19, 2002 :rofl:

[Ziggy]

I take it that is the guy from the other forum who was always defending the effort and posting the hallmarks of the design. Im sure he is going to switch sceen names and keep on bringing chestnuts to feed the Lemmings.

IRL, there leaders got visions

Ziggy

[Railbird]

My little Falcon tale:

I drink a little beer with a guy that has earned several Indy winner rings with his engineering skills. After he returned from a visit to the MK facility his thoughts were less than promising. Some of the new manufacturing techniques Bennet spoke of were not only outside the rules, they were scary in my friends opinion. "I wouldn't put anyone I liked in that thing".

Billet aluminum uprights instead of the more traditional units fabricated from 4130 steel were the main, but not the only, problem.

When I mentioned this in a thread at Track Forum Scott jumped me with fairly scornful questions about my friends qualifications to judge this groundbreaking device.

So I PMd him to let him know who was who and what was what.

He then edited his post and explained why some of the new techniques were used. Amazingly, most of the reasoning involved cost and time, not what is best or safest. He explained that all the F1 teams use aluminum uprights like theirs, well not exactly. They couldn't afford the tooling to pull that off so they rigged up another deal that would, or should in his mind, slip through some equivalency formula in the IRL rulebook.

While relating this tale to my buddy he just rolled his eyes and told me a little story about pressure from above to get this all American deal on the track.

I'd bore you with the details but

I then started recieving emails and PMs from folks I didn't know questioning my reasons for "trying to hurt" this deal.

As late as last week I received an email assuring me that a test was scheduled this week with none other than the fabulous RayGun behind the wheel.

I guess that's as good a way to prove a vehicle's durability as any.:rolleyes:

Then of course there was a problem with one of the main players in the design team having a less than stellar reputation with some along pit row.


Like I said, I was hoping it would work.

[Napoleon]

Originally posted by lone_groover
yutz named Scott Bennett, November 19, 2002 :rofl: [/B]

Could someone give me a little more to go on - exactly who is this guy and does he post somewhere (I think I can guess the answer based on Ziggy's and Railbirds post).

Interesting story 'Bird, but quite frankly I don't believe it. I would guess you have drank more then a little beer with that guy. :D

[JT265]

Pretty much gotta agree 'Bird. Using Ray-Gun would have the effect of knowing how many lateral G's it would take to make the entire thing into a grenade.

Unfortunately, the one goal that would be unattainable would be to actually determine the longevity of the unit as a whole.

[Ziggy]

Thanks for the update 'bird. Im sure the toadies were agast over the questions towards the Falcon. I read that thread last night (bored, I confess) Nothing like talking to someone who knows something and dealing with an "Internet Expert".

Ziggy "NASA Test Pilot"

[nrc]

Originally posted by Railbird
While relating this tale to my buddy he just rolled his eyes and told me a little story about pressure from above to get this all American deal on the track.


The implication here seems to be that certain people on the IRL side are still ready to sacrifice safety for expediency and PR purposes.

Can someone remind me again what the IRL's excuse was for blocking suppliers from selling chasis for use any other series was about? Something about making sure the IRL had stable, commited suppliers?

[Racewriter]

Originally posted by Railbird
My little Falcon tale:

I drink a little beer with a guy that has earned several Indy winner rings with his engineering skills. After he returned from a visit to the MK facility his thoughts were less than promising. Some of the new manufacturing techniques Bennet spoke of were not only outside the rules, they were scary in my friends opinion. "I wouldn't put anyone I liked in that thing".

Billet aluminum uprights instead of the more traditional units fabricated from 4130 steel were the main, but not the only, problem.

When I mentioned this in a thread at Track Forum Scott jumped me with fairly scornful questions about my friends qualifications to judge this groundbreaking device.

So I PMd him to let him know who was who and what was what.

He then edited his post and explained why some of the new techniques were used. Amazingly, most of the reasoning involved cost and time, not what is best or safest. He explained that all the F1 teams use aluminum uprights like theirs, well not exactly. They couldn't afford the tooling to pull that off so they rigged up another deal that would, or should in his mind, slip through some equivalency formula in the IRL rulebook.

While relating this tale to my buddy he just rolled his eyes and told me a little story about pressure from above to get this all American deal on the track.

I'd bore you with the details but

I then started recieving emails and PMs from folks I didn't know questioning my reasons for "trying to hurt" this deal.

As late as last week I received an email assuring me that a test was scheduled this week with none other than the fabulous RayGun behind the wheel.

I guess that's as good a way to prove a vehicle's durability as any.:rolleyes:

Then of course there was a problem with one of the main players in the design team having a less than stellar reputation with some along pit row.


Like I said, I was hoping it would work.

Hey Bird, I bounced the thread Indymotors started (and you and he both took quite a bit of abuse on) back up to the top, so those who jumped you and talked about the "fact" that the Falcon would fly at Homestead could apologize. It's been kinda quiet.

I was hoping it was a real deal too.

[Napoleon]

Originally posted by Racewriter
It's been kinda quiet.

:rofl:

What a surprise.

[JT265]

Nappy,

You just don't know what Falcon means :D