i have a theory about the rc212v small seat-fairing

http://www.nickyhayden.com//upload_images/408f51d78fe31680e1251c79eb0c3ce9.jpg

the consensus is that there isnt alot you can do aerodynamically to
clean up a modern motorcycle. the whole package is just a mess, the
back-end behind the rider in particular - unless you create a massive
teardrop fairing, which i'm sure MOTOGP rules prohibit ;-)

however, my theory is that honda have created that small seat fairing
not so much to improve the aerodynamic drag of their bike, but to
reduce the size of the aerodynamic pocket (i.e. the draft) that
following riders can take advantage of.

there was some testing done by the US cycling team back in the
early/mid '90s with our olympic cyclists...all around reducing drag.
as you can imagine, with 1-person as the powersource (typically about
0.33 horsepower in a steady-state for extended durations), even the
smallest bit of drag improvement means alot @ the top level of sport.

well, they did some testing around the seat-post and between the riders
legs and just behind the saddle just to see how the air was behaving in
that very turbulent area (legs churning up the air and whatnot). they
found that you couldnt to anything to reduce drag in that area, but if
a rider used a thin aerodynamic seatpost, they'd reduce the size of the
draft that someone behind could use.

so methinks honda's doing something similar on the rc212v. that's my
theory, at least.

w

 

Where did you hear that?

 

Interesting, but I think you'll find that it's weapon-like tip is in
fact designed to dissuade a following team-mate from giving a t-bone up
the arse.

 

i heard it directly from jim martin's mouth, former coach/guru w/ Team
EDS. he and Team EDS and some of the national team came up here to
motown to do some time in the windtunnel. i had the good fortune of
having a close friend that did the testing in the GM windtunnel, so i
had a "paddock pass" for much of the testing. neat stuff!

w

 

I'll bet it was.

The only time I spent in a wind tunnel was in '91 at Texas A&M, and it was
(at least in that session) about rider position into the wind, not wind
coming off the rider or bike. Via EDS's relationship with GM, I'm sure their
team had unique opportunities to use the GM tunnel, but I'm not sure how
much of that was passed on for further study and/or applied. In 1992, nobody
was using particularly aero seat tube/seat post profiles. If somebody was
using a seatpost with a profile other than round, it was still a production,
i.e. Shimano, Campagnolo, or similar product and was more of an oval profile
than "knife edged" to minimize the air pocket for following riders.

Some of the EDS riders developed and built aerodynamic frames, but they were
not used in mass start racing where the effects of such efforts would be
directed.

In the following years, the US team developed "Project 96" for the 1996
Olympics in Atlanta, but the aerodynamic aspect of this was aimed at timed
events, not massed start races.

Despite being one of the few seatposts in that era that did have a genuine
aerodynamic profile to it (Corima, standard EDS team issue), one of the more
"roadworthy" EDS riders opted for a standard round profile post because he
said the Corima post was harsh and caused the back end of his bike to judder
over bumps.

Back around 1990, a Canadian rider in the individual pursuit did employ a
seat with an aerodynamic tailsection to minimize the turbulent air behind
him, but the tailsection was questionable from an equipment rule standpoint.
(He was attempting to set a Canadian record, so it was up to the Canadian
federation to determine whether the tailsection was legal or not. I don't
recall how it turned out.) But the tailsection was used to make the rider
faster, not minimize any benefit for a following rider.

I'll ask Jimbo whatever became of those studies.

 

That is if thr rider isn't 1.6 m tall. If you're that short, then it fits
like a glove.

 

as i recall, my response to them analyzing the wind in that area was
"that's useless...the wind's so churned up there cant possibly be any
benefit".

but jim said they were thinking it would be of use in draft-legal ITU
triathlons...at least taking a look at the possibility of minimizing
the size/effectiveness of a rider's draft.

w

 

Are you sure Jim wasn't BSing you? In a big bicycle race field, the
difference an aero seatpost would make is insignificant and a multiple
person breakaway is a cooperative effort even for riders on different teams,
so it would more practical to allow the following rider a slightly better
draft. The same goes for draft legal triathlons.

 

perhaps...i was bright-eyed and perhaps a bit gullible at the time, not
the cynical old skeptical curmudgeon i've become.

w