agreed! love this stuff, clever engineers doing clever things. Its a real pity this channel have to talk utter bollocks for half the video rather than getting to the damn point.
Well they set a different precedent with the flexy wing which was legal in 2021 for RB because it passed the tests but still had to change it, only reason they will not do anything now is because they need a championship to be more competitive
I am not sure what you are on buddy because the DAS was made in collaboration of FIA, the original design was actually ruled banned and the one they raced was never in doubt of legality it was just a matter of costs that it got banned
Honestly at this point I think the fia should just focus on verifying flexible aero is safe. If it meets the loading standard it wont break on track then even if flex happens it should be fine. There is no practical way for them police this and I'm tired of hearing about it every few years.
It's a broad cultural problem: people like to make rules that say how you're allowed to implement something, instead of making a rule on the outcome itself.
Just allow Flex, it's not in the teams interest to make a wing that might break. Only thing I could see wrong with allowing flex is maybe less wealthy teams will struggle to make use of the flex properly.
Round and round We go.... flexi wings. Asymmetrical braking, "Active suspension" augmentation.... same old trucks, different time periods...... This year HAS to be close, so The FIA acts accordingly. If Red Bull had dominated all season AGAIN, half of Us would no longer be watching anymore.
History suggests teams will push limits until then breaking point to win so some level of foa testing is necessary. I think the rich teams argument isn't as strong under the cost cap now.
If policing flexi-wings is so difficult, why not make them explicitly allowed under the rules? It's not technically active aero if they only move under the force of the oncoming wind
It's baffling to me they don't allow flexible parts since that would be a useful development that could come in handy for actual cars. So they allow active aero changes through DRS and next year it will be applied to front wings too, but a little flex now is a problem.
@@parabelluminvicta8380 well it's all arbitrarily defined under the FIA rulebooks. My proposal was to change the definition of "active aero" to mean aerodynamic devices which are intentionally activated by some sort of actuator, and passive aero to be anything that deforms under load. DRS is activated by the driver pushing a button so it would be considered active, flexi wings would deform under load so they'd be considered passive. The point is that currently flexi wings are hard to enforce because they exist in a gray area that isn't well-enough defined in the FIA rulebooks. But flexible bodywork isn't inherently damaging to the integrity of the sport, so why not make it easier for everyone by just allowing it?
It’s a fine point. But I’ve seen first hand what Happens when it goes too far. Broadening the definition opens bigger boxes leaking even more pandora. Clamp it shut. Trust me. But idk how they are gonna wind back McLaren, they might just have to let it go and keep arbitrarily moving the goal post incrementally
In case people didn't understand the ruling and keep saying flexy wing should be banned, the regulation specifies static load test, that team needs to pass, so theoretically you can have a wing that deforms non-linearly at higher end to achieve the flexing effect while stay within the rule. However, the regulation also explicitly says that FIA reserves the right to change the static load test procedure if they think the current testing does not reflecting the effect FIA wants from the rule, and that includes in-season test change. So even if they change the test procedure, it's not red bull or ferrari having FIA in their pocket, in case any hater wants to rush and start hating.
The testing regimen is all wonky, tbqh. 60N of static load normal to the wing surface - the thing is, the loads the wings are subjected to while driving _aren't_ normal to the wing surfaces, and as such the deflection isn't in that vector either. Rather, the wings are subjected to torque around their axis and twist to conform to the airflow, what the current tests aren't designed to address.
The point is that the main article of the regulation says that aerodynamic parts must he rigidly secured and immobile. The load tests are a way to make those statements quantitative. However, a part that passes the loadtests yet is designed to flex still fails the main article. In the case of outwash, the fia made it clear it had the right to change the tests if parts violated the spirit of the regulation quickly. Why have they never mentioned this "spirit of the regulations" rule here, when teams are basically admitting they are violating the spirit of the regulation?
Probably because immobility is a term with connotations of its own, given that aerodynamic devices inherently cannot be completely static or immobile under load. In the case of the McLaren, where the front wing is rigid but flexes past the bracket shown in videos. Any ambiguity around the spirit of the regulation may lie in that area of the design, and that the specific regulation pertains more to a safety aspect than anything else.
I think flex wings should be embraced since the cars will be faster and advances in material sciences could be made trying to take more advantage of this. Plus, it gets rid of the complexity in having to investigate. Maybe other parts of the car too which would be really interesting on how they would introduce like active aero without the active part. It also makes the cars even more fuel efficient too which is one of the goals of the FIA.
@@srthebox4946 I wasn’t thinking 2026 and was considering the cars we already do have and hypothetically keeping them. Even though there will be controllable active aero elements in 2026, it would be really cool to know that they are basically doing it passively with material science and structural engineering in mind. It would be even cooler to see others if we could see other aero parts be tuned to be passively variable this way and see with what the teams come up with.
no, both teams passed all the tests in 2021. Now the FIA changed the tests mid season, and most teams on the grid had to modify their wings because otherwise they would not have passed the new tests. but no team ever failed a test in 2021 as far as I know.
@@dibdab101 CH said something else too they passed the test but the wing were flexing more he admited that and because the static test is not affidable and doesnt take into account all the variables thats why Ferrari, willians and red bull want FIA to take action.
@@benhayes5396 that was not the same thing: that test had always been there and Mercs was found to be in breach of that test because of a faulty assembly. It had nothing to do with the Load bearing test they used to determine if a wing flexes more than it should.
@@snowrabbit9558 Are you talking about the same RB that just got busted for cheating with their brake system and had to remove it, and since then have suffered greatly in performance? And all their delusional fans still claim that it absolutely had nothing to do with their car going from being vastly superior to suddenly barely manage 3rd or 4th?! Sure! Keep lying to yourself, muppet!
Just while watching the recent races I specifically commented on how freaking bendy the McLaren wing was. I didn't notice it on the Mercedes but if it's there, that stuff needs fixed. You could clearly see the McLaren wing significantly deform on the T-cam through the suspension arms and the close-up just confirmed it. As much as I'd hate for Red Bull to catch up I'd much more prefer stiffening up on some of the technical rules. Just like how the rear wings had been designed to cut down on the aero wash but the teams immediately undercut the rules and went back to square wings basically.
8:50 “the question is whether Red Bull is capable of doing this and was waiting for the FIA…” I have yet to see RB, or most teams for that matter, wait for the FIA to rule something legal or illegal. If there is a benefit to be gained they’ll pursue it and then plead for forgiveness after the fact. My money is on RB not having found the secret sauce that permits just the right amount of wing flex under load - ie the optimal aerodynamic shape with the right material composition. A rare time in this ground effect era they’ve been behind in developments, but as a spectator I’m pleased to see the variability at the top of the standings.
That's BS, you haven't watched F1 for long enough. Red bull protested DAS because they couldn't make it work, they protested double diffuser they couldn't make it work and all because those changed require fundamental design changes that are just not possibile in this stage especially redesigning the front wing conecpt mid season is nearly impossibilie and for 2025 it's too little too late
@@MuhammadNiz007 lol, I’ve been watching F1 since Jacques Villeneuve was racing. It’s definitely possible to design a new front wing, it’s nothing as difficult as DAS or double diffuser, although it could potentially require additional changes further down the body or floor in order to maximize its effectiveness. Someone else suggested they’re out of wind tunnel time, which is much more likely. Also possibly financial budget, they may not have expected rivals to catch up and even surpass them as much as they have and figured they’d pivot to the 2025 car(and beyond).
Brother , retract the statement. The most obvious last time this sort of situation happened, was in 2019 when Ferrari allegedly developed an "illegal" engine. So what's my point? RedBull logged a queston, to clarify the rules about how fuel enters the engines. THEY WAITED, same with Mercedes, they knew that the rules already dissalowed the sort of things the Ferrari engine allegedly did, and held off, but ratted to the FIA. You're just wrong. PS: as some others have pointed out, trying to implement an expensive system, that could be marked illegal, in the cost cap era, is a REALLY BAD DECISION. Thats why they didin't do it with DAS.
@@Hungary_0987Yeah, makes no sense given that Red Bull literally did the same thing with their front and rear wing in 2021 ( also passed every FIA test) and yet still had to change both of their wings in-season because the FIA demanded it. Makes 0 sense that the FIA is now handling this situation differently given that the Merc and especially the McLaren FW‘s flex like crazy.
@@Reaz399 it wasn't that that F1 demanded it be changed they just introduced more stringent tests that redbull wasn't able to pass. The Fia can introduce any test it feels necessary and as long as it passes the tests it's legal.
Point is - They create DRS like scenarios without having to follow the DRS ruleset. Which has to be regulated in some way. Otehrwise they could just scrap the whole DRS ruleset. I was never a fan of DRS, but if they want to keep it, they gotta shut down the workarounds.
It is so bleedingly obvious that the MCL and MB wings have been designed to flex. They even have a gap which allow the outer part to pivot with respect to the inner part. I don't buy the argument that this is hard to regulate against because "some flex has to be allowed because the parts would otherwise snap". The only explaination I have for the lack of regulation is either incompetence or the fact that in this case, the fia may think flexi wings have been crucial to revive the championship.
So in 2021 many teams had to change their wings mid-season *despite passing all static load tests* because it was "against the spirit of the rules", but now when the same loophole is being abused they are handling it differently? Surely, this does not reek foul play / backdoor deals / favoritism at all!
Only common things here is Mercedes...... It's been clear FIA has constantly been more likely to rule in favour of them and their customers, denying it is no longer possible.
They could introduce an air tunnel test, and every team has to submit a random front wing from their race selection post race. The FIA can then load test the traditional way and with aero. Any wing that fails, any car that was using an identical wing make up can be excluded from the results. There is not a shortage of wind tunnels.
@@simon9548 - I don't understand your point. Flexible wings will improve performance but it won't magically allow them to go 300mph all of a sudden if that is what you are saying?
Typical fia. Aston had their wings banned last year , ferrari in 2017 had theirs banned before the summer break. But nah let's let this go on the whole year
2021: RB wings pass load tests but new tests are invented to get them banned. 2024: McLaren wings pass load tests but are clearly flexing more than rivals on cameras, but that's okay I guess... I'm not against flexi wings, in fact, I don't know why they keep banning them... Engineers should be able to flex their creativity. But the lack of consistency bothers me.
A big part of watching F1 for a few decades now IS the technical genius development i see being made. Creating a part that bends this perfectly should be applauded.
No static load test could possibly emulate the forces exerted by air flow over the entire surface(s) of a front wing at a couple of 100 KPH or more. Not that I'm complaining, just saying. The only way to "level the playing field" would to be to mandate a standardised front wing, as with so much else on F1 cars, which has made it _so_ exciting .
Aero elasticity has been used in F1 since the 1980s, starting with Rory Byrne's front and rear wing brackets, which allowed the wings to lean backwards in a controlled manner. Forti used concave underbodies in the early 90's with the sides curving downwards, McLaren in 1996 used a similar front wing to today that curved backwards, Ferrari in 1997 used a front wing that leaned with the sides towards the ground and Rory Byrne in 2003 introduced a flexible underbody, to name just the better known cases. In the early 00's this was even a major battleground and Ferrari were "the masters" of bending, with wings bending up to 7cm in some cases. So it's been a development area in F1 for a very, very long time. The media should stop portraying it as if things have been done in F1 over the last 10 years that are oh so blatant and everything is oh so progressive and superior. Aeroelasticity has been around in F1 for ages, since the 1980s in fact. You should mention this in a report like this and not give the impression that this has only been an issue in the last 10 to 15 years because it's so modern and progressive. F1 has always been like that and today's engineers come up with tricks that people like Newey, Head, Brawn or Byrne used almost half a century ago.
It's obviously not exactly the same thing. If it was, they would ban it. McLaren have sussed something out that's in the grey area, which is what all successful racing teams have done throughout the history of racing. The wing falls within the today's rules. And if it doesn't, it must be really hard to prove.
@@robertvanzant2653Wrong, because the Mclaren and Merc wings actually passed the tests within the legal limits. Mclaren and Merc are just using the movement withing those legal limits to better results. It helps when you actually understand the technical side of the sport.
Ferrari and Redbull's performance upgrades: Witch craft and banned. Mercedes and Maclaren's performance upgrades: F1 don't know whether it is legal or illegal.
yeah exactly. And it's funny how any rule relating to Mercedes literally never gets changed mid-season. But if it's Red Bull or Ferrari, TD gets issued promptly after like 2 weeks tops 🤣
I might be missing something obvious, but it seems like most of this could be solved by mandating the top wing elements must be one piece and attach to the nose like the other elements do and not allow this break where they deform from.
Just allow flex wing as long as its passive and not actively actuated. Development cost should not be an issue as all teams are already exploring it anyway
the frustrating part is now that we have a budget cap, we should open up the rules and whoever builds the best car under the cap wins. We get different cars AND don’t have to deal with these silly arguments
I really hope the FIA aren’t dragging this out because of title fight implications, though even if mclaren got nerfed, the red bull is so middling, it wouldn’t change much
Without the flexy wing the balance of the car would change dramatically because McLaren has to reduce drag or increase the ride height to avoid bouncing on high speed passages. Look at Mercedes they had bouncing issues for over two years and since they got the flexy wing they could win races with the same car which was garbage before. Saying nothing will change when the flexy wings get banned couldn't be farther from the truth.
Wings are always designed with flex in mind. Aerofoils under load will always have twist and deflection. No perfectly rigid material exists. Teams are going to innovate. The Fai needs to encourage the teams innovate these features while assuring they are safe for drivers, crew and the fans.
First, they have to figure out what is happening. Then they have to figure out how it’s happening. Then they have to figure out how to design a test to limit the flex even more without making the parts so rigid they will break. After all that, they have to give the teams sufficient lead time to be able to design and manufacture parts that will meet the new tests - at least a few weeks. And by the time they get all that done, there will only be a few more races before the argument becomes irrelevant. That’s why the FIA are just looking at it for next year.
Remove 70% of all aero and go back to cars and not planes upside-down. Ruins racing, cost a fortune so attaracts mediocre drivers with lots of money and destroys the correlation to street cars. By far the greatest to watch right now is Formula Women, where the aero stuff is minimal, but there's full-on racing from start to finish.
We have been down this road in 2010, where funnily enough it was the reverse. McLaren were complaining about Red Bull and Ferrari's flexible front wings. Both teams passed the standard tests so nothing was done. Arguably lost McLaren the championship that year.
So what do you guys think in the future if F1 will allow teams to freely tune their entire front wings & rear wings to flex freely to achieve more performance. This is done in order to simplify the moving parts in the car such as actuators, so basically more freedom, simpler car, and no more discussions about flexi wings (because it's actually legal). I think this could be exciting because F1 would also pushing the known boundaries of material science!
In order to properly police this the FIA is probably going to have to switch from load tests to optical tests -- place a camera or laser in a specified position on the nose pointed at the wing and put markings at specific lengths along the wing, then record the distances to those markers around a lap. This way they can detect how much deflection is happening when the car runs through the air rather than trying to crudely simulated it with weights.
Redbull was told to change their wing mid season last year with even less bend. McLaren however is being given until the end of the season and then next year that very same wing is banned.
The way to police this is to remove the static load tests and use the camera measurements taken in race conditions to measure deflection. This would remove the engineering of wings designed to pass the test (the letter of the law) but still act as a movable aerodynamic device during the race (the spirit). Otherwise we’ll keep having this conversation ad infinitum.
Deflection of what is the question. Then they will make some trivial bar that doesnt move and let the flaps be really soft and it will conform to the rules as the "extreme part of the wing" does not deflect. You would have to set up 3D parameters, volume of movement or something. All wings being different, its impossible. They cannot put hundred probes with sensors over the top of a wing, since they don't know what part is rated/designed for what load.
The grey areas in the guidance and regs are the best thing about F1. Finding the ambiguity, exploiting it, and upending a once dominant team. I’m all for the drama (as long as it’s legal, of course!)
I’d have no problem with this except one thing. The salary cap. The rules, I thought, were made with the intent to keep the cars at a relatively affordable price for slower teams to have a chance to get a bit more competitive. If we’re saying it’s all legal and that’s that, well it’s obviously something they decided they had to do to win, and it turns out the fia is cool with it? I guess. But no cussing.
I think it's time we give up the notion that 'active aero' is bad and legalize it so every team can use it. I mean, DRS is active aero but only partly so so why not allow the front and rear wings to be like airplane wings that change shape to increase or decrease life as needed. Make the wings small enough that the effect is reduced, but giving every team the same chances should actually lower costs and improve the relative performance of back marker teams. Lock down the floor at this stage, but allow the front and rear wings to be active aero devises. I'd also look to require the exit from the diffuser be somewhat laminar to reduce the disturbed air behind the cars.
Doesn’t seem like McLaren is taking drivers seriously. They left over 10 points on the table between Hungary and Monza. They will probably regret that come the last race
Eh probs not my guy their car is way too fast for it to matter, unless lando isn't maximizing the car which he has been doing since miami both championships are mclaren's to lose
FIA should start to focus more in the budget cap and less on the regulations themselves. Without infinite money there is no need for such restrictive rules. Apart of course from safety the rules should allow the teams to do whatever they want with the money.
the front wing is more important than the floor think about how that front wing controls the entire handling of the car when cornering having to stiff of a front wings would introduce safety concerns
FLEX is the Wrong word. the wing isn't flexing. its COMPRESSING the reason you want the front wing to compress like this is because. as the speed gets higher the forces/load on the wing increases, also drag increases. So if you can have the wings angle drop as the speed increases and you can do this in a reliable and repeatable way, you do a few things. 1. you make the downforce EVEN over all speeds. so as you get faster the wing angle drops but as the speed increases so does the load. so lowering the wing angle by making it compress (I dont think flexing is the right word) the force applied on the wing stays Equal/even over the whole speed profile 2. you lower the downforce as the speed climbs limiting the drag technically the wing isnt flexing . its *COMPRESSING* Flexing would be if you were to pick the wing up by each end and then trying to bend/brake it and the wing would touch both ends. this would be *Flexing* instead all that happens when the speed/load increases over the flaps they just get pushed down aka compressing. look at it this way. when a piston is on its COMPRESSION stroke you dont say its flexing the piston or the fuel to compress it do you? No you say it's compressing. it's 2 totally different actions
There is a rule of thumb that the backside of the wing does 3x more work than the “compression” leading /front… A group of elements work together to energize the air into the next element, compounding efficiency. It’s the boundary layer on backside of a wing or group of wings which does the real work. Rear defusers work on this principle to create downforce. For evidence, look at a f1 car in the wet to see how aggressively water is accelerated in to air going from low pressure under the car to near ambient pressure behind the car, especially when the drs is open. Each element is always designed to “twist” and “flatten” its downforce in predicted ways at defined speeds which is why wings are designed for individual tracks and even adjusted for changes in ambient air pressure. Kyle engineering on TH-cam has excellent articles into how f1 aero works.
Aero components certainly can be entirely rigid and not break under load. The cars might weigh a lot more, but it's certainly feasible. Air is not an unstoppable force, nor an immovable object.
This is the ONE area that the FIA have NEVER been able to get on top off and probably never will, given the current vagueness of the rules! Bottom line is that flexi wings ARE against the spirit of the rules, but how can you ever effectively police this if you "have" to allow at least "some" flex??? I disagree with the notion that at least "some" flex has to be allowed, in the wings. I understand that the chassis must be able to bend... But the wing does NOT HAVE to flex!!! If the wing breaks off due to the load, it's simply NOT strong enough. Who says you can only use carbon fibre in the wing? Who says that the wing blades can only be a certain thickness? Now. I am not an F1 rule expert, but it is absolutely possible to force the teams to remove ANY flex without the wings breaking off!
Electrical energy through the wing causing deformation? Perhaps material that bends with building downforce yet more rigid under instant pressure tests.
Toto - C'mon Zaaaack, I gave you engine. Please tell us how you go so fast?? Zack. B- Listen Toto, that's not how this work's. BUT, I'll give you one element... Our nose wing flexes flat on straights.... Toto- Arrrrgh Brilliant JA!
So it’s not illegal. Good to know. I’m so curious to how they were able to make it flex so much more than the rest. The McLaren and Merc look very different but gotten similar results it’s fascinating.
it makes me laugh that red bullies are beetching about flexible wings when they deliberately engineered a rear wing that passed all the stress tests the FIA used to make sure all cars complied. red bull were eventually found to have cheated but instead of being given a penalty, they were allowed time to replace said rear wing. but of course as everyone will remember, they were allowed to change the wing in increments! and for those red bull fans who may want to reply with "stop crying," its old, use something else
So just to get this right. when redbull had a flexible part (that cleared all of the FIAs test without a probelm) they changed the rules/testing procedure mid-season to ban that part. But now its okey and they wont make a change until next season. hmmmmmmmmmm, seems a bit odd
@@tilled6695 actually he is bang on. RBR or Mercs wings never got banned in 2021, and no team ever failed FIA tests. The FIA introduce new tests mis season which forced a lot of the teams on the grid to modify their wings to comply with the new tests, but no wing by any team ever got expressively banned. This year the FIA have not changed the way wings are tested, so as long as they pass the current tests, then they are legal....it is just a matter of the FIA choosing to intervene or not.
Please inform me a non technical fan, the reason why wing flexing is so controlled, and if flexed too much, deemed illegal? Williams won years ago (as far as I know) largely based on innovation, nowadays, the FIA is so strict it appears it is hindering innovation. So again, why is extreme flexing illegal? Why is innovation suppressed? It seems that now a rich team has the advantage because they have the man power to squeeze the last 3 percent out of the rules.
I mean, the rules are the rules, but this is a weird one. A totally passive flexing feature to provide an aero advantage seems right in what Formula 1 was originally meant to be; the experimentation of car performance.
@@MichaelCampbell01 the rules are the rules, but the tests are a different thing all together. Exploiting where the tests and rules differ is the art of f1
It's the brakes, I remember Lewis's last maclaren, it was stiffer than a teenage morning glory, He was always adjusting diff settings between corners. Now the red bull has lost the party trick, we get commentators trying to convince us it's not the brake magic.
Is anyone else really tired of this subject? Like, I'm an engineer and I completely get it. The FIA should focus on changing the rules so we stop talking about this. Let a specified amount of deflection or some other way of making it black and white such as saying any deflection that occurs while still passing the deflection test is allowed so we can all move on. Let's talk about something else.
Of course, if every team was using exactly the same front and rear wings, mandated by the FIA and manufactured by a single independent manufacturer, none of this would be an issue, plus the racing would be much closer and therefore more enjoyable to watch.
Why isn't anybody mentioning that Redbull's problems started on almost the exact same day that Newey announced he was leaving. I guess he hit the self destruct button on his way out.
Ferrari and Red Bull have basically gotten clarification that it's ok to run a flexi-wing by the FIA. So expect them to show up in Baku with them and Zak Brown will be crying immediately.
The FIA has been in almost complete denial over the last four decades since they first banned the ground-effect cars; cars that didn't even have front wings because they didn't need them. They banned the wrong thing! Aerodynamic downforce has been ruining formula racing (and many other series) since it was introduced by Lotus. It only works properly for the car in front, which creates turbulent, dirty air that is way less efficient for the cars behind. Get rid of wings and go 100% ground effect if you want to see better racing where the hole in the air created by the car in front helps the cars behind. I'd even bring back the Brabham-style fan.
Discussions about flexi wings. F1 is truly back
Classic F1 Dark Arts
We're so back
Nah mate - Just THE RACE doing THE RACE things.
@@zainmalik1872Can't wait for 2025 i'm pretty sure it's gonna be one of the best seasons in the history
Wrong. It has a salary cap that nobody seems to talk about.
This is the best of F1, doing something thats hard to tell if it's illegal. just like DAS and blown diffusers
agreed! love this stuff, clever engineers doing clever things. Its a real pity this channel have to talk utter bollocks for half the video rather than getting to the damn point.
@@DAGATHire gotta make the video long enough for more ads 😂
Well they set a different precedent with the flexy wing which was legal in 2021 for RB because it passed the tests but still had to change it, only reason they will not do anything now is because they need a championship to be more competitive
I am not sure what you are on buddy because the DAS was made in collaboration of FIA, the original design was actually ruled banned and the one they raced was never in doubt of legality it was just a matter of costs that it got banned
Flexy wings are illegal, check the regulations
Negative air pressure HATES this one trick!
Aha you're silly
Honestly at this point I think the fia should just focus on verifying flexible aero is safe. If it meets the loading standard it wont break on track then even if flex happens it should be fine. There is no practical way for them police this and I'm tired of hearing about it every few years.
It's a broad cultural problem: people like to make rules that say how you're allowed to implement something, instead of making a rule on the outcome itself.
That is a really good point
Just allow Flex, it's not in the teams interest to make a wing that might break. Only thing I could see wrong with allowing flex is maybe less wealthy teams will struggle to make use of the flex properly.
Round and round We go.... flexi wings. Asymmetrical braking, "Active suspension" augmentation.... same old trucks, different time periods...... This year HAS to be close, so The FIA acts accordingly. If Red Bull had dominated all season AGAIN, half of Us would no longer be watching anymore.
History suggests teams will push limits until then breaking point to win so some level of foa testing is necessary. I think the rich teams argument isn't as strong under the cost cap now.
If policing flexi-wings is so difficult, why not make them explicitly allowed under the rules? It's not technically active aero if they only move under the force of the oncoming wind
Or make them the same for everyone.
It's baffling to me they don't allow flexible parts since that would be a useful development that could come in handy for actual cars. So they allow active aero changes through DRS and next year it will be applied to front wings too, but a little flex now is a problem.
wrong flexiwing are considered active aereo so its not allowed by the rules but some flex is allowed only with the frontal wing like 1.5cm.
@@parabelluminvicta8380 well it's all arbitrarily defined under the FIA rulebooks. My proposal was to change the definition of "active aero" to mean aerodynamic devices which are intentionally activated by some sort of actuator, and passive aero to be anything that deforms under load. DRS is activated by the driver pushing a button so it would be considered active, flexi wings would deform under load so they'd be considered passive. The point is that currently flexi wings are hard to enforce because they exist in a gray area that isn't well-enough defined in the FIA rulebooks. But flexible bodywork isn't inherently damaging to the integrity of the sport, so why not make it easier for everyone by just allowing it?
It’s a fine point. But I’ve seen first hand what Happens when it goes too far. Broadening the definition opens bigger boxes leaking even more pandora. Clamp it shut. Trust me. But idk how they are gonna wind back McLaren, they might just have to let it go and keep arbitrarily moving the goal post incrementally
I think the original intent was to prevent active (mechanized) movement. The rule should just be re-written to allow passive mobility only.
In case people didn't understand the ruling and keep saying flexy wing should be banned, the regulation specifies static load test, that team needs to pass, so theoretically you can have a wing that deforms non-linearly at higher end to achieve the flexing effect while stay within the rule. However, the regulation also explicitly says that FIA reserves the right to change the static load test procedure if they think the current testing does not reflecting the effect FIA wants from the rule, and that includes in-season test change. So even if they change the test procedure, it's not red bull or ferrari having FIA in their pocket, in case any hater wants to rush and start hating.
The testing regimen is all wonky, tbqh. 60N of static load normal to the wing surface - the thing is, the loads the wings are subjected to while driving _aren't_ normal to the wing surfaces, and as such the deflection isn't in that vector either.
Rather, the wings are subjected to torque around their axis and twist to conform to the airflow, what the current tests aren't designed to address.
The interruption in the wing is designed to allow it to flex. Start by banning such interruptions. Next season, of course, no rule changes mid season.
@@EversonBernardes They do also have torque load testing as well, which is an offset force.
The point is that the main article of the regulation says that aerodynamic parts must he rigidly secured and immobile. The load tests are a way to make those statements quantitative. However, a part that passes the loadtests yet is designed to flex still fails the main article. In the case of outwash, the fia made it clear it had the right to change the tests if parts violated the spirit of the regulation quickly. Why have they never mentioned this "spirit of the regulations" rule here, when teams are basically admitting they are violating the spirit of the regulation?
Probably because immobility is a term with connotations of its own, given that aerodynamic devices inherently cannot be completely static or immobile under load.
In the case of the McLaren, where the front wing is rigid but flexes past the bracket shown in videos. Any ambiguity around the spirit of the regulation may lie in that area of the design, and that the specific regulation pertains more to a safety aspect than anything else.
To quote Horner "Fix your ****** car"
Change not fix
Zak: Change your f**king car
Max : "Better change my team"
Guessing this is like when Mercedes had DAS and Horner was squealing like a stuck pig.
If you practice a little more you might one day be able to make your own jokes
That graphic at 8:19 is scary af. Who the hell would've thought redbull would be 4th fastest in Monza and just ahead of .. Willams. 😨
Petrifying
Asymmetric braking left with Newey
To be fair Williams has always produced an insanely good car for high speed circuits.
I think flex wings should be embraced since the cars will be faster and advances in material sciences could be made trying to take more advantage of this. Plus, it gets rid of the complexity in having to investigate. Maybe other parts of the car too which would be really interesting on how they would introduce like active aero without the active part. It also makes the cars even more fuel efficient too which is one of the goals of the FIA.
Not gonna really matter since in 2026, we’re gonna get active aero which defeats the purpose of flexi wing anyway.
@@srthebox4946 I wasn’t thinking 2026 and was considering the cars we already do have and hypothetically keeping them. Even though there will be controllable active aero elements in 2026, it would be really cool to know that they are basically doing it passively with material science and structural engineering in mind. It would be even cooler to see others if we could see other aero parts be tuned to be passively variable this way and see with what the teams come up with.
The irony of red bull complaining about flexible elements when to be honest they used to be the masters of this dark art for years isn't lost on me.
Haven't both rb and merc had wings thrown out because of this before?
Yes in 2021
no, both teams passed all the tests in 2021. Now the FIA changed the tests mid season, and most teams on the grid had to modify their wings because otherwise they would not have passed the new tests. but no team ever failed a test in 2021 as far as I know.
@@dibdab101 CH said something else too they passed the test but the wing were flexing more he admited that and because the static test is not affidable and doesnt take into account all the variables thats why Ferrari, willians and red bull want FIA to take action.
@@dibdab101not true, if you remember the 2021 Brazilian GP where the test was introduced after qualifying and it caused Hamilton to be DSQ from Quali
@@benhayes5396 that was not the same thing: that test had always been there and Mercs was found to be in breach of that test because of a faulty assembly. It had nothing to do with the Load bearing test they used to determine if a wing flexes more than it should.
The thing is, before Singapore 2023, flexiwings were banned, so I don't get why are they back
All wings flex or they would break. You can't ban it outright.
Because it helps the UK 🇬🇧 TV market for liberty media. They can’t beat Red Bull the fair way 😂
@@snowrabbit9558 Red Bull Racing is based in the UK lmao
@@snowrabbit9558 Are you talking about the same RB that just got busted for cheating with their brake system and had to remove it, and since then have suffered greatly in performance? And all their delusional fans still claim that it absolutely had nothing to do with their car going from being vastly superior to suddenly barely manage 3rd or 4th?! Sure! Keep lying to yourself, muppet!
@@snowrabbit9558 keep crying
Just while watching the recent races I specifically commented on how freaking bendy the McLaren wing was. I didn't notice it on the Mercedes but if it's there, that stuff needs fixed. You could clearly see the McLaren wing significantly deform on the T-cam through the suspension arms and the close-up just confirmed it.
As much as I'd hate for Red Bull to catch up I'd much more prefer stiffening up on some of the technical rules. Just like how the rear wings had been designed to cut down on the aero wash but the teams immediately undercut the rules and went back to square wings basically.
flexi wings we've been down this path before i thought they stopped it
8:50 “the question is whether Red Bull is capable of doing this and was waiting for the FIA…” I have yet to see RB, or most teams for that matter, wait for the FIA to rule something legal or illegal. If there is a benefit to be gained they’ll pursue it and then plead for forgiveness after the fact. My money is on RB not having found the secret sauce that permits just the right amount of wing flex under load - ie the optimal aerodynamic shape with the right material composition. A rare time in this ground effect era they’ve been behind in developments, but as a spectator I’m pleased to see the variability at the top of the standings.
That's BS, you haven't watched F1 for long enough. Red bull protested DAS because they couldn't make it work, they protested double diffuser they couldn't make it work and all because those changed require fundamental design changes that are just not possibile in this stage especially redesigning the front wing conecpt mid season is nearly impossibilie and for 2025 it's too little too late
It's quite possible redbull don't have the budget to design one and bring the parts...
@@MuhammadNiz007 lol, I’ve been watching F1 since Jacques Villeneuve was racing. It’s definitely possible to design a new front wing, it’s nothing as difficult as DAS or double diffuser, although it could potentially require additional changes further down the body or floor in order to maximize its effectiveness. Someone else suggested they’re out of wind tunnel time, which is much more likely. Also possibly financial budget, they may not have expected rivals to catch up and even surpass them as much as they have and figured they’d pivot to the 2025 car(and beyond).
@@AdityaVarmaMudunuri yes, this and wind tunnel time might be their constraining factors, agreed.
Brother , retract the statement. The most obvious last time this sort of situation happened, was in 2019 when Ferrari allegedly developed an "illegal" engine.
So what's my point? RedBull logged a queston, to clarify the rules about how fuel enters the engines. THEY WAITED, same with Mercedes, they knew that the rules already dissalowed the sort of things the Ferrari engine allegedly did, and held off, but ratted to the FIA. You're just wrong.
PS: as some others have pointed out, trying to implement an expensive system, that could be marked illegal, in the cost cap era, is a REALLY BAD DECISION. Thats why they didin't do it with DAS.
If its legal then McLaren did a big brain move.
"IF"
It’s legal, says the fia
@@Hungary_0987Yeah, makes no sense given that Red Bull literally did the same thing with their front and rear wing in 2021 ( also passed every FIA test) and yet still had to change both of their wings in-season because the FIA demanded it.
Makes 0 sense that the FIA is now handling this situation differently given that the Merc and especially the McLaren FW‘s flex like crazy.
@@Reaz399 it wasn't that that F1 demanded it be changed they just introduced more stringent tests that redbull wasn't able to pass. The Fia can introduce any test it feels necessary and as long as it passes the tests it's legal.
@@Dischingo That‘s not true. Red Bull passed every single test in 2021.
Point is - They create DRS like scenarios without having to follow the DRS ruleset. Which has to be regulated in some way. Otehrwise they could just scrap the whole DRS ruleset. I was never a fan of DRS, but if they want to keep it, they gotta shut down the workarounds.
It is so bleedingly obvious that the MCL and MB wings have been designed to flex. They even have a gap which allow the outer part to pivot with respect to the inner part. I don't buy the argument that this is hard to regulate against because "some flex has to be allowed because the parts would otherwise snap". The only explaination I have for the lack of regulation is either incompetence or the fact that in this case, the fia may think flexi wings have been crucial to revive the championship.
So in 2021 many teams had to change their wings mid-season *despite passing all static load tests* because it was "against the spirit of the rules", but now when the same loophole is being abused they are handling it differently?
Surely, this does not reek foul play / backdoor deals / favoritism at all!
Cry in costcap
Only common things here is Mercedes......
It's been clear FIA has constantly been more likely to rule in favour of them and their customers, denying it is no longer possible.
They could introduce an air tunnel test, and every team has to submit a random front wing from their race selection post race. The FIA can then load test the traditional way and with aero. Any wing that fails, any car that was using an identical wing make up can be excluded from the results. There is not a shortage of wind tunnels.
*Potential to go faster exists*
FIA: Yeah, we don't do that here
Faster cars -> higher speeds -> need safer cars -> cars become even heavier
@@simon9548 - I don't understand your point. Flexible wings will improve performance but it won't magically allow them to go 300mph all of a sudden if that is what you are saying?
Just apply DRS to the front and rear wings and let all the cars do 400 on the straight.
Thats what the 2026 regulations are for
@@srthebox4946 And it will suck
Typical fia. Aston had their wings banned last year , ferrari in 2017 had theirs banned before the summer break. But nah let's let this go on the whole year
2021: RB wings pass load tests but new tests are invented to get them banned.
2024: McLaren wings pass load tests but are clearly flexing more than rivals on cameras, but that's okay I guess...
I'm not against flexi wings, in fact, I don't know why they keep banning them... Engineers should be able to flex their creativity. But the lack of consistency bothers me.
🇬🇧
Same here "I'm not against flexi wings, in fact, I don't know why they keep banning them"
"flex their creativity" nice pun lol
A big part of watching F1 for a few decades now IS the technical genius development i see being made.
Creating a part that bends this perfectly should be applauded.
No static load test could possibly emulate the forces exerted by air flow over the entire surface(s) of a front wing at a couple of 100 KPH or more. Not that I'm complaining, just saying. The only way to "level the playing field" would to be to mandate a standardised front wing, as with so much else on F1 cars, which has made it _so_ exciting .
Aero elasticity has been used in F1 since the 1980s, starting with Rory Byrne's front and rear wing brackets, which allowed the wings to lean backwards in a controlled manner. Forti used concave underbodies in the early 90's with the sides curving downwards, McLaren in 1996 used a similar front wing to today that curved backwards, Ferrari in 1997 used a front wing that leaned with the sides towards the ground and Rory Byrne in 2003 introduced a flexible underbody, to name just the better known cases. In the early 00's this was even a major battleground and Ferrari were "the masters" of bending, with wings bending up to 7cm in some cases. So it's been a development area in F1 for a very, very long time. The media should stop portraying it as if things have been done in F1 over the last 10 years that are oh so blatant and everything is oh so progressive and superior. Aeroelasticity has been around in F1 for ages, since the 1980s in fact. You should mention this in a report like this and not give the impression that this has only been an issue in the last 10 to 15 years because it's so modern and progressive. F1 has always been like that and today's engineers come up with tricks that people like Newey, Head, Brawn or Byrne used almost half a century ago.
Another great technical video that considers the full impact. Thank you
It bothers me that RedBull 2021 front wing got banned for exactly the same thing. Why the difference now?
The FIA is the difference .
It's obviously not exactly the same thing.
If it was, they would ban it.
McLaren have sussed something out that's in the grey area, which is what all successful racing teams have done throughout the history of racing.
The wing falls within the today's rules. And if it doesn't, it must be really hard to prove.
Exactly like the RB wing in 2021 it passed all the Fia tests but thry changed the tests mid season why not now? 🤔@@Weeji_420
@@robertvanzant2653Wrong, because the Mclaren and Merc wings actually passed the tests within the legal limits. Mclaren and Merc are just using the movement withing those legal limits to better results. It helps when you actually understand the technical side of the sport.
@@Weeji_420and it’s a totally different car
Your have audio maxed . good job mate.
This is F1 the sport where teams need to find holes in the rule book, and make racing interesting that way. Is the pinnacle of technology ❤❤
Ferrari and Redbull's performance upgrades: Witch craft and banned.
Mercedes and Maclaren's performance upgrades: F1 don't know whether it is legal or illegal.
yeah exactly. And it's funny how any rule relating to Mercedes literally never gets changed mid-season.
But if it's Red Bull or Ferrari, TD gets issued promptly after like 2 weeks tops 🤣
I might be missing something obvious, but it seems like most of this could be solved by mandating the top wing elements must be one piece and attach to the nose like the other elements do and not allow this break where they deform from.
Just allow flex wing as long as its passive and not actively actuated.
Development cost should not be an issue as all teams are already exploring it anyway
Whoever edited this video did an amazing job
Thoroughly explained. Thank you ❤❤
FIA want to see which teams are affected before making a decision. Yeah that's very impartial rule making 😂
the frustrating part is now that we have a budget cap, we should open up the rules and whoever builds the best car under the cap wins.
We get different cars AND don’t have to deal with these silly arguments
Thanks The Race to use my models!
I really hope the FIA aren’t dragging this out because of title fight implications, though even if mclaren got nerfed, the red bull is so middling, it wouldn’t change much
Without the flexy wing the balance of the car would change dramatically because McLaren has to reduce drag or increase the ride height to avoid bouncing on high speed passages. Look at Mercedes they had bouncing issues for over two years and since they got the flexy wing they could win races with the same car which was garbage before. Saying nothing will change when the flexy wings get banned couldn't be farther from the truth.
Ah, the shouting Scott Mitchell-Malm
been looking forward to this
Wings are always designed with flex in mind. Aerofoils under load will always have twist and deflection.
No perfectly rigid material exists.
Teams are going to innovate.
The Fai needs to encourage the teams innovate these features while assuring they are safe for drivers, crew and the fans.
At this point making them legal would be more interesting compared to next gen's glorified DRS dubbed as "active aero".
Flexi wings have been used before.....
And now they're illegal ...
@@ramezehab662not when you are a 🇬🇧 driver 😆
last time they changed the test, now its all okay.
f the FIA
First, they have to figure out what is happening.
Then they have to figure out how it’s happening.
Then they have to figure out how to design a test to limit the flex even more without making the parts so rigid they will break.
After all that, they have to give the teams sufficient lead time to be able to design and manufacture parts that will meet the new tests - at least a few weeks.
And by the time they get all that done, there will only be a few more races before the argument becomes irrelevant. That’s why the FIA are just looking at it for next year.
Remove 70% of all aero and go back to cars and not planes upside-down. Ruins racing, cost a fortune so attaracts mediocre drivers with lots of money and destroys the correlation to street cars. By far the greatest to watch right now is Formula Women, where the aero stuff is minimal, but there's full-on racing from start to finish.
We have been down this road in 2010, where funnily enough it was the reverse. McLaren were complaining about Red Bull and Ferrari's flexible front wings. Both teams passed the standard tests so nothing was done. Arguably lost McLaren the championship that year.
A more flexible front wing could be exactly what Redbull need to fix their balance issues
So what do you guys think in the future if F1 will allow teams to freely tune their entire front wings & rear wings to flex freely to achieve more performance. This is done in order to simplify the moving parts in the car such as actuators, so basically more freedom, simpler car, and no more discussions about flexi wings (because it's actually legal). I think this could be exciting because F1 would also pushing the known boundaries of material science!
In order to properly police this the FIA is probably going to have to switch from load tests to optical tests -- place a camera or laser in a specified position on the nose pointed at the wing and put markings at specific lengths along the wing, then record the distances to those markers around a lap. This way they can detect how much deflection is happening when the car runs through the air rather than trying to crudely simulated it with weights.
@@kevinamery5922 they already thought of that, which is why all the cars now have cameras
Scott, do you have to yell ?
Domenicali and MBS have been reluctant to interfere the past few years...but those sweet, sweet ratings/ engagement are too tempting now
Redbull was told to change their wing mid season last year with even less bend. McLaren however is being given until the end of the season and then next year that very same wing is banned.
It's amazing how McLaren doesn't have an attention grabbing TD like Newey and Allison yet are ahead of the field by quite some margin.
FIA should have its own aero tunnel to do the testing and revise rules accordingly. Watching dots is kinda funny.
The way to police this is to remove the static load tests and use the camera measurements taken in race conditions to measure deflection. This would remove the engineering of wings designed to pass the test (the letter of the law) but still act as a movable aerodynamic device during the race (the spirit). Otherwise we’ll keep having this conversation ad infinitum.
Deflection of what is the question. Then they will make some trivial bar that doesnt move and let the flaps be really soft and it will conform to the rules as the "extreme part of the wing" does not deflect. You would have to set up 3D parameters, volume of movement or something. All wings being different, its impossible. They cannot put hundred probes with sensors over the top of a wing, since they don't know what part is rated/designed for what load.
That is incredible innovation that could be adapted for commercial use. Awesome.
The grey areas in the guidance and regs are the best thing about F1. Finding the ambiguity, exploiting it, and upending a once dominant team. I’m all for the drama (as long as it’s legal, of course!)
Instead of those fins they should put there a U bracket that will limit deformation leave the wing few cm of flex
I’d have no problem with this except one thing. The salary cap. The rules, I thought, were made with the intent to keep the cars at a relatively affordable price for slower teams to have a chance to get a bit more competitive. If we’re saying it’s all legal and that’s that, well it’s obviously something they decided they had to do to win, and it turns out the fia is cool with it? I guess. But no cussing.
I think it's time we give up the notion that 'active aero' is bad and legalize it so every team can use it. I mean, DRS is active aero but only partly so so why not allow the front and rear wings to be like airplane wings that change shape to increase or decrease life as needed. Make the wings small enough that the effect is reduced, but giving every team the same chances should actually lower costs and improve the relative performance of back marker teams. Lock down the floor at this stage, but allow the front and rear wings to be active aero devises. I'd also look to require the exit from the diffuser be somewhat laminar to reduce the disturbed air behind the cars.
Doesn’t seem like McLaren is taking drivers seriously. They left over 10 points on the table between Hungary and Monza. They will probably regret that come the last race
@@josephprocopio8423 they only car about the constructors and keeping Oscar happy
Eh probs not my guy their car is way too fast for it to matter, unless lando isn't maximizing the car which he has been doing since miami both championships are mclaren's to lose
FIA should start to focus more in the budget cap and less on the regulations themselves.
Without infinite money there is no need for such restrictive rules. Apart of course from safety the rules should allow the teams to do whatever they want with the money.
the front wing is more important than the floor think about how that front wing controls the entire handling of the car when cornering having to stiff of a front wings would introduce safety concerns
Who TF pronounces opacity "Oh-pace-ity"
Uncanny, i heard him say it as i read your comment. First class, and weird pronunciation
Someone with a small vocabulary who is reading a script without knowing what all the words mean.
@@C.I... This is the correct answer.
FLEX is the Wrong word. the wing isn't flexing. its COMPRESSING
the reason you want the front wing to compress like this is because.
as the speed gets higher the forces/load on the wing increases, also drag increases. So if you can have the wings angle drop as the speed increases and you can do this in a reliable and repeatable way, you do a few things.
1. you make the downforce EVEN over all speeds. so as you get faster the wing angle drops but as the speed increases so does the load. so lowering the wing angle by making it compress (I dont think flexing is the right word) the force applied on the wing stays Equal/even over the whole speed profile
2. you lower the downforce as the speed climbs limiting the drag
technically the wing isnt flexing . its *COMPRESSING* Flexing would be if you were to pick the wing up by each end and then trying to bend/brake it and the wing would touch both ends. this would be *Flexing* instead all that happens when the speed/load increases over the flaps they just get pushed down aka compressing.
look at it this way. when a piston is on its COMPRESSION stroke you dont say its flexing the piston or the fuel to compress it do you? No you say it's compressing. it's 2 totally different actions
There is a rule of thumb that the backside of the wing does 3x more work than the “compression” leading /front…
A group of elements work together to energize the air into the next element, compounding efficiency.
It’s the boundary layer on backside of a wing or group of wings which does the real work. Rear defusers work on this principle to create downforce. For evidence, look at a f1 car in the wet to see how aggressively water is accelerated in to air going from low pressure under the car to near ambient pressure behind the car, especially when the drs is open.
Each element is always designed to “twist” and “flatten” its downforce in predicted ways at defined speeds which is why wings are designed for individual tracks and even adjusted for changes in ambient air pressure.
Kyle engineering on TH-cam has excellent articles into how f1 aero works.
Aero components certainly can be entirely rigid and not break under load. The cars might weigh a lot more, but it's certainly feasible. Air is not an unstoppable force, nor an immovable object.
This is the ONE area that the FIA have NEVER been able to get on top off and probably never will, given the current vagueness of the rules!
Bottom line is that flexi wings ARE against the spirit of the rules, but how can you ever effectively police this if you "have" to allow at least "some" flex???
I disagree with the notion that at least "some" flex has to be allowed, in the wings. I understand that the chassis must be able to bend... But the wing does NOT HAVE to flex!!! If the wing breaks off due to the load, it's simply NOT strong enough. Who says you can only use carbon fibre in the wing? Who says that the wing blades can only be a certain thickness?
Now. I am not an F1 rule expert, but it is absolutely possible to force the teams to remove ANY flex without the wings breaking off!
They should legalize flexi wing.. or even better, active aero 💪
Electrical energy through the wing causing deformation? Perhaps material that bends with building downforce yet more rigid under instant pressure tests.
I know nothing of aerodynamics but I'd love to see an f1 team design a jet of some kind
Toto - C'mon Zaaaack, I gave you engine. Please tell us how you go so fast??
Zack. B- Listen Toto, that's not how this work's. BUT, I'll give you one element... Our nose wing flexes flat on straights....
Toto- Arrrrgh Brilliant JA!
So it’s not illegal. Good to know. I’m so curious to how they were able to make it flex so much more than the rest. The McLaren and Merc look very different but gotten similar results it’s fascinating.
Flexi wings should just be allowed.
I dont see any need for them to be banned and they're clearly impossible to police
Why no video of the RB's dark art braking system installed only on one car? Not interesting enough?
Should be mandatory feature.
Red bull should try X braking. I believe it may help 🤠🤠🤠
it makes me laugh that red bullies are beetching about flexible wings when they deliberately engineered a rear wing that passed all the stress tests the FIA used to make sure all cars complied. red bull were eventually found to have cheated but instead of being given a penalty, they were allowed time to replace said rear wing. but of course as everyone will remember, they were allowed to change the wing in increments! and for those red bull fans who may want to reply with "stop crying," its old, use something else
Also amusing: Checo crying about Lando slowing down to hold him up when that’s exactly what he’s done for Max so many times
Just let the front wings go crazy and flap around 😂
We need to talk "reglas dd los papayas"
So just to get this right. when redbull had a flexible part (that cleared all of the FIAs test without a probelm) they changed the rules/testing procedure mid-season to ban that part. But now its okey and they wont make a change until next season. hmmmmmmmmmm, seems a bit odd
not really, your just a casual viewer which is okay, but no totally different to anyone who understands the rules
@@tilled6695 Bring arguments or stay quiet you emotional girl.
@tilled6695 then educate him then. Don't be acting high and mighty as if you weren't a casual before.
@@tilled6695 actually he is bang on.
RBR or Mercs wings never got banned in 2021, and no team ever failed FIA tests. The FIA introduce new tests mis season which forced a lot of the teams on the grid to modify their wings to comply with the new tests, but no wing by any team ever got expressively banned. This year the FIA have not changed the way wings are tested, so as long as they pass the current tests, then they are legal....it is just a matter of the FIA choosing to intervene or not.
Big flex by mclaren this season
FIA: Doing a static test on the most dynamic thing ever.
Good job guys!
@@gefx0164 how would you do it?
@@QuotidianStupidity I would have someone sit on the front wing down the straight at Monza and measure it under load. Obviously...
Please leave the photographs on the screen for a bit longer 🙂
Please inform me a non technical fan, the reason why wing flexing is so controlled, and if flexed too much, deemed illegal? Williams won years ago (as far as I know) largely based on innovation, nowadays, the FIA is so strict it appears it is hindering innovation. So again, why is extreme flexing illegal? Why is innovation suppressed? It seems that now a rich team has the advantage because they have the man power to squeeze the last 3 percent out of the rules.
These cars generate a lot of slow speed, you are right.
The red bull guy @0:46 is kevin magnisun in disguise.
After he retires next year
@@kingotaku3389 he's undercover for Haas.
So let's using flexi wing again. No big deal. RB also should implement flexi wing.
I mean, the rules are the rules, but this is a weird one. A totally passive flexing feature to provide an aero advantage seems right in what Formula 1 was originally meant to be; the experimentation of car performance.
@@MichaelCampbell01 the rules are the rules, but the tests are a different thing all together.
Exploiting where the tests and rules differ is the art of f1
It's the brakes, I remember Lewis's last maclaren, it was stiffer than a teenage morning glory,
He was always adjusting diff settings between corners.
Now the red bull has lost the party trick, we get commentators trying to convince us it's not the brake magic.
Is anyone else really tired of this subject? Like, I'm an engineer and I completely get it. The FIA should focus on changing the rules so we stop talking about this. Let a specified amount of deflection or some other way of making it black and white such as saying any deflection that occurs while still passing the deflection test is allowed so we can all move on. Let's talk about something else.
Key question there at the end. I guess we will find out soon enough.
We’re finally seeing the impact of Red Bull’s wind tunnel testing restrictions.
Of course, if every team was using exactly the same front and rear wings, mandated by the FIA and manufactured by a single independent manufacturer, none of this would be an issue, plus the racing would be much closer and therefore more enjoyable to watch.
That's not the point of F1. What you're describing is a spec series and if that's what you're after, go watch F3 or Indycar.
I don't see why they feel they need to restrict more and more... leave them some freedom to experiment...
Exactly what I think. I thought f1 was about innovation, coming up with new ideas etc.
Why isn't anybody mentioning that Redbull's problems started on almost the exact same day that Newey announced he was leaving. I guess he hit the self destruct button on his way out.
Ferrari and Red Bull have basically gotten clarification that it's ok to run a flexi-wing by the FIA. So expect them to show up in Baku with them and Zak Brown will be crying immediately.
The FIA has been in almost complete denial over the last four decades since they first banned the ground-effect cars; cars that didn't even have front wings because they didn't need them.
They banned the wrong thing!
Aerodynamic downforce has been ruining formula racing (and many other series) since it was introduced by Lotus.
It only works properly for the car in front, which creates turbulent, dirty air that is way less efficient for the cars behind.
Get rid of wings and go 100% ground effect if you want to see better racing where the hole in the air created by the car in front helps the cars behind.
I'd even bring back the Brabham-style fan.