The bans are half the reason that innovation is so prominent in the sport. Every time something is banned a lot of resources go into design to go faster but remain within the new rules. Essentially new things are discovered because the teams are forced to work hard around the rules rather than doing the obvious
Exactly!! I think we can all agree we want to see innovation, but the problem with doing that now is that the richer teams would run away with it even more then they do now. But with a budget cap, if they can loosen a couple rules to allow for more variety between the cars it’s be fantastic!
I agree however, I do see a negative from this as well... If a team gets lucky with its innovation, the cost cap prevents other teams to try to understand and redesign that component. And you would probably see one team dominate the Formula for some time... So I agree it would be entertaining to see the restrictions lightened, but it would probably make for less random events. We might see some of the "poorer" teams make that gap though.
Well I don't think that's active aero, because active aero has to be activated electronically, not mechanically. That's why for instance the DAS system was declared legal on the Merc
@@leonardantal6333 I don't think that's the case. Mechanically activated active aero would be easily achievable, so all cars would have it if it was allowed. From my understanding DAS was declared legal as Mercedes sold it as "part of the steering system" and also - it's no aero.
@@1hej0k3r maybe I wasn't clear enough, I meant aero that's only activated by the flow of the air, like everything that's in this video. I'd love to see those not banned, of course they have to be limited because there's high risk of failures
@@leonardantal6333 Ah, now I see what you mean. To me "mechanically activated" seemed to imply a switch and a cord or something like that, as you mentioned electronics in contrary to that principle. In that case I absolutely agree with you, flexible parts are an extremely interesting concept to play with in racing and as long as all parts are safe to use I don't really see a point to outlaw them.
its to stop teams getting an unfair advantage and running away with it, and then everyone spending a fortune on something like flex wings just to get back to level. Then nobody has an advantage, and everything is just more expensive. Plus flex wings increase top speeds and could become fragile as teams push for performance, how does a 300+kph crash sound due to a flexible wing failure?
@@jamesrowland2002 an advantage shouldn't be considered unfair just because it's an advantage, and there's no way to make Formula 1 cheap without diluting the essence of the sport. F1 cars are supposed to be the pinnacle of engineering and automotive innovation, pegging back teams when they do just that is actively stifling innovation
@@dannybimma There is a way. Just stop banning everything. If small investments in to technical development will make large gains, it's win win. If everything is banned and cars are ordered to be the same, only huge amount of money will make you slightly faster.
So that the costs don't go haywire. I mean sure, you could allow it and let every team develop their own version, but that raises the engineering costs overall. The thing is that you can't keep spending more and expect linear proportional results in laptime, as you spend more you will get proportionally less for your money. Banning trick suspension and flexible wings keeps the base ammount of spending needed to develop an f1 car lower. It also encourages teams every winter break to come up with something groundbreaking, so that they have an opportunity to punch above their weight in the following season as these rule-bending elements, like DAS or flexi wings, are usually allowed for at least the season that they're introduced.
I thoroughly love this series. Let me ask, if F1 implemented a strict, much lower annual spending limit (say $50 million per team) but opened up the rule book on pretty much most anything, do you think that would be feasible and generate more exciting racing? I think of the days of 6-wheel cars, fan cars, turbo vs naturally aspirated, ground effects, double diffusers, etc...Cars that were dramatically different from one another. Some ideas worked, some ideas failed miserably.
The ban started for safety, but now it's based on cost for further development. With the cost cap there's no need to keep making the rules even more strict
I remember seeing a Ferrari front wing pull itself outward from the the middle mount creating a gap. It was from the nose camera that I caught this.. love the series, thanks..
It's ironic that, when ever Marc pearcy mentions something in his podcast, autosports just jumps on that and make a video. Did lawrence stroll has any relation with autosports😂😂
I feel like the FIA is constantly trying to design the teams' cars for them by tackling each engineering feature with a design rule, when really they should be phrasing rules to dictate their desired outcomes, and let the engineers work on ways to make a fast car within those regulations. For example, to address the safety issues of ground effect, contrast having a FIA engineering team sit down and create extremely intricate dimensioning requirements for the bargeboard, versus saying "the variation in downforce cannot exceed a certain fraction of the average downforce recorded over the course of the race" and letting the engineering teams go wild.
It's about what happens behind the wing in that case. The stalling of air causes such heavy turbulence that there is less down force in the trailing edge, due to not having such a low pressure. No low pressure, less down force, less drag
@@LPChipi your welcome Though don't take everything I say as 100% true, but that's what I understand from my TH-cam aerodynamics general knowledge Also I think it explains the spoon shaped wings the F1 teams have for high speed places with slight download like Monza and Spa
I'd love to see a separation in approach in f1, kinda like the possible engine layouts in the 24h of le mons. One set of rules for aero cars, basically do whatever aero nonsense you want but the following car can't lose more than 10% downforce when following within 1 second and your all good, but you have to use a standard engine that's down on power, with ofc the alternative power cars being given freedom to design whatever kind of super powerful engines they want, no boost control no displacement restrictions just make it fit in the car and your fine but now downforce whatsoever in the wind tunnel
I am no expert, but i thinke that whilst a Stall in the flight industry means losing updraft, a stall in aero of cars means no more downforce, therefore reducing drag
@@firex6525 A wing with zero lift certainly has zero vortex drag, but a stalled wing would experience flow separation, which would increase drag. On TV F1 programmes I have heard claims of stalling wings having reduced drag, but wish somebody on one of those channels could explain how it is possible. The only idea I've had is that they mean vortex drag is reduced, implying that vortex drag from the wings is very high.
frogandspanner i'm not an expert but i think the larger angles in automotive wings mean they have more vortices. please let me know if you find out any more on the subject as i have been wondering as well
Drag from turbulent flow behind a stalled wing isn't that significant, the actual angle (frontal area) presented to the airflow is more important. Your aircraft is in free air, post stall it can pretty much fall straight down and then the airflow is almost 90 degrees onto the wing. Creating a lot of drag. An F1 wing is not free to move like that, in stall it will still present the same frontal area to the incoming air. Also remember that an F1 wing is a very high AoA multi element wing with an absolutely huge amount of induced drag. The amount of drag caused by turbulence behind the stalled wing is nothing compared to the induced drag shed by stalling it.
I remember the 2017 ferrari having huge slots on the side of the floor that pushed the edges nearly touching the ground. They were banned after like 3 races
Seems like the tires may be the great equalizer here--at least with moderately inflexible wings. At Imola, Red Bull noted on the radio that they were faster on the corners but slower on the straights than Mercedes. This may indicate that RB had more downforce, improving their cornering, but the increased drag slowing them on the straights. (Is this why only Verstappen seems to be able to drive the RB well?) In the end, all of that extra downforce may be hard on the tires-letting Hamilton extend on the mediums while Verstappen has a blowout on his right rear tire.
Always more freedom to designers. Make safety rules and let them fly. Why the hell should Technical Queen of motorsport ban everything all the time????
The wing angle is too high for airflow to stay attached in a single element wing, that's why it needs the gap to make it a multi-element wing. Closing the gap causes the wing to stall and it produces almost no downforce.
Should the FIA allow flexible wings? Well, they need to make sure that the sport is relatively safe, and have rules that can be enforced. As long as the wings aren't going to fail, and they can scrutineer whatever rules are in place, and the cars aren't too fast for the tracks, then there is no particular reason to ban it. And if you need to reign in the performance of the cars, it may be easier to do so with something easily measurable, like reducing the surface area of the wings. But with the comments this weekend about Red Bull's wing flexing and gaining them an advantage, this may be a subject that gains some prominence over the next few weeks.
They have to keep a lid on flexible aero parts, otherwise we'll end up with flexible floor parts to seal at the edges & all sorts of crazy interpretations that teams will push to the limit, & over it, increasing sudden failure under load & compromised driver safety. We'd have cars behaving like the FW41 & 42 as teams lower down the grid encountered issues with unstable aero
FIA: creates complicated, well-thought, overlapping regulations Teams: Find a workaround for the regulations FIA: Aaaarghhh. I'm gonna ban that next year Teams: FInd another workaround for the ban ... CONTINUES UNTIL THE END OF F1
I wouldn't mind flexible wings, but get rid of those weirdly wide lawnmower front wings and force them to be narrower so that you can't gain as much downforce from them. Less downforce effectively means less sensitivity to wake turbulence as well.
Wait so 2006 had a sort of reverse DRS system? Now correct me if I'm wrong but that seems like it works in the opposite way that DRS works today, and with no moving parts
Freedom. I want to see what the engineers can do if they're allowed to have some playing field to differentiate their selves after the R&D spending cap. That will add another layer for sure.
I’d like to mention how the technology F1 is using today came from constant banning of old tech by the FIA. I’d like to think of it as a way of promoting constant technological advancement by the teams to keep F1 the “Pinnacle of Motorsport”
Is just me or does FIA hinders technological innovations from teams? (ever since the fan car. ) am not against making cars safer but lots of these bans seem ridiculous
I didn't understand why would FIA want to ban the flexible wings? Are they some kind of safety hazard? Are they so expensive that they make competitiveness harder?
It is quite simple all teams must use a FIA supplied front and rear wing also the floor follow the contours of the bodywork at it base with no form of ingress or egress for air to take (i.e.) no holes at all) what could be more simple
So what I'm understanding is that the FIA is enforcing a ban on flexi-wings today because it was unsafe 20 years ago. Why play cat and mouse with the regulations instead of focusing on testing if the wings are actually secure? An example of how things that were once deemed unsafe can come back is ground effect. Ground effect will be huge in the 2022 cars compared to the current ones. So why not do the same for flexible body parts?
I think the sport would be much more entertaining for spectators if the rules weren't so particular and stringent. I also think that there would be much more technological innovation if teams were left open to creation. I hate that tyres are designed to wear. I hate that refuelling isn't allowed (although I recognise the safety implications). I hate that DRS isn't available whenever the driver wants it. I hate that KERS is so finely regulated. Just let the engineers engineer and let the drivers race.
You can ban technology, but you can not un-learn knowledge. Applying knowledge on existing tech can be expensive. What FIA tend to forget is that developing new technology (to recreate effects you build up knowledge about) often is much more expensive.
Since I know AI race cars exist, I really want to see a series where there is no restrictions on how to build your car and witness all the weird tech people can come up with. (For AI, safety is not an issue)
I do not like the use of stock footage to make visual puns to match the script. I get you're trying to create something different to those guys who've gone off to make it on their own, but it kind of undercuts the high quality points you're trying to make. I'd be much more interested in closer visuals of the wings, with highlighting the significant points of interest, and where those load references would be. Then could show how the teams reacted and how these circumvent the changes. At the moment, it feel like watching Economics Explained does F1.
I need to see a 6-wheeler fan car with an onboard f-duct, double diffuser, flexible wings and a das system.
That would be pretty quick I think.
add active aero and you can get rid of the f-duct :)
venturi tunnels and freedom of engines
What about some AcT1Ve Su5penS10n?
@@gabrielenitti3243 why not
FIA: Weird flex but okay
Weird flex AND NOT OK BY ANY MEANS!!!!
man was this a clever comment
Iconic
Comment of the day
More like weird flex not ok
F1: Bunch of scientists trying to push beyond the limits of traditional cars for science.
*also F1: Experiments bad
The bans are half the reason that innovation is so prominent in the sport.
Every time something is banned a lot of resources go into design to go faster but remain within the new rules.
Essentially new things are discovered because the teams are forced to work hard around the rules rather than doing the obvious
@@iamaperson1337 There's much, and there's _too_ _much_ .
I think they should also relax the rules on things like these when the budget caps come in
Exactly!! I think we can all agree we want to see innovation, but the problem with doing that now is that the richer teams would run away with it even more then they do now. But with a budget cap, if they can loosen a couple rules to allow for more variety between the cars it’s be fantastic!
I agree however, I do see a negative from this as well... If a team gets lucky with its innovation, the cost cap prevents other teams to try to understand and redesign that component. And you would probably see one team dominate the Formula for some time...
So I agree it would be entertaining to see the restrictions lightened, but it would probably make for less random events. We might see some of the "poorer" teams make that gap though.
Ngl problem with that is the dirty air, if u relaxed the rules, the teams would just generate tons of vortex’s damaging the racing
@@frostypenguin2888 I doubt that a budget cap would help the richer teams. It's much cheaper to copy than it is to innovate.
@@stianhatlevoll7305 yup
Flexible wings really only exist because active aero is banned lmao.
Well I don't think that's active aero, because active aero has to be activated electronically, not mechanically. That's why for instance the DAS system was declared legal on the Merc
@@leonardantal6333 I don't think that's the case. Mechanically activated active aero would be easily achievable, so all cars would have it if it was allowed. From my understanding DAS was declared legal as Mercedes sold it as "part of the steering system" and also - it's no aero.
@@1hej0k3r maybe I wasn't clear enough, I meant aero that's only activated by the flow of the air, like everything that's in this video. I'd love to see those not banned, of course they have to be limited because there's high risk of failures
@@leonardantal6333 Ah, now I see what you mean. To me "mechanically activated" seemed to imply a switch and a cord or something like that, as you mentioned electronics in contrary to that principle. In that case I absolutely agree with you, flexible parts are an extremely interesting concept to play with in racing and as long as all parts are safe to use I don't really see a point to outlaw them.
@@1hej0k3r yep, that's what I meant, I just said it in a wrong way 😂
Well the flexing wing is back
i see waht you did there
It's kind of obnoxious how whenever the teams create any sort of innovation, the FIA just straight up bans the shit.
It makes the entire thing kinda dumb
its to stop teams getting an unfair advantage and running away with it, and then everyone spending a fortune on something like flex wings just to get back to level. Then nobody has an advantage, and everything is just more expensive. Plus flex wings increase top speeds and could become fragile as teams push for performance, how does a 300+kph crash sound due to a flexible wing failure?
@@jamesrowland2002 an advantage shouldn't be considered unfair just because it's an advantage, and there's no way to make Formula 1 cheap without diluting the essence of the sport. F1 cars are supposed to be the pinnacle of engineering and automotive innovation, pegging back teams when they do just that is actively stifling innovation
@@dannybimma There is a way. Just stop banning everything. If small investments in to technical development will make large gains, it's win win. If everything is banned and cars are ordered to be the same, only huge amount of money will make you slightly faster.
@@jamesrowland2002 this has never worked though lmfao
I've always wondered what was going on with those winglets going over the nose on the 2007 McLaren among others.
*"weird flex but ok"*
outside of safety, I really don't know why they choose to ban things. Isn't ingenuity part of the game?
So that the costs don't go haywire. I mean sure, you could allow it and let every team develop their own version, but that raises the engineering costs overall. The thing is that you can't keep spending more and expect linear proportional results in laptime, as you spend more you will get proportionally less for your money. Banning trick suspension and flexible wings keeps the base ammount of spending needed to develop an f1 car lower.
It also encourages teams every winter break to come up with something groundbreaking, so that they have an opportunity to punch above their weight in the following season as these rule-bending elements, like DAS or flexi wings, are usually allowed for at least the season that they're introduced.
I thoroughly love this series. Let me ask, if F1 implemented a strict, much lower annual spending limit (say $50 million per team) but opened up the rule book on pretty much most anything, do you think that would be feasible and generate more exciting racing? I think of the days of 6-wheel cars, fan cars, turbo vs naturally aspirated, ground effects, double diffusers, etc...Cars that were dramatically different from one another. Some ideas worked, some ideas failed miserably.
TLDR because there were some crashes when straight line speed increased, according to one offhand line early in the video.
The ban started for safety, but now it's based on cost for further development. With the cost cap there's no need to keep making the rules even more strict
3:26 that transition was smooth af
Why is nobody here after LH comments on sky..
Enjoining the banned series and would be any chance of doing a story on the fuel wars that happened during the sport
Teams: Remove this slot gap separator, we want our stalled wings!
FIA: I got you fam. *Introduces DRS*
Adrian Newey is an absolute machine, the way he churns out designs to bypass every new rule the FIA can think up!
Here we go again.
Instead of rotating the rear wing or rear winglets now its about moving the entire wing.
Red bull gives you bendy wings
its always the red bull huh
I remember seeing a Ferrari front wing pull itself outward from the the middle mount creating a gap. It was from the nose camera that I caught this.. love the series, thanks..
Meanwhile Mercedes are already prepared for F1 2030 season.
It's ironic that, when ever Marc pearcy mentions something in his podcast, autosports just jumps on that and make a video. Did lawrence stroll has any relation with autosports😂😂
Please do more of these videos, so many examples to make videos...
1994 driving assist ban ...
Thank you for all the content produced!
I feel like the FIA is constantly trying to design the teams' cars for them by tackling each engineering feature with a design rule, when really they should be phrasing rules to dictate their desired outcomes, and let the engineers work on ways to make a fast car within those regulations.
For example, to address the safety issues of ground effect, contrast having a FIA engineering team sit down and create extremely intricate dimensioning requirements for the bargeboard, versus saying "the variation in downforce cannot exceed a certain fraction of the average downforce recorded over the course of the race" and letting the engineering teams go wild.
F1:we don't want movable wings that reduce drag
Also f1: here have some drs
1:20 I don't get this it seems to me like less air circulation would cause more drag. Am I missing something?
It's about what happens behind the wing in that case. The stalling of air causes such heavy turbulence that there is less down force in the trailing edge, due to not having such a low pressure. No low pressure, less down force, less drag
@@b29ak2007 That's much clearer, I appreciate it!
@@LPChipi your welcome
Though don't take everything I say as 100% true, but that's what I understand from my TH-cam aerodynamics general knowledge
Also I think it explains the spoon shaped wings the F1 teams have for high speed places with slight download like Monza and Spa
Flexi wings: banned
Red Bull: im gonna broke your world
I'd love to see a separation in approach in f1, kinda like the possible engine layouts in the 24h of le mons. One set of rules for aero cars, basically do whatever aero nonsense you want but the following car can't lose more than 10% downforce when following within 1 second and your all good, but you have to use a standard engine that's down on power, with ofc the alternative power cars being given freedom to design whatever kind of super powerful engines they want, no boost control no displacement restrictions just make it fit in the car and your fine but now downforce whatsoever in the wind tunnel
1:24 How does stalling a wing reduce drag? Stalling increases turbulence and drag, or at least it does on my C152 .
I am no expert, but i thinke that whilst a Stall in the flight industry means losing updraft, a stall in aero of cars means no more downforce, therefore reducing drag
@@firex6525 A wing with zero lift certainly has zero vortex drag, but a stalled wing would experience flow separation, which would increase drag.
On TV F1 programmes I have heard claims of stalling wings having reduced drag, but wish somebody on one of those channels could explain how it is possible. The only idea I've had is that they mean vortex drag is reduced, implying that vortex drag from the wings is very high.
frogandspanner i'm not an expert but i think the larger angles in automotive wings mean they have more vortices. please let me know if you find out any more on the subject as i have been wondering as well
Drag from turbulent flow behind a stalled wing isn't that significant, the actual angle (frontal area) presented to the airflow is more important. Your aircraft is in free air, post stall it can pretty much fall straight down and then the airflow is almost 90 degrees onto the wing. Creating a lot of drag.
An F1 wing is not free to move like that, in stall it will still present the same frontal area to the incoming air. Also remember that an F1 wing is a very high AoA multi element wing with an absolutely huge amount of induced drag. The amount of drag caused by turbulence behind the stalled wing is nothing compared to the induced drag shed by stalling it.
It would be really interesting to see what the F1 guys could come up with if they were allowed movable body work.
Do you remember these Ferrari 2007 front cam (Malaysia?) that showed how the upper flap of the front wing was moving in straight lines?!
Fia : yes, we want fastest car in the world
Also Fia : We ban everything that makes car go faster.
With the 2022 cars flexy wings could play a huge role in pushing the lap time back up without creating significant dirty air
I remember the 2017 ferrari having huge slots on the side of the floor that pushed the edges nearly touching the ground. They were banned after like 3 races
I would love to hear about any engine/power unit bans that weren't part of a planned rule change
Who’s watching this in 2021 lmao
Seems like the tires may be the great equalizer here--at least with moderately inflexible wings. At Imola, Red Bull noted on the radio that they were faster on the corners but slower on the straights than Mercedes. This may indicate that RB had more downforce, improving their cornering, but the increased drag slowing them on the straights. (Is this why only Verstappen seems to be able to drive the RB well?) In the end, all of that extra downforce may be hard on the tires-letting Hamilton extend on the mediums while Verstappen has a blowout on his right rear tire.
Hard to say, until initial working designs of the 2022+ cars are tested.
Red Bull did their front wing design like this because they just proved their motto "gives you wings"
This is what makes F1 so special.
Capped budget but total design freedom.
The teams might end up with some brilliant ideas which enhances sport.
Always more freedom to designers. Make safety rules and let them fly. Why the hell should Technical Queen of motorsport ban everything all the time????
RB front wings where just to obvious how flexi they where on the straights.
I feel like all these regulations sometimes make the sport too expensive.
They need to make f1 lawless and see what happens
*neck breaks in the first coner*
Any F1 team: *breaths*
The FIA: NO THATS BANNED
1:21 not sure about that, i dont know, but i thought that if the gap is closed, than the downforce shiuld still be there, but with much more drag.
i think the area of low pressure behind the wing reduces the drag compared to the non-stalled vortices of the normal positioned wing, but i am unsure.
The wing angle is too high for airflow to stay attached in a single element wing, that's why it needs the gap to make it a multi-element wing. Closing the gap causes the wing to stall and it produces almost no downforce.
Should the FIA allow flexible wings? Well, they need to make sure that the sport is relatively safe, and have rules that can be enforced. As long as the wings aren't going to fail, and they can scrutineer whatever rules are in place, and the cars aren't too fast for the tracks, then there is no particular reason to ban it. And if you need to reign in the performance of the cars, it may be easier to do so with something easily measurable, like reducing the surface area of the wings.
But with the comments this weekend about Red Bull's wing flexing and gaining them an advantage, this may be a subject that gains some prominence over the next few weeks.
Just check the on-board rear camera on Max's car at the RedBull Ring races. And no, it's not the same on Alex's car.
They have to keep a lid on flexible aero parts, otherwise we'll end up with flexible floor parts to seal at the edges & all sorts of crazy interpretations that teams will push to the limit, & over it, increasing sudden failure under load & compromised driver safety. We'd have cars behaving like the FW41 & 42 as teams lower down the grid encountered issues with unstable aero
What is the name of this part shaking at 0:15 as indicated by an arrow?
Shark fin I think
I'lld love to see a race without wings all together
That would be very unstable because of the power from the engine
FIA: creates complicated, well-thought, overlapping regulations
Teams: Find a workaround for the regulations
FIA: Aaaarghhh. I'm gonna ban that next year
Teams: FInd another workaround for the ban
... CONTINUES UNTIL THE END OF F1
i actually didnt know what slot gap separators were for technically until now
Do a video on the weighted fron wings that were banned
I wouldn't mind flexible wings, but get rid of those weirdly wide lawnmower front wings and force them to be narrower so that you can't gain as much downforce from them. Less downforce effectively means less sensitivity to wake turbulence as well.
Have you guys done fuels yet?
Wait so 2006 had a sort of reverse DRS system? Now correct me if I'm wrong but that seems like it works in the opposite way that DRS works today, and with no moving parts
Freedom. I want to see what the engineers can do if they're allowed to have some playing field to differentiate their selves after the R&D spending cap. That will add another layer for sure.
Check out Red Bull X2010. That would happen.
Flexi rear wings are back!
Totally on point, watching three years later 😂
What about a video on the Redbull Flexi-plank?
Budget cap and full design freedom.
The name of the game is, engineers come up with creative and breakthru ways to make their cars super complex and better and fia banning it
How about heat warping?
That thing about the mid-2000s in the beginning of the video is certainly wrong. Its like saying that drs reduces top speed and increases downforce
Total freedom!
FIA should give teams room to be creative in design, be it engine or aero dynamics
they do. Hence the innovations constantly being developed that keep being banned those that are not banned and all differences between the cars....
I’d like to mention how the technology F1 is using today came from constant banning of old tech by the FIA. I’d like to think of it as a way of promoting constant technological advancement by the teams to keep F1 the “Pinnacle of Motorsport”
Mass damper?
These seem to be a cheap way to get speed unless the real cost is all the wind-tunnel time. F1 needs more of these cheap ways.
Hmm. This video seems to have predicted the future, eh?
Is just me or does FIA hinders technological innovations from teams? (ever since the fan car. )
am not against making cars safer but lots of these bans seem ridiculous
As always more freedom. Unless it has a severe safety risk, there is no reason it should be banned from the sport
So flex wings are basically drs?
why am i seeing no comments about how this aged well
How the turn tables don't they Mr. Horner? Look who's complaining all the time now 😅
TH-cam recommends it now.
Ez clutch
I didn't understand why would FIA want to ban the flexible wings? Are they some kind of safety hazard? Are they so expensive that they make competitiveness harder?
It is quite simple all teams must use a FIA supplied front and rear wing also the floor follow the contours of the bodywork at it base with no form of ingress or egress for air to take (i.e.) no holes at all) what could be more simple
It wild be funn to se a f1 unlimited series where ewerything is unbanned. Even if it wuld just bee fore a feew seasons.
Do a video on the old timey scaffolding wings that moved before moving aerodynamics were banned in late 60's
We talk about them a bit in our first Banned video!
th-cam.com/video/h6_UUXTVjK0/w-d-xo.html
This aged like fine wine
So what I'm understanding is that the FIA is enforcing a ban on flexi-wings today because it was unsafe 20 years ago.
Why play cat and mouse with the regulations instead of focusing on testing if the wings are actually secure?
An example of how things that were once deemed unsafe can come back is ground effect. Ground effect will be huge in the 2022 cars compared to the current ones. So why not do the same for flexible body parts?
The FIA is really killing F1 year by year. I very much doubt F1 will be good to watch in the future
Î would have liked a more in depth reason to why flexible parts are a danger
But why ban it?
Maybe create a “Banned-ish” series.
Anyone remember the REDBULL flexi- nose,just the yellow part???(forgot year),so obvious.....soft foam.
I think the sport would be much more entertaining for spectators if the rules weren't so particular and stringent. I also think that there would be much more technological innovation if teams were left open to creation.
I hate that tyres are designed to wear. I hate that refuelling isn't allowed (although I recognise the safety implications). I hate that DRS isn't available whenever the driver wants it. I hate that KERS is so finely regulated. Just let the engineers engineer and let the drivers race.
You can ban technology, but you can not un-learn knowledge. Applying knowledge on existing tech can be expensive. What FIA tend to forget is that developing new technology (to recreate effects you build up knowledge about) often is much more expensive.
Since I know AI race cars exist, I really want to see a series where there is no restrictions on how to build your car and witness all the weird tech people can come up with. (For AI, safety is not an issue)
The innovations would be very interesting but the racing would be super boring though.
Hi I really interested in the story of banning the massive amount of oil
Talk about rollover hoops.
can't wait for them to ban tires and make then race with just the rims
Why were flexing wings banned? It wasn't dangerous like ground effect right?
Sure would be nice if the fia started at Mercedes like how they did when any other car had a unfair advantage
FIA should let the designers work almost rule free for at least one season just so we can see what they are capable of lmao
I think formula 1 should only have 3 sorts of rules, crash testing, energy consumption and minimum weight (please not in tank territory)
I do not like the use of stock footage to make visual puns to match the script. I get you're trying to create something different to those guys who've gone off to make it on their own, but it kind of undercuts the high quality points you're trying to make. I'd be much more interested in closer visuals of the wings, with highlighting the significant points of interest, and where those load references would be. Then could show how the teams reacted and how these circumvent the changes.
At the moment, it feel like watching Economics Explained does F1.
Who's here after the Red Bull rear wing controversy?