Been going on for decades. Teams don’t design to the rules - they design to meet and pass the scrutineering tests. They all push it until someone goes too far, then the FIA gets is embarrassing into action saying ‘OK stop taking the piss lads”
Cheeky innovations are my fav part of F1 compared to spec series. People act like it’s a thing of the past cus the rules are so tight nowadays, but teams always find a way!
I think the one thing I absolutely hated hearing was that they were looking over the rules to iron out any ways that teams could bend the rules to their own advantage - don't they understand that's part of the appeal of F1 - the ingenuity.
I'm both worried and excited about the 2022 reg for this very reason. With more underbody aero the teams will "innovate" around the rule book in this area, as expected. However I see two problems, 1) we won't be able to see the innovation as its underneath and more importantly 2) other teams won't either. The FIA seem pretty ignorant on what their own rule book usually means. A team will propose a new trick and even pass it past the FIA for clarification pre-season, then the FIA give them the go ahead, then the season starts and the other teams see it and protest, followed by the FIA back tracking. Once the innovations are hidden under the car that all ends, who knows what teams will be running under there? Not us for sure.
There is a video on here somewhere about that. The FIA made a rule that said cars had to have a minimum ride height when inspected in the pit lane, so the teams reacted by designing an air suspension system that let them lift the car for inspection, then drop it down on the way pt of the pit lane. There wasn’t any subterfuge about it either; this was all out in the open, on camera, but the cars met the letter of the law, so they were legal like that. This kind of trickeration led to the ‘FIA legality plank’ that all the cars have to run now. They can run the cars as low as they can on track, but if the plank is worn down below a certain minimum thickness, you get penalized. Sometimes you can get off if you can prove the plank was worn when the driver ran over a curb or something, but probably only if the FIA likes you.
@@3Dsjk The plank came about with introduction of "stepped" floors (an FIA determined central section of the floor had to be lower than the floor under the side pods)... The lowest step, the plank was weighed before fitting to the car, then removed during post qualifying/race scrutineering and weighed again.... If the plank had lost more than an FIA determined amount of weight, then the car was deemed to have been run illegally low and disqualification would follow... Seeing large quantities of saw dust strewn around tracks during F1 meetings wasn't unusual...
Honestly, teams bending the rules as far as they can, and dare, is part of the fun for me. The stupidly clever enginerding involved in F1 is a major part of the sport's appeal. Happily, most of the field seem to be genuinely nice people, but let's not forget F1 is a constructors' championship first. If we wanted F1 to be down to driver skill alone, we'd have to make a spec series out of it, and fuck that.
Ligier Ford had an unintended version of this in the 80s that destroyed their year. After dominating the first couple of races they fell out of competitiveness. The joke was that the team manager had lost the day packet with the set up on. In fact the aluminium underbodies had started to degrade and were deforming under load. If someone had realised this they could have walked the championship.
"Whatever replaces Turkey" I wish they would give Raikkonen and Bottas a home Grand Prix and do a race at Kymi Ring in Finland. Speaking of which, you should do one of your sim driving videos on that circuit.
As the regulation is written, it's against the rules. The rules arn't 'beat our tests for X rule' The tests arn't perfect, and passing a test doesn't = legal. Even Farraris engine passed FIA testing. But, a change in testing still meant the engine lost a ton of performance... As, the new testing would have otherwise shown it to be illegal. The rule is clear as written aero parts must be "rigidly secured to the entirely sprung part of the car”, and to “remain immobile in relation to the sprung part of the car” The parts currently are not immobile in relation to the sprung part of the car, and although there must be some flex. The degree of movement is extreame. There is comparison footage on here comparing with the merc, worth a watch.
@@mrflibble9783 Because there must always be some flex though, that means every team is always going to maximise abusing that for an advantage. The rules say there must not be some flex, there can be 0...but they also say the car can't be a 40 tonne block of solid tungsten, which is about the only way 0 flex is happening. It's an arms race, no doubt they're all now working on their new rear wings and finding interesting ways to get them to flex as much as possible within the new tests.
@@ApothecaryTerry The 'degree' of flex is the problem. It's not good enough to say they will all flex. The shear amount that rear wing is flexing is propostrous. And, can't be in the same vein as 'there must be some flex' as the other cars arn't even close. The car is illegally flouting the rules as they are defined, and the FIA are as impotant as if it were a Ferarri infraction.
@@mrflibble9783 4 teams have said they'll have to change their wings as a result of this, so I don't think it's necessarily fair to say that other cars aren't even close- weren't Alfa Romeo relatively similar? That said, I generally agree, the RB wing was clearly outside the rules. However, it's a question of how much flex and not something like traction control which is much more binary. The reason that matters is that all the teams will be pushing that boundary and for me it puts it in the category of being the FIA's responsibility to enforce it, it's an arms race. It's like runners having bouncier shoes or swimmers having fancy suits, they'll always push the limits and rightly so in my opinion. In this case, the FIA have clarified the limit and said this is beyond it, so the arms race begins again.
I used to work for Merc and there was always a profound sense of smugness on the Monday after a race knowing that the victory was done with a full legal car. It was more fun when Ferrari were cheating. Call them whatever you want - Mercedes do things by the books. They're also about as German as my left foot; they just don't want to cheat in case they're caught and it ruins the perfect record they have going.
@@vincentras1991 DAS system in itself wasn't cheating. It allowed a driver to control parts of the car that normally only a mechanic could control - Yes it's true that there is a rule that says that you can't adjust that particular setting in Parc ferme, but crucially, once Q1 starts, parc ferme starts, and it ends _the moment the light goes green at the start of a race_. So long as the drivers didn't activate the Das system during Quali, or on the warm up lap, they didn't break the rules.
They are absolutely right to take away any advantage their competition may have, especially if it actually does breach regs...but it sucks seeing as how the teams in question already have top speed deficits as it is. Wonder how badly they'll be affected assuming they'll have to make changes.
The Alpine is an absolute rocketship in a straight line and Redbull seem to have a slight top end advantage over the Mercedes (based on speed trap data from Portimao ruclips.net/video/BzXdXvH0s_o/видео.html )
Loopholes in f1 have always been a key part. Most of our favourite cars are favourites for these loopholes (brabham bt46b for example). They are great for engineering and creativity and should be 100% cool until they are banned. Doesn’t matter what team it is. Merc DAS or RB wobble wing.
Things is, the wobbly wing is banned and the only "innovation" RedBull found is a way to pass the test but continue cheating. Mercedes' DAS exploited a loophole in the rules and even presented their innovation to the FIA to assk if it was in the regulations
RedBull ran active aero at one point using tensile cable that where electronically resistive, when the car was on a straight voltage would be applied heating the cables and causing them to expand which would change the angle of the wing. Mercedes did a similar thing when DRS was first introduced using small tubes to push air to the front wing and "stall" the front wing reducing drag on both sings when DRS was active. Eventually FIA regulations caught up with innovation of course. 🙂 Actually the wings of the Mercedes deflect less than the RedBull but watch the current Mercedes nose section, relative to the rest of the car, at the end of a straight in side profile and I think you'll see Mercedes are using a flexi-nose section skin. No one has protested...yet. 🤔
Back in 2014 Toyota exploited a very similar loophole in the WEC regulations with a flexing/rotating rear wing. Porsche also tried to get away with flexible body work but were caught early on. I wouldn’t be surprised if more F1 teams were running similarly sneaky setups.
The give has nothing to do with not breaking. 100% stiffness can still have the right tensile strength to not break at loads. In this case redbull is skirting the rules, but the FIA painted themselves in a corner by having tests and redbull have been compliant. This might be illegal under the flexible aero clause, but they would need to define what is too much. If you think about it, the gearbox flexes, the cars body flexes, but such at a small scale. In this case we are talking what 1 inch? Is .5in too much? Or .25in? Or is 1in? That's what the stress test was supposed to solve, but Redbul did pass that. It's a good loop hole that the FIA will close, but I have a feeling it will effect everyone, not just RB.
It is all strategy. You takes notes and use the fact that teams are pushing the grey areas when it is to your benefit. Mercedes got the same treatment with DAS
The last flexi wing saga was cause of RBR as well 2011 🤔 I think. Lewis simply said after qualy, “RBR have this weird flexing wing, makes them faster in the straits, so will be hard to keep them behind” no moaning, simply stating facts, and RBR are mad that someone noticed lmao
I doubt RBR are mad, they will have been expecting this, but have to phrase their responses the correct way to avoid negatively influencing the FIA. It's always the fans (and more recently Netflix) causing the grief. It's almost like lots of them don't realise that this is a part of the sport. Teams "Innovate" into possibly grey areas of the technical regs. Other teams challenge (more to get a firm acceptable/unacceptable from the FIA before they copy the concept; to avoid later being penalised), and everybody carries on with the season. If only the fans would get on board with that process, we wouldn't have all these mountains that should just be molehills.
Watch RB and Merc team leaders interact. They are friends and rivals. They will protest actions by the other (especially RB) but they both accept this as how it works. RB"s reaction in private would have been something like bugger i was hoping to get a few more races out of that lol
@@AidanMillward Hamilton seems to have so much spare capacity much of the time, I wouldn't actually be surprised if he launched an audio memoir on Audible that he had recorded - between radio calls to the team - during races. Obviously, I'm being a bit facetious... But only a little.
@@AidanMillward absolutely is, but when you have been doing it, at the high a level for so long, your brain gets to the point where you have extra capacity to see these things, it’s quite incredible what top level sportsman can do
The people claiming the FIA are favouring Mercedes over Red Bull, so that Mercedes aren't challenged, conveniently forget that: - The DAS system Mercedes used was a genuine innovation - not something where they were breaking a specific rule that already exists, but Red Bull moaned to the FIA resulting in the FIA banning it anyway. - The FIA changed the aero rules this season to move towards high-rake designs - knowing that this is a design philosophy that Red Bull excel in and that Mercedes don't use, therefore specifically trying to disadvantage Mercedes and favour Red Bull. - The fact that Red Bull have passed the stress tests doesn't mean anything if they are still able to deflect the wings at speed on track more than is allowed in the regulations. The tests are flawed if that is the case. - Red Bull will still be allowed to use a potentially illegal car for three races before these new tests are introduced. If the wing is found to be illegal under the new tests, or Red Bull changes it because they know it's illegal, then they're still able to keep their results from those races. If those GPs went badly for Mercedes but well for Red Bull, it could possibly decide the championship. Oh, but I forgot, the FIA favour Mercedes...
Reminiscent of when everyone said Red Bull were winning because they were illegally exploiting blown diffusers. It was rather amusing when they closed the loophole and all the other teams fell further back.
Name a more iconic duo than RB and bendy wings... The thing about carbon fiber is that you can manipulate how it bends under load by changing the orientation of the various carbon sheets that are used to make it. So with the know how and resources that F1 teams have you could cheat a test from the FIA making your wing very stiff to the test loads but flexible for real loads. A lot of the rules are "this piece can only move by this much in these conditions", so basically once you are out of the FIA testing range you can do wathever the hell you want, unless you get caught. F1 in a nutshell...
More iconic duo? Hamilton and complaining about tyres ☺ Agreed though, and honestly the way I see it is always that in any sport it's the ref's job to enforce the rules. Competitors should always be pushing things as far as they can within the boundaries of how the rules are written and checked. Having traction control for example would be just plain cheating, but something like this where it's about how much flex is ok, it's up to the FIA to set the limit and I don't see why the teams shouldn't abuse physics to whatever extent they can if they pass those tests. The arms race is inevitable with complaints, new tests and new ways to gain advantages, that's one of F1's more entertaining aspects I think.
Red Bull can't stop fiddling with the aero, it's an obsession. They caught it in 2007 too, after Spain indeed. The Season Review DVD showed footage of the rear wing clearly moving down on the back straight and moving up again under braking into Turn 10, and it being stated that the FIA were changing the tests. This is another example of Adrian Newey shaking his fist at the FIA shouting 'Do ya want some?!' It's so common of Red Bull to do this, that to complain about it would make them look guilty, so Horner's biting his tongue this time. I'm writing a comment here, then not deleting it an hour later, that's new! Also Princess LewLew, I'm having that. That's right up there with Dick Tantrum for Dan Ticktum, thanks Josh Revell for that one.
It's almost like the team that has been targeted the most by most rule major changes to slow them down in the last couple of years while sticking to the rules doesn't like it when other teams bend the rules (not sorry for that one) to try to win. Merc and Lewis don't mind losing if they were straight up bested, but they do mind losing to a car of dubious legality. If that wing bending was a proper hole in the rules Red Bull would have shown the wing to the FIA like Merc did with DAS to ensure it is legal. They didn't because it isn't legal. Does the B-suffix in RB16B stand for Bendy? People love to whinge about Lewis, but the fact of the matter is that despite being in the worse car than Max he's still ahead of him. He is smarter wheel to wheel, and seems to have a bit of the Jim Clark light touch on the car. Surely people aren't crapping on Lewis' driving skills because he has some strong opinions and is black, right?
I fail to understand fixation on Lewis’ skin colour. At this point it’s just a way to deflect criticism. I can’t give a fuck about what skin colour Lewis is, he could be anything other than black and I’d still have the same opinion of him. I also have little issue over him having strong opinions, everyone has strong opinions of some kind, Eddie Irvine and James Hunt had strong opinions and I don’t care. I also don’t think he is overrated, this season if anything has proved he is where he is for a reason. The thing I have noticed however, is that I can’t say much about Lewis as a person. He says the same stuff every single race, like at this point you can compile a bunch of “Lewis-isms”. “This place has the best fans”, “it was a tough race guys”. I mean, it’s not too much to ask for a more interesting dude winning is it? Also yes I do just want to see some diversity in who wins every year.
@@whitewolf8051 thats how it works.. he wants to play it.. baring in mind he grew up very privaliged and claims to be from a slum.. people can play it right back. Are you saying its annoying when people drag other matters into places they dont belong.... Idiot.
Normal course of business. Red Bull also contested DAS to the stewards and complained to FIA about Party Mode to get it banned (latter according to Marco anyways), and now Mercedes "bringing attention" to RB's wings. Can even being this back further if we go back to the Brawn days. Trying to push the grey areas of the rules and then having other teams complaining or bring attention to is part of parcel of the sport. Long may it continue.
Wasn't going to watch this because there were so many videos on the subject, but the HBK reference in the thumbnail made me laugh while taking a drink, so I clicked after cleaning off my monitor. Well played, sir.
I mean DAS got banned for no good reason...so I guess Meredes has room to protest this one. I just wish these innovations were left there and not banned inmmediately if they complied with the rules at pre-season!
DAS is a bit too far and deserved to be banned. talking about redbull rear flexi wing, you can hardly notice and I do agree that it give 6/10 of the speed in straight but you should take a look at Mercedes front flexi wing that nobody talks about.
The issue with the load test isn't that it isn't carried out at 200mph... What changes when the car is at 200mph? The rear wing impacts 'stationary' air, with some of their pushing the car back (drag), and some pushing the car down (downforce). I suspect the problem is that the load test doesn't test how the wing flexes when loaded both vertically and horizontally at the same time. They may test a vertical load on top of the wing, then a horizontal load pulling the wing backwards, but not a combination. It's smart engineering. How do we design an aero surface that flexes under certain load vectors we'd get in a race setting, but not under the ones that the FIA tests for.
I believe they have been doing a pull-back test only and they're adding a vertical load test to that. At 200mph the forces are much more complex with all the vortices and whatever else. For example, they could have been using other aero on the car to create low pressure on the outside (or inside) of the rear wing support. If the front of the wing support was stiffer than the rear, it wouldn't bend but would twist slightly, which in turn would effectively rotate the wing itself backwards in the way they're doing. Something like that which uses varying stiffness and doesn't directly affect the wing itself would explain how they can get different behaviour under aero load compared to testing conditions. Obviously I have no idea if that's what they're doing or if that would even work. I know enough to know the physics of just that idea would work but nowhere near enough about the cars to know if they could do that without screwing up their downforce and/or creating a load of drag that would defeat the whole point. Whatever they're doing though, it's likely to be pretty complex and clever- which is another reason Merc complained rather than just joining in the fun and copying it.
Personally if Lewis said it I don't mind because it's letter of the law stuff. However it's when he's on the receiving end of it that I find difficult because then we get the whole "FIA are out to get us" and that just gets tiring. Really fucking tiring. Being totally honest, I think it is very clever and makes me sort of wish for the 70s style of heavy experimentation. I know it won't because social media and everything else but if these companies are spending the money they are now, I would've thought that by rights they should have a go. Still, it is what it is and the other teams will have to come up with something else that will probably get banned. (You can tell I want the fan car to be a staple of future F1 cars)
car being stationary or moving has no impact on the flex testing results. Its just that the fast airflow is bending the wing in a different way than the FIA is trying to bend it. Redbull knows exactly which way the FIA is trying bend the wing and which part of the wing they are stressing so they can make the wing strong in those ways and bendy in other places. Its like having a flat square part and knowing FIA is only going to test two corners by adding lets say 100kg weights on them. The part can be designed so those two corners will hardly bend anywhere but the two other corners can be as bendy as a slice of cheese. adding fast airflow won't change that. the two tested corners will still be extremely strong and stiff and the rest will be flapping around. the measurements would still show the part to be legal even if it would be obvious to the naked eye that the part isn't rigid.
What's surprising is that the teams haven't figured out ways to use the expansion / flex of hot metals, of let's say the engine & gearbox, to some aerodynamic advantage.
If this is a problem, then it is the FIA and F1's issue for testing thoroughly. If the wing passes scrutiny, then it passes scrutiny; it isnt Red Bull's issue if they dont refine their testing methodology.
@@AmsterdamHeavy Well they can't make moving aero parts, so they did break the rules, but found a way not to get caught. A bit like Ferrari with the way they found to circumvent the fuel flow sensors.
We’ve always had slightly bendy wings, shhhhh just dw about it, I wouldn’t be surprised if our halo was secretly made out of ramen to save Adrian a few grams 😂
Ferrari have tried painting their cars red for years, I think that and the stripes stopped working about 15 years ago. They have got big wings and exhausts on all the cars though, as well as a bunch of stickers. A couple of them have even matte-wrapped their cars this year (McLaren and Ferrari I think are the matte ones). Camber is looking good too. The only other thing I can think of is air suspension...
I wonder if we are going to see a similar effect to the FIA hauling in Ferrari’s oil burning? Aka sudden, mysterious lack of performance post French GP?
ferrari actually did the wing mirror thing at the introduction of the halo. they mounted the mirrors on the halo to get an aerodynamic advantage out of the mounting, but it was found out pretty early and they had to mount the wing back at the body.
Weren't the first flexi wings back in the late 90's? The problem is not with the teams or the rules, as usual its the enforcing of the rules. If the cars pass the load tests than they are legal, whether the load tests are up to scratch is a different matter.
Great this is exactly what F1 needs! Strict enforcement of rules that’ll help Mercedes reassert itself as the only car that can should be expected to win races.
In 2 minds here. I want them to leave it because competition But i also think they did the floor changes at the rear to slow merc down and even though it wasn't enough they have to be fair with rules. In essence I want them to leave it alone but i understand that they can't.
@@hobgoblinuk5100 I am of one obstinate, pompous and unshakable thought. Which is that F1s greatest flaw is that there is an aristocracy, of the financial order, that is interfering with real competition. I applauded the Pink Mercs and was thrilled to see their success and I resented Renault and the FIA for taking action against Racing Point. The reason that Romain Grosjean did so well at the Indy GP, despite the fact his team is the F1 equivalent of a Haas or Williams, is because all the cars are more or less the same and he is an excellent race car driver! The more F1 can minimize the monopoly of speed by the more wealthy teams the better racing will be throughout the ENTIRE field. Words like “back marker” should hold no meaning, it certainly means little to nothing fir Indycar except as bullshit excuses for a bad day of racing. If I had my druthers, at the end of every season the entire CAD plan for each and every car would be released into public domain so that every team could pick and choose from every possible design, or add new designs if their own, to make the most competitive race car that they possibly can.
As much as I want to dish on the Mercs, this latest RB innovation (rule bending) really does show how good the Mercs really are. With all the commentators this year frothing over the high rake design FINALLY being the best design, they have suddenly become very quiet on this as Mercs still dominating with the low rake design that other teams refuse to copy.
Mercedes always has been on the lead ever since the 2014 . They need a hard rule change. like 2013-2014 transition and 2004-2005 transition and also 2007-2008 transition. And Lewis is just a legend to make use of his best resources. Its show the mentality of the mercedes under toto wolf they are ruthless and will do anything to win. rather than complaining they adapt. they adapted agaisnt eh iffy illegal ferrari engine creating a car that was LITERALLY ONE SECOND FASTER THAN REDBULL in the early stages of the 2020 season.And now they are still winning agaisnt a surging redbull
@@AidanMillward that was not a rule change as crushing as the ones mentioned. It was just about tires like the overall philosophy of Mercedes which is to build a car that is ap fast under normal circumstances but fails in dirty air was not addressed. All the mercy overtakes are either strategic or in the earlier stages of the race.
These sorts of dustups are why I, as an American, prefer Formula 1 over Indycar. Now if only we can get an F1 car setup and tuned to demo a run on a superspeedway oval!
It's not some novel idea to be deemed brilliant by this point. On the contrary, I'd say it's stupid as anything other than an opportunistic thing till FIA stops those doing it because once everyone else sees it, why not have everybody else do it and once any comparative advantage is lost, have teams compete in terms of who will make the most flappy wings out there and race into finding their breaking point or something.
Well they're banned so RB isn't "finding a creative be solution", but just found a way not getting caught cheating. And for the "let's see who breaks their wing first", I guess we're not in the 60s, killing drivers is out of fashion.
i did think that some of it might have been, you know all those contracts you have been offering for power plant tallent for a little advantage next year?, well its getting annoying so the FIA might want to take a look at the bendy wing you are using for one this year.
To everyone saying RB should be allowed to run the wing. Remember these rules came in because teams were complaining that Mercedes was too good. Do you real want to see FIA untie Mercedes’s hands? I sure don’t, not interested in seeing Mercedes lap the field.
I want clear regulations. A test is clear cut, you pass, it's fine; you don't, it's not. But changing the test, because someone complained is muddying the waters. Essentially it boils down to the same issue we've had with track limits, a line is clear, you're either in or outside the line, but changing what's fine depending on if you're overtaking or whatever is not clear at all.
@@DJDiarrhea absolutely clean cut rules. Does the wing meet the rules, not the test the actual rule. If so ok, Mercedes has one next week, so four teams would have them. Only hurts the other six teams especially the ones that can’t afford the upgraded wing.
@@DJDiarrhea as for the test, have seen video of the wing? Zero question the wing bends more that the rule allows. That’s on all three cars/teams in question. In that case Ferrari passed all the FIA Engine testing, advantage happed on track. That’s the same as this wing. FIA changed the way they tested engines because their tests were inadequate, same as the wing.
This does seem like a bit of a slam dunk to me. The rules say that aside from the DRS flap you can't have moving aero parts on your car. A floppy wing is an aero part that moves. If there's enough evidence that it's moving excessively then it's clearly not legal. This isn't like a mass-damper or a double diffuser or DAS or some other piece of bloody clever engineering that was arguably banned more because it made one team dominant rather than for being an infraction of the rules, This is quite clearly brinksmanship with rules that have existed in F1 since the days of the Brabham fan car.
Because DAS wasn't illegal, it was a loophole. Essentially the way the rules for steering were written didn't say that a steering wheel couldn't move more than one axis of direction. Originally Mercedes wanted it to be electronic but the FIA said no and that any system like DAS would have to be purely mechanical and so Mercedes developed a purely mechanical way of having the steering wheel move more than one axis of steering
Indeed- which they are. They're now claiming the Merc front wing is flexing too much...which it probably is, along with the RB and everyone else's- but presumably RB have worked out that theirs flexes less than the Merc (as Merc have with the rear) so they're calling it.
As an engineer, you are tasked with interpreting the rules in as objective a perspective as possible, not make some subjective judgement as to the "intent" of them (whatever that means in your culture). So, adhering only to the strictest letter of the law is not only appropriate, but expected. If you can design a wing within the rules that hinges itself at appropriate times to gain an advantage, that should not be denigrated as "dodgy" or "shady", but should be celebrated as innovative; it is definitely not cheating.
The thing is, these wings don't seem to be within the rules. They definitely aren't immobile relative to the sprung part of the car; the Red Bull's in particular definitely moves more than the suspension drop due to the aero load which is relative motion and thus you could say not legal. That being said, innovation within the rules should absolutely be lauded such as Merc's DAS system, the F-Duct and McLaren's third brake pedal to name but a few.
@@transformersguy234 Ok, but I'll be ridiculously pedantic and say making the wings "immobile relative to the sprung part of the car" is physically impossible, short of cooling all atoms in the car to absolute zero. So, what we do is say "here's a rule" and "here's a test protocol we've designed to verify adherence to the rule". This gives the engineers a box in which to work, build something and apply the protocol, if it passes, race it. I suspect my biggest issue is with FIA's historically ad hoc approach to this sort of situation, they just are completely inconsistent and it pisses me (and apparently other people) off quite frequently. Here in the US, at the other end of the spectrum is NASCAR, where they say right up front "we control the rules and we'll change them at our whim, wherever and whenever we like". Then if some team starts gaining a perceived advantage, the rules are changed immediately and the "offender" is informed to straighten up. NASCAR has lots of issues, but parity and equity of rules application is not one of them (easy for them, as the teams don't sit on some frickin' committee and tell the governing body what to do).
@@d00dEEE I agree that the rule should probably have a motion range rather than require something physically impossible. But at the same time - as shown with Red Bulls flexible front wing - passing the test to check legality of the part doesn't mean it's legal. It's somewhat similar to the VW scandal a few years back where the product in question was illegal but was designed to defeat the test to pass as legal. (I'm aware there's more nuance than that.) In some respects the FIA is kind of consistent. They tend not to take action unless a team starts to take the piss, certain teams f-duct methods which required the use of the hand, past flexy wings, even the track limits at Bahrain this year. But the FIA should absolutely be more consistent in regards to enforcement and laying down of technical and sporting regulations. The teams absolutely have too much say in how the sport is run at the moment, but it is a result of politicking from several decades ago though it does need addressing.
Mercedes complained that the RBR rear wing made the RBR car faster than the merc yet the Mercedes was faster than the RBR on the straights, even without DRS, Hamilton made up time on the straights and was how he managed to get with in drs of max.
I don't get the issue tbh. Everything is fllexible, you can't outlaw the laws of phsics. What the FIA did is place a restriction on the amount of flex, determined by a standardized test. Engineering is in large parts dimensioning parts to fit a set point. If that set point isn't high enough it's no failure of Redbull. And if Redbull finds an advantage while complying with the rigidity tests I say more power to them.
Yes, exactly. There's no such thing as an ideally rigid body outside of simulation. Go out to the street, push down with your finger and you've bent the roadway. If the only thing separating this engineering feat from something they do under the body work is that it's visible, then what the hell is the issue?
So to you cheating is ok? Yes everything bends because physics but the FIA have a mandated limit and flex tolerance which they test. By a static load test. Now if a team has a wing designed to pass a static test but flex beyond the rules when under real load then thats illegal as the wing falls outside of the rules. The new test the FIA is doing is to all cars to see how much the wings flex in real applications
@@rorycoles679 If the FIA gives you a test for compliance with the rule, and you pass that test, how can it possibly be cheating? The test is the physical embodiment of the rule as determined by the governing body.
@@d00dEEE because you can cheat a test. Why do you think school exams have a list of prohibited items? The tests the FIA do only simulate load on the wing. So you can design a wing that "passes" the test but in reality doesn't comply with the rules.
"If I didn't get caught speeding, then I didn't break the law" ~Me, except that 1 time I got caught speeding. While I'd love to see more innovation, sadly just because the test doesn't catch someone cheating doesn't change that they were cheating.
Alright Aidan, I'm a subscriber for over a year, and I've turned notifications on but I'm not getting any of your videos on my timeline for quite some months now. Know anything about that?
Attention FIA, no need to investigate anymore, this chap on youtube has already found Red Bull guilty, he clearly has all the relevant proof of it so we can just go to handing Hammy the title right now. Oh, and nobody ever said Ferrari cheated in 17/18 (2019 then yes), but I guess you have to find an excuse for why they were closer to Sir Hammy of Lewis than before
Exactly. It's all part of the game. It would be a wasted opportunity not to protest because that protest just might be upheld. If it isn't, they haven't lost anything by trying.
![[#2024MAMA] ROSÉ (로제), Bruno Mars - APT. | Mnet 241122 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dgGqD28J6aQ/mqdefault.jpg)
C19 really did a number on my voice didn’t it? Holy balls.
Keep on pushing!
Take care mate!
What did Mika Salo's Sauber do to you?
sounds better ngl
Been going on for decades. Teams don’t design to the rules - they design to meet and pass the scrutineering tests.
They all push it until someone goes too far, then the FIA gets is embarrassing into action saying ‘OK stop taking the piss lads”
are you sure because I thought "iNnoVAtiOn in F! iS deAD"
@@GloomGaiGar it's not dead, just peaked with the current regs. I hope next year's regs help mix things up. Won't know till we see it in action.
Cheeky innovations are my fav part of F1 compared to spec series. People act like it’s a thing of the past cus the rules are so tight nowadays, but teams always find a way!
They just need to be a little more subtle than before so we get bendy wings instead of fan cars.
I think the one thing I absolutely hated hearing was that they were looking over the rules to iron out any ways that teams could bend the rules to their own advantage - don't they understand that's part of the appeal of F1 - the ingenuity.
I'm both worried and excited about the 2022 reg for this very reason. With more underbody aero the teams will "innovate" around the rule book in this area, as expected. However I see two problems, 1) we won't be able to see the innovation as its underneath and more importantly 2) other teams won't either. The FIA seem pretty ignorant on what their own rule book usually means. A team will propose a new trick and even pass it past the FIA for clarification pre-season, then the FIA give them the go ahead, then the season starts and the other teams see it and protest, followed by the FIA back tracking. Once the innovations are hidden under the car that all ends, who knows what teams will be running under there? Not us for sure.
This is like the ride height requirements during the ground effect years.
The FIA will sigh, and tell them to behave.
There is a video on here somewhere about that. The FIA made a rule that said cars had to have a minimum ride height when inspected in the pit lane, so the teams reacted by designing an air suspension system that let them lift the car for inspection, then drop it down on the way pt of the pit lane. There wasn’t any subterfuge about it either; this was all out in the open, on camera, but the cars met the letter of the law, so they were legal like that.
This kind of trickeration led to the ‘FIA legality plank’ that all the cars have to run now. They can run the cars as low as they can on track, but if the plank is worn down below a certain minimum thickness, you get penalized. Sometimes you can get off if you can prove the plank was worn when the driver ran over a curb or something, but probably only if the FIA likes you.
@@3Dsjk Aidan's Storytime video on ground effect covered that lovely.
@@3Dsjk The plank came about with introduction of "stepped" floors (an FIA determined central section of the floor had to be lower than the floor under the side pods)... The lowest step, the plank was weighed before fitting to the car, then removed during post qualifying/race scrutineering and weighed again.... If the plank had lost more than an FIA determined amount of weight, then the car was deemed to have been run illegally low and disqualification would follow... Seeing large quantities of saw dust strewn around tracks during F1 meetings wasn't unusual...
So it is true... Red Bull does give you wings that flex.
Keep saying stupid shitt like that and you don't really have to wonder why you call yourself mr. Nobody
@@matthew-jy5jp ???
"How's Adrian Newey going to get out of this one?"
Been there, done that. X-Wings from the late 90's.
@@sp0nge1337 wings on the rear wing
Honestly, teams bending the rules as far as they can, and dare, is part of the fun for me. The stupidly clever enginerding involved in F1 is a major part of the sport's appeal.
Happily, most of the field seem to be genuinely nice people, but let's not forget F1 is a constructors' championship first. If we wanted F1 to be down to driver skill alone, we'd have to make a spec series out of it, and fuck that.
Agreed, this is nothing new for F1.
They should know by now that Adrian Newey loves his floppy aero parts.
Aidan and James May sound really similar when they imitate Germans
"Of course he's wet Hans, he's standing under a waterfall"
@@TheBrainSpecialist That was the first thing that came to my head as well
natürlich Hans nass ist, er steht unter einem Wasserfall.
@@AidanMillward very close, actually not bad!
I'm loving that HBK reference in the thumbnail xd
"Flexy boy"
Colin Chapman has entered the chat.
Ligier Ford had an unintended version of this in the 80s that destroyed their year. After dominating the first couple of races they fell out of competitiveness. The joke was that the team manager had lost the day packet with the set up on. In fact the aluminium underbodies had started to degrade and were deforming under load.
If someone had realised this they could have walked the championship.
"Whatever replaces Turkey" I wish they would give Raikkonen and Bottas a home Grand Prix and do a race at Kymi Ring in Finland. Speaking of which, you should do one of your sim driving videos on that circuit.
No! It would ruin my one interesting thing about f1 that surprises everyone, that being that Silverstone is the most Northern GP on the calendar!
"Bending the rules" 😂
Adrian Newey: *makes floppy aero parts that reduce drag in a straight line and/or at high speed*
The FIA: *surprised Pikachu face*
Princess Lou Lou 😂 brilliant
I prefer Looois lmao
@@rodracer4567 loopy loois
Well as long as it’s within the regulations it’s not „cheating“ but „clever engineering“
As the regulation is written, it's against the rules. The rules arn't 'beat our tests for X rule' The tests arn't perfect, and passing a test doesn't = legal.
Even Farraris engine passed FIA testing. But, a change in testing still meant the engine lost a ton of performance... As, the new testing would have otherwise shown it to be illegal.
The rule is clear as written aero parts must be "rigidly secured to the entirely sprung part of the car”, and to “remain immobile in relation to the sprung part of the car”
The parts currently are not immobile in relation to the sprung part of the car, and although there must be some flex. The degree of movement is extreame. There is comparison footage on here comparing with the merc, worth a watch.
@@mrflibble9783 Because there must always be some flex though, that means every team is always going to maximise abusing that for an advantage. The rules say there must not be some flex, there can be 0...but they also say the car can't be a 40 tonne block of solid tungsten, which is about the only way 0 flex is happening. It's an arms race, no doubt they're all now working on their new rear wings and finding interesting ways to get them to flex as much as possible within the new tests.
@@ApothecaryTerry The 'degree' of flex is the problem.
It's not good enough to say they will all flex. The shear amount that rear wing is flexing is propostrous. And, can't be in the same vein as 'there must be some flex' as the other cars arn't even close.
The car is illegally flouting the rules as they are defined, and the FIA are as impotant as if it were a Ferarri infraction.
@@mrflibble9783 4 teams have said they'll have to change their wings as a result of this, so I don't think it's necessarily fair to say that other cars aren't even close- weren't Alfa Romeo relatively similar?
That said, I generally agree, the RB wing was clearly outside the rules.
However, it's a question of how much flex and not something like traction control which is much more binary. The reason that matters is that all the teams will be pushing that boundary and for me it puts it in the category of being the FIA's responsibility to enforce it, it's an arms race. It's like runners having bouncier shoes or swimmers having fancy suits, they'll always push the limits and rightly so in my opinion. In this case, the FIA have clarified the limit and said this is beyond it, so the arms race begins again.
"I have the reach, but red bull has the flexible. " Garrus Vakarin
I used to work for Merc and there was always a profound sense of smugness on the Monday after a race knowing that the victory was done with a full legal car. It was more fun when Ferrari were cheating. Call them whatever you want - Mercedes do things by the books. They're also about as German as my left foot; they just don't want to cheat in case they're caught and it ruins the perfect record they have going.
Mmmm that’ll be the Germans at VW and Mercedes guilty of diesel emissions cheating 🤔
That's what a cheater would say.
DAS system?
@@vincentras1991 DAS system in itself wasn't cheating. It allowed a driver to control parts of the car that normally only a mechanic could control - Yes it's true that there is a rule that says that you can't adjust that particular setting in Parc ferme, but crucially, once Q1 starts, parc ferme starts, and it ends _the moment the light goes green at the start of a race_. So long as the drivers didn't activate the Das system during Quali, or on the warm up lap, they didn't break the rules.
@@vincentras1991 DAS was never illegal. It was outlawed for 2021 onwards so that team wouldnt spend a lot of money on developing it.
That thumbnail gdi lmaoooo
Now you have me thinking of Lancelot superkicking Seb
"What's your name?"
"Seb."
"Seb. *WHOMP* SEE?I JUST KICKED SEB!"
I wonder what kinda cheese Ted Kravitz is gonna use to explain this one
Processed Cheesestrings is my bet.
He won't use food. He wouldn't want Seb (who no doubt lives in a huge house and has about 150 cars!) to accuse him of wasting things again!😂😂😂
Cheesestrings. But the white ones, they’re way more flexible.
That jazz clip never gets tired
They are absolutely right to take away any advantage their competition may have, especially if it actually does breach regs...but it sucks seeing as how the teams in question already have top speed deficits as it is. Wonder how badly they'll be affected assuming they'll have to make changes.
The Alpine is an absolute rocketship in a straight line and Redbull seem to have a slight top end advantage over the Mercedes (based on speed trap data from Portimao ruclips.net/video/BzXdXvH0s_o/видео.html )
Loopholes in f1 have always been a key part. Most of our favourite cars are favourites for these loopholes (brabham bt46b for example). They are great for engineering and creativity and should be 100% cool until they are banned. Doesn’t matter what team it is. Merc DAS or RB wobble wing.
Things is, the wobbly wing is banned and the only "innovation" RedBull found is a way to pass the test but continue cheating.
Mercedes' DAS exploited a loophole in the rules and even presented their innovation to the FIA to assk if it was in the regulations
Wreckfest is quite possibly the greatest automotive game ever developed.
RedBull ran active aero at one point using tensile cable that where electronically resistive, when the car was on a straight voltage would be applied heating the cables and causing them to expand which would change the angle of the wing. Mercedes did a similar thing when DRS was first introduced using small tubes to push air to the front wing and "stall" the front wing reducing drag on both sings when DRS was active. Eventually FIA regulations caught up with innovation of course. 🙂
Actually the wings of the Mercedes deflect less than the RedBull but watch the current Mercedes nose section, relative to the rest of the car, at the end of a straight in side profile and I think you'll see Mercedes are using a flexi-nose section skin. No one has protested...yet. 🤔
Back in 2014 Toyota exploited a very similar loophole in the WEC regulations with a flexing/rotating rear wing. Porsche also tried to get away with flexible body work but were caught early on. I wouldn’t be surprised if more F1 teams were running similarly sneaky setups.
Love the Simpson reference at the start
I love the RCR intro 😂
The give has nothing to do with not breaking. 100% stiffness can still have the right tensile strength to not break at loads. In this case redbull is skirting the rules, but the FIA painted themselves in a corner by having tests and redbull have been compliant. This might be illegal under the flexible aero clause, but they would need to define what is too much. If you think about it, the gearbox flexes, the cars body flexes, but such at a small scale. In this case we are talking what 1 inch? Is .5in too much? Or .25in? Or is 1in? That's what the stress test was supposed to solve, but Redbul did pass that. It's a good loop hole that the FIA will close, but I have a feeling it will effect everyone, not just RB.
Those dang Con-Dons in stiff breezes
I forgot muricans pronounce it Caahhhndum
Toto: crap we ALMOST lost a race better find something illegal on their car
That'd be correct, if it was just Toto.
Because at least two other teams including Ferrari have asked about them.
It is all strategy. You takes notes and use the fact that teams are pushing the grey areas when it is to your benefit. Mercedes got the same treatment with DAS
Ferrari also used flexi front wing at Sepang in 2006. Not banned, just told to "fix it" IIRC
oil burning, wheels that pull air through them(which they are still running) Mercedes does this stuff too
The last flexi wing saga was cause of RBR as well 2011 🤔 I think. Lewis simply said after qualy, “RBR have this weird flexing wing, makes them faster in the straits, so will be hard to keep them behind” no moaning, simply stating facts, and RBR are mad that someone noticed lmao
I doubt RBR are mad, they will have been expecting this, but have to phrase their responses the correct way to avoid negatively influencing the FIA. It's always the fans (and more recently Netflix) causing the grief. It's almost like lots of them don't realise that this is a part of the sport.
Teams "Innovate" into possibly grey areas of the technical regs. Other teams challenge (more to get a firm acceptable/unacceptable from the FIA before they copy the concept; to avoid later being penalised), and everybody carries on with the season. If only the fans would get on board with that process, we wouldn't have all these mountains that should just be molehills.
Watch RB and Merc team leaders interact. They are friends and rivals. They will protest actions by the other (especially RB) but they both accept this as how it works.
RB"s reaction in private would have been something like bugger i was hoping to get a few more races out of that lol
And that he can see that while following at 180mph is also impressive.
@@AidanMillward Hamilton seems to have so much spare capacity much of the time, I wouldn't actually be surprised if he launched an audio memoir on Audible that he had recorded - between radio calls to the team - during races.
Obviously, I'm being a bit facetious... But only a little.
@@AidanMillward absolutely is, but when you have been doing it, at the high a level for so long, your brain gets to the point where you have extra capacity to see these things, it’s quite incredible what top level sportsman can do
The people claiming the FIA are favouring Mercedes over Red Bull, so that Mercedes aren't challenged, conveniently forget that:
- The DAS system Mercedes used was a genuine innovation - not something where they were breaking a specific rule that already exists, but Red Bull moaned to the FIA resulting in the FIA banning it anyway.
- The FIA changed the aero rules this season to move towards high-rake designs - knowing that this is a design philosophy that Red Bull excel in and that Mercedes don't use, therefore specifically trying to disadvantage Mercedes and favour Red Bull.
- The fact that Red Bull have passed the stress tests doesn't mean anything if they are still able to deflect the wings at speed on track more than is allowed in the regulations. The tests are flawed if that is the case.
- Red Bull will still be allowed to use a potentially illegal car for three races before these new tests are introduced. If the wing is found to be illegal under the new tests, or Red Bull changes it because they know it's illegal, then they're still able to keep their results from those races. If those GPs went badly for Mercedes but well for Red Bull, it could possibly decide the championship.
Oh, but I forgot, the FIA favour Mercedes...
Reminiscent of when everyone said Red Bull were winning because they were illegally exploiting blown diffusers. It was rather amusing when they closed the loophole and all the other teams fell further back.
I like guessing what circuits are in the video. Sebring, I believe.
Yeah sebring.
Wonder if Vettel is any good round there? 🤔😆
Casually droppin that he raced with Jenson in Wreckfest..
Name a more iconic duo than RB and bendy wings...
The thing about carbon fiber is that you can manipulate how it bends under load by changing the orientation of the various carbon sheets that are used to make it. So with the know how and resources that F1 teams have you could cheat a test from the FIA making your wing very stiff to the test loads but flexible for real loads. A lot of the rules are "this piece can only move by this much in these conditions", so basically once you are out of the FIA testing range you can do wathever the hell you want, unless you get caught. F1 in a nutshell...
More iconic duo? Hamilton and complaining about tyres ☺
Agreed though, and honestly the way I see it is always that in any sport it's the ref's job to enforce the rules. Competitors should always be pushing things as far as they can within the boundaries of how the rules are written and checked. Having traction control for example would be just plain cheating, but something like this where it's about how much flex is ok, it's up to the FIA to set the limit and I don't see why the teams shouldn't abuse physics to whatever extent they can if they pass those tests. The arms race is inevitable with complaints, new tests and new ways to gain advantages, that's one of F1's more entertaining aspects I think.
Red Bull can't stop fiddling with the aero, it's an obsession. They caught it in 2007 too, after Spain indeed. The Season Review DVD showed footage of the rear wing clearly moving down on the back straight and moving up again under braking into Turn 10, and it being stated that the FIA were changing the tests. This is another example of Adrian Newey shaking his fist at the FIA shouting 'Do ya want some?!' It's so common of Red Bull to do this, that to complain about it would make them look guilty, so Horner's biting his tongue this time.
I'm writing a comment here, then not deleting it an hour later, that's new! Also Princess LewLew, I'm having that. That's right up there with Dick Tantrum for Dan Ticktum, thanks Josh Revell for that one.
Some great one-liners in this episode!
It's almost like the team that has been targeted the most by most rule major changes to slow them down in the last couple of years while sticking to the rules doesn't like it when other teams bend the rules (not sorry for that one) to try to win. Merc and Lewis don't mind losing if they were straight up bested, but they do mind losing to a car of dubious legality. If that wing bending was a proper hole in the rules Red Bull would have shown the wing to the FIA like Merc did with DAS to ensure it is legal. They didn't because it isn't legal. Does the B-suffix in RB16B stand for Bendy?
People love to whinge about Lewis, but the fact of the matter is that despite being in the worse car than Max he's still ahead of him. He is smarter wheel to wheel, and seems to have a bit of the Jim Clark light touch on the car. Surely people aren't crapping on Lewis' driving skills because he has some strong opinions and is black, right?
The wing passed the test devised.
End of story.
Anything else is pure gatekeeping garbage.
Hahahaha! Lewis the poor oppressed BAME! Suffering in his Monaco home.
GTFOH!
The whinge virtue signaling is strong with this one.
You did not just try to pull the fucking race card on this...and where exactly is it said Lewis had a worse car? They look pretty even to me
I fail to understand fixation on Lewis’ skin colour. At this point it’s just a way to deflect criticism. I can’t give a fuck about what skin colour Lewis is, he could be anything other than black and I’d still have the same opinion of him. I also have little issue over him having strong opinions, everyone has strong opinions of some kind, Eddie Irvine and James Hunt had strong opinions and I don’t care. I also don’t think he is overrated, this season if anything has proved he is where he is for a reason. The thing I have noticed however, is that I can’t say much about Lewis as a person. He says the same stuff every single race, like at this point you can compile a bunch of “Lewis-isms”. “This place has the best fans”, “it was a tough race guys”. I mean, it’s not too much to ask for a more interesting dude winning is it? Also yes I do just want to see some diversity in who wins every year.
@@whitewolf8051 thats how it works.. he wants to play it.. baring in mind he grew up very privaliged and claims to be from a slum.. people can play it right
back.
Are you saying its annoying when people drag other matters into places they dont belong....
Idiot.
wel--- That's season I guess. It was a fun few weeks
Normal course of business. Red Bull also contested DAS to the stewards and complained to FIA about Party Mode to get it banned (latter according to Marco anyways), and now Mercedes "bringing attention" to RB's wings. Can even being this back further if we go back to the Brawn days.
Trying to push the grey areas of the rules and then having other teams complaining or bring attention to is part of parcel of the sport. Long may it continue.
Cloud goes up, cloud goes down, cloud goes up, cloud goes down!
Wasn't going to watch this because there were so many videos on the subject, but the HBK reference in the thumbnail made me laugh while taking a drink, so I clicked after cleaning off my monitor. Well played, sir.
Wasn’t intentional. It was only when others mentioned it I thought “oh yeah, Shawn Michaels”
@@AidanMillward hey got my click.
I mean DAS got banned for no good reason...so I guess Meredes has room to protest this one.
I just wish these innovations were left there and not banned inmmediately if they complied with the rules at pre-season!
DAS is a bit too far and deserved to be banned. talking about redbull rear flexi wing, you can hardly notice and I do agree that it give 6/10 of the speed in straight but you should take a look at Mercedes front flexi wing that nobody talks about.
The issue with the load test isn't that it isn't carried out at 200mph...
What changes when the car is at 200mph?
The rear wing impacts 'stationary' air, with some of their pushing the car back (drag), and some pushing the car down (downforce).
I suspect the problem is that the load test doesn't test how the wing flexes when loaded both vertically and horizontally at the same time. They may test a vertical load on top of the wing, then a horizontal load pulling the wing backwards, but not a combination.
It's smart engineering.
How do we design an aero surface that flexes under certain load vectors we'd get in a race setting, but not under the ones that the FIA tests for.
I believe they have been doing a pull-back test only and they're adding a vertical load test to that.
At 200mph the forces are much more complex with all the vortices and whatever else. For example, they could have been using other aero on the car to create low pressure on the outside (or inside) of the rear wing support. If the front of the wing support was stiffer than the rear, it wouldn't bend but would twist slightly, which in turn would effectively rotate the wing itself backwards in the way they're doing. Something like that which uses varying stiffness and doesn't directly affect the wing itself would explain how they can get different behaviour under aero load compared to testing conditions.
Obviously I have no idea if that's what they're doing or if that would even work. I know enough to know the physics of just that idea would work but nowhere near enough about the cars to know if they could do that without screwing up their downforce and/or creating a load of drag that would defeat the whole point. Whatever they're doing though, it's likely to be pretty complex and clever- which is another reason Merc complained rather than just joining in the fun and copying it.
If you want to know how to bend the rules but not break them in motorsport, just watch the story on Jeff Gorden's T-rex car.
Smokey liked this.
Personally if Lewis said it I don't mind because it's letter of the law stuff. However it's when he's on the receiving end of it that I find difficult because then we get the whole "FIA are out to get us" and that just gets tiring. Really fucking tiring.
Being totally honest, I think it is very clever and makes me sort of wish for the 70s style of heavy experimentation. I know it won't because social media and everything else but if these companies are spending the money they are now, I would've thought that by rights they should have a go. Still, it is what it is and the other teams will have to come up with something else that will probably get banned.
(You can tell I want the fan car to be a staple of future F1 cars)
We're getting sucky boi ground effects next year man, so just 3/4 of a year more to go.
Nice to hear you're feeling better now, Aiden!
car being stationary or moving has no impact on the flex testing results. Its just that the fast airflow is bending the wing in a different way than the FIA is trying to bend it. Redbull knows exactly which way the FIA is trying bend the wing and which part of the wing they are stressing so they can make the wing strong in those ways and bendy in other places. Its like having a flat square part and knowing FIA is only going to test two corners by adding lets say 100kg weights on them. The part can be designed so those two corners will hardly bend anywhere but the two other corners can be as bendy as a slice of cheese. adding fast airflow won't change that. the two tested corners will still be extremely strong and stiff and the rest will be flapping around. the measurements would still show the part to be legal even if it would be obvious to the naked eye that the part isn't rigid.
Mass damping is still in effect.. inert systems on the suspension sorry if you have already covered it.
What's surprising is that the teams haven't figured out ways to use the expansion / flex of hot metals, of let's say the engine & gearbox, to some aerodynamic advantage.
lets just say red bull love to bend the rules like there wings bend
If this is a problem, then it is the FIA and F1's issue for testing thoroughly. If the wing passes scrutiny, then it passes scrutiny; it isnt Red Bull's issue if they dont refine their testing methodology.
Well they're changing the test, aren't they ?
@@aaronaaronsen3360 ...and thats fine, but it isnt a "cheat", in my opinion, by any definition
@@AmsterdamHeavy Well they can't make moving aero parts, so they did break the rules, but found a way not to get caught. A bit like Ferrari with the way they found to circumvent the fuel flow sensors.
@@aaronaaronsen3360 Not even close to the same thing.
@@AmsterdamHeavy Both found a way to pass the test but still cheat. What's the difference ?
We’ve always had slightly bendy wings, shhhhh just dw about it, I wouldn’t be surprised if our halo was secretly made out of ramen to save Adrian a few grams 😂
Has anyone ever tried “go faster stripes”? I mean they worked on every 1L Nissan micra soooo.....
Ferrari have tried painting their cars red for years, I think that and the stripes stopped working about 15 years ago. They have got big wings and exhausts on all the cars though, as well as a bunch of stickers. A couple of them have even matte-wrapped their cars this year (McLaren and Ferrari I think are the matte ones). Camber is looking good too.
The only other thing I can think of is air suspension...
7:07 you might want to tell that one to Volkswagen
And all the other motor manufacturers. It wasn’t just VW, they were all doing it.
I wonder if we are going to see a similar effect to the FIA hauling in Ferrari’s oil burning? Aka sudden, mysterious lack of performance post French GP?
So whats next? Flaccid wing mirror? Flappy barge board?
ferrari actually did the wing mirror thing at the introduction of the halo. they mounted the mirrors on the halo to get an aerodynamic advantage out of the mounting, but it was found out pretty early and they had to mount the wing back at the body.
I lol at Princess Lulu hahaha
Wouldn't it be lovely to see a video discussing the new game ratings for drivers though…? 😏
If rb break while testing that would be cheeky move
While Merc flex on whole competition. Ferrari and Red Bull cried in corners when FIA stole their toys away. :D
Porsche pulled this on group 4 and 5 cars but won. Because homologation = safety!
What mod and sim is in this video? Been looking for an early 10s redbull mod!
Really Whats flexing more...Red Bulls wing or Aidrian Newey just being brilliant?
flexing wings on a red bull car wow that s new 2010 to 2014 flexing front wings and now the rear wings well i cant say that i m surprised about it
Weren't the first flexi wings back in the late 90's? The problem is not with the teams or the rules, as usual its the enforcing of the rules. If the cars pass the load tests than they are legal, whether the load tests are up to scratch is a different matter.
Great this is exactly what F1 needs!
Strict enforcement of rules that’ll help Mercedes reassert itself as the only car that can should be expected to win races.
In 2 minds here. I want them to leave it because competition
But i also think they did the floor changes at the rear to slow merc down and even though it wasn't enough they have to be fair with rules.
In essence I want them to leave it alone but i understand that they can't.
@@hobgoblinuk5100 I am of one obstinate, pompous and unshakable thought. Which is that F1s greatest flaw is that there is an aristocracy, of the financial order, that is interfering with real competition. I applauded the Pink Mercs and was thrilled to see their success and I resented Renault and the FIA for taking action against Racing Point. The reason that Romain Grosjean did so well at the Indy GP, despite the fact his team is the F1 equivalent of a Haas or Williams, is because all the cars are more or less the same and he is an excellent race car driver! The more F1 can minimize the monopoly of speed by the more wealthy teams the better racing will be throughout the ENTIRE field. Words like “back marker” should hold no meaning, it certainly means little to nothing fir Indycar except as bullshit excuses for a bad day of racing.
If I had my druthers, at the end of every season the entire CAD plan for each and every car would be released into public domain so that every team could pick and choose from every possible design, or add new designs if their own, to make the most competitive race car that they possibly can.
As much as I want to dish on the Mercs, this latest RB innovation (rule bending) really does show how good the Mercs really are. With all the commentators this year frothing over the high rake design FINALLY being the best design, they have suddenly become very quiet on this as Mercs still dominating with the low rake design that other teams refuse to copy.
And the one team that did copy Mercedes' low rake design has dropped back into the midfield
Mercedes always has been on the lead ever since the 2014 . They need a hard rule change. like 2013-2014 transition and 2004-2005 transition and also 2007-2008 transition. And Lewis is just a legend to make use of his best resources.
Its show the mentality of the mercedes under toto wolf they are ruthless and will do anything to win. rather than complaining they adapt. they adapted agaisnt eh iffy illegal ferrari engine creating a car that was LITERALLY ONE SECOND FASTER THAN REDBULL in the early stages of the 2020 season.And now they are still winning agaisnt a surging redbull
They had the 16-17 rule change and still won.
@@AidanMillward that was not a rule change as crushing as the ones mentioned. It was just about tires like the overall philosophy of Mercedes which is to build a car that is ap fast under normal circumstances but fails in dirty air was not addressed. All the mercy overtakes are either strategic or in the earlier stages of the race.
@@speeddemon2901 Well, yeah. If you're pretty much guaranteed to always run the race from the front, you'll design your car for that scenario
These sorts of dustups are why I, as an American, prefer Formula 1 over Indycar. Now if only we can get an F1 car setup and tuned to demo a run on a superspeedway oval!
It's not some novel idea to be deemed brilliant by this point. On the contrary, I'd say it's stupid as anything other than an opportunistic thing till FIA stops those doing it because once everyone else sees it, why not have everybody else do it and once any comparative advantage is lost, have teams compete in terms of who will make the most flappy wings out there and race into finding their breaking point or something.
Well they're banned so RB isn't "finding a creative be solution", but just found a way not getting caught cheating.
And for the "let's see who breaks their wing first", I guess we're not in the 60s, killing drivers is out of fashion.
Ferrari wing also seems to flex similar to RB and Alpine
i did think that some of it might have been, you know all those contracts you have been offering for power plant tallent for a little advantage next year?, well its getting annoying so the FIA might want to take a look at the bendy wing you are using for one this year.
So no flexi rear wing but you can have movable suspension too warm the front tires
Makes a nice change from red bull constantly complaining about Mercedes ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
To everyone saying RB should be allowed to run the wing. Remember these rules came in because teams were complaining that Mercedes was too good. Do you real want to see FIA untie Mercedes’s hands? I sure don’t, not interested in seeing Mercedes lap the field.
I want clear regulations. A test is clear cut, you pass, it's fine; you don't, it's not. But changing the test, because someone complained is muddying the waters.
Essentially it boils down to the same issue we've had with track limits, a line is clear, you're either in or outside the line, but changing what's fine depending on if you're overtaking or whatever is not clear at all.
@@DJDiarrhea absolutely clean cut rules. Does the wing meet the rules, not the test the actual rule. If so ok, Mercedes has one next week, so four teams would have them. Only hurts the other six teams especially the ones that can’t afford the upgraded wing.
@@DJDiarrhea as for the test, have seen video of the wing? Zero question the wing bends more that the rule allows. That’s on all three cars/teams in question. In that case Ferrari passed all the FIA Engine testing, advantage happed on track. That’s the same as this wing. FIA changed the way they tested engines because their tests were inadequate, same as the wing.
@@nsrvtqc The test is the rule. If you pass the test you pass the rule.
No
This does seem like a bit of a slam dunk to me. The rules say that aside from the DRS flap you can't have moving aero parts on your car. A floppy wing is an aero part that moves. If there's enough evidence that it's moving excessively then it's clearly not legal.
This isn't like a mass-damper or a double diffuser or DAS or some other piece of bloody clever engineering that was arguably banned more because it made one team dominant rather than for being an infraction of the rules, This is quite clearly brinksmanship with rules that have existed in F1 since the days of the Brabham fan car.
Why is 'cheat' in quotes? I get it. You're proving my point. They're not actually cheating.
Why wasn't DAS banned straight away can someone explain when they knew about it at the start of the season?
Because DAS wasn't illegal, it was a loophole. Essentially the way the rules for steering were written didn't say that a steering wheel couldn't move more than one axis of direction. Originally Mercedes wanted it to be electronic but the FIA said no and that any system like DAS would have to be purely mechanical and so Mercedes developed a purely mechanical way of having the steering wheel move more than one axis of steering
@@rorycoles679 merc paid enough
@@robertthassy461 Merc was told to change it, i dont see any paying there
On the real if the shoe was on the other feet you and I know RB would be crying wolf
Indeed- which they are. They're now claiming the Merc front wing is flexing too much...which it probably is, along with the RB and everyone else's- but presumably RB have worked out that theirs flexes less than the Merc (as Merc have with the rear) so they're calling it.
I'd like if audibility were better or there were subtitles
Same audio settings and levels I’ve used for years.
wonder if any of the teams could use a flywheel hybrid system like what williams was experimenting with in 2014 or 2015
Not allowed. And williams couldn't have been experimenting with those for f1. Their PU was/is supplied by hpp (mercedes)
That's what KERS was
Princess Lulu
Germany within the rule... one word DAS...
Might as well be indycar at this point. Just spec series it
As an engineer, you are tasked with interpreting the rules in as objective a perspective as possible, not make some subjective judgement as to the "intent" of them (whatever that means in your culture). So, adhering only to the strictest letter of the law is not only appropriate, but expected. If you can design a wing within the rules that hinges itself at appropriate times to gain an advantage, that should not be denigrated as "dodgy" or "shady", but should be celebrated as innovative; it is definitely not cheating.
The thing is, these wings don't seem to be within the rules. They definitely aren't immobile relative to the sprung part of the car; the Red Bull's in particular definitely moves more than the suspension drop due to the aero load which is relative motion and thus you could say not legal.
That being said, innovation within the rules should absolutely be lauded such as Merc's DAS system, the F-Duct and McLaren's third brake pedal to name but a few.
@@transformersguy234 Ok, but I'll be ridiculously pedantic and say making the wings "immobile relative to the sprung part of the car" is physically impossible, short of cooling all atoms in the car to absolute zero. So, what we do is say "here's a rule" and "here's a test protocol we've designed to verify adherence to the rule". This gives the engineers a box in which to work, build something and apply the protocol, if it passes, race it.
I suspect my biggest issue is with FIA's historically ad hoc approach to this sort of situation, they just are completely inconsistent and it pisses me (and apparently other people) off quite frequently. Here in the US, at the other end of the spectrum is NASCAR, where they say right up front "we control the rules and we'll change them at our whim, wherever and whenever we like". Then if some team starts gaining a perceived advantage, the rules are changed immediately and the "offender" is informed to straighten up. NASCAR has lots of issues, but parity and equity of rules application is not one of them (easy for them, as the teams don't sit on some frickin' committee and tell the governing body what to do).
@@d00dEEE I agree that the rule should probably have a motion range rather than require something physically impossible. But at the same time - as shown with Red Bulls flexible front wing - passing the test to check legality of the part doesn't mean it's legal. It's somewhat similar to the VW scandal a few years back where the product in question was illegal but was designed to defeat the test to pass as legal. (I'm aware there's more nuance than that.)
In some respects the FIA is kind of consistent. They tend not to take action unless a team starts to take the piss, certain teams f-duct methods which required the use of the hand, past flexy wings, even the track limits at Bahrain this year. But the FIA should absolutely be more consistent in regards to enforcement and laying down of technical and sporting regulations.
The teams absolutely have too much say in how the sport is run at the moment, but it is a result of politicking from several decades ago though it does need addressing.
Mercedes complained that the RBR rear wing made the RBR car faster than the merc yet the Mercedes was faster than the RBR on the straights, even without DRS, Hamilton made up time on the straights and was how he managed to get with in drs of max.
Wasn’t just merc.
@@AidanMillward true but they were the loudest imo
So...RedBull is flexing on Mercedes with their new car?
The "wrong titles" bit gets me every time lol
Roll* titles
It’s “roll titles”, you uncultured swine.
@@sanfordcurtis8242 Whoops, sorry
*oink
"Princes Lewlew"
I don't get the issue tbh. Everything is fllexible, you can't outlaw the laws of phsics. What the FIA did is place a restriction on the amount of flex, determined by a standardized test. Engineering is in large parts dimensioning parts to fit a set point. If that set point isn't high enough it's no failure of Redbull. And if Redbull finds an advantage while complying with the rigidity tests I say more power to them.
Yes, exactly. There's no such thing as an ideally rigid body outside of simulation. Go out to the street, push down with your finger and you've bent the roadway. If the only thing separating this engineering feat from something they do under the body work is that it's visible, then what the hell is the issue?
So to you cheating is ok? Yes everything bends because physics but the FIA have a mandated limit and flex tolerance which they test. By a static load test. Now if a team has a wing designed to pass a static test but flex beyond the rules when under real load then thats illegal as the wing falls outside of the rules. The new test the FIA is doing is to all cars to see how much the wings flex in real applications
@@rorycoles679 If the FIA gives you a test for compliance with the rule, and you pass that test, how can it possibly be cheating? The test is the physical embodiment of the rule as determined by the governing body.
@@d00dEEE because you can cheat a test. Why do you think school exams have a list of prohibited items? The tests the FIA do only simulate load on the wing. So you can design a wing that "passes" the test but in reality doesn't comply with the rules.
@@rorycoles679 The test is the rule
It satisfied the test so it should be legal too
"If I didn't get caught speeding, then I didn't break the law" ~Me, except that 1 time I got caught speeding.
While I'd love to see more innovation, sadly just because the test doesn't catch someone cheating doesn't change that they were cheating.
Alright Aidan, I'm a subscriber for over a year, and I've turned notifications on but I'm not getting any of your videos on my timeline for quite some months now. Know anything about that?
Nope.
The 2017,2018 and 2019 Ferrari was illegal.The current 2021 Redbull is illegal.The difference in performance is Sir Lewis Hamilton.
Attention FIA, no need to investigate anymore, this chap on youtube has already found Red Bull guilty, he clearly has all the relevant proof of it so we can just go to handing Hammy the title right now.
Oh, and nobody ever said Ferrari cheated in 17/18 (2019 then yes), but I guess you have to find an excuse for why they were closer to Sir Hammy of Lewis than before
"The difference in performance is Sir Lewis Hamilton."
Right, so that's why Bottas was wiping the floor with his team mate all weekend.
Any of these teams will file a protest in a second if they think someone is gaining an advantage over them, period.
Exactly. It's all part of the game. It would be a wasted opportunity not to protest because that protest just might be upheld. If it isn't, they haven't lost anything by trying.