Agreed, however you have to wonder if they kept to the "rules" (if you know what I mean) then they maybe wouldn't be so quick in the first place. Same as Brawn, Renault, Benetton, Ferrari etc over the years which made them win championships.
Spanish Grand Prix 2011, Circuit de Catalunya- Race 5/19
- Thread starter Glaucus
- Start date
Teams/designers will always flirt with breaking the "spirit" of the rules, but as long as their car passes the FIA tests...it is legal.
The RBR car (and all associated technology) is legal, no matter what non-FIA people say.
The likes of McLaren and Ferrari wasted time trying to get the RBR flexi wing banned (rather than developing their own) and now it seems they have found something else about the RBR car to moan about.
I am absolutely amazed that when McLaren saw the flexi wing, a year ago, they didnt immediately get to work on their own. If I was a team principal, I would've been all over that innovation. To actually change the shape of the car while it is travelling, is the holy grail of aerodynamics.
I think teams can use their time/resources better, by copying RBR trick bits, rather than moaning about them.
The RBR car (and all associated technology) is legal, no matter what non-FIA people say.
The likes of McLaren and Ferrari wasted time trying to get the RBR flexi wing banned (rather than developing their own) and now it seems they have found something else about the RBR car to moan about.
I am absolutely amazed that when McLaren saw the flexi wing, a year ago, they didnt immediately get to work on their own. If I was a team principal, I would've been all over that innovation. To actually change the shape of the car while it is travelling, is the holy grail of aerodynamics.
I think teams can use their time/resources better, by copying RBR trick bits, rather than moaning about them.
Soldato
Problem is that copying isn't easy to do, take the front wing for example, maybe it only works well for them is because of the rake they use so any team wanting to copy it could face a total redsign of the car which takes a long time.
Getting it banned is faster and easier.
No it isn't. It's a moveable aero device and therefore banned.
These sort of inter team arguing over the rules is nothing new. There was nothing wrong with Mclarens 3rd pedal, it passed all the rules and was run past the FIA, until all the others teams had trouble getting it to work.
Banned.
Mass Damper, same. Cleared then banned.
Honda passed all the tests and rules, they got banned anyway. Despite other teams running the exact same fuel system.
We all know that the red bull wing/nose is flexing passed the limits and is against the rules for moving aero devices. This was banned fast enough when it was the rear wing doing it. I expect the teams thought wrongly the same rules would apply this time.
They could easily check if the wings where flexing too much in motion with a wear strip that would cost pence to police. For some reason they don't seem interested.
Except that is totally unreliable. The flex is in reference to the floor of the car, not the road. If the surface is uneven, or sloped, or the car is heavily loaded to one side compressing the suspension and tyres, then it it totally possible a perfectly legal totally rigid wing could clip the ground at its end. Hell, clipping a curb would do it.
The rules are in relation to the reference plane of the car, and are tested on a stationary car using weights to simulate down force. The Red Bull wing passes these tests, therefore is perfectly legal.
All things in life that bring real value to your company/team/car/etc., usually, are not easy to do. The fact that it is difficult, makes it worthwhile when a team finally succeeds in implementing a design.
Lets look at the stats over the last 2 years.
Whenever a team brings out an innovative design, invariably it doesn't get banned (immediately).
There 2 notable instances:
2009: When Ferrari took BrawnGP to court and wanted their innovative diffuser banned. The courts through the case out, however, the FIA eventually banned the device, but allowed BrawnGP to use it, for the remainder of the year.
2010: There has been a lot of furore surrounding the flexi wing. McLaren in particular were desperate to get this thing banned. The FIA responded by making the tests more stringent. They also passed this flexi wing as legal, because the flexi wing passes all their tests.
Note that none of these devices got banned and gave the advantage to other teams. Sure, you can take RBR to court and keep trying to get their car banned, but in the long run, the most successful teams are not those who protest about other teams' cars, but are those teams who come up with innovative designs and quickly copy other teams' innovations.
Making protests, these days, doesn't really get you anywhere...or so it seems.
Re: Flexi wings
According to Dannyjo...this is banned.
However, according to the FIA, it is not banned.
I understand where you are coming from Danny, but the FIA's ruling is what counts and they have been saying (over the last year), that the flexi wing is legal.
But dannyjo is one to something there!
The rules should really read at no point in the race may any of the body work of the car touch the race track (safety, real world appliance as no car touches the road out side of the contact patches of the tyre) so then teams are forced to find performance in a more practical manner. Sticking some more planks on the bottoms of the cars and measuring the wear would be a really sensible way of policing it, could also jam one by the diffuser and say this is pretty flammable DONT force hot stuff through it...
Would be a good way to ensure performance is found in more sensible ways than how low the car runs at high speeds (which costs a huge amount to develop)
The rules should really read at no point in the race may any of the body work of the car touch the race track (safety, real world appliance as no car touches the road out side of the contact patches of the tyre) so then teams are forced to find performance in a more practical manner. Sticking some more planks on the bottoms of the cars and measuring the wear would be a really sensible way of policing it, could also jam one by the diffuser and say this is pretty flammable DONT force hot stuff through it...
Would be a good way to ensure performance is found in more sensible ways than how low the car runs at high speeds (which costs a huge amount to develop)
Yes I know, but there's nothing to stop them changing the test or the method of measurement. As they did to michelin and to honda when it suited.
It would make them stiffened up the wings or have to raise the ride height.
It's not something I want them to do over night but they can change the tests and criteria for next year if they wanted pretty easily.
Just the same as when they put the plank under the car, you could damage that on a kerb but tough ****, raise the ride height.
But they did change the tests. They increased the weight applied (by 5x I think!) and the wing STILL passed the flex test. It is perfectly legal.
People need to forget the idea of how close the wing gets to the road deeming if its legal. Short of the floor of the car in terms of ride height, pretty much no regulations around an F1 car measure things in distance from the road. It is all distance from the reference plane, which (i belive) is the flat floor of the car.
You could make the front end of an F1 car really soft with a few inches travel in the suspension, and then through cornering the end of your front wing could touch the ground every time. However, providing it didnt flex in reference to the reference plane, it would be perfectly legal.
Red Bull have what looks to be a flexi wing. Teams complained. The FIA said it was legal, but changed the tests. The wings still passed as legal. What do you want them to do now? Create a dannyjo rule?
"Im sorry Christian, but your cars have been deemed illegal to race under section 69.2(e) of the sporting regulations. 'If dannyjo22 doesn't like it, then it should be banned'"
People need to forget the idea of how close the wing gets to the road deeming if its legal. Short of the floor of the car in terms of ride height, pretty much no regulations around an F1 car measure things in distance from the road. It is all distance from the reference plane, which (i belive) is the flat floor of the car.
You could make the front end of an F1 car really soft with a few inches travel in the suspension, and then through cornering the end of your front wing could touch the ground every time. However, providing it didnt flex in reference to the reference plane, it would be perfectly legal.
Red Bull have what looks to be a flexi wing. Teams complained. The FIA said it was legal, but changed the tests. The wings still passed as legal. What do you want them to do now? Create a dannyjo rule?
"Im sorry Christian, but your cars have been deemed illegal to race under section 69.2(e) of the sporting regulations. 'If dannyjo22 doesn't like it, then it should be banned'"
How do you know they didn't immediately get to work on it? It could be they either can't get it to work within the rules/tests or it won't fit within the design of the car.
For all we know, Red Bull may have spent several years getting it working behind the scenes, before we even saw it on track.
We don't know for sure. But if they are struggling to duplicate the manufacturing process...they need to try harder.
I know it sounds harsh, but nobody said competing at the the very top of F1 (which is where RBR at the moment), was going to be easy.
Anyone checked the BBC site where Hamilton is moaning that Schumacher blocked him in the race when both he and Vettel were lapping him which cost him the chance of victory. I don't know what race he was in but even Brundle commented that schumi got out of the way very quickly. Certainly even I did not see an issue with them lapping schumi.
Soldato
Where did hamilton expect him to go? If he'd vaporised or done the comedy wheels on extendable poles cartoon thing then maybe he'd have got out of the way quicker but that would have been about the only way he could have done so
sunama said:
The trouble is they're supposed to be making F1 cheaper so that the big few teams don't dominate like Ferrari did, so considering they've made huge cutbacks to save money in so many other areas (testing/fuel/tyres/gearbox/engine etc) it wouldn't make much sense to tell the other teams to get on with making their own given the R&D costs that will be involved.
Skeeter said:
They just need to test it in real world conditions, ie. drive the car at 175mph and monitor the wing in action - stick some sensors at the base of the wing and measure the distance to the floor, god knows why they don't bother given the photos of the wing practically touching the floor.
It's not that the wing is legal but rather th FIA test is heavily flawed and for whatever reason they can't be arsed to do anything about it.
R+D is all part of F1. This is the very essence of what F1 is about. If R+D was to be significantly reduced to minuscule proportions, I'm not so sure this would be F1 any more.
With regards to cost cutting: The FIA and powers that be, change rules and regs to suit themselves, using reasons such as cost cutting and "going green" as an excuse.
Fundamentally, F1 is about making money. It is a business. Money talks and BS walks.
If the FIA deem it appropriate for RBR to dominate the championship and win it by race number 10, then it will happen. If the FIA feel that RBR dominance is hurting F1 viewing figures and income, then they will nail RBR. At this moment in time, the FIA are happy for things to proceed as they are, so RBR must make the most of it.
I remember when MSc began dominating, the FIA changed rules that they felt would halt MSc's domination. The same happened in 1994 to Williams, when they were dominating. The same could happen to RBR...but that time has clearly, not yet arrived.
As stated above, while the FIA are happy to allow RBR to win races, they will happily allow RBR to use devices which are not in the spirit of the rules.
F1 teams and F1 followers, just have to suck it up.
Soldato
Tell that to rb because they can't get the Kers to work and that's been around for YEARS
Tell that to rb because they can't get the Kers to work and that's been around for YEARS
It's been around for years, but in 2009 when it was legal, they did not use it (BrawnGP who were their closest rivals also chose not to use it, so in hindsight, maybe this was the correct decision).
In 2010, all teams agreed not to use it.
In 2011, KERS was brought back, so in effect, RBR have had a single Winter to develop the device.
In 2011, as we have seen, their KERS device is working, but not reliably. Instead, they have invested their resources on developing other areas of the car and to this end (given their results), they have made the right choice.
The same cannot be said about McLaren or Ferrari.
For the love of god! The regulations have NOTHING to do with the proximity of the wing to the ground! They measure the flex of the wing in relation to the floor of the car! Go push down on the corner of your car. The bodywork of your car will get closer to the ground, but it hasnt moved in relation to the floor of your car as its a fixed structure.
The regulations have nothing to do with the wing and the ground, so testing it at speed measuring the distance to the ground is pointless.
I do not understand how people can think the FIA are just letting Red Bull run an illegal part. They just aren't. Its legal, get over it.
but it's the best way to measure for flexing, stick another sensor under the floor to measure the movement there too but the point is the wing/floor movement is measured under real world conditions, all you need is a flat surface.
That's irrelevant, there are videos showing the Red Bull wing flexing closer to the ground at high speed with the rest of the front end staying put and then the wing springs back upwards as the car slows.
No it's not, the problem is the FIA test is not putting a real world load on the wing they are just artificially simulating it and the wing is passing, driving at 175mph there is a far larger surface area under load.
Nope, they've just invented something that passes the FIA test but looks to behave illegally otherwise.
Last edited: