2021 Red Bull Racing F1 Team

[dans79]

Brazil is at elevation so the same excuse about dirty downforce should hold as well.

The lowest point on Autodromo Hermanos Rodriguez sits at 2226.2 meters. The lowest point on Autodromo Jose Carlos Pace is 738.9 meters. Mexico is 3 time higher and not even remotely comparable.


source:
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/feat ... nges-.html

[NathanOlder]

They had enough dirty downforce to beat Mercedes at COTA, enough dirty downforce to beat Mercedes in Paul Ricard, Bahrain, Austria, Zandvoort(literally at sea level) those circuits weren't at super high altitude like Mexico. What they did have in common was a lot of aero dependent corners, something the Red Bull excels at. Mexico was just the icing on the cake, you don't get a better read for downforce than there. Even Mercedes fearless leader says Red Bull has more downforce this year.

Losail requires a lot of downforce, thus says the circuit director. Perez has raced and won here, so we do have some data, even if it is 12 years old.

So are you just going to ignore all the other races where Mercedes were faster, at tracks that are far more similar to Losail than any of the ones you mentioned? You can't just cherry pick a quote from an outlier race and then say "Look! I'm right!". Anyone can do that and create a narrative that conforms to their desires and beliefs.

Bahrain was very early season, the cars were closely matched, both Lewis AND Max could have won that race. Austria and Mexico has been terrible for Merc for a while now, and good for Red Bull.

As stated by Mercedes multiple times, they really didn't like the aggressive banking and lost all their time in the banked corners.

Such as?
Barcelona was nip and tuck, and bad strategy cost Verstappen the race more than a pace deficit, same in Bahrain. Mercedes were stronger on the exits of corners and could manage their rear tires better. That's a fact. Portimao has nothing but corners where exit traction wins, any corner that requires carrying speed through it is easy flat. Mercedes didn't win in Hungary and had to use political means to get his man into P2. Russia, well I mean Hamilton only had to beat Norris, so sure. Silverstone? LOL! Where else did Mercedes win post Silverstone upgrade...Turkey and Brazil, Turkey was in the wet, and Bottas's Mercedes with superior exit traction and top speed won, and then finally Brazil.

Brazil is at elevation so the same excuse about dirty downforce should hold as well. Brazil doesn't have many mid to high speed corners that require you to carry speed through. It does have an abundance of corners that require exit traction, getting a good run out of Juncao helps massively down the main straight.

"they really didn't like the aggressive banking and lost all their time in the banked corners."

Then they're going to struggle in Losail, it's not as flat as the sims have you believe, there's a fair bit of undulation and camber on the road that's not easy to see. I tried to drive with this in mind.

But Losail compared to Interlagos is much more flat and less bumpy.

[SiLo]

They had enough dirty downforce to beat Mercedes at COTA, enough dirty downforce to beat Mercedes in Paul Ricard, Bahrain, Austria, Zandvoort(literally at sea level) those circuits weren't at super high altitude like Mexico. What they did have in common was a lot of aero dependent corners, something the Red Bull excels at. Mexico was just the icing on the cake, you don't get a better read for downforce than there. Even Mercedes fearless leader says Red Bull has more downforce this year.

Losail requires a lot of downforce, thus says the circuit director. Perez has raced and won here, so we do have some data, even if it is 12 years old.

So are you just going to ignore all the other races where Mercedes were faster, at tracks that are far more similar to Losail than any of the ones you mentioned? You can't just cherry pick a quote from an outlier race and then say "Look! I'm right!". Anyone can do that and create a narrative that conforms to their desires and beliefs.

Bahrain was very early season, the cars were closely matched, both Lewis AND Max could have won that race. Austria and Mexico has been terrible for Merc for a while now, and good for Red Bull.

As stated by Mercedes multiple times, they really didn't like the aggressive banking and lost all their time in the banked corners.

Such as?
Barcelona was nip and tuck, and bad strategy cost Verstappen the race more than a pace deficit, same in Bahrain. Mercedes were stronger on the exits of corners and could manage their rear tires better. That's a fact. Portimao has nothing but corners where exit traction wins, any corner that requires carrying speed through it is easy flat. Mercedes didn't win in Hungary and had to use political means to get his man into P2. Russia, well I mean Hamilton only had to beat Norris, so sure. Silverstone? LOL! Where else did Mercedes win post Silverstone upgrade...Turkey and Brazil, Turkey was in the wet, and Bottas's Mercedes with superior exit traction and top speed won, and then finally Brazil.

Brazil is at elevation so the same excuse about dirty downforce should hold as well. Brazil doesn't have many mid to high speed corners that require you to carry speed through. It does have an abundance of corners that require exit traction, getting a good run out of Juncao helps massively down the main straight.

"they really didn't like the aggressive banking and lost all their time in the banked corners."

Then they're going to struggle in Losail, it's not as flat as the sims have you believe, there's a fair bit of undulation and camber on the road that's not easy to see. I tried to drive with this in mind.

An excuse for almost every race yet won't hear the opposite for Red Bull. I'm just trying to point out the biases in your reasoning. Mercedes were clearly faster in Barcelona, that's why that strategy worked out for them. Similarly for Red Bull in Austin even with a compromised Merc setup.

Monaco is all tractions zones and Red Bull were very fast there as well, plus its all dirty downforce.

It's been back and forth all year, but I don't agree with your statements that Red Bull are "untouchable" in high speed corners when the evidence simply does not point to such a conclusion.

[Marty_Y]

They had enough dirty downforce to beat Mercedes at COTA, enough dirty downforce to beat Mercedes in Paul Ricard, Bahrain, Austria, Zandvoort(literally at sea level) those circuits weren't at super high altitude like Mexico. What they did have in common was a lot of aero dependent corners, something the Red Bull excels at. Mexico was just the icing on the cake, you don't get a better read for downforce than there. Even Mercedes fearless leader says Red Bull has more downforce this year.

Losail requires a lot of downforce, thus says the circuit director. Perez has raced and won here, so we do have some data, even if it is 12 years old.

So are you just going to ignore all the other races where Mercedes were faster, at tracks that are far more similar to Losail than any of the ones you mentioned? You can't just cherry pick a quote from an outlier race and then say "Look! I'm right!". Anyone can do that and create a narrative that conforms to their desires and beliefs.

Bahrain was very early season, the cars were closely matched, both Lewis AND Max could have won that race. Austria and Mexico has been terrible for Merc for a while now, and good for Red Bull.

As stated by Mercedes multiple times, they really didn't like the aggressive banking and lost all their time in the banked corners.

Such as?
Barcelona was nip and tuck, and bad strategy cost Verstappen the race more than a pace deficit, same in Bahrain. Mercedes were stronger on the exits of corners and could manage their rear tires better. That's a fact. Portimao has nothing but corners where exit traction wins, any corner that requires carrying speed through it is easy flat. Mercedes didn't win in Hungary and had to use political means to get his man into P2. Russia, well I mean Hamilton only had to beat Norris, so sure. Silverstone? LOL! Where else did Mercedes win post Silverstone upgrade...Turkey and Brazil, Turkey was in the wet, and Bottas's Mercedes with superior exit traction and top speed won, and then finally Brazil.

Brazil is at elevation so the same excuse about dirty downforce should hold as well. Brazil doesn't have many mid to high speed corners that require you to carry speed through. It does have an abundance of corners that require exit traction, getting a good run out of Juncao helps massively down the main straight.

"they really didn't like the aggressive banking and lost all their time in the banked corners."

Then they're going to struggle in Losail, it's not as flat as the sims have you believe, there's a fair bit of undulation and camber on the road that's not easy to see. I tried to drive with this in mind.

Mercedes didn't win in Hungary and had to use political means to get his man into P2.

What do you mean by that?

[flmkane]

So are you just going to ignore all the other races where Mercedes were faster, at tracks that are far more similar to Losail than any of the ones you mentioned? You can't just cherry pick a quote from an outlier race and then say "Look! I'm right!". Anyone can do that and create a narrative that conforms to their desires and beliefs.

Bahrain was very early season, the cars were closely matched, both Lewis AND Max could have won that race. Austria and Mexico has been terrible for Merc for a while now, and good for Red Bull.

As stated by Mercedes multiple times, they really didn't like the aggressive banking and lost all their time in the banked corners.

Such as?
Barcelona was nip and tuck, and bad strategy cost Verstappen the race more than a pace deficit, same in Bahrain. Mercedes were stronger on the exits of corners and could manage their rear tires better. That's a fact. Portimao has nothing but corners where exit traction wins, any corner that requires carrying speed through it is easy flat. Mercedes didn't win in Hungary and had to use political means to get his man into P2. Russia, well I mean Hamilton only had to beat Norris, so sure. Silverstone? LOL! Where else did Mercedes win post Silverstone upgrade...Turkey and Brazil, Turkey was in the wet, and Bottas's Mercedes with superior exit traction and top speed won, and then finally Brazil.

Brazil is at elevation so the same excuse about dirty downforce should hold as well. Brazil doesn't have many mid to high speed corners that require you to carry speed through. It does have an abundance of corners that require exit traction, getting a good run out of Juncao helps massively down the main straight.

"they really didn't like the aggressive banking and lost all their time in the banked corners."

Then they're going to struggle in Losail, it's not as flat as the sims have you believe, there's a fair bit of undulation and camber on the road that's not easy to see. I tried to drive with this in mind.

An excuse for almost every race yet won't hear the opposite for Red Bull. I'm just trying to point out the biases in your reasoning. Mercedes were clearly faster in Barcelona, that's why that strategy worked out for them. Similarly for Red Bull in Austin even with a compromised Merc setup.

Monaco is all tractions zones and Red Bull were very fast there as well, plus its all dirty downforce.

It's been back and forth all year, but I don't agree with your statements that Red Bull are "untouchable" in high speed corners when the evidence simply does not point to such a conclusion.

Guys, chill out

It's easy to tell who's gonna be faster, it just takes a little time.

Watch. The. Race.

[godlameroso]

So are you just going to ignore all the other races where Mercedes were faster, at tracks that are far more similar to Losail than any of the ones you mentioned? You can't just cherry pick a quote from an outlier race and then say "Look! I'm right!". Anyone can do that and create a narrative that conforms to their desires and beliefs.

Bahrain was very early season, the cars were closely matched, both Lewis AND Max could have won that race. Austria and Mexico has been terrible for Merc for a while now, and good for Red Bull.

As stated by Mercedes multiple times, they really didn't like the aggressive banking and lost all their time in the banked corners.

Such as?
Barcelona was nip and tuck, and bad strategy cost Verstappen the race more than a pace deficit, same in Bahrain. Mercedes were stronger on the exits of corners and could manage their rear tires better. That's a fact. Portimao has nothing but corners where exit traction wins, any corner that requires carrying speed through it is easy flat. Mercedes didn't win in Hungary and had to use political means to get his man into P2. Russia, well I mean Hamilton only had to beat Norris, so sure. Silverstone? LOL! Where else did Mercedes win post Silverstone upgrade...Turkey and Brazil, Turkey was in the wet, and Bottas's Mercedes with superior exit traction and top speed won, and then finally Brazil.

Brazil is at elevation so the same excuse about dirty downforce should hold as well. Brazil doesn't have many mid to high speed corners that require you to carry speed through. It does have an abundance of corners that require exit traction, getting a good run out of Juncao helps massively down the main straight.

"they really didn't like the aggressive banking and lost all their time in the banked corners."

Then they're going to struggle in Losail, it's not as flat as the sims have you believe, there's a fair bit of undulation and camber on the road that's not easy to see. I tried to drive with this in mind.

Mercedes didn't win in Hungary and had to use political means to get his man into P2.

What do you mean by that?

Exactly what I said. Hamilton finished P3 in Hungary and politics were used to disqualify Vettel to get a free spot. Mercedes throws a tantrum about Red Bull using politics, and the time for diplomacy is over and whatnot. Yet Mercedes have been throwing their political influence this year as well.

[Marty_Y]

Such as?
Barcelona was nip and tuck, and bad strategy cost Verstappen the race more than a pace deficit, same in Bahrain. Mercedes were stronger on the exits of corners and could manage their rear tires better. That's a fact. Portimao has nothing but corners where exit traction wins, any corner that requires carrying speed through it is easy flat. Mercedes didn't win in Hungary and had to use political means to get his man into P2. Russia, well I mean Hamilton only had to beat Norris, so sure. Silverstone? LOL! Where else did Mercedes win post Silverstone upgrade...Turkey and Brazil, Turkey was in the wet, and Bottas's Mercedes with superior exit traction and top speed won, and then finally Brazil.

Brazil is at elevation so the same excuse about dirty downforce should hold as well. Brazil doesn't have many mid to high speed corners that require you to carry speed through. It does have an abundance of corners that require exit traction, getting a good run out of Juncao helps massively down the main straight.

"they really didn't like the aggressive banking and lost all their time in the banked corners."

Then they're going to struggle in Losail, it's not as flat as the sims have you believe, there's a fair bit of undulation and camber on the road that's not easy to see. I tried to drive with this in mind.

Mercedes didn't win in Hungary and had to use political means to get his man into P2.

What do you mean by that?

Exactly what I said. Hamilton finished P3 in Hungary and politics were used to disqualify Vettel to get a free spot. Mercedes throws a tantrum about Red Bull using politics, and the time for diplomacy is over and whatnot. Yet Mercedes have been throwing their political influence this year as well.

As far as I am aware Mercedes had nothing to do with Sebastian Vettel being disqualified, but maybe I'm wrong about that.

I thought it was because Aston Martin couldn't provide a sufficient fuel sample, which has nothing to do with politics.

[Wouter]

[RGAEDA]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FEZOuBWWQAE ... name=small

Is it possible to design and build a composite element such as a rear wing with one side not as stiff as the rules demand and the other side meeting the stiffness demands of the sport? Pardon me if this question or a similar one of this sort was asked here before but i want to know if it is possible as i don't have any knowledge of composite technology.

Reading the theory which red bull came up with makes me think "if it is possible to flex the main plate under load, are they making the main plate flex only at the location where the upper flap bottom end meets the main plate? Are they subjecting just that tiny area of the main plate to flex? If so, how is that even possible? How does it withstand such enormous force by flexing only one side(upper side) of the plate and still maintaining the integrity as the lower side stays rigid?". Also, if the theory is right, it would leak the high-pressure air into the low-pressure zone, what would they gain by doing so? Is it that they could create an effect of having two smaller wings where the drag might not be as much as a single wing?

[flmkane]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FEZOuBWWQAE ... name=small

Is it possible to design and build a composite element such as a rear wing with one side not as stiff as the rules demand and the other side meeting the stiffness demands of the sport? Pardon me if this question or a similar one of this sort was asked here before but i want to know if it is possible as i don't have any knowledge of composite technology.

Reading the theory which red bull came up with makes me think "if it is possible to flex the main plate under load, are they making the main plate flex only at the location where the upper flap bottom end meets the main plate? Are they subjecting just that tiny area of the main plate to flex? If so, how is that even possible? How does it withstand such enormous force by flexing only one side(upper side) of the plate and still maintaining the integrity as the lower side stays rigid?". Also, if the theory is right, it would leak the high-pressure air into the low-pressure zone, what would they gain by doing so? Is it that they could create an effect of having two smaller wings where the drag might not be as much as a single wing?

Yes they can do that. Quite easily.

The hard part is doing that AND passing the test.

Edit: just for the record, I've seen it being done. I've held the prototypes for the fiber layup on the x29 wings. Torsional stiffness was different depending on the the direction of applied torque.

[RGAEDA]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FEZOuBWWQAE ... name=small

Is it possible to design and build a composite element such as a rear wing with one side not as stiff as the rules demand and the other side meeting the stiffness demands of the sport? Pardon me if this question or a similar one of this sort was asked here before but i want to know if it is possible as i don't have any knowledge of composite technology.

Reading the theory which red bull came up with makes me think "if it is possible to flex the main plate under load, are they making the main plate flex only at the location where the upper flap bottom end meets the main plate? Are they subjecting just that tiny area of the main plate to flex? If so, how is that even possible? How does it withstand such enormous force by flexing only one side(upper side) of the plate and still maintaining the integrity as the lower side stays rigid?". Also, if the theory is right, it would leak the high-pressure air into the low-pressure zone, what would they gain by doing so? Is it that they could create an effect of having two smaller wings where the drag might not be as much as a single wing?

Yes they can do that. Quite easily.

The hard part is doing that AND passing the test.

Edit: just for the record, I've seen it being done. I've held the prototypes for the fiber layup on the x29 wings. Torsional stiffness was different depending on the the direction of applied torque.

Thank you. I guess other teams can and may already be doing this, but the question is if they are all doing it, to what extent each one of them is benefiting from it? Probably the big 3 might hold an advantage over others in this regard but reb bull going to FIA about this, to me at least, indicates that they are not gaining the sort of advantage Mercedes gains or of any kind. I know i'm reading too much into red bull's theory but the possibility of it happening is an intriguing one. Now that you mentioned about the laying patterns of fiber on the X-29 wing, i want to gain some knowledge, could you please point me to the artifacts if they are available for public viewing?

[Wouter]

[flmkane]

Is it possible to design and build a composite element such as a rear wing with one side not as stiff as the rules demand and the other side meeting the stiffness demands of the sport? Pardon me if this question or a similar one of this sort was asked here before but i want to know if it is possible as i don't have any knowledge of composite technology.

Reading the theory which red bull came up with makes me think "if it is possible to flex the main plate under load, are they making the main plate flex only at the location where the upper flap bottom end meets the main plate? Are they subjecting just that tiny area of the main plate to flex? If so, how is that even possible? How does it withstand such enormous force by flexing only one side(upper side) of the plate and still maintaining the integrity as the lower side stays rigid?". Also, if the theory is right, it would leak the high-pressure air into the low-pressure zone, what would they gain by doing so? Is it that they could create an effect of having two smaller wings where the drag might not be as much as a single wing?

Yes they can do that. Quite easily.

The hard part is doing that AND passing the test.

Edit: just for the record, I've seen it being done. I've held the prototypes for the fiber layup on the x29 wings. Torsional stiffness was different depending on the the direction of applied torque.

Thank you. I guess other teams can and may already be doing this, but the question is if they are all doing it, to what extent each one of them is benefiting from it? Probably the big 3 might hold an advantage over others in this regard but reb bull going to FIA about this, to me at least, indicates that they are not gaining the sort of advantage Mercedes gains or of any kind. I know i'm reading too much into red bull's theory but the possibility of it happening is an intriguing one. Now that you mentioned about the laying patterns of fiber on the X-29 wing, i want to gain some knowledge, could you please point me to the artifacts if they are available for public viewing?

I'm afraid that they're not available publicly. My department head worked on that plane and he has samples in his office.

Edit: found some reading material though
https://aerospaceengineeringblog.com/ae ... mman-x-29/

[seense]

Yes they can do that. Quite easily.

The hard part is doing that AND passing the test.

Edit: just for the record, I've seen it being done. I've held the prototypes for the fiber layup on the x29 wings. Torsional stiffness was different depending on the the direction of applied torque.

Went looking for it and indeed it is noticeable in france allready. You can see the gap increasing especially on the right side. Interestingly; the gap is increasing a lot also at the "fixed" point on the end plate. Not really a fixed support in that direction then.

[Wouter]

A new circuit, so Max is doing a trackwalk with his dad Jos and Lambiase . Perez with ...... Anyone?