Ferrari F1-75

[gordonthegun]

So, 2023 will be something like this, correct?

The change is very small, an evolution of this year floor and works on this year car.
If this were the 2023 floor, it would mean that the car would not have radical changes, at least in the terminal area of ​​the sidepods.
I would hope for something more than this.

[AR3-GP]

The massive step in the floor leading edge since France always spooked me. It just looks extremely aggressive aerodynamically. The just installed a stair case on the car out of nowhere.

[F1NAC]

So long F1-75. You were one of the most beautiful cars ever made. It wasn’t meant to be.

Hopefully project 675 will make another step to the objective

[deadhead]

[ing.]

https://ibb.co/F7Jn7Pm

Great pic that also highlights how Ferrari were trying to reduce lift on the upper surface of the sidepods with the lateral “fences” and kick-up at the rear. Probably good for some local DF or lift reduction but likely not good for drag.

Alpine went the same way—scalloped upper surface—with their revised sidepods, but smashed the trailing edge of the sidepods down to the floor, most likely to better energize the diffuser and reduce drag for overall better efficiency.

[deadhead]

https://ibb.co/F7Jn7Pm

Great pic that also highlights how Ferrari were trying to reduce lift on the upper surface of the sidepods with the lateral “fences” and kick-up at the rear. Probably good for some local DF or lift reduction but likely not good for drag.

Alpine went the same way—scalloped upper surface—with their revised sidepods, but smashed the trailing edge of the sidepods down to the floor, most likely to better energize the diffuser and reduce drag for overall better efficiency.

I really hope they can keep using this "philosophy" for next year's car and not copy Red Bull but I suspect they might have to with the new rules and all.

[falonso81]

The coke bottle area will have to change. I am guessing is going to look similar to Alpine's solution. The 2023 car will be what Ferrari should have brought in 2022.

[Andi76]

https://ibb.co/F7Jn7Pm

Great pic that also highlights how Ferrari were trying to reduce lift on the upper surface of the sidepods with the lateral “fences” and kick-up at the rear. Probably good for some local DF or lift reduction but likely not good for drag.

Alpine went the same way—scalloped upper surface—with their revised sidepods, but smashed the trailing edge of the sidepods down to the floor, most likely to better energize the diffuser and reduce drag for overall better efficiency.

Could you please explain why it should be not good for drag? I mean we have CFD simulation that says pretty much the opposite. Also the Ferrari was not a car that had any problems with drag. If you suggest this because of Red Bulls topspeed advantage, i do not think this would support your arguement, as without DRS, both cars were pretty close in terms of topspeed. What makes it highly likely that Red Bulls Topspeed advantage had more to do with DRS than with drag itself.

[Vanja #66]

Additionally, Ferrari seem to have discovered that RB was using flex wings more than expected in 2022, this is also a benefit for low drag. Less and less arguments that Ferrari 2022 chassis (wings and floor excluded) is higher-drag than RB.

[AR3-GP]

Additionally, Ferrari seem to have discovered that RB was using flex wings more than expected in 2022, this is also a benefit for low drag. Less and less arguments that Ferrari 2022 chassis (wings and floor excluded) is higher-drag than RB.

Considering the issues from 2021, I strongly doubt anyone was flexing their wings an appreciable amount and that no other team called it out. Additionally, the FIA mounted video targets on the rear wing, which all but rules it out.

[FDD]

Additionally, Ferrari seem to have discovered that RB was using flex wings more than expected in 2022, this is also a benefit for low drag. Less and less arguments that Ferrari 2022 chassis (wings and floor excluded) is higher-drag than RB.

Considering the issues from 2021, I strongly doubt anyone was flexing their wings an appreciable amount and that no other team called it out. Additionally, the FIA mounted video targets on the rear wing, which all but rules it out.

If I remember good RB used front flex wings more aggressively than the others.
But as I said I am not sure.

[AR3-GP]

Additionally, Ferrari seem to have discovered that RB was using flex wings more than expected in 2022, this is also a benefit for low drag. Less and less arguments that Ferrari 2022 chassis (wings and floor excluded) is higher-drag than RB.

Considering the issues from 2021, I strongly doubt anyone was flexing their wings an appreciable amount and that no other team called it out. Additionally, the FIA mounted video targets on the rear wing, which all but rules it out.

If I remember good RB used front flex wings more aggressively than the others.
But as I said I am not sure.

The politics were awfully quiet on the front wings this season which makes me believe there is either nothing there, or that no one wanted to new test introduced because their own wings were flexing.

[Vanja #66]

These are just rumors for now, nothing confirmed. And even if confirmed, its just what Ferrari engineers came up with as an explanation. Still, flexi wings were RBs strong point in Vettel era, so I don't expect Newey to give up on any advantage without doing everything to use it.

[ing.]

https://ibb.co/F7Jn7Pm

Great pic that also highlights how Ferrari were trying to reduce lift on the upper surface of the sidepods with the lateral “fences” and kick-up at the rear. Probably good for some local DF or lift reduction but likely not good for drag.

Alpine went the same way—scalloped upper surface—with their revised sidepods, but smashed the trailing edge of the sidepods down to the floor, most likely to better energize the diffuser and reduce drag for overall better efficiency.

Could you please explain why it should be not good for drag? I mean we have CFD simulation that says pretty much the opposite. Also the Ferrari was not a car that had any problems with drag. If you suggest this because of Red Bulls topspeed advantage, i do not think this would support your arguement, as without DRS, both cars were pretty close in terms of topspeed. What makes it highly likely that Red Bulls Topspeed advantage had more to do with DRS than with drag itself.

Agree that the overall design concept of the F1-75 is very good. It’s just my eyeball CFD having an issue with the inward-tapering “fences” on the top of the pylon and the little kick-up/radiator exit just ahead of the upper wishbone front leg.

I believe Ferrari were trying to reduce the lift normally induced by the downward tapering of the sidepod tops by creating the lick-up at the back, so basically defining an (inverted) wing profile.

So, while the lift may have been reduced, I would expect that the price for this is induced drag from any DF generated—especially since the flow coming off the trailing edge is probably not aligned with the downwash ahead of the RW—as well as what must be a vortex sheet rolling off the top of the rounded, raised sidepod edges trying to work like fences.

Also, from an overall aero efficiency point-of-view, I would expect that not driving more flow down to the floor to power the diffuser must be sacrificing some efficiency gains.

[Andi76]

These are just rumors for now, nothing confirmed. And even if confirmed, its just what Ferrari engineers came up with as an explanation. Still, flexi wings were RBs strong point in Vettel era, so I don't expect Newey to give up on any advantage without doing everything to use it.

There is not a single piece of evidence to support your theory or any theory about flexing wings, floors or planks on the RB18. Why do you keep pushing this narrative on several car threads when there isn't any evidence to support your assertions.

I think its pretty much common knowledge that Red Bull is using flexi wings and no need to give any evidence. But as you obviously doubt it, here is some evidence, which by the way can easily be found by s simple search on youtube(Red Bull Flexi Wing):






And finally - there is nothing wrong about using flexi wings or flexible aero devices. You obvious think its an allegation of cheating. But it isn't. The best F1 designers use what is called aeroelasticity for decades. Rory Byrne introduced rear wing mountings in the mid 1980's to allow the rearwing to flex, Sergio Rinland designed a floor in the early 1990's that used aeroelasticity and an concave shape, Rory Byrne designed a frontwing that flexed in 1997 for the last few races of the championship fight between Schumacher and Villeneuve, McLaren used aeroelasticity(flexi-frontwing) to cancel out the dramatic change in balance of their 1996 car, the early 2000's saw many frontwings and rearwings flexing and also bargeboards(Rory Byrne and Ferrari were the undisputed masters in that area) and Newey used at Red Bull since his arrival. Today all the teams, Red Bull are using aeroelasticity. The rules and the legality tests were always something that made the use of flexible aerodynamic devices something thats very hard to achieve. Material, Direction, Resin - its extremely complicated to design a wing that passes the tests and is still able to flex. But anyway - that has nothing to do with cheating. Its a technology and a form of know how that is used for many decades in F1. And at the moment Red Bull is leading the field in that area. And if someone says Red Bull uses this - there is nothing wrong about it.