Oracle Red Bull Racing RB19 Speculation Thread

[Vanja #66]

Can't help but wonder how changing the aero philosophy would correspond with (small, but existing) wt and cfd time penalty...

My take - fake until confirmed

[AR3-GP]

Can't help but wonder how changing the aero philosophy would correspond with (small, but existing) wt and cfd time penalty...

My take - fake until confirmed

Well the problem is they would have decided on a direction for the '23 car, since the summer break. They were not aware of wt restrictions until October.

[organic]

https://racingnews365.com/the-benefits- ... n-for-2023

The rumours filtering through are striking, because it seems that although a strong link between the RB18 and the RB19 will be noticeable, the latter will be a totally new single-seater, in terms of aerodynamic design, making wholesale changes to what was one of its most competitive aspects last year. Sources very close to the Milton Keynes team report that 90 percent of the aerodynamic surfaces of the new car will be different from those of the RB18.

Really very little to no information other than that in the article. Nothingburger and honestly the 90% number is probably BS based on Aston Martin's figure that they stated plainly in an interview.

Article does claim that RB will seek a continuation/development of the rb18's aerodynamic concept, but who wouldn't guess that

I am reposting this from the Autosport forum RB thread:

Reported in Dutch press, who quote Italian Autosprint

Quote

The RB19 will be ninety percent a new concept. "That's why a camouflaged RB18 will be shown in New York on February 3."


"From an aerodynamic point of view, the RB19 will be very different"
Still, it is quite strange that Red Bull chooses to develop the car drastically. Earlier there was talk of an upgrade of the car that won the title in a dominant way last year. "From an aerodynamic point of view, the car will be very different. The roundings, the edges and the developments of the surfaces in direct contact with the air will not correspond to the concept of the RB18.'

So many adjustments will also be made under the car. After all, the floor is now the most important part to generate downforce. These changes are based on accurate analysis of performance and data from the 2022 season. Under the leadership of Pierre Waché, and under the supervision of Adrian Newey, the team appears to have significantly increased performance and is likely to maintain its competitive advantage.”

This is hilarious

Racingnews365 put out their 90% new aerodynamic surfaces rumour, and it gets re-reported and translated a dozen times through the lower tier media outlets eg crash.net and now it comes back modified due to the translations as a new piece of rumour! amazing

I also cannot find an article on Italian autosprint that contains info about the rb19 of any sort

My belief is that the 'new concept' rumour is rubbish; we won't know for a long time anyway, but it's just my thoughts

[Vanja #66]

Well the problem is they would have decided on a direction for the '23 car, since the summer break. They were not aware of wt restrictions until October.

True, nice catch. However, this is also in cotradiction with earlier rumours they will use lighter chassis, never used in 2022. Changing philosophy would require different chassis also...

[Stu]

I’m not sure that I see that as a contradiction.
In this new era of the cost cap, there is a budgetary logic to not introducing the new chassis (which may have included some of the development features being alluded to); the ‘lightweight’ chassis was reportedly due to a change in material layup, a primary driver of which is driven by shape; by the time the chassis was allegedly ready, the outcome of TD039 had already handed RB a race pace advantage over their primary rival (and was, therefore, not required from a performance perspective).
If you don’t need the extra performance, why use up valuable budget in bringing it to the track? It also keeps their development progress a secret, so that it cannot be copied (in season we saw two teams move to a very RB-esque side-pod; why not keep your powder dry?

[NL_Fer]

If the development cap is activated after the win of wcc ‘22 wouldn’t it be smart start a new concept for ‘23?

Sure the ‘22 car is an excellent base to continue, but in 2022 there is more capacity to develop a new concept, unlike in 2023 when the limit kicks in.

[organic]

If the development cap is activated after the win of wcc ‘22 wouldn’t it be smart start a new concept for ‘23?

Sure the ‘22 car is an excellent base to continue, but in 2022 there is more capacity to develop a new concept, unlike in 2023 when the limit kicks in.

I don't think so

[Cassius]

https://racingnews365.com/the-benefits- ... n-for-2023



Really very little to no information other than that in the article. Nothingburger and honestly the 90% number is probably BS based on Aston Martin's figure that they stated plainly in an interview.

Article does claim that RB will seek a continuation/development of the rb18's aerodynamic concept, but who wouldn't guess that

I am reposting this from the Autosport forum RB thread:

Reported in Dutch press, who quote Italian Autosprint

Quote

The RB19 will be ninety percent a new concept. "That's why a camouflaged RB18 will be shown in New York on February 3."


"From an aerodynamic point of view, the RB19 will be very different"
Still, it is quite strange that Red Bull chooses to develop the car drastically. Earlier there was talk of an upgrade of the car that won the title in a dominant way last year. "From an aerodynamic point of view, the car will be very different. The roundings, the edges and the developments of the surfaces in direct contact with the air will not correspond to the concept of the RB18.'

So many adjustments will also be made under the car. After all, the floor is now the most important part to generate downforce. These changes are based on accurate analysis of performance and data from the 2022 season. Under the leadership of Pierre Waché, and under the supervision of Adrian Newey, the team appears to have significantly increased performance and is likely to maintain its competitive advantage.”

This is hilarious

Racingnews365 put out their 90% new aerodynamic surfaces rumour, and it gets re-reported and translated a dozen times through the lower tier media outlets eg crash.net and now it comes back modified due to the translations as a new piece of rumour! amazing

I also cannot find an article on Italian autosprint that contains info about the rb19 of any sort

My belief is that the 'new concept' rumour is rubbish; we won't know for a long time anyway, but it's just my thoughts

The way I read this, is that 90% of the aero parts have been redesigned. Which is probably similar for every team when designing a new car. Doesn't mean they will go for a new aero concept, which is unlikely given the performance of the car in 2022. This is just sensational journalism from Racingnews365.

[OO7]

Can't help but wonder how changing the aero philosophy would correspond with (small, but existing) wt and cfd time penalty...

My take - fake until confirmed

Wouldn't the change of concept have happened much earlier than the any knowledge of a penalty being issued?

EDIT:
AR3-GP has already covered this point.

[AR3-GP]

Well the problem is they would have decided on a direction for the '23 car, since the summer break. They were not aware of wt restrictions until October.

True, nice catch. However, this is also in cotradiction with earlier rumours they will use lighter chassis, never used in 2022. Changing philosophy would require different chassis also...

Alfa, Williams, and Aston Martin managed to be quite different looking using the same chassis.

[SiLo]

Well the problem is they would have decided on a direction for the '23 car, since the summer break. They were not aware of wt restrictions until October.

True, nice catch. However, this is also in cotradiction with earlier rumours they will use lighter chassis, never used in 2022. Changing philosophy would require different chassis also...

Alfa, Williams, and Aston Martin managed to be quite different looking using the same chassis.

The external parts of the chassis have a relatively minimal impact on the flow structures of the car vs all of the other surfaces. I think the changes will be minimal all over but if you slightly redesign a curve or a face, 100% of it can change easily.

[RonMexico]

I’m not sure that I see that as a contradiction.
In this new era of the cost cap, there is a budgetary logic to not introducing the new chassis (which may have included some of the development features being alluded to); the ‘lightweight’ chassis was reportedly due to a change in material layup, a primary driver of which is driven by shape; by the time the chassis was allegedly ready, the outcome of TD039 had already handed RB a race pace advantage over their primary rival (and was, therefore, not required from a performance perspective).
If you don’t need the extra performance, why use up valuable budget in bringing it to the track? It also keeps their development progress a secret, so that it cannot be copied (in season we saw two teams move to a very RB-esque side-pod; why not keep your powder dry?

A great hedge against the CFD penalty which they had to have assumed was a strong possibility/probability

[Blackout]

At least they shared some useful 'studio' pics of the RB18

FRB BTW

[ScrewCaptain27]

Roll hoop and rear cooling exits look slightly different, so for the moment it is a minor evolution.
FRB.

[Raleigh]

Didn't realize the Red Bull had a 100% penalty on 2023 development...