2023 Oracle Red Bull Racing F1 Team

[Just_a_fan]

I don’t see how it’s different than banning FRIC, DAS, engine qualifying modes (those had worked without issue for years), etc. Applies to all teams equally. Does it matter if they instead came out with a targeted directive to neutralize whatever RB has incorporated with their design? The end result is the same.

I’m with Toto. Leave people alone who have done a better job. Sadly, when Merc was being targeted by the rule makers, other teams, and rival fan bases, people were excited to see Merc pegged back if it meant closer racing.

I think the logic of banning those examples you mention is to slow the cars down in the corners (for safety reasons) and to keep costs down for teams.

You can argue that DAS and FRIC are expensive to develop and maintain if every team has to do it. Also, FRIC makes cars much quicker in corners, and engine qualifying modes can hurt engines and give a performance advantage that is engine based. FRIC was also eventually deemed a moving aerodynamic device.

DRS doesn't do any of that (beyond being a moveable aerodynamic devuce - but that's also its purpose), and it's there anyway. So the only reason to remove it in qualifying is to slow down teams who have a more effective DRS.

Those things were done to slow down the leading team that had the best of those system. Qualifying modes were banned precisely because one team had by far the better system.

And it's interesting to look back and remember what Horner said about the ban on "party mode":

I think it's a healthy thing for the manufacturers and if anything, if it creates better and closer racing it's a positive for Formula 1.

So he was happy to have a rule change that created better/closer racing. But now people act as if it's all terrible to try to slow the leading team to create closer racing. Funny how various people's opinions change.

[Stu]

AMuS reporting that F1 is investigating removing DRS usage in qualifying. Maybe first signs of a RB nerf for next season



https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... s-mclaren/

I’m not entirely sure how this effect the order in qualifying? If nobody has DRS during qualifying there will be no net gain/loss for anyone (Belgium is a weird one to use anyway - Rus/Ham had different rear wing set-ups, McLaren were an outlier wrt every other team).
I wonder how those numbers would compare at somewhere like Silverstone, Barcelona or Hungary?

[Just_a_fan]

I’m not entirely sure how this effect the order in qualifying? If nobody has DRS during qualifying there will be no net gain/loss for anyone (Belgium is a weird one to use anyway - Rus/Ham had different rear wing set-ups, McLaren were an outlier wrt every other team).
I wonder how those numbers would compare at somewhere like Silverstone, Barcelona or Hungary?

I guess one way it might affect the order in qualifying is that it means that a mistake in a corner that loses a tenth or two can't be so easily masked by the high top speed in a DRS zone. How much of a difference that will make would require data, of course.

I've always wondered why they even have DRS in qualifying. DRS is an overtaking aid and there shouldn't be any overtaking in qualifying. Allowing its use just seems to be a way of giving better headline qualifying times. It doesn't really bring anything to the event otherwise.

[Juzh]

I’m not entirely sure how this effect the order in qualifying? If nobody has DRS during qualifying there will be no net gain/loss for anyone (Belgium is a weird one to use anyway - Rus/Ham had different rear wing set-ups, McLaren were an outlier wrt every other team).
I wonder how those numbers would compare at somewhere like Silverstone, Barcelona or Hungary?

I guess one way it might affect the order in qualifying is that it means that a mistake in a corner that loses a tenth or two can't be so easily masked by the high top speed in a DRS zone. How much of a difference that will make would require data, of course.

This is such a niche scenario its not worth even considering, even then probably difference is in the hundredths, if that.

Lack of DRS already almost (!) did affect qualifying in sprint shootout. With DRS Verstappen would be tenths ahead of piastri, but was only just ahead because it was disabled.

AMuS reporting that F1 is investigating removing DRS usage in qualifying. Maybe first signs of a RB nerf for next season



https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... s-mclaren/

I’m not entirely sure how this effect the order in qualifying? If nobody has DRS during qualifying there will be no net gain/loss for anyone (Belgium is a weird one to use anyway - Rus/Ham had different rear wing set-ups, McLaren were an outlier wrt every other team).
I wonder how those numbers would compare at somewhere like Silverstone, Barcelona or Hungary?

What you're saying is that every car on the grid has exactly the same DRS effectiveness, seriously ? Why is belgium not a good example? So what if teams had different setups, what we saw is same old story, RB gains the most with DRS open.

Ver vs Ham - low DF wing still not enough to overhaul RB's DRS


Ver vs Rus - It looks like Rus ran very similar drag levels as Verstappen, except of course when DRS is activated


In Silverstone RB was consistently not very fast in S1 and S3 during Q1 and Q2, then was immediately on the pace in Q3 with drs open.

[chrisc90]

A lot of that is energy recovery on the Mercedes though.
I’d imagine RB are using different deployment/recovery at the end of the straights coupled with the DRS advantage.

[organic]

No DRS would mean Merc's ERS disadvantage / Honda's advantage would be even more obvious maybe the change wouldn't have the effect they expect

[Willy]

I don’t see how it’s different than banning FRIC, DAS, engine qualifying modes (those had worked without issue for years), etc. Applies to all teams equally. Does it matter if they instead came out with a targeted directive to neutralize whatever RB has incorporated with their design? The end result is the same.

I’m with Toto. Leave people alone who have done a better job. Sadly, when Merc was being targeted by the rule makers, other teams, and rival fan bases, people were excited to see Merc pegged back if it meant closer racing.

I think the logic of banning those examples you mention is to slow the cars down in the corners (for safety reasons) and to keep costs down for teams.

You can argue that DAS and FRIC are expensive to develop and maintain if every team has to do it. Also, FRIC makes cars much quicker in corners, and engine qualifying modes can hurt engines and give a performance advantage that is engine based. FRIC was also eventually deemed a moving aerodynamic device.

DRS doesn't do any of that (beyond being a moveable aerodynamic devuce - but that's also its purpose), and it's there anyway. So the only reason to remove it in qualifying is to slow down teams who have a more effective DRS.

DAS was banned as it was altering toe angle of the car after the car enters parc ferme (in qualifying). It should have been done at the start of 2020, but was allowed for full season.

FRIC was in contravention to Article 3.15 of the governing body's technical regulations, which outlaws moveable aerodynamic devices and hence Charlie Whiting issues TD to remove it.

[Willy]

No DRS would mean Merc's ERS disadvantage / Honda's advantage would be even more obvious maybe the change wouldn't have the effect they expect

Since last year, they are playing with few things and hasn't got desired effect. Like TD039, which was expected to slow down Ferrari and Red Bull both, but it destroyed the show as only Ferrari got caught in it. Then there was porpoising metrics forced on by Mercedes in hopes of slowing down others, that also backfired in Spa last year and was junked by Singapore. I have no doubt if this backfires, it would be reinstated.

But they have no choice but to do something as Red Bull is annihilating the Sports by winning every race so far and looks set to win everything this year.

[Just_a_fan]

I don’t see how it’s different than banning FRIC, DAS, engine qualifying modes (those had worked without issue for years), etc. Applies to all teams equally. Does it matter if they instead came out with a targeted directive to neutralize whatever RB has incorporated with their design? The end result is the same.

I’m with Toto. Leave people alone who have done a better job. Sadly, when Merc was being targeted by the rule makers, other teams, and rival fan bases, people were excited to see Merc pegged back if it meant closer racing.

I think the logic of banning those examples you mention is to slow the cars down in the corners (for safety reasons) and to keep costs down for teams.

You can argue that DAS and FRIC are expensive to develop and maintain if every team has to do it. Also, FRIC makes cars much quicker in corners, and engine qualifying modes can hurt engines and give a performance advantage that is engine based. FRIC was also eventually deemed a moving aerodynamic device.

DRS doesn't do any of that (beyond being a moveable aerodynamic devuce - but that's also its purpose), and it's there anyway. So the only reason to remove it in qualifying is to slow down teams who have a more effective DRS.

DAS was banned as it was altering toe angle of the car after the car enters parc ferme (in qualifying). It should have been done at the start of 2020, but was allowed for full season.

FRIC was in contravention to Article 3.15 of the governing body's technical regulations, which outlaws moveable aerodynamic devices and hence Charlie Whiting issues TD to remove it.

DAS was banned simply to prevent an arms race and thus a huge investment in money for little real gain.

FRIC was banned for the same reason that Renault's mass damper was banned - to peg back a team doing well. When the mass damper was banned, Renault lost 0.3s/lap and the season then saw Ferrari go on to win the majority of the remaining races. The R26 was designed around the use of the mass damper so it hit them especially hard. Just as planned.

The use of excuses about moveable aero was just the way the FIA covered off any appeal by Renault (and some others that were also disadvantaged by the change mid-way through the season).

[TFSA]

Those things were done to slow down the leading team that had the best of those system. Qualifying modes were banned precisely because one team had by far the better system.

And it's interesting to look back and remember what Horner said about the ban on "party mode":

I think it's a healthy thing for the manufacturers and if anything, if it creates better and closer racing it's a positive for Formula 1.

So he was happy to have a rule change that created better/closer racing. But now people act as if it's all terrible to try to slow the leading team to create closer racing. Funny how various people's opinions change.

Well, that assumes peoples opinion have changed. I was simply trying to explain why some things might have been banned. Also, Horner hasn't complained about this... Yet. If he does, we can call him out on the for being a hypocrite.

My opinion is that most of these bans are stupid, including some of the ones Mercedes faced. As for Red Bull, i don't think this will be a particularly big nerf for them. At least not as big as most people think. But i might be wrong.

[TFSA]

DAS was banned as it was altering toe angle of the car after the car enters parc ferme (in qualifying). It should have been done at the start of 2020, but was allowed for full season.

FRIC was in contravention to Article 3.15 of the governing body's technical regulations, which outlaws moveable aerodynamic devices and hence Charlie Whiting issues TD to remove it.

DAS was protested by Red Bull, but was deemed to be fully legal for 2020. Mercedes had kept in touch with the FIA about the system, and as Just_a_Fan said, it was banned to prevent an arms race.

As for FRIC: FRIC was allowed to stay for a full 5 seasons. It first appeared on the RB6 in 2010. Back then, the FIA accepted Red Bulls explanation that its primary purpose was ride improvement, and as such it was not considered a moveable aerodynamic device at the time.

It was only after all the other teams copied it, that the FIA did a 180 and banned it at the end of 2014.

So for 5 years it wasn't considered an aerodynamic moveable device, and then suddenly it was - you can make of that what you will.

[Wouter]

Red Bull Motorsports

Formula 1 World Champion and Oracle Red Bull Racing Driver Max Verstappen, took on a lifelong ambition to learn to drive a drift car with the help of none other than professional drift driver and record-breaker ‘Mad’ Mike Whiddett.

[AR3-GP]

No DRS would mean Merc's ERS disadvantage / Honda's advantage would be even more obvious maybe the change wouldn't have the effect they expect

I don’t think on average, it will come to a 2 tenths nerf for RB for the reason you mention. On some circuits ERS will be more exposed due to longer time spent on the straights.

[Willy]

DAS was banned as it was altering toe angle of the car after the car enters parc ferme (in qualifying). It should have been done at the start of 2020, but was allowed for full season.

FRIC was in contravention to Article 3.15 of the governing body's technical regulations, which outlaws moveable aerodynamic devices and hence Charlie Whiting issues TD to remove it.

DAS was protested by Red Bull, but was deemed to be fully legal for 2020. Mercedes had kept in touch with the FIA about the system, and as Just_a_Fan said, it was banned to prevent an arms race.

As for FRIC: FRIC was allowed to stay for a full 5 seasons. It first appeared on the RB6 in 2010. Back then, the FIA accepted Red Bulls explanation that its primary purpose was ride improvement, and as such it was not considered a moveable aerodynamic device at the time.

It was only after all the other teams copied it, that the FIA did a 180 and banned it at the end of 2014.

So for 5 years it wasn't considered an aerodynamic moveable device, and then suddenly it was - you can make of that what you will.

It's perplexing how a feature can be legal for one year and illegal for another. If it's illegal or leads to an arms race (which is nonsense) it should be stopped immediately. There was double DRS in 2012, which was treated similarly.

[Farnborough]

Being observant that this is RB team thread but it's usually how the rules are written, in tbat an unseen development path comes to fruition without impingement on existing framework.

"Double diffuser" I understand that Brawn specifically asked the rule makers questions along the lines of "do you think that the current set of rules needs tightening to prevent unseen paths being available" that with the knowledge of what his team understood to be possible, not a loophole, but fully compliant with the existing wording, description etc on the table during the design phase of that car.

They apparently indicated (rules guys) that they had every confidence thst they were watertight

They then had to change the next rules to contain this path and make everyone aware of that coming. Morally correct, but with that season performance we all now know.