2024 Oracle Red Bull Racing F1 Team

[ali623]

Hello everyone,
I have a little question. Coming out of the preseason tests, I've read a lot of rumors around the paddock describing our speed as frightening. However, after seeing plenty of data and analyses by experts, I don't recall seeing any "frightening" advantage over the other teams, especially considering that all the top teams have made significant progress. Do you also find this puzzling, or have you seen something that makes you believe we're going to blow everyone away?

Thanks!

Just look Red Bull themselves. GP and Newey laughing and smiling on day 1 when Max was doing his initial laps. Max beaming in every post-test interview, calling the car better in every area and looking every bit as confident as he did last season.

Combine that with every other team saying they're miles ahead and you don't even need to read between the lines.

[organic]

The RB18 was a dog in terms of the balance as well.

It was overweight, and also on the front axle, which meant Max struggled much more with that car. As the weights kept going down the car became a rocket at many races.

I think sim to real is still quite a bit of work in progress. The RB18 was only really bad in two races -- Austria, and Brazil. Both sprint weekends. It was quite good everywhere else.

Australia was another poor one.

[SSScoffee]

Could it be that they are finding less floor gains, and are trying to find more gains elsewhere, hence the massive sidepod aero change?

[f1isgood]

The RB18 was a dog in terms of the balance as well.

It was overweight, and also on the front axle, which meant Max struggled much more with that car. As the weights kept going down the car became a rocket at many races.

I think sim to real is still quite a bit of work in progress. The RB18 was only really bad in two races -- Austria, and Brazil. Both sprint weekends. It was quite good everywhere else.

Australia was another poor one.

Good catch, yes Australia was certainly a bad race.

[venkyhere]

Could it be that they are finding less floor gains, and are trying to find more gains elsewhere, hence the massive sidepod aero change?

Other way around... everything that is done on the 'visible' bodywork is solely meant to increase the efficiency and productivity of the 'invisible' bodywork - the floor underneath. All this reworking the non-roll-hoop cooling setup (to increase the undercut by a huge margin compared to RB19) and splitting it into 3 inlets per side (instead of 1 per side for RB19) is aimed to improve the flow characteristics of the sidepods and engine cover, in a particular way such that the flow to the rear of the car is enhanced in such a way as to utilize the benefits from the way the floor works, even more.

[Espresso]

Could it be that they are finding less floor gains, and are trying to find more gains elsewhere, hence the massive sidepod aero change?

Other way around... everything that is done on the 'visible' bodywork is solely meant to increase the efficiency and productivity of the 'invisible' bodywork - the floor underneath. All this reworking the non-roll-hoop cooling setup (to increase the undercut by a huge margin compared to RB19) and splitting it into 3 inlets per side (instead of 1 per side for RB19) is aimed to improve the flow characteristics of the sidepods and engine cover, in a particular way such that the flow to the rear of the car is enhanced in such a way as to utilize the benefits from the way the floor works, even more.

Or stating the obvious? With increasing speed the sidepod generates a marginal lift countering the increasing downforce, supporting the suspension and stabilizing (the downward motion of) the floor in result preventing a stall of the floor at high speed....
The game is to keep the ´suction´ generated at cornering at maximum and at straight line optimal & minimal whilst preventing a stall.

[AR3-GP]

Or stating the obvious? With increasing speed the sidepod generates a marginal lift countering the increasing downforce, supporting the suspension and stabilizing (the downward motion of) the floor in result preventing a stall of the floor at high speed....
The game is to keep the ´suction´ generated at cornering at maximum and at straight line optimal & minimal whilst preventing a stall.

I do not believe that the purpose of the sidepod is this.

[venkyhere]

Could it be that they are finding less floor gains, and are trying to find more gains elsewhere, hence the massive sidepod aero change?

Other way around... everything that is done on the 'visible' bodywork is solely meant to increase the efficiency and productivity of the 'invisible' bodywork - the floor underneath. All this reworking the non-roll-hoop cooling setup (to increase the undercut by a huge margin compared to RB19) and splitting it into 3 inlets per side (instead of 1 per side for RB19) is aimed to improve the flow characteristics of the sidepods and engine cover, in a particular way such that the flow to the rear of the car is enhanced in such a way as to utilize the benefits from the way the floor works, even more.

Or stating the obvious? With increasing speed the sidepod generates a marginal lift countering the increasing downforce, supporting the suspension and stabilizing (the downward motion of) the floor in result preventing a stall of the floor at high speed....
The game is to keep the ´suction´ generated at cornering at maximum and at straight line optimal & minimal whilst preventing a stall.

To be honest, I've thought about this, that's why I worded my reply without including the words lift or downforce. Because we have two low-pressure surfaces near the 'blocking area' of the sidepod undercut's high pressure zone -> one above the sidepod and one below it, the outwash portion of the underfloor. So where is the 'resultant' force from the sidepod going to be ? upwards or downwards ?

The surfaces and shapes might be designed in such a way that the two opposing forces follow different non-linearities with the car's speed:

1) when there is an actual yaw-angle present, the floor-pressing may dominate
2) when there is no yaw, the 'lifting' may dominate, reducing the severity of the underfloor downforce at near Vmax straighline speeds, and thus preventing stall/porpoising etc.

All this, apart from the primary jobs of the high-pressure zone in the undercut's 'blocker region'
a) bleed sideways and bulldoze the front wheel wake outwards of the car, not giving it a chance to meet the car's bodywork (assisted by the floor edge vortices)
b) bleed (or squeeze) itself through the entire undercut path, all the way to the coke bottle area, providing assist (apart from other assistants like cooling rejected hot air, sidepod top downwash, elephant-trunk/sausage gullies, main engine cover cooling reject hot air etc, all of which are flowing towards the rear) by gushing into the beamwing area, improving diffuser extraction.

[Wouter]

Waché explains why Red Bull are taking a risk with the aggressive RB20

As Chief Technical Director, Adrian Newey is often mentioned regarding Red Bull Racing's new car, but Pierre Waché
has an ever-growing influence behind the scenes. In an exclusive interview with GPblog.com, Waché explains
why Red Bull made the RB20 radically different and how it is done.

People might think, after last season 'why change the RB19 at all. Why did you change it?

Pierre Waché: "Because if you don't change, you lose. You have to progress. You have to improve. The performance is not fixed.
You have to make sure that you improve the car more than the others. Because you are here to win.
You are here to beat them because it's a competition. And the only way we found to make a decent step enough
was to change the car."

https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/261766/w ... -rb20.html

[Cassius]

Waché explains why Red Bull are taking a risk with the aggressive RB20

As Chief Technical Director, Adrian Newey is often mentioned regarding Red Bull Racing's new car, but Pierre Waché
has an ever-growing influence behind the scenes. In an exclusive interview with GPblog.com, Waché explains
why Red Bull made the RB20 radically different and how it is done.

People might think, after last season 'why change the RB19 at all. Why did you change it?

Pierre Waché: "Because if you don't change, you lose. You have to progress. You have to improve. The performance is not fixed.
You have to make sure that you improve the car more than the others. Because you are here to win.
You are here to beat them because it's a competition. And the only way we found to make a decent step enough
was to change the car."

https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/261766/w ... -rb20.html

Great interview.

They definitely achieved their goal of improved low speed corner performance. Max seemed faster than Ferrari in corners 1, 4 and 5 and he gained around 4 tenths vs last year's testing times in those corners.

As was already mentioned in articles in January they are still not happy with the kerb performance, but that is probably a compromise to keep their advantage in high speed corners.

I am wondering whether they have lost some performance in high speed corners/drag. In the last two corners Max was much slower than last year in testing. Also he almost never had purple in sector 3.

It could be related to lower engine modes, but Russell and Leclerc were ~3 tenths faster in s3 on same tyre. Not sure whether that is all engine detuning related.

[organic]

Marko on 2025 seat from Kleine Zeitung @kleinezeitung

Albon is not a candidate for us, he has a contract until 2025 and Sainz probably wants to make a decision earlier than we do.”

“Checo must perform consistently. It is clear that he cannot always drive at Verstappen level. If he finishes second in the Driver’s Championship and gets one or two victories, he will certainly be a candidate for 2025.

The seat - next to Verstappen - is, on the one hand, very coveted, but on the other, it is an ejectable seat, since no teammate can live up to Max, and it can quickly become demoralising.”

[AR3-GP]

Waché explains why Red Bull are taking a risk with the aggressive RB20

As Chief Technical Director, Adrian Newey is often mentioned regarding Red Bull Racing's new car, but Pierre Waché
has an ever-growing influence behind the scenes. In an exclusive interview with GPblog.com, Waché explains
why Red Bull made the RB20 radically different and how it is done.

People might think, after last season 'why change the RB19 at all. Why did you change it?

Pierre Waché: "Because if you don't change, you lose. You have to progress. You have to improve. The performance is not fixed.
You have to make sure that you improve the car more than the others. Because you are here to win.
You are here to beat them because it's a competition. And the only way we found to make a decent step enough
was to change the car."

https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/261766/w ... -rb20.html

Superschön! I fear he's said too much!

[franbatista123]

Marko on 2025 seat from Kleine Zeitung @kleinezeitung

Albon is not a candidate for us, he has a contract until 2025 and Sainz probably wants to make a decision earlier than we do.”

“Checo must perform consistently. It is clear that he cannot always drive at Verstappen level. If he finishes second in the Driver’s Championship and gets one or two victories, he will certainly be a candidate for 2025.

The seat - next to Verstappen - is, on the one hand, very coveted, but on the other, it is an ejectable seat, since no teammate can live up to Max, and it can quickly become demoralising.”

Not sure that it's motivating for other drivers to hear that the 2nd seat is "ejectable", but that's classic Marko. Going into 2024 i think Red Bull is in a very weird position... they want to replace Pérez but Norris has rejected them, which leaves Ricciardo as the 2nd option but there's a chance Tsunoda beats him and in turn doesn't justify Ricciardo for the 2nd seat, and they probably don't want Tsunoda. I take it Albon and Sainz are out of the equation as well.

This year i think a underperfoming Perez could throw the constructors away, but that's a topic for another thread.

[AR3-GP]

Marko on 2025 seat from Kleine Zeitung @kleinezeitung

Albon is not a candidate for us, he has a contract until 2025 and Sainz probably wants to make a decision earlier than we do.”

“Checo must perform consistently. It is clear that he cannot always drive at Verstappen level. If he finishes second in the Driver’s Championship and gets one or two victories, he will certainly be a candidate for 2025.

The seat - next to Verstappen - is, on the one hand, very coveted, but on the other, it is an ejectable seat, since no teammate can live up to Max, and it can quickly become demoralising.”

Not sure that it's motivating for other drivers to hear that the 2nd seat is "ejectable", but that's classic Marko. Going into 2024 i think Red Bull is in a very weird position... they want to replace Pérez but Norris has rejected them, which leaves Ricciardo as the 2nd option but there's a chance Tsunoda beats him and in turn doesn't justify Ricciardo for the 2nd seat, and they probably don't want Tsunoda. I take it Albon and Sainz are out of the equation as well.

This year i think a underperfoming Perez could throw the constructors away, but that's a topic for another thread.

Sainz is not out of the equation yet. Marko said above that it's just a risk that Sainz signs somewhere else before RB is ready to make a decision.

[franbatista123]

You're right, your interpretation makes more sense.