Flexiwings 2024

[Cassius]

Do we have a comparison of the same angle of red bull at cota with an old one such as at Canada or somewhere else with similar downforce levels

https://iimg.su/i/zbvlX

https://iimg.su/i/gAZ8s

In fact, this topic was comical from the very beginning, that Red Bull's wings did not bend, only biased fans did not see this.

It is not about the top flap, but about the whole wing structure bending down. People keep on confusing this. Not even biased fans have said the RB top flap hasn't been bending. Hence why for me it looked like the Austin RB wing did not change vs previous races based on f1tv footage. Top flap bends in same way and I didn't see the whole wing bending down.

The new video from rikhart did show the full wing bending down, so a good question from Organic to also see that perspective from an older race like Canada.

[Rikhart]

There is lots of room between an official protest and simply press chatter for things to happen

At the very least there was a lot of discussion and the FIA did at least agree to monitor flexing more closely. Iirc They also insinuated that they may change the rules regarding flexing FWs for 2025

Red Bull obviously also use a flexible wing and no formal protests have been lodged against other teams. So what is your complaint against McLaren or MB?

I am baffled by this, honestly. Can you tell me without laughing, after looking at the diverse videos in this thread that you consider what Red Bull has in any way similar to what the Mclaren wing is doing?

[chrisc90]

only bit I could see from Lando during FP1 with some flowvis on the front corner. No front wing shots at all unfortunately all weekend

[Vanja #66]

To alleviate this brittle situation, most engineers would simply recommend using less noodles instead of carbon fibre when making this front wing

[Vanja #66]

Here you go with that nonsense again. Point to us all please the races where McLaren were disqualified for running an illegal rear wing??

You can't because they didn't. Their wing passed all the required tests and so was legal. The rules were changed and they changed the wing.

This is no different than in previous years where Red Bull had to make changes mid season, or Ferrari had to make changes etc. It is the very core of F1 to push the rules wherever you can.

I'm not the person to change anyone's mind. Facts are:

- RBR reported the wing during the Spa weekend and FIA looked the other way
- RBR reported the wing during the Monza weekend and FIA looked the other way
- RBR, Mercedes and Ferrari reported the wing after the Baku race and FIA couldn't look the other way no more
- the wing was visibly flexing to previously unseen levels and constituted an illegal moveable aerodynamic device
- McLaren was forced (accepted, offered, whatever you like) to change the design of several wings, not just the clearly illegal one
- no rules, measuring procedures or guidelines were changed to force them to do it, FIA blatantly ignored this issue until Mercedes, Ferrari and general public pointed to it along with RBR

Make of that what you will. I acknowledge your disagreement on my view. I don't think it's necessary for you to point this out to me on every single occasion.

[Stea1th]

Seems fia is artificially trying to help McLaren. There are to many questionable calls in the past months that make me think otherwise. Obviously a closer battle is better but it’s gotten to the point where it’s becoming obvious intential decisions are being made or not made in some cases.

[Stea1th]

Seems fia is artificially trying to help McLaren. There are to many questionable calls in the past months that make me think otherwise. Obviously a closer battle is better but it’s gotten to the point where it’s becoming obvious intential decisions are being made or not made in some cases.

[PapayaFan481]

...
- no rules, measuring procedures or guidelines were changed to force them to do it, ...

Except for, you know, the measuring procedure changing which is why they now have more dots on the rear wings....

As for the rest of your conspiracy nonsense, do you have sources for yhe FIA looking the other way?? Or indeed footage of the wings at those events doing what you say they were doing?

I call out lies and gaslighting whenever I see it. You don't have to keep repeating the same lies.

[Vanja #66]

Except for, you know, the measuring procedure changing which is why they now have more dots on the rear wings....

As for the rest of your conspiracy nonsense, do you have sources for yhe FIA looking the other way?? Or indeed footage of the wings at those events doing what you say they were doing?

I call out lies and gaslighting whenever I see it. You don't have to keep repeating the same lies.

Those are some pretty strong words for a person who didn't bother to look into the subject

Measuring procedure didn't change, adding datum dots is simply adding additional reference to make flexing easier to spot so the FIA can wash its hands. Dots were introduced after RB and Mercedes traded blows with flex wings in 2021. McLaren exhibited the same amount of flap trailing edge flexing as RB16B in 2021, this alone was declared unacceptable deformation 3 years ago.



This was banned promptly in 2021:

https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/arti ... directive/

As for flexible flap tips, which is even more obvious and advantageous, it was present in Spa already of course and it was the same wing in Monza and Baku:

Rear Wing SPA

Red Bull confirmed they alone protested 3 times after the Baku weekend, so why did it take Mercedes, Ferrari and general public to point it out before they had any reaction?

https://www.si.com/fannation/racing/f1b ... j87wh11t11

The FIA's directive, TD34, clearly states (it does not consider legal):

"Designs whose structural characteristics are altered by secondary parameters, so as to produce (whilst running at the track) a different deflection characteristic than when stationary during the FIA checks. Examples of secondary parameters could be temperature, aerodynamic load etc."

Following the rear wing saga, Marko spoke about Red Bull's efforts to prompt the FIA to take action against McLaren. In a social media post, he cautioned McLaren regarding potential issues with their front wing. He said:

"Three times we protested against McLaren's rear wing. Today the FIA made a very correct decision. McLaren's rear wing is not allowed."

You are free to disagree with facts. Just don't call me a liar because you don't accept them, it's bad manners after all

[Slitch-nl]

After this race it became painfully obvious the FIA looks the other way. Those penalties were a joke, just as the way they handled the rear wing of McLaren

[PapayaFan481]

Except for, you know, the measuring procedure changing which is why they now have more dots on the rear wings....

As for the rest of your conspiracy nonsense, do you have sources for yhe FIA looking the other way?? Or indeed footage of the wings at those events doing what you say they were doing?

I call out lies and gaslighting whenever I see it. You don't have to keep repeating the same lies.

Those are some pretty strong words for a person who didn't bother to look into the subject

Measuring procedure didn't change, adding datum dots is simply adding additional reference to make flexing easier to spot so the FIA can wash its hands. Dots were introduced after RB and Mercedes traded blows with flex wings in 2021. McLaren exhibited the same amount of flap trailing edge flexing as RB16B in 2021, this alone was declared unacceptable deformation 3 years ago.

https://i.ibb.co/XpGL9WM/rbr-mcl-flex.png

This was banned promptly in 2021:

https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/arti ... directive/

As for flexible flap tips, which is even more obvious and advantageous, it was present in Spa already of course and it was the same wing in Monza and Baku:

Rear Wing SPA
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GXvgrnKXgAANjRQ?format=jpg

Red Bull confirmed they alone protested 3 times after the Baku weekend, so why did it take Mercedes, Ferrari and general public to point it out before they had any reaction?

https://www.si.com/fannation/racing/f1b ... j87wh11t11

The FIA's directive, TD34, clearly states (it does not consider legal):

"Designs whose structural characteristics are altered by secondary parameters, so as to produce (whilst running at the track) a different deflection characteristic than when stationary during the FIA checks. Examples of secondary parameters could be temperature, aerodynamic load etc."

Following the rear wing saga, Marko spoke about Red Bull's efforts to prompt the FIA to take action against McLaren. In a social media post, he cautioned McLaren regarding potential issues with their front wing. He said:

"Three times we protested against McLaren's rear wing. Today the FIA made a very correct decision. McLaren's rear wing is not allowed."

You are free to disagree with facts. Just don't call me a liar because you don't accept them, it's bad manners after all

You say the measuring process didn't change and then point out that it changed. Says it all about your bias.

I ask again, which races were McLaren disqualified from for their illegal rear wings??

You say the wings were illegal. They were not illegal, otherwise they would have been disqualified. That is the fact. And no, facts cannot be disagreed with, that is not how facts work. Facts are facts. Opinions are not facts. Facts are not opinions. Facts are the indisputable record of what happened.

I'm not sure what your definition of a lie is, but in my dictionary, saying something happened that did not is a lie and the person saying it is a liar.

So do you still maintain that McLaren ran illegal rear wings, when the fact is that their wings were not illegal since they complied with all the required tests to confirm that they were legal. The test changed and McLaren complied with the new tests. That does not retrospectively make a wing that complied with the contemporaneous tests illegal. That would be like introducing a new lower speed limit and then going back to give tickets to the people who drove at the old, higher speed limit the previous week.

[chrisc90]

It’s strange the FIA didn’t need to bring in any additional load tests to cover it. We got a couple of extra dots I believe.

Just like it was in 2021 with RBR and Merc flexing wings. Was Noted and then later stopped.
FIA just don’t have the balls to disqualify people after the event has happened.

[Vanja #66]

You say the measuring process didn't change and then point out that it changed. Says it all about your bias.

I ask again, which races were McLaren disqualified from for their illegal rear wings??

You say the wings were illegal. They were not illegal, otherwise they would have been disqualified. That is the fact. And no, facts cannot be disagreed with, that is not how facts work. Facts are facts. Opinions are not facts. Facts are not opinions. Facts are the indisputable record of what happened.

I'm not sure what your definition of a lie is, but in my dictionary, saying something happened that did not is a lie and the person saying it is a liar.

So do you still maintain that McLaren ran illegal rear wings, when the fact is that their wings were not illegal since they complied with all the required tests to confirm that they were legal. The test changed and McLaren complied with the new tests. That does not retrospectively make a wing that complied with the contemporaneous tests illegal. That would be like introducing a new lower speed limit and then going back to give tickets to the people who drove at the old, higher speed limit the previous week.

There is a difference between a car declared OK to race and a fully legal car according to the wording of rules and TDs. Just like a car declared legal before the start can become illegal during the race with too much plank wear (just one example) because it ran too low too long, tests carried out to check if the car is legal or not may or may not be able to identify the source of illegality of certain parts and systems on the car.

Bodywork load tests carried out by vertical loads cannot replicate the aerodynamic force acting on a wing and generating vertical and horizontal load and a twisting torque at the same time. This is why rear-view cameras and datum dots were introduced on rear and beam wings - to have a visual reference on the wing at any and all times. This is in charge of FIA and FIA alone is responsible in enforcing its own technical regulations.

Unlike front wings of McLaren and Mercedes (which I never described as illegal because they never were), McLaren's rear wings required design and manufacturing changes after more than 3 teams and general public pointed out to them after Baku race. This is what makes them inarguably illegal - why would they be forced to change it if it was legal in the first place. There are no additional test introduced and neither were existing test made more stringent to change wing legality between Baku and Singapore.

It's not a loophole like the famous Double Deck Diffuser (where teams who missed had to catch up later), it's simply an illegal part that was mistakenly declared legal by FIA. Why FIA ignored RBR's complaints 2 times and only reacted once Ferrari and Mercedes also raised their voice is between FIA and teams. If FIA said "McLaren wings are legal, no changes required" it would have been a completely different situation and then other teams would be able to replicate such effects and neutralise McLaren's advantage.

FIA never gave a DSQ to a car that passed all relevant legality tests before and after an official session, especially concerning flexible bodywork. If they gave a car a pass in one event, it's unfair to subsequently DSQ that car because FIA didn't do its job as t should have. It's a completely different case from having an illegal component or a system that a team hides, omits or otherwise makes unavailable for FIA to check that only becomes apparent or available to FIA to check later.

It’s strange the FIA didn’t need to bring in any additional load tests to cover it. We got a couple of extra dots I believe.

Just like it was in 2021 with RBR and Merc flexing wings. Was Noted and then later stopped.
FIA just don’t have the balls to disqualify people after the event has happened.

Like I said above, if FIA scrutineers give it a pass with all information available to them, FIA won't give a DSQ just because it didn't do its job for whatever reason. What the reason is, we can only speculate. Although, in this case its quite clear...

[PapayaFan481]

You say the measuring process didn't change and then point out that it changed. Says it all about your bias.

I ask again, which races were McLaren disqualified from for their illegal rear wings??

You say the wings were illegal. They were not illegal, otherwise they would have been disqualified. That is the fact. And no, facts cannot be disagreed with, that is not how facts work. Facts are facts. Opinions are not facts. Facts are not opinions. Facts are the indisputable record of what happened.

I'm not sure what your definition of a lie is, but in my dictionary, saying something happened that did not is a lie and the person saying it is a liar.

So do you still maintain that McLaren ran illegal rear wings, when the fact is that their wings were not illegal since they complied with all the required tests to confirm that they were legal. The test changed and McLaren complied with the new tests. That does not retrospectively make a wing that complied with the contemporaneous tests illegal. That would be like introducing a new lower speed limit and then going back to give tickets to the people who drove at the old, higher speed limit the previous week.

There is a difference between a car declared OK to race and a fully legal car according to the wording of rules and TDs. Just like a car declared legal before the start can become illegal during the race with too much plank wear (just one example) because it ran too low too long, tests carried out to check if the car is legal or not may or may not be able to identify the source of illegality of certain parts and systems on the car.

Bodywork load tests carried out by vertical loads cannot replicate the aerodynamic force acting on a wing and generating vertical and horizontal load and a twisting torque at the same time. This is why rear-view cameras and datum dots were introduced on rear and beam wings - to have a visual reference on the wing at any and all times. This is in charge of FIA and FIA alone is responsible in enforcing its own technical regulations.

Unlike front wings of McLaren and Mercedes (which I never described as illegal because they never were), McLaren's rear wings required design and manufacturing changes after more than 3 teams and general public pointed out to them after Baku race. This is what makes them inarguably illegal - why would they be forced to change it if it was legal in the first place. There are no additional test introduced and neither were existing test made more stringent to change wing legality between Baku and Singapore.

It's not a loophole like the famous Double Deck Diffuser (where teams who missed had to catch up later), it's simply an illegal part that was mistakenly declared legal by FIA. Why FIA ignored RBR's complaints 2 times and only reacted once Ferrari and Mercedes also raised their voice is between FIA and teams. If FIA said "McLaren wings are legal, no changes required" it would have been a completely different situation and then other teams would be able to replicate such effects and neutralise McLaren's advantage.

FIA never gave a DSQ to a car that passed all relevant legality tests before and after an official session, especially concerning flexible bodywork. If they gave a car a pass in one event, it's unfair to subsequently DSQ that car because FIA didn't do its job as t should have. It's a completely different case from having an illegal component or a system that a team hides, omits or otherwise makes unavailable for FIA to check that only becomes apparent or available to FIA to check later.

It’s strange the FIA didn’t need to bring in any additional load tests to cover it. We got a couple of extra dots I believe.

Just like it was in 2021 with RBR and Merc flexing wings. Was Noted and then later stopped.
FIA just don’t have the balls to disqualify people after the event has happened.

Like I said above, if FIA scrutineers give it a pass with all information available to them, FIA won't give a DSQ just because it didn't do its job for whatever reason. What the reason is, we can only speculate. Although, in this case its quite clear...

So you cannot prove they were illegal just as noone can prove Red Bull did anything untoward with their bib adjustment. Yet I don't hear you saying that Max has been driving a car with an illegal bib when he won his last 2 titles or the races at the start of the year....

[Vanja #66]

So you cannot prove they were illegal just as noone can prove Red Bull did anything untoward with their bib adjustment. Yet I don't hear you saying that Max has been driving a car with an illegal bib when he won his last 2 titles or the races at the start of the year....

As I already said before, FIA requested design changes to prevent excessive flexing in contrast to TD34, confirming that previous design didn't fully comply with regulations and directives.

RBR bib story is a reactionary nothingburger started by Brown to take revenge because they had to make above changes that reduce their competitive advantage (imo). The system is an open source component, design of which was and is available to all teams for 3 full seasons. In 3 years no one had a complaint and all of a sudden its a controversy? Come on...

Please don't mind, but this conversation seems to have an expiry date, so I'm clocking out. I'm not here to change anyone's mind. Cheers