Flexiwings 2025

[stewie325]

Complete farce of a decision.

Most teams would have stopped '25 development early to focus on the '26 regs, but will now have to spend resources on this.

[Watto]

A pretty poor decision.

Had they made it a few months ago for all 2025 designs fair enough - can argue they should allow the flex.

But iirc Marko said one of the reasons RBR didn't go down the flexi wing route last year was downstream the car wasn't designed around it and it wouldn't really be beneficial to them without more changes. Now on the eve of the season when I'd say most core designs have been made and they are getting into early production stages they decide to act. Yet the FIA use the cost of developing as a reason to block features against an arms race.

[FW17]

While there are tests for the front wings, the rear wing tests are totally inadequate.
The rear wing tests are downward deflection tests, but I doubt that anything is being done about the upward deflection of the DRS flap.

Last year Mclaren took advantage of this with a much talked about mini DRS, FIA dont know what they have done other than reducing the slot gap. While mini DRS was being spoken about the real impact of that flap when the DRS was open was never talked about. The flex upwards of the flap when DRS is open along with the small upward flick of the flap at the leading edges is sureling more than 85mm. How is this being ensured by FIA for fair competition?

It is not only Mclaren which run upward flick in the flap, Ferrari, Red Bull, Mercedes all run that profile

[Luscion]

Stella saying Mclaren will only have to make small adjustments to their front wing for the incoming flexi wing TD

https://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433 ... rea-stella

[the EDGE]

Stella saying Mclaren will only have to make small adjustments to their front wing for the incoming flexi wing TD

https://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433 ... rea-stella

Well obviously they’ll only have to make small adjustments, they’ve just got to lay the carbon up slightly different to stop it flexing by a third when the test load is applied. This is easy

The question is, will the stiffening of the wing mean they won’t be able to balance the car as well across the speed range

The article does not ask or discuss that, and neither will Stella.

[organic]

F1 commission meeting today confirms stricter rear wing tests from the start of 2025 season and stricter FW tests from Spanish GP onwards

[ispano6]

Are the vehicle mounted cameras good enough to even accurately measure millimeter differences as the chassis vibrates and experiences dynamic changes due to external factors, such as temperature gradients? It would seem to me that the FIA would need to come up with ways to measure induced heating/cooling. As an engineer/designer I would make use of all available avenues to change the behavior of materials under dynamic conditions. Remember when McLaren was caught for covering the brake drum hole with tape? I believe dimpled surfaces are also illegal. As is asymmetric braking, which is actually used in some road cars to aid turn in and traction. The FIA/F1 seem to do a good job in dumbing down cars when the sport actually should be pushing the envelope in efficiency and ingenuity. Aston Martin took a hit in 2023-24 for having to redo their front wing, which likely messed up the entire package. It would seem to me then that the next avenue would be to attempt asymmetric aeroelasticity- if it's not already being incorporated.

[Stu]

The only solution is for a mandated wing package, produced & supplied by the FIA (much like the Halo). That way flexing can ONLY be as a result of the mounting design or by modification of the assembly. Easily enforced, as if ‘foul play’ is suspected, a replacement is easily swapped in and the ‘offending article’ can be taken away for thorough testing.
Not the best for the aero wizards, but guarantees a level playing field.

[FW17]

They should test wings after the race too.

[peewon]

If FIA wanted to simply enforce rules and not use them as a tool to influence outcomes and direction of the sport, it would be pretty easy. Have well defined tests before the start of the season and check to see if teams are compliant or not. 0 or 1. If you're unhappy with certain solutions, change the rules and/or tests AFTER THE SEASON. But the FIA wants to have that ambiguity and grey areas so they can chose if and when to step in and have their influence that way. This isnt a theory, its the only logical explanation for their contradictory statements and actions on this over the last 2-3 years.

[FW17]

If FIA wanted to simply enforce rules and not use them as a tool to influence outcomes and direction of the sport, it would be pretty easy. Have well defined tests before the start of the season and check to see if teams are compliant or not. 0 or 1. If you're unhappy with certain solutions, change the rules and/or tests AFTER THE SEASON. But the FIA wants to have that ambiguity and grey areas so they can chose if and when to step in and have their influence that way. This isnt a theory, its the only logical explanation for their contradictory statements and actions on this over the last 2-3 years.

Didnt FOM once ask Pirelli to make fragile tyres? Ambiguity from FIA was also made a requirement by FOM for the circus show.

[langedweil]

It would seem to me then that the next avenue would be to attempt asymmetric aeroelasticity- if it's not already being incorporated.

I'd say that's indeed already around .. for longer than one imagines ..

[taperoo2k]

The only solution is for a mandated wing package, produced & supplied by the FIA (much like the Halo). That way flexing can ONLY be as a result of the mounting design or by modification of the assembly. Easily enforced, as if ‘foul play’ is suspected, a replacement is easily swapped in and the ‘offending article’ can be taken away for thorough testing.
Not the best for the aero wizards, but guarantees a level playing field.

Whatever you do, there will always be some amount of flexing. I think this is likely the FIA President indirectly throwing his weight around again. However, the FIA providing front wings is a non starter for me. It would take away freedom from the teams to design the complete aero package. The Halo is a safety device, so that being a standard part makes sense. The onus is on the FIA to come up with a better testing methodology.

The thing to keep an eye on during the tests, is if teams run flexi wings and wings that should pass an FIA deflection test. It'll be interesting to see which teams when all in on Flexi wings and which teams hedged their bets.

[Rodak]

The thing to keep an eye on during the tests, is if teams run flexi wings and wings that should pass an FIA deflection test. It'll be interesting to see which teams when all in on Flexi wings and which teams hedged their bets.

Do the cars have to be legal during the test days? Does the FIA check them, or are teams allowed to run whatever they want? Certainly the chassis will have to pass impact tests, but is there any enforcement of things such as wing flex?

[the EDGE]

The thing to keep an eye on during the tests, is if teams run flexi wings and wings that should pass an FIA deflection test. It'll be interesting to see which teams when all in on Flexi wings and which teams hedged their bets.

Do the cars have to be legal during the test days? Does the FIA check them, or are teams allowed to run whatever they want? Certainly the chassis will have to pass impact tests, but is there any enforcement of things such as wing flex?

Teams wouldn’t run a wing in testing that is not permissible in Australia, it would be a waste of time, but I guess they technically could, nothing will be scrutinised until then

But the front wing clamp down doesn’t kick in until Spain, which is 9 races away, so, so expect lots of flexing until then because no one would throw away an advantage like that before they have to