TD018 2023 - clampdown on flexible wings

[RZS10]

In addition to the lighting it's imho also the "wobble" distortion, artifacting and what i suspect is some movement from the camera pod.

There's loads of higher res pics of the nose around (Albert is just my go to source for a quick look), i just wanted to show that this particular modular panel has been on the W14 from the beginning of the season and that it looks different depending on the angle/lighting of the shot.

It appears to be a single piece together with the two upper inner FW flap pieces which slightly changes depending on the FW config, i personally don't think any "mechanism" would be needed to achieve the desired flex, just thin walled carbon - i might be wrong, of course.

Either way, there are no "huge reinforcements", there is no "clearly" visible change to that part and even if Merc had to stiffen it up any reinforcement would arguably happen on the inside as to not disturb the airflow.

[AR3-GP]

I think people have sort of forgotten some of the original post content regarding this TD. It was reported that Haas might have to stiffen their rear wing. That Williams might have to stiffen their floor. Remember Ferrari and Alpine at various points in start of season had wobbly rear wings which the FIA no doubt had a private chat with them. Along with Aston Martin's front wing.


Anyway, Toto says the following which suggest most teams had to a "touching up" of their car just to be safe.

We won't know all this until Suzuka. Perhaps some will be brought down to earth there. Mercedes team boss Toto Wolff warns against jumping to conclusions: "Everyone had to react to the TDs somehow. One more, the other less. But you can't say after two days of practice and with one set of data whether this has already had any effect."

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... ur-pleite/

[RZS10]

I think people have sort of forgotten some of the original post content regarding this TD. It was reported that Haas might have to stiffen their rear wing. [...] most teams had to [do] a "touching up" of their car just to be safe.

IIRC it wasn't just that there were reports they might have to change it but that they openly admitted they had to.
And that's the thing, innit? At first glance there doesn't seem to be some major difference on their rear/beam wing visually and it never appeared to move more/differently to any other RW on the grid previously* (imho).
That kinda means two things:
- some teams are likely able to achieve the same deflection of their parts without the need for "mechanisms"
- we might never be able to tell which parts were changed just by looking at them

So yeah, as i mentioned in the last sentence of my earlier post: a visibly unchanged part does not mean there were no changes and if there were changes they would probably never appear as "clearly visible" "huge carbon reinforcements".

*i could post high/low speed comparisons from several races if anyone would actually want to see them, i got the HAAS in Spain, Miami, Austria with others to compare to at the same venue

[TimW]

I don't understand why people are so defensive of their favorite team, or why team bosses are not willing to admit if they are affected by the TD. F1 is all about engineering to the maximum that the rules allow you, isn't it?

As a team principle you should be upset if your team is not affected by the TD. That means that the team failed to exploit a loophole and left performance on the table.

The brilliant team boss response would be 'Yes, the TD forces us to modify our car. But don't worry, we found new loopholes already and will allow us to regain the performance lost"

[slinger]

Can of worms drop...

[CMSMJ1]

Let's have less of this arguing nonsense please

On Topic - thanks

[PlatinumZealot]

Ok so we have our first benchmark:

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/hamil ... /10522947/
He says if RedBull doesn't win by 30 seconds somwthing is up..

Hyperbole or logical?

[dialtone]

Ok so we have our first benchmark:

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/hamil ... /10522947/
He says if RedBull doesn't win by 30 seconds somwthing is up..

Hyperbole or logical?

I would agree. Aside from Spa, this is probably one of the best tracks for RedBull. Last year Max was in a different planet. LEC was 30 seconds behind and it wasn’t really 30 seconds close.

The idea that RedBull post TD will struggle to enter q3 obviously makes no sense, they are strong still but if they aren’t as dominant something is up. And how do you measure how dominant they are? I agree with Ham that 30 seconds wins are a good proxy.

[AR3-GP]

Ok so we have our first benchmark:

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/hamil ... /10522947/
He says if RedBull doesn't win by 30 seconds somwthing is up..

Hyperbole or logical?

I would agree. Aside from Spa, this is probably one of the best tracks for RedBull. Last year Max was in a different planet. LEC was 30 seconds behind and it wasn’t really 30 seconds close.

The idea that RedBull post TD will struggle to enter q3 obviously makes no sense, they are strong still but if they aren’t as dominant something is up. And how do you measure how dominant they are? I agree with Ham that 30 seconds wins are a good proxy.

Mclaren put on a 4 tenths upgrade package in Singapore, c-spec car, and Ferrari have a new floor. What if the other teams genuinely got closer and they only win by 20 seconds?

[dialtone]

Ok so we have our first benchmark:

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/hamil ... /10522947/
He says if RedBull doesn't win by 30 seconds somwthing is up..

Hyperbole or logical?

I would agree. Aside from Spa, this is probably one of the best tracks for RedBull. Last year Max was in a different planet. LEC was 30 seconds behind and it wasn’t really 30 seconds close.

The idea that RedBull post TD will struggle to enter q3 obviously makes no sense, they are strong still but if they aren’t as dominant something is up. And how do you measure how dominant they are? I agree with Ham that 30 seconds wins are a good proxy.

Mclaren put on a 4 tenths upgrade package in Singapore, c-spec car, and Ferrari have a new floor. What if the other teams genuinely got closer and they only win by 20 seconds?

McLaren is maybe the only team that can be closer but race sims in Singapore were faster but not in front faster. And they still ran out of tires before the Ferrari.

Ferrari new floor is unlikely to fix all cornering problems.

[AR3-GP]

I would agree. Aside from Spa, this is probably one of the best tracks for RedBull. Last year Max was in a different planet. LEC was 30 seconds behind and it wasn’t really 30 seconds close.

The idea that RedBull post TD will struggle to enter q3 obviously makes no sense, they are strong still but if they aren’t as dominant something is up. And how do you measure how dominant they are? I agree with Ham that 30 seconds wins are a good proxy.

Mclaren put on a 4 tenths upgrade package in Singapore, c-spec car, and Ferrari have a new floor. What if the other teams genuinely got closer and they only win by 20 seconds?

McLaren is maybe the only team that can be closer but race sims in Singapore were faster but not in front faster. And they still ran out of tires before the Ferrari.

Ferrari new floor is unlikely to fix all cornering problems.

Singapore will have been one of Mclarens worst circuits though. They aren’t as strong as Ferrari in traction and braking. Well documented.

Suzuka will really be home for their car because of the high speed corners which their car excels at.

And likewise, Ferrari’s new floor doesn’t have to fix “all” of their problems. A 1 tenth upgrade adds up to a few seconds of race time improvement.

30 seconds is a pulled out of the arse number anyway. If Rb are still winning by that margin with their penalty and lack of upgrades, the others need to sell their teams.

[mkay]

Mclaren put on a 4 tenths upgrade package in Singapore, c-spec car, and Ferrari have a new floor. What if the other teams genuinely got closer and they only win by 20 seconds?

McLaren is maybe the only team that can be closer but race sims in Singapore were faster but not in front faster. And they still ran out of tires before the Ferrari.

Ferrari new floor is unlikely to fix all cornering problems.

Singapore will have been one of Mclarens worst circuits though. They aren’t as strong as Ferrari in traction and braking. Well documented.

Suzuka will really be home for their car because of the high speed corners which their car excels at.

And likewise, Ferrari’s new floor doesn’t have to fix “all” of their problems. A 1 tenth upgrade adds up to a few seconds of race time improvement.

30 seconds is a pulled out of the arse number anyway. If Rb are still winning by that margin with their penalty and lack of upgrades, the others need to sell their teams.

Maybe but in recent GPs, RB won by 34 seconds in Hungary and 32 seconds at Spa, and would have won by close to 30 seconds in Austria if Max hadn't pitted to secure FL.

[AR3-GP]

McLaren is maybe the only team that can be closer but race sims in Singapore were faster but not in front faster. And they still ran out of tires before the Ferrari.

Ferrari new floor is unlikely to fix all cornering problems.

Singapore will have been one of Mclarens worst circuits though. They aren’t as strong as Ferrari in traction and braking. Well documented.

Suzuka will really be home for their car because of the high speed corners which their car excels at.

And likewise, Ferrari’s new floor doesn’t have to fix “all” of their problems. A 1 tenth upgrade adds up to a few seconds of race time improvement.

30 seconds is a pulled out of the arse number anyway. If Rb are still winning by that margin with their penalty and lack of upgrades, the others need to sell their teams.

Maybe but in recent GPs, RB won by 34 seconds in Hungary and 32 seconds at Spa, and would have won by close to 30 seconds in Austria if Max hadn't pitted to secure FL.

and they only won by 11 seconds in Monza. We are fortunate to have had Monza before the TD where they already didn't take pole because otherwise people would use Monza as evidence that they are no longer winning by 30 seconds after the TD.

The truth is disappointing. When Mercedes was 1.5 seconds off pole in 2015 without any regulations changes, no one bats and eye.

[dans79]

The truth is disappointing. When Mercedes was 1.5 seconds off pole in 2015 without any regulations changes, no one bats and eye.

Merc qualified 5th and 6th that year.

Not to mention the field spread was also significantly larger. 2.528 seconds covered the top 10 vs 1.284 seconds this year.

Edit: The tire rules also played a part, because teams could pick how many of each tire they wanted.

[AR3-GP]

The truth is disappointing. When Mercedes was 1.5 seconds off pole in 2015 without any regulations changes, no one bats and eye.

Merc qualified 5th and 6th that year.

Not to mention the field spread was also significantly larger. 2.528 seconds covered the top 10 vs 1.284 seconds this year.

Edit: The tire rules also played a part, because teams could pick how many of each tire they wanted.

This entire post is misguided I’m not sure where to begin. What exactly is the argument here? That they "qualified 5th and 6th". This is a technical forum. The positions they qualified in are irrelevant.

It’s the time delta that matters and 1.5 seconds is absolutely shocking. “Field spread” is only a matter of the strength of the grid due to regulations and therefore also completely irrelevant.