Following the complaints of a number of teams regarding the flexibility of the Red Bull Racing and Ferrari front wings, the FIA has moved to increase the requirements regarding the strength of the front wings to prevent them from flexing too much.
Definitely for preventing flex - perhaps to measure the difference between different amounts of flex by adjusting the play in the cables.phezzy wrote:That cable assembly looks a bit too 'agricultural' to be used for measuring purposes...maybe it was meant to prevent the wing from flexing so that other teams would not pick up on the amount of flex...?
breezy ...NO it was apparent earlier this year already...we discussed this already before Canada....this thread in may..pages 63...65 etc..BreezyRacer wrote:This whole thing of the front wing flexing like these photos show has to be a new phenomena otherwise I cannot imagine we wouldn't have picked it up on that much movement much earlier than now. I'm thinking it was probably introduced in Germany.
Given that RB was a bit off the pace there I wonder if this even turned out to be a GOOD idea. We may never see it again. So go ahead McLaren, follow this dead end as well.
Of course the big issue here is whether it meets with the rules and it's already been determined that it does so that's been cleared up too.
The wing study in testing shows a lot of interesting things .. there is side to side flex as well as flex under g forces. Of course last year teams were ballasting the the front wings as heavy as they could get them .. this year not so much.
in silverstone but then it was the nosecone which did work loose...boydy19 wrote:Just to throw something into the mix, do you remember Vettels wing actually breaking under load a couple of races ago. Nobody really took note of that at the time but i remember at the time thinking that was quite weird.
I wouldnt say it broke off, it more so dislodged at the connection point.boydy19 wrote:Just to throw something into the mix, do you remember Vettels wing actually breaking under load a couple of races ago. Nobody really took note of that at the time but i remember at the time thinking that was quite weird.
Could the nosecone be part of the flex?marcush. wrote:in silverstone but then it was the nosecone which did work loose...boydy19 wrote:Just to throw something into the mix, do you remember Vettels wing actually breaking under load a couple of races ago. Nobody really took note of that at the time but i remember at the time thinking that was quite weird.
It was actually the nose cone fixings that broke!boydy19 wrote:Just to throw something into the mix, do you remember Vettels wing actually breaking under load a couple of races ago. Nobody really took note of that at the time but i remember at the time thinking that was quite weird.
I wouldn't call this particular area 'innovation', i'd rather put it down to interpretation and 'flexing' the rules. After watching onboard of redbull and mclaren i can clearly see the ends of the wing on the red bull moving up and down considerabely while the Mclaren doesn't move at all.gilgen wrote:It was actually the nose cone fixings that broke!boydy19 wrote:Just to throw something into the mix, do you remember Vettels wing actually breaking under load a couple of races ago. Nobody really took note of that at the time but i remember at the time thinking that was quite weird.
The comparison photos shown, to try and show deflection, are taken in differing light conditions. The sunny ones are with a higher angle of light. Look how the nose itself gets wider and narrower!
Whateer is happening, the wings comply with the rules, and have been tested by FIA, so surely it is better to be praising Newey, for finding a new way to extract more speed from his cars. We all want innovation, but when it arrives, there are many who criticise it.
Watch slo-mos of cars riding the kerbs, and you will see considerable deflection in all front wings. The more pressure you put on the deflectors, the more likely it is that there will be some movement. Put a lot of vanes on a wing, and the downforce on the end plates will be increased.
to say so, one should prove that they are flexible. FIA tests so far show that they are not. You cannot judge from couple of pictures. If FIA tests with realistic DF levels then it would be a different story. But again, they should re-write the regulations.gibells wrote:Question to you guys out there, because at the time I had exiled myself from the sport due to the same old same old.
Are these flexible floors not in the same precident as the flexi floor used by Ferrari a few years back? I mean to say that the floor IIRC was not unlawful, but against the spirit of safety? It this not the same thing?
The tests are not set in stone. They are just a momentary way of verification. If sufficient evidence is presented by competitors that aero devices are movable the tests can be unilaterally changed from one event to the next by the FiA. No consent of the teams is needed. There is sufficient precedent in the last rear wing debate to show that the FiA will indeed react by tightening the tolerances in the tests or changing the testing arrangements all together.vall wrote:there is no controversy at all!!! The rules say how the flexibility should be tested and what are the allowed margins. If the measurements are within the allowed limits, this it.
