#rear wing

[308ferrari]

[onlyhappyvibes]

[coffeeaddictbluebird]

SO I FOUND THE PICTURE ON TWITTER (OR X) LMAO

"We don't have another rear wing, a smaller rear wing, as we see it on our competitors. It would be more helpful, for sure," Red Bull adviser Helmut Marko confirmed, whilst also explaining that replacements will not be shipped to Las Vegas overnight.

WDYM there is a picture of Red Bull manually cutting their wing 😭😭😭

[ef-1]

yeah F1 is cool but imagine a driver gets shunted and he bodily rips off his rear wing (Which fucking says "Race Against CRIME") as he's being swarmed by officials

And he just yeets it at the guy who shunted him

[alexturntable]

“We don’t have a mini DRS as an upgrade but we have a new front wing”

[alianoralacanta]

Part 2: Comment Part 1 (DRS-specific issues)

There has been some discussion of McLaren's rear wing in Azerbaijan. Having seen the above photos: I'm sorry to say we have a problem. I'm not even touching the flexibility part, because the FIA has already done a check for this. That part, I'm satisfied that McLaren are in conformance. (For those asking "What about the spirit of the rules?", I sympathise with them but also reply as Eddie Jordan did after a particularly notorious F1 episode, "The spirit of F1 is to win". Brilliant workarounds are part of the sport). The bigger problem is that the highlighted part of the rear wing forms part of the DRS. This has a bunch of additional regulations on top of the ones applying to the aero in general (the flexibility regulations apply to all aerodynamic surfaces, not just the rear wing or DRS). Matters to check, other than the flexibility of the wing:- Axis of rotation: Article 3.10.10 b) requires DRS to have a single axis of rotation, . If there's a mini-DRS above the main one, and they're not the same depth (which the photos show is not the case for the McLaren - instead it is angled with a deeper element in the outer side than the inner, shown by the reflection of the sun on its curvature). That is 2 axes of rotation, differing by, at minimum, the Z-axis. Article 3.10.10 c) requires there to be no relative movement between the parts of the DRS bodywork. So all parts of the DRS have to open and close by the same amounts at the same speed. This is not in visual evidence here, as the mini-DRS appears to be opening more under former DRS than non-DRS. This not only is a problem for McLaren, but also Red Bull. In fact, Red Bull's is more obvious, because its central section is practically closed and the outer part has clear air going through. It would not surprise me if other teams were also out of compliance on this point, if two teams so demonstrably are. Article 3.10.10 d) is an exemption to two of the general aero articles, needed in order for it to be possible for DRS to exist in the first place. In particular, this means the angle of the mini-DRS is not an issue. However, only the DRS system is exempted. A separate mini-DRS system would not. Article 3.10.10 e) would be breached on the McLaren, if the mini-DRS is adjudged to be a duct rather than a DRS. This prevents a classification-based argument to avoid the previous two issues I indicated. It only takes one breach to judge a wing illegal and mete out full consequences. Red Bull has nothing in that area which could be described as a duct, so this is not a concern to them. Article 3.10.10 f) cannot be judged from these photos and probably is in compliance for all the wings shown. Article 3.10.10 g) is probably not the issue. Aero that is considered to be flexing within the regulations is, under the regulations, moving as part of regular airflow, which is automatically allowed for general aero and not reiterated for the DRS part specifically. Article 3.10.10 h) will also be OK, since the mini-DRS forms an open (rather than closed) section, not a separate section. The rear wing beam can be open in section. The photos aren't clear on this point, but I'm going to assume McLaren employed sides to the mini-DRS that are completely vertical. That's required by Article 3.10.3 c).

another one on the flexi wings issue

[pucksandpower]

I’m actually so excited to see what Ferrari does with their livery for Miami 🫣

[race-week]

FIA Statement on Flexi-wings

“The FIA is closely monitoring the flexibility of bodywork on all cars and reserves the right to request teams to make modifications at any point during the season.”

“However, if a team successfully passes all deflection tests and adheres to the regulations and technical directives, they are deemed to be in full compliance, and no further action will be taken.”

“The FIA is currently reviewing data and any additional evidence that has emerged from the Baku GP and is considering any mitigating measures for future implementation.”

“This is part of the standard process when scrutineering technical legality, and the FIA retains the authority to introduce regulatory changes during the season if required.””

But while McLaren is at the centre of the current intrigue, it is understood to not be the only team whose rear wing design is coming under the spotlight because of either flexing on the straight of the opening of the slot gap

[mitchellcoolboy123]

IS THAT SOMEONE ON FACE TIME LMFAO??

[onlyhappyvibes]

[brawngp2009]

Bahrain GP, Sunday, March 05, 2023. Photographer: Steve Etherington

[bisexualmcqueen]

various lightning sketches :D

[valyrfia]

I’m going to be so real with you all the idea of this bib device is so ingenious I think it should be allowed

[p1-norris]

charles leclerc:

[leclercskiesahead]

sitting so politely

[mysteriouslyjovialcolor]

I really like this shot for some reason