Discussion
Yes as it's currently legal we can expect other teams to deploy similar.
Worth noting the mini DRS allows them to reach a higher top speed earlier, by the time a pursuing driver finally gets to use DRS it’s often too late.
'24 has proven to be an unpredictable season.
FIA must be doing something right.
Worth noting the mini DRS allows them to reach a higher top speed earlier, by the time a pursuing driver finally gets to use DRS it’s often too late.
'24 has proven to be an unpredictable season.
FIA must be doing something right.
Evercross said:
Looks like a nothingburger to me and probably more an accident than by design.
If anything the before/after animation in that article shows the biggest change in the gap between the DRS flap and the main wing element on the Ferrari rather than the McLaren.
Glad it wasn't just me thinking that about the Ferrari. If anything the before/after animation in that article shows the biggest change in the gap between the DRS flap and the main wing element on the Ferrari rather than the McLaren.
Lando’s car was one of those pulled aside for aero measurement checks after the Baku race.
https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/decision-d...
No issues were found.
There’s a massive performance gain to be had by making the rear wing ‘back off’ under load, so they’ll all do it until they’re told to stop.
It’s the usual game of cat and mouse, because you can’t design an aerodynamic surface that doesn’t move at all under a load of tonnes, so they pass the static load tests until the FIA introduce new static load tests.
They do now have ‘dots’ on the wing which are in a known place and can be tracked by the known focal length of the rear-facing camera.
Ball now firmly in the FIA’s court.
https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/decision-d...
No issues were found.
There’s a massive performance gain to be had by making the rear wing ‘back off’ under load, so they’ll all do it until they’re told to stop.
It’s the usual game of cat and mouse, because you can’t design an aerodynamic surface that doesn’t move at all under a load of tonnes, so they pass the static load tests until the FIA introduce new static load tests.
They do now have ‘dots’ on the wing which are in a known place and can be tracked by the known focal length of the rear-facing camera.
Ball now firmly in the FIA’s court.
thegreenhell said:
Worth noting that this is with a view to potentially changing the tests for future races, most likely from next season. They have been very careful to state that the Mclaren's wing is currently perfectly legal. kambites said:
thegreenhell said:
Worth noting that this is with a view to potentially changing the tests for future races, most likely from next season. They have been very careful to state that the Mclaren's wing is currently perfectly legal. thegreenhell said:
I await the unpublished report, the muddled and self-inconsistent press release, and the total lack of action with anticipation.F1’s rules dictate that aerodynamic components must be “must be rigidly secured and immobile”.
“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."
Don't see how those two statements can exist in the context of what the McLaren wing is doing. It's obviously not immobile otherwise the gap wouldn't appear.
“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."
Don't see how those two statements can exist in the context of what the McLaren wing is doing. It's obviously not immobile otherwise the gap wouldn't appear.
WPA said:
kambites said:
thegreenhell said:
Worth noting that this is with a view to potentially changing the tests for future races, most likely from next season. They have been very careful to state that the Mclaren's wing is currently perfectly legal. Now they'll all be at it
GlobalRacer said:
F1’s rules dictate that aerodynamic components must be “must be rigidly secured and immobile”.
“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."
Don't see how those two statements can exist in the context of what the McLaren wing is doing. It's obviously not immobile otherwise the gap wouldn't appear.
Clearly the deflection tests do not impose the same conditions as is causing the flexibility. So the FIA cannot determine the degree of flexibility with the car in the pits/paddocks for inspection. The flexibility must be due to a load being imposed somewhere that the FIA cannot find, and that load is being induced by aero or velocity. “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."
Don't see how those two statements can exist in the context of what the McLaren wing is doing. It's obviously not immobile otherwise the gap wouldn't appear.
Very clever, most likely to be copied and then outlawed soon!
And also "immobile" is impossible - everything in the world has some degree of flexibility, even the earth itself, however minor. Hence the FIA have deflection tests to quantify exactly how much flex is permissible.
Everything bends to certain extent…. Why chase after ‘zero’ movement! If the car passes the tests then it’s legal… all the others teams can do it if they want. They are just whinging because theirs doesn't to the same extent.
Who cares???
It’s just waffle all the time about his wing vs our wing….
I personally think McLaren didn't intend it to flex but its a lucky side affect
Who cares???
It’s just waffle all the time about his wing vs our wing….
I personally think McLaren didn't intend it to flex but its a lucky side affect
Edited by super7 on Friday 20th September 10:27
super7 said:
Everything bends to certain extent…. Why chase after ‘zero’ movement! If the car passes the tests then it’s legal… all the others teams can do it if they want. They are just whinging because theirs doesn't to the same extent.
Who cares???
It’s just waffle all the time about his wing vs our wing….
I personally think McLaren didn't intend it to flex but its a lucky side affect
I guess there is a difference: if there is just a bit of flex or if it is actually moving around the pivot, which it is not supposed to do.Who cares???
It’s just waffle all the time about his wing vs our wing….
I personally think McLaren didn't intend it to flex but its a lucky side affect
Edited by super7 on Friday 20th September 10:27
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff