Red Bull's Bendy Rear Wing (split from FIA and Mercedes)

Forum rules
Please read the forum rules
User avatar
Alienturnedhuman
Posts: 4259
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm

Red Bull's Bendy Rear Wing (split from FIA and Mercedes)

Post by Alienturnedhuman »

Split from the locked FIA and Mercedes Thread by Moderation Team.
Asphalt_World wrote:
Wed May 12, 2021 3:56 pm
If it is Mercedes that have noticed dodgy things. then good on them for bringing it up with the FIA.

By the way, are there any pictures on-line that show what they are talking about?
It's really noticeable under braking into Turn 1, the wing looks to move forwards about 10-15cm. At timecode 42 seconds there is a still side by side comparision for both Red Bull and Mercedes.

Asphalt_World
Posts: 5686
Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm

Re: Red Bull's Bendy Rear Wing

Post by Asphalt_World »

A.J. wrote:
Wed May 12, 2021 4:03 pm
Asphalt_World wrote:
Wed May 12, 2021 3:56 pm
If it is Mercedes that have noticed dodgy things. then good on them for bringing it up with the FIA.

By the way, are there any pictures on-line that show what they are talking about?
Sure - but when they do dodgy things it is considered innovation (such as DAS, which never should have been allowed imo).

Here's a video I found of the wing from Spain: https://streamable.com/6xb9xv (mods: not sure if this is allowed - please feel free to remove if not)
Thanks for the link.

DAS was tricky because it's a grey area. Wings that flex to aid performance are clearly banned. That's far easier to judge, or at least it should be.
Instagram @italian_car_pictures

Asphalt_World
Posts: 5686
Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm

Re: Red Bull's Bendy Rear Wing

Post by Asphalt_World »

Wow, having watched the video linked above, that's quite a significant but of flexing going on there.
Instagram @italian_car_pictures

A.J.
Posts: 987
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 11:37 am

Re: Red Bull's Bendy Rear Wing

Post by A.J. »

pokerman wrote:
Wed May 12, 2021 4:05 pm
A.J. wrote:
Wed May 12, 2021 4:03 pm
Asphalt_World wrote:
Wed May 12, 2021 3:56 pm
If it is Mercedes that have noticed dodgy things. then good on them for bringing it up with the FIA.

By the way, are there any pictures on-line that show what they are talking about?
Sure - but when they do dodgy things it is considered innovation (such as DAS, which never should have been allowed imo).

Here's a video I found of the wing from Spain: https://streamable.com/6xb9xv (mods: not sure if this is allowed - please feel free to remove if not)
How was DAS cheating when they ran it through the stewards before using it?
How are the wings illegal if they pass all the tests? Your logic (I'm being kind in using this word) is circular.

Option or Prime
Posts: 2118
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Location: UK

Re: FIA and Mercedes

Post by Option or Prime »

A.J. wrote:
Wed May 12, 2021 4:13 pm
pokerman wrote:
Wed May 12, 2021 4:05 pm
A.J. wrote:
Wed May 12, 2021 4:03 pm
Asphalt_World wrote:
Wed May 12, 2021 3:56 pm
If it is Mercedes that have noticed dodgy things. then good on them for bringing it up with the FIA.

By the way, are there any pictures on-line that show what they are talking about?
Sure - but when they do dodgy things it is considered innovation (such as DAS, which never should have been allowed imo).

Here's a video I found of the wing from Spain: https://streamable.com/6xb9xv (mods: not sure if this is allowed - please feel free to remove if not)
How was DAS cheating when they ran it through the stewards before using it?
How are the wings illegal if they pass all the tests? Your logic (I'm being kind in using this word) is circular.
Its all explained in the article. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/57086036 Not sure why you seem so angry about this, its an FIA crackdown.
No team was mentioned so how do we know its not an issue other teams are guilty of.

pokerman
Posts: 37197
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: FIA and Mercedes

Post by pokerman »

A.J. wrote:
Wed May 12, 2021 4:13 pm
pokerman wrote:
Wed May 12, 2021 4:05 pm
A.J. wrote:
Wed May 12, 2021 4:03 pm
Asphalt_World wrote:
Wed May 12, 2021 3:56 pm
If it is Mercedes that have noticed dodgy things. then good on them for bringing it up with the FIA.

By the way, are there any pictures on-line that show what they are talking about?
Sure - but when they do dodgy things it is considered innovation (such as DAS, which never should have been allowed imo).

Here's a video I found of the wing from Spain: https://streamable.com/6xb9xv (mods: not sure if this is allowed - please feel free to remove if not)
How was DAS cheating when they ran it through the stewards before using it?
How are the wings illegal if they pass all the tests? Your logic (I'm being kind in using this word) is circular.
They passed the load tests so they were deemed legal, however it's not the first time such things have been designed to pass a load test only to run in an illegal manner on the track, as in visible flexing beyond what is considered normal.

The stewards will merely revisit how they test the wings, which might be as simple as sticking more load on, maybe loading it in different places.

They wouldn't do that unless they themselves were unhappy with what they were seeing out on track
Lewis Hamilton #44

World Drivers Titles: 7 (1st)
Grand Prix Wins: 98 (1st)
Pole Positions: 100 (1st)
Podiums: 169 (1st)


PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2014: Champion

Siao7
Posts: 9328
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am

Re: FIA and Mercedes

Post by Siao7 »

Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Wed May 12, 2021 4:05 pm
Asphalt_World wrote:
Wed May 12, 2021 3:56 pm
If it is Mercedes that have noticed dodgy things. then good on them for bringing it up with the FIA.

By the way, are there any pictures on-line that show what they are talking about?
It's really noticeable under braking into Turn 1, the wing looks to move forwards about 10-15cm. At timecode 42 seconds there is a still side by side comparision for both Red Bull and Mercedes.
If there's some flexing going on, that's the Merc's shark fin!!!

Asphalt_World
Posts: 5686
Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm

Re: FIA and Mercedes

Post by Asphalt_World »

The video does appear to show a bonkers amount of flex. When you consider a couple of turn on the front wing during a pit stop, can basically dial out over or understeer, you begin to realise that even small differences in a wing can make big differences to a car's performance. So, I can imagine that flexing adding a good few mph being added at least, all without having to forgo corners speed.
Instagram @italian_car_pictures

EPROM
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2021 12:59 am

Re: FIA and Mercedes

Post by EPROM »

pokerman wrote:
Wed May 12, 2021 4:52 pm
A.J. wrote:
Wed May 12, 2021 4:13 pm
How are the wings illegal if they pass all the tests? Your logic (I'm being kind in using this word) is circular.
They passed the load tests so they were deemed legal, however it's not the first time such things have been designed to pass a load test only to run in an illegal manner on the track, as in visible flexing beyond what is considered normal.

The stewards will merely revisit how they test the wings, which might be as simple as sticking more load on, maybe loading it in different places.

They wouldn't do that unless they themselves were unhappy with what they were seeing out on track
As an engineer (of various sorts over the years - product engineer, manufacturing engineer, requirements engineer, process engineer) and computer scientist, it seems quite clear - requirements must be testable. The solutions must pass clearly-specified testing procedures. If your product passes the test, it is good - regardless of the underlying methods utilized unless they fail some objective test.

So to me, when I heard Hamilton jabbing at RB's flexi wing, I thought, "Hey, he's complaining about innovative engineering." It passed the published test, right? If so what's to complain about?

As an American, I used to follow Champ Cars, and in 2001, Ford came up with some creative engineering. The engines were allowed a specified maximum turbo boost pressure as measured by a "pop-off" valve supplied by the sanctioning body to each team. Ford made their intake plenum a bit taller so that the sensor was raised by perhaps 2 cm more than the other engine manufacturers and that raised the effective pressure a bit at the actual manifold - giving them a performance advantage.

The other teams / engine badgers complained loudly, calling it "spacer gate". But Ford was allowed their design because it was technically within the specs. The sanctioning body later tightened up the specs to negate that advantage. But they did not declare Ford in violation of the rules (they were not...)

I thought it creative engineering and praised it. You give me a spec and I meet it. Yes - if I can meet it and still maximize some parameter beneficial to performance compared to the competition - that is what engineering and competition is all about!

If the FIA does not like RB's creative engineering approach, it is up to them to be more specific in how they write the specs.

Otherwise, how do you specify (and measure) how much flexibility a wing should be allowed? The flexibility cannot be zero of course (physics and mechanics). How much should be allowed? That's the basic nature of requirements and specifications.

Geesh, what am I missing? It seems so obvious. Give me the specs and allow me to meet it any way I can. And if my way provides me better performance, praise me for my creativity.

User avatar
UnlikeUday
Posts: 9353
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: FIA and Mercedes

Post by UnlikeUday »

Flexing of the wing made into a gif:
Feel The Fourth

Clarky
Posts: 4638
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 4:09 pm
Location: LONDON...!

Re: FIA and Mercedes

Post by Clarky »

Better video that Mayhem posted in the other thread.

You have a grid which shows the difference.


User avatar
UnlikeUday
Posts: 9353
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: FIA and Mercedes

Post by UnlikeUday »

Basically it flexes upon braking.
Feel The Fourth

Clarky
Posts: 4638
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 4:09 pm
Location: LONDON...!

Re: FIA and Mercedes

Post by Clarky »

UnlikeUday wrote:
Thu May 13, 2021 8:42 am
Basically it flexes upon braking.
No it flexes down the straight by pushing downwards and returns under breaking.

User avatar
UnlikeUday
Posts: 9353
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: FIA and Mercedes

Post by UnlikeUday »

Gary Anderson's take on this. Quite interesting read.

https://the-race.com/formula-1/gary-and ... hind-them/
Feel The Fourth

Option or Prime
Posts: 2118
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Location: UK

Re: FIA and Mercedes

Post by Option or Prime »

Clarky wrote:
Thu May 13, 2021 8:36 am
Better video that Mayhem posted in the other thread.

You have a grid which shows the difference.


That's much clearer, I had trouble spotting it on the other video, thanks Clarky.

Question for me is "How did it get noticed in the first place"? Bearing in mind it is only visible at high speed.

Really not sure about the influence aspect. Haven't the FIA been implementing changes to arrest the Mercedes development domination?
Last edited by Option or Prime on Thu May 13, 2021 5:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

pokerman
Posts: 37197
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: FIA and Mercedes

Post by pokerman »

EPROM wrote:
Thu May 13, 2021 2:21 am
pokerman wrote:
Wed May 12, 2021 4:52 pm
A.J. wrote:
Wed May 12, 2021 4:13 pm
How are the wings illegal if they pass all the tests? Your logic (I'm being kind in using this word) is circular.
They passed the load tests so they were deemed legal, however it's not the first time such things have been designed to pass a load test only to run in an illegal manner on the track, as in visible flexing beyond what is considered normal.

The stewards will merely revisit how they test the wings, which might be as simple as sticking more load on, maybe loading it in different places.

They wouldn't do that unless they themselves were unhappy with what they were seeing out on track
As an engineer (of various sorts over the years - product engineer, manufacturing engineer, requirements engineer, process engineer) and computer scientist, it seems quite clear - requirements must be testable. The solutions must pass clearly-specified testing procedures. If your product passes the test, it is good - regardless of the underlying methods utilized unless they fail some objective test.

So to me, when I heard Hamilton jabbing at RB's flexi wing, I thought, "Hey, he's complaining about innovative engineering." It passed the published test, right? If so what's to complain about?

As an American, I used to follow Champ Cars, and in 2001, Ford came up with some creative engineering. The engines were allowed a specified maximum turbo boost pressure as measured by a "pop-off" valve supplied by the sanctioning body to each team. Ford made their intake plenum a bit taller so that the sensor was raised by perhaps 2 cm more than the other engine manufacturers and that raised the effective pressure a bit at the actual manifold - giving them a performance advantage.

The other teams / engine badgers complained loudly, calling it "spacer gate". But Ford was allowed their design because it was technically within the specs. The sanctioning body later tightened up the specs to negate that advantage. But they did not declare Ford in violation of the rules (they were not...)

I thought it creative engineering and praised it. You give me a spec and I meet it. Yes - if I can meet it and still maximize some parameter beneficial to performance compared to the competition - that is what engineering and competition is all about!

If the FIA does not like RB's creative engineering approach, it is up to them to be more specific in how they write the specs.

Otherwise, how do you specify (and measure) how much flexibility a wing should be allowed? The flexibility cannot be zero of course (physics and mechanics). How much should be allowed? That's the basic nature of requirements and specifications.

Geesh, what am I missing? It seems so obvious. Give me the specs and allow me to meet it any way I can. And if my way provides me better performance, praise me for my creativity.
While I'm not an engineer and leave all that to the people that know about such things, given there is a deflection test then I have to assume there's a set limit for how much a wing is allowed to deflect, the test in theory represents the loads on the track.

The stewards then watch the car on track and see that the wing is bending more than is allowed so revisit how they go about testing the wings in a different manner, it's interesting they're looking to fit cameras on the car and making measurement that way.

It's one thing failing pre-event scrutineering, you can take that off, I wonder what happens if you fail a legality test while on the track. I've offered wondered how cavalier some teams might be if there was no pre-event scrutineering and cars were only scrutineered after the race.
Lewis Hamilton #44

World Drivers Titles: 7 (1st)
Grand Prix Wins: 98 (1st)
Pole Positions: 100 (1st)
Podiums: 169 (1st)


PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2014: Champion

pokerman
Posts: 37197
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: FIA and Mercedes

Post by pokerman »

Clarky wrote:
Thu May 13, 2021 9:23 am
UnlikeUday wrote:
Thu May 13, 2021 8:42 am
Basically it flexes upon braking.
No it flexes down the straight by pushing downwards and returns under breaking.
It actually starts to bend down as soon as the driver goes on full throttle soon after the corner.
Lewis Hamilton #44

World Drivers Titles: 7 (1st)
Grand Prix Wins: 98 (1st)
Pole Positions: 100 (1st)
Podiums: 169 (1st)


PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2014: Champion

pokerman
Posts: 37197
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: FIA and Mercedes

Post by pokerman »

UnlikeUday wrote:
Thu May 13, 2021 9:28 am
Gary Anderson's take on this. Quite interesting read.

https://the-race.com/formula-1/gary-and ... hind-them/
So Anderson is saying there's not only the load test but the camera test which we're able to see, but clearly the camera test is not being used to determine if the wing is legal otherwise Red Bull would have been disqualified, the camera test seems little more than we need to improve the load test.
Lewis Hamilton #44

World Drivers Titles: 7 (1st)
Grand Prix Wins: 98 (1st)
Pole Positions: 100 (1st)
Podiums: 169 (1st)


PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2014: Champion

User avatar
Tufty
Posts: 2342
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 4:33 pm
Location: Colwyn Bay, North Wales

Re: Red Bull's Bendy Rear Wing

Post by Tufty »

pokerman wrote:
Thu May 13, 2021 12:48 pm
EPROM wrote:
Thu May 13, 2021 2:21 am
pokerman wrote:
Wed May 12, 2021 4:52 pm
A.J. wrote:
Wed May 12, 2021 4:13 pm
How are the wings illegal if they pass all the tests? Your logic (I'm being kind in using this word) is circular.
They passed the load tests so they were deemed legal, however it's not the first time such things have been designed to pass a load test only to run in an illegal manner on the track, as in visible flexing beyond what is considered normal.

The stewards will merely revisit how they test the wings, which might be as simple as sticking more load on, maybe loading it in different places.

They wouldn't do that unless they themselves were unhappy with what they were seeing out on track
As an engineer (of various sorts over the years - product engineer, manufacturing engineer, requirements engineer, process engineer) and computer scientist, it seems quite clear - requirements must be testable. The solutions must pass clearly-specified testing procedures. If your product passes the test, it is good - regardless of the underlying methods utilized unless they fail some objective test.

So to me, when I heard Hamilton jabbing at RB's flexi wing, I thought, "Hey, he's complaining about innovative engineering." It passed the published test, right? If so what's to complain about?

As an American, I used to follow Champ Cars, and in 2001, Ford came up with some creative engineering. The engines were allowed a specified maximum turbo boost pressure as measured by a "pop-off" valve supplied by the sanctioning body to each team. Ford made their intake plenum a bit taller so that the sensor was raised by perhaps 2 cm more than the other engine manufacturers and that raised the effective pressure a bit at the actual manifold - giving them a performance advantage.

The other teams / engine badgers complained loudly, calling it "spacer gate". But Ford was allowed their design because it was technically within the specs. The sanctioning body later tightened up the specs to negate that advantage. But they did not declare Ford in violation of the rules (they were not...)

I thought it creative engineering and praised it. You give me a spec and I meet it. Yes - if I can meet it and still maximize some parameter beneficial to performance compared to the competition - that is what engineering and competition is all about!

If the FIA does not like RB's creative engineering approach, it is up to them to be more specific in how they write the specs.

Otherwise, how do you specify (and measure) how much flexibility a wing should be allowed? The flexibility cannot be zero of course (physics and mechanics). How much should be allowed? That's the basic nature of requirements and specifications.

Geesh, what am I missing? It seems so obvious. Give me the specs and allow me to meet it any way I can. And if my way provides me better performance, praise me for my creativity.
While I'm not an engineer and leave all that to the people that know about such things, given there is a deflection test then I have to assume there's a set limit for how much a wing is allowed to deflect, the test in theory represents the loads on the track.

The stewards then watch the car on track and see that the wing is bending more than is allowed so revisit how they go about testing the wings in a different manner, it's interesting they're looking to fit cameras on the car and making measurement that way.

It's one thing failing pre-event scrutineering, you can take that off, I wonder what happens if you fail a legality test while on the track. I've offered wondered how cavalier some teams might be if there was no pre-event scrutineering and cars were only scrutineered after the race.
I always wanted the opposite - test all cars pre-race, weighed without tyres or fuel to ensure they never run underweight, and then you know every car on the grid is legal. Then post-race only test those cars that had parts replaced.
Anyone in or near North Wales interested in an RC car racing tournament?

Siao7
Posts: 9328
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am

Re: Red Bull's Bendy Rear Wing

Post by Siao7 »

Option or Prime wrote:
Thu May 13, 2021 10:20 am
Clarky wrote:
Thu May 13, 2021 8:36 am
Better video that Mayhem posted in the other thread.

You have a grid which shows the difference.


That's much clearer, I had trouble spotting it on the other video, thanks Clarky.

Question for me is "How did it get noticed in the first place"? Bearing in mind it is only visible at high speed.

Really not sure about the influence aspect. Haven't the FIA been implementing changes to arrest the Mercedes development domination?
Good question. Maybe from the video?

It is not so much of a flex, it seems the whole top element of the wing is lowering. Where it is attached on the sides, the "hinges" if you like, like the whole assembly is get lower. Very bizarre.

User avatar
PF1 Mod Team
Site Admin
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2021 5:34 pm

Re: Red Bull's Bendy Rear Wing (split from FIA and Mercedes)

Post by PF1 Mod Team »

The Mercedes FIA conspiracy thread has been locked for many reasons, but as the Red Bull bendy wing saga is an ongoing event that could affect the season, the posts relating to that have been split out into this thread for that part of discussion to continue.

Greenman
Posts: 480
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 5:58 pm

Re: Red Bull's Bendy Rear Wing (split from FIA and Mercedes)

Post by Greenman »

.

I would note that many people have forgotten the whole saga of the flexing front wing, where camera evidence led to the testing regime being tightened up (not least the Red Bull management !)

It might be an idea for people to re-visit that thread to remind themselves of the various arguments and the eventual outcome.

I think the FIA are being overly generous in allowing time for new (legal) wings to be fitted.

.

User avatar
tootsie323
Posts: 3541
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 5:52 am

Re: Red Bull's Bendy Rear Wing (split from FIA and Mercedes)

Post by tootsie323 »

Greenman wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 11:51 am
.

I would note that many people have forgotten the whole saga of the flexing front wing, where camera evidence led to the testing regime being tightened up (not least the Red Bull management !)

It might be an idea for people to re-visit that thread to remind themselves of the various arguments and the eventual outcome.

I think the FIA are being overly generous in allowing time for new (legal) wings to be fitted.

.
To be fair, the wings have passed the static load test and that was the criteria for determine the legality of the wing. If the FIA changes its test (criteria) then its surely right to allow the affected team to change its design.
Where I'm going, I don't need roads

pokerman
Posts: 37197
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: Red Bull's Bendy Rear Wing (split from FIA and Mercedes)

Post by pokerman »

Greenman wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 11:51 am
.

I would note that many people have forgotten the whole saga of the flexing front wing, where camera evidence led to the testing regime being tightened up (not least the Red Bull management !)

It might be an idea for people to re-visit that thread to remind themselves of the various arguments and the eventual outcome.

I think the FIA are being overly generous in allowing time for new (legal) wings to be fitted.

.
Yeah if Max had won the race we probably would be asking how many races is he going to win with this wing before it gets banned, it harks back to the Vettel years were they would put something dodgy on the car win a race or two before the stewards cottoned on to what Red Bull were doing and then ban it, Red Bull wouldn't care that's wins in the bank and then on to the next dodgy thing.

I kind of hoped I'd heard the last of these Red Bull flexi wings designed to pass the load tests and while there is no recourse for them they can keep on doing these kind of things, it seems all reward and no pain, even though the stewards can see the wing is operating outside of the rules on the track it seems quite a blaza way to govern the sport.
Lewis Hamilton #44

World Drivers Titles: 7 (1st)
Grand Prix Wins: 98 (1st)
Pole Positions: 100 (1st)
Podiums: 169 (1st)


PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2014: Champion

pokerman
Posts: 37197
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: Red Bull's Bendy Rear Wing (split from FIA and Mercedes)

Post by pokerman »

tootsie323 wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 11:58 am
Greenman wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 11:51 am
.

I would note that many people have forgotten the whole saga of the flexing front wing, where camera evidence led to the testing regime being tightened up (not least the Red Bull management !)

It might be an idea for people to re-visit that thread to remind themselves of the various arguments and the eventual outcome.

I think the FIA are being overly generous in allowing time for new (legal) wings to be fitted.

.
To be fair, the wings have passed the static load test and that was the criteria for determine the legality of the wing. If the FIA changes its test (criteria) then its surely right to allow the affected team to change its design.
They also have cameras policing the wings so they know exactly what's going on yet apparently it needs Mercedes to point it out, the reluctance to act with immediate effect on something they know visually it's operating outside of parameters is very puzzling.
Lewis Hamilton #44

World Drivers Titles: 7 (1st)
Grand Prix Wins: 98 (1st)
Pole Positions: 100 (1st)
Podiums: 169 (1st)


PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2014: Champion

User avatar
DFWdude
Posts: 187
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2019 6:04 pm

Re: Red Bull's Bendy Rear Wing (split from FIA and Mercedes)

Post by DFWdude »

The GIF in UnlikeUday's post shows the ENTIRE wing assembly flexing down at the MOUNT below. Take a look...

Any load test on the upper wing element alone will pass, since the gif clearly shows it's not the wing flap bending, but the entire wing is flexing (backward) with increased aero load.

Arguably, some of this can be explained as increased aero load (chassis squat) as the speed of the whole car increases. But, not all of it, since the rest of the chassis in view does not appear to settle as much as the wing.

FIA should devise a test to eliminate this.

Greenman
Posts: 480
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 5:58 pm

Re: Red Bull's Bendy Rear Wing (split from FIA and Mercedes)

Post by Greenman »

tootsie323 wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 11:58 am

To be fair, the wings have passed the static load test and that was the criteria for determine the legality of the wing. If the FIA changes its test (criteria) then its surely right to allow the affected team to change its design.
NO !

I asked for people to remeber what happened with the flexible front wings. The tests are NOT the whole of the problem, the REGULATIONS say that the wings should not flex (irrespective of any tests). The cameras show now (as they showed with the front wings) that the rear wing flexes IN CONTRAVENTION OF OF THE REGULATION.

It is pointless just parroting the false arguments about the front wings passing the tests when the FIA just pointed to the actual regulation and said that they were wrong.

Why do people insist on ignoring the facts ?

.

Siao7
Posts: 9328
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am

Re: Red Bull's Bendy Rear Wing (split from FIA and Mercedes)

Post by Siao7 »

Greenman wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 1:22 pm
tootsie323 wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 11:58 am

To be fair, the wings have passed the static load test and that was the criteria for determine the legality of the wing. If the FIA changes its test (criteria) then its surely right to allow the affected team to change its design.
NO !

I asked for people to remeber what happened with the flexible front wings. The tests are NOT the whole of the problem, the REGULATIONS say that the wings should not flex (irrespective of any tests). The cameras show now (as they showed with the front wings) that the rear wing flexes IN CONTRAVENTION OF OF THE REGULATION.

It is pointless just parroting the false arguments about the front wings passing the tests when the FIA just pointed to the actual regulation and said that they were wrong.

Why do people insist on ignoring the facts ?

.
Can you please at least provide the link for that thread? I tried looking for it and it doesn't come up.

A.J.
Posts: 987
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 11:37 am

Re: Red Bull's Bendy Rear Wing (split from FIA and Mercedes)

Post by A.J. »

pokerman wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 12:16 pm
Greenman wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 11:51 am
.

I would note that many people have forgotten the whole saga of the flexing front wing, where camera evidence led to the testing regime being tightened up (not least the Red Bull management !)

It might be an idea for people to re-visit that thread to remind themselves of the various arguments and the eventual outcome.

I think the FIA are being overly generous in allowing time for new (legal) wings to be fitted.

.
Yeah if Max had won the race we probably would be asking how many races is he going to win with this wing before it gets banned, it harks back to the Vettel years were they would put something dodgy on the car win a race or two before the stewards cottoned on to what Red Bull were doing and then ban it, Red Bull wouldn't care that's wins in the bank and then on to the next dodgy thing.

I kind of hoped I'd heard the last of these Red Bull flexi wings designed to pass the load tests and while there is no recourse for them they can keep on doing these kind of things, it seems all reward and no pain, even though the stewards can see the wing is operating outside of the rules on the track it seems quite a blaza way to govern the sport.
Serious and unsubstantiated allegation.

If any team has been indulging in dodgy behaviour in recent times it has been Mercedes, not Red Bull.

BMWSauber84
Posts: 865
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2017 1:19 pm

Re: Red Bull's Bendy Rear Wing (split from FIA and Mercedes)

Post by BMWSauber84 »

Removed for off topic

mikeyg123
Posts: 19039
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm

Re: Red Bull's Bendy Rear Wing (split from FIA and Mercedes)

Post by mikeyg123 »

A.J. wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 1:44 pm
pokerman wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 12:16 pm
Greenman wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 11:51 am
.

I would note that many people have forgotten the whole saga of the flexing front wing, where camera evidence led to the testing regime being tightened up (not least the Red Bull management !)

It might be an idea for people to re-visit that thread to remind themselves of the various arguments and the eventual outcome.

I think the FIA are being overly generous in allowing time for new (legal) wings to be fitted.

.
Yeah if Max had won the race we probably would be asking how many races is he going to win with this wing before it gets banned, it harks back to the Vettel years were they would put something dodgy on the car win a race or two before the stewards cottoned on to what Red Bull were doing and then ban it, Red Bull wouldn't care that's wins in the bank and then on to the next dodgy thing.

I kind of hoped I'd heard the last of these Red Bull flexi wings designed to pass the load tests and while there is no recourse for them they can keep on doing these kind of things, it seems all reward and no pain, even though the stewards can see the wing is operating outside of the rules on the track it seems quite a blaza way to govern the sport.
Serious and unsubstantiated allegation.

If any team has been indulging in dodgy behaviour in recent times it has been Mercedes, not Red Bull.
Funny that the first sentence didn't make you think twice about writing the second.

A.J.
Posts: 987
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 11:37 am

Re: Red Bull's Bendy Rear Wing (split from FIA and Mercedes)

Post by A.J. »

mikeyg123 wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 3:56 pm
A.J. wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 1:44 pm
pokerman wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 12:16 pm
Greenman wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 11:51 am
.

I would note that many people have forgotten the whole saga of the flexing front wing, where camera evidence led to the testing regime being tightened up (not least the Red Bull management !)

It might be an idea for people to re-visit that thread to remind themselves of the various arguments and the eventual outcome.

I think the FIA are being overly generous in allowing time for new (legal) wings to be fitted.

.
Yeah if Max had won the race we probably would be asking how many races is he going to win with this wing before it gets banned, it harks back to the Vettel years were they would put something dodgy on the car win a race or two before the stewards cottoned on to what Red Bull were doing and then ban it, Red Bull wouldn't care that's wins in the bank and then on to the next dodgy thing.

I kind of hoped I'd heard the last of these Red Bull flexi wings designed to pass the load tests and while there is no recourse for them they can keep on doing these kind of things, it seems all reward and no pain, even though the stewards can see the wing is operating outside of the rules on the track it seems quite a blaza way to govern the sport.
Serious and unsubstantiated allegation.

If any team has been indulging in dodgy behaviour in recent times it has been Mercedes, not Red Bull.
Funny that the first sentence didn't make you think twice about writing the second.
Funny you seem to not understand the meaning of the word "if" :uhoh:

mikeyg123
Posts: 19039
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm

Re: Red Bull's Bendy Rear Wing (split from FIA and Mercedes)

Post by mikeyg123 »

A.J. wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 4:17 pm
mikeyg123 wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 3:56 pm
A.J. wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 1:44 pm
pokerman wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 12:16 pm
Greenman wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 11:51 am
.

I would note that many people have forgotten the whole saga of the flexing front wing, where camera evidence led to the testing regime being tightened up (not least the Red Bull management !)

It might be an idea for people to re-visit that thread to remind themselves of the various arguments and the eventual outcome.

I think the FIA are being overly generous in allowing time for new (legal) wings to be fitted.

.
Yeah if Max had won the race we probably would be asking how many races is he going to win with this wing before it gets banned, it harks back to the Vettel years were they would put something dodgy on the car win a race or two before the stewards cottoned on to what Red Bull were doing and then ban it, Red Bull wouldn't care that's wins in the bank and then on to the next dodgy thing.

I kind of hoped I'd heard the last of these Red Bull flexi wings designed to pass the load tests and while there is no recourse for them they can keep on doing these kind of things, it seems all reward and no pain, even though the stewards can see the wing is operating outside of the rules on the track it seems quite a blaza way to govern the sport.
Serious and unsubstantiated allegation.

If any team has been indulging in dodgy behaviour in recent times it has been Mercedes, not Red Bull.
Funny that the first sentence didn't make you think twice about writing the second.
Funny you seem to not understand the meaning of the word "if" :uhoh:
So are you accusing Mercedes or not? If not then what he hell is the point of that sentence.

User avatar
Mod Aqua
Site Admin
Posts: 693
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 11:10 am

Re: Red Bull's Bendy Rear Wing (split from FIA and Mercedes)

Post by Mod Aqua »

Let's keep the discussion on the facts please, this petty squabbling is dragging the thread into the mud.

From now on, if people are going to make controversial accusations, they should provide a credible source (ie, a reputable F1 publication, or F1 personality)

You don't put a fire out by throwing fuel on it.

Siao7
Posts: 9328
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am

Re: Red Bull's Bendy Rear Wing (split from FIA and Mercedes)

Post by Siao7 »

We can lighten up with some old comedy?

http://blog.axisofoversteer.com/2012/11 ... -wing.html

I guess the wing itself wasn't flexing!

User avatar
tootsie323
Posts: 3541
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 5:52 am

Re: Red Bull's Bendy Rear Wing (split from FIA and Mercedes)

Post by tootsie323 »

Greenman wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 1:22 pm
tootsie323 wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 11:58 am

To be fair, the wings have passed the static load test and that was the criteria for determine the legality of the wing. If the FIA changes its test (criteria) then its surely right to allow the affected team to change its design.
NO !

I asked for people to remeber what happened with the flexible front wings. The tests are NOT the whole of the problem, the REGULATIONS say that the wings should not flex (irrespective of any tests). The cameras show now (as they showed with the front wings) that the rear wing flexes IN CONTRAVENTION OF OF THE REGULATION.

It is pointless just parroting the false arguments about the front wings passing the tests when the FIA just pointed to the actual regulation and said that they were wrong.

Why do people insist on ignoring the facts ?

.
I'm not seeking to ignore facts. I accept that the wings should not (excessively) flex but am simply pointing out that the test criteria has been limited to a static load (and that Red Bull has exploited this - again, it seems).
I'm just stating that I think it's a little unfair to penalise them for passing a test which they are about to change the criteria for. You're more than welcome to disagree with me on that point.
Where I'm going, I don't need roads

Greenman
Posts: 480
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 5:58 pm

Re: Red Bull's Bendy Rear Wing (split from FIA and Mercedes)

Post by Greenman »

tootsie323 wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 6:34 pm
Greenman wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 1:22 pm
tootsie323 wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 11:58 am

To be fair, the wings have passed the static load test and that was the criteria for determine the legality of the wing. If the FIA changes its test (criteria) then its surely right to allow the affected team to change its design.
NO !

I asked for people to remeber what happened with the flexible front wings. The tests are NOT the whole of the problem, the REGULATIONS say that the wings should not flex (irrespective of any tests). The cameras show now (as they showed with the front wings) that the rear wing flexes IN CONTRAVENTION OF OF THE REGULATION.

It is pointless just parroting the false arguments about the front wings passing the tests when the FIA just pointed to the actual regulation and said that they were wrong.

Why do people insist on ignoring the facts ?

.
I'm not seeking to ignore facts. I accept that the wings should not (excessively) flex but am simply pointing out that the test criteria has been limited to a static load (and that Red Bull has exploited this - again, it seems).
I'm just stating that I think it's a little unfair to penalise them for passing a test which they are about to change the criteria for. You're more than welcome to disagree with me on that point.
The criteria (as with the illegal flexible front wing, is NOT passing the test, it is obeying the regulation which demand no flexing.

Every team knows this (because of the illegal flexing front wing) so there is no excuse for having a flexing rear wing.

.

Option or Prime
Posts: 2118
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Location: UK

Re: Red Bull's Bendy Rear Wing (split from FIA and Mercedes)

Post by Option or Prime »

mikeyg123 wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 4:33 pm
A.J. wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 4:17 pm
mikeyg123 wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 3:56 pm
A.J. wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 1:44 pm
pokerman wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 12:16 pm

Yeah if Max had won the race we probably would be asking how many races is he going to win with this wing before it gets banned, it harks back to the Vettel years were they would put something dodgy on the car win a race or two before the stewards cottoned on to what Red Bull were doing and then ban it, Red Bull wouldn't care that's wins in the bank and then on to the next dodgy thing.

I kind of hoped I'd heard the last of these Red Bull flexi wings designed to pass the load tests and while there is no recourse for them they can keep on doing these kind of things, it seems all reward and no pain, even though the stewards can see the wing is operating outside of the rules on the track it seems quite a blaza way to govern the sport.
Serious and unsubstantiated allegation.

If any team has been indulging in dodgy behaviour in recent times it has been Mercedes, not Red Bull.
Funny that the first sentence didn't make you think twice about writing the second.
Funny you seem to not understand the meaning of the word "if" :uhoh:
So are you accusing Mercedes or not? If not then what he hell is the point of that sentence.
:thumbup: An accusation of what specifically, the FIA have forced Mercedes to alter their design through rule change and they have complied at a performance cost.
Complaining about Mercedes when the thread is about Red Bull's bendy wing, or perhaps it should be called a 'limbo' wing is simply a distraction isn't it?

EPROM
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2021 12:59 am

Re: Red Bull's Bendy Rear Wing (split from FIA and Mercedes)

Post by EPROM »

Greenman wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 7:56 pm

The criteria (as with the illegal flexible front wing, is NOT passing the test, it is obeying the regulation which demand no flexing.

Every team knows this (because of the illegal flexing front wing) so there is no excuse for having a flexing rear wing.
I will guarantee you that the Mercedes rear wing was flexing, too. Certainly less (by eye in the video) than the Red Bull per wing, but flexing to some degree nonetheless. There is no such thing as "no flexing" (under load).

How much flexing is allowable? How can anyone say that the Mercedes wing was not also "excessive" if there is no objective, measurable test defining it that Mercedes positively passed and Red Bull positively failed? Subjective technical regs are silly at best.

The current view here by some seems to be that subjective rule judging is adequate for a technical specification. I reject that contention categorically as an unachievable goal.

Do I have to design a diamond/titanium matrix (I'm making this up) rear wing to avoid flexing? Cast iron? Carbon fibre? How thick? There are all sorts of engineering decisions to make, and the goal is always to maximize performance with some constraint. What is that constraint? "Excessive"? Give me a break. Measure it in newtons and meters (and perhaps seconds) in some manner. Period.

I seem to remember that some technical specification (in some racing series) specified that the pistons must be round (cylindrical). Well, what constitutes "round" unless you specify a limit of some sort - because nothing is perfectly round, period. The intent is obvious, but the enforcement much be concrete and objectively measurable.

No material on earth is absolutely immune from flexing. One place to start looking at such an issue is Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elastic_modulus Any mechanical engineer worth their salt should tell you the same thing.

I applaud racing teams that attempt to stretch the envelope within the specific, objective technical specifications - that is the nature of competition in general and racing in specific. It is the sanctioning body that is responsible for making rules that are both simple and effective in encouraging the intent.

As an aside at work I have two expressions (many more, but two relevant here):
  1. When you manage people by the numbers, people will manage the numbers.
  2. When you specify a requirement, you will likely get what you asked for, but may not get what you wanted.
I have been led to understand that back in the 1960s the American CanAm series had very few technical rules. In one way that was great - bring everything you've got to bear. In other ways, it was horrible as the strongest team had the economic capability to dominate the series, making it boring.

Technical rules are there to encourage creative engineering. Objective rules are the only ones that are truly manageable. Well-written, objective rules are the only one that are truly effective.

User avatar
UnlikeUday
Posts: 9353
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Red Bull's Bendy Rear Wing (split from FIA and Mercedes)

Post by UnlikeUday »

Are front wings allowed to flex as well? The 2 videos are from Portugal. Keep an eye on the bottom left of Bottas' front wing. The 2nd video is of Red Bull for comparison.





https://www.sportvideos.tv/video-merced ... E_mIc1QAvI
Feel The Fourth

Post Reply