Here is my very simple take on the whole thing.

Have a look at the rake of the Red Bull compared to the McLaren in the two Darren Heath photos.

The McLaren is near enough to horizontal whereas the Red Bull is definitely raked forward at speed.

The Ferrari is in between the two.

The wing is probably completely legal but the front of the car is lowering at speed.

I would imagine that Red Bull is just taking advantage of the downforce load placed on the suspension and are using this loading to get the car to it's 'designed' ride height.

It would obviously involve a rather complicated and well tuned suspension system but it is most likely just a mechanical cammed input into front dampers which effectively make the springs go from very soft over the first cm or so of travel to normal firmness thereafter.

It would also explain why the redbull appears to have more body roll than many competitors cars (more droop on the unloaded wheel) and would of course mean the car is 100% legal.

The simplest explanation is usually the right one.

IMO the simplest way of changing the flex characteristics of a material, any material, is heat. Electrically generated heat that is. First lightbulb made by Edison had a carbon filament. You can switch a current on and off, and the heat signature may not even appear on a thermal camera, since the contact surface with the air is not heated directly but by radiance. During post-race scrutineering the current is off so no heat. It may even be arguable that such solution is not forbidden by the rules.

The FIA is open to changing the test, so in the end it has the same result as declaring the wing illegal. McLaren and Mercedes just need to proposea better way to test the wingflex and the flexi wings are gone.

It is just sad that after Germany we will could have another winner of the GP, who has obviously broken the rules.

Hmm who to believe an engineer of a team that currently gets their *ss handed to them on a weekly basis and who possibly cannot incorporate a flexi-wing/floor in their design or Ross Brawn?

Sorry but I'll stick with Ross.

Stick with whoever you want. If McLaren weekly get their ass handed to them, then how would you describe the beating the team of Ross Brawn gets?

Pwnage

I applaud what RBR has done, and agree that they are doing exactly what every other team does, but there is, in my opinion, a crucial difference between the DD and the RBR front wing: the DD was unquestionably within the rules as written. The rules specified that the DD had to have certain dimensions, etc, and the DD complied. On the other hand, the RBR front wing would appear to be illegal - Rule 3.15 clearly states that the parts must be immobile, and the RBR front wing clearly offends 3.15. The problem is not that the wing is legal, but that the current test used by the FIA to determine whether 3.15 has been broken is inadequate. RBR has simply exploited the inadequacy of the test to create a wing that is apparently illegal, but about which nothing can be done until the test is changed. For what it's worth, Rule 3.17.8 specifically provides for the possibility of altering the tests if they appear to be inadequate to ensure compliance with the rules.

Occam's razor no less! ;)

Agree 100%. FIA could simply decide that more weights need to be applied as the loading test for an appropriate maximum flexibility in the wing.

With respect is that same team not leading both championships?

And what if McLaren front wings fail at this higher load?

Are you assuming that the other teams are over engineering their cars beyond the test levels?

Hate to bring this to you, but it's most likely some clever engineering somewhere else in the car and not the front wing flexing

Also known as the "Best rigid-wing team".

sh*t FIA how the hell they are allowing these cheaters? McLaren and other teams must react to this asap

I'm desperate to find out how the RB6 works, and what ingenious design elements it has. I'm just so intrigued by the sheer number of things on that car that have caused numerous people to scratch their heads and wonder what the hell they're up to.

Yes. Almost certainly.

RedBull aren't cheating. They've designed a car that passers scrutineering. And until the FIA decide to change the way they test front wing flexibility then RBR can only be praised

Let's face it there were always going to plenty of people refering to it (incorrectly) of being a "known dodgy car" well before this latest 'scandal'.

Leading a championship mid-season doesn't win you any prizes as Macca probably is going to find out this year (again)

Agreed. I don't think that the wing is legal, but 'cheating' is a rather harsh description of doing nothing more than what every other team does to an extent.

It's not cheating, it's bending the rules (pun intended). The rules were badly written, and 50Kg is bugger all when it comes to wing loading in an F1 car, and the rule makers should have known this. If it deflects 10mm at 50kg, and 20mm at 100Kg, then put 250Kg on the wing and you may reasonably expect it to move 50mm, so yes, the other teams have in someway overengineered their wings, as visual evidence doesn't seem to suggest that flat chat on the straights the McLaren/Mercedes/Renault/Sauber wings don't seem to have acquired any extra droop at all; having probably been designed not to, in the interests of reduced drag; but as everybody except Newey seems to have forgotten, it's going round the corners quickly that wins races...

It doesn't say that at all. And saying it will only flex so much under any loads breaks the laws of physics.

Rules say the wing can't flex at all but the testing procedures put forward do allow tolerances.

If the front wing flexes any amount its in contravention of 3.17

Then that's poor engineering surely?

Then that's poor engineering surely?

I don't think it will be the first time that FIA has approved something only to change their mind at a later stage.

We are not blinded people everyone saw with their naked eyes Red Bull's and Ferrari's front wings are TOUCHING the ground whereas McLaren,Renault,Mercedes,Sauber's front wings looks stiff and much higher to the ground at Turn In

? No ones denying this.


Technically everyone is breaking rule 3.17 on the basis that every single wing flexes.

Had to chuckle, when the BBC just played an onboard shot of Vettel's qualifying lap. The amount of wing flex is hilarious. What's amazing to see is how slowly and steadily the wing flexes. As they accelerate, the wing slowly moves downwards, A LOT, and as they brake, it slowly moves back up. It's a very gradual effect, which is massively impressive. To Christian Horner's credit, he's not taking people for fools by denying that there's a significant flex, he's simply saying that the wing complies with the tests, which is correct.

Every wing can flex but there is a rule how much it can flex

Not necessairly. Their eye might have been off the ball with flexing as this is a new innovation by Redbull, and have traditionally concentrated on the aero aspects of the front wing. I would see it as flexing the wing being a new innovation by Redbull rather than poor engineering by McLaren, Merecedes, Renault, Sauber, Williams, Force India....

And the RB wing doesnt go beyond what the rule says.

it hits the floor?

The rule says 10mm deflection for 50 kg... It passes.

People who think the RB6 is illegal and the team are cheating need to stop watching F1, because you don't understand it, and you're wasting your own time and everyone elses.

I believe what Martin Whitmarsh and Andy said. they should know what they are talking about.

You are dreaming if you think that is the response from the wing... LOL

So amusing....

I wouldnt believe what they say when they have vested interests... They have NO idea what is going on.

What's with the patronizing tone?

You're not exactly providing answers.. you're just grasping on the current test procedure.

Do you have a mirror handy?

Hank's Adrian Newey.

You didn't know that??

Hi R-F1... Good sleep?

Since CH questioned the validity of photographic evidence, the media community used the Hockenheim to produce some pretty irrefutable evidence that the front wings on both the Red Bull and Ferrari are significantly closer to the track than their competitors wings under near identical conditions.

This is not an interpretation of the regulations issue, which clearly stipulate the technical specifications the wings must achieve. The problem is that, whilst most teams have taken the regulations in the spirit in which they were written - i.e. that under any load the wing maybe exposed to the "flex" must be within the specifications detailed within the regulations, RBR and Ferrari have not entered into the spirit of the regulations.

Both teams have looked at how this regulation is tested and clearly identified that there is a significant gap between the loads tested for by the FIA, and the loads which the wings are exposed to in race conditions. Subsequently they have exploited this; no explicit rule-breaking, but certainly not in the spirit in which the rules were drafted.

There is an exceptionally simple solution. The FIA collate data from all the teams and races from the previous race, and use this data to test the "flex" of the front wing; thus closing the gap.

Should RBR and Ferrari be punished? Not entering into the spirit of the regulations is just as serious as not following them explicitly, and so both should be duly punished.

Not Patronising, just stating my opinion as you are...

The current test procedure is how the amount of flex is determined.

I would think that the RB wing is pretty linear in response - but what would I know...

There was "irrefutable" photographic evidence that Red Bull is/was using a ride height control system as well.

Yeah, they're closer to the track than the competitors' wings. That by itself doesn't mean a rule has been broken. It depends on how that is done ... and I have no idea whether rules are being broken.

Bloody average I'm afraid, and China is bloody hot. But the food is superb and F1 is on the box, so happiness abound.

Actually it doesn't matter how it's done, they have to remain a certain height. And the ride height thing is probably all part of the same puzzle.

No there isn't.

The FIA tests allow a tolerance on the weight test but this is clearly not in the rules. The rules state that the wing cannot flex, at all.


If your wing flex any amount, then you break rule 3.17. As it's impossible to create a wing which doesn't flex under load, every single team is breaking rule 3.17.

However, the FIA tests are not accurate enough or allow a given tolerance so that the strictness of 3.17 can never be fully imposed.

The RBR so far, passes all FIA tests on wings flexing.


So, in summary

1. All teams break rule 3.17
2. RBR breaks it more than others
3. All teams front wings pass the test presently put forward by the FIA.


In no way is that RBR illegal, unless the FIA put forward new, stricter tests.

Its curious because legard on commentary on bbc has just said that nothing has been said - it hasn't been announced yet.

Opps, sorry Hi everyone! Longtime lurker

That does n't mean they are using a ride height control system. Downforce is generated while moving forwards, potentially generated by the flexi wing reaching much lower to the ground than a more conventional flexi limited/rigid wing.