Newey “baffled” by new rules interpretation

F1 Fanatic round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Adrian Newey questions why the rules on exhaust-blown diffusers were changed.


Top F1 links from the past 24 hours:

Red Bull designer Adrian Newey baffled by rule changes (BBC)

“I’m slightly baffled by it because it had been declared legal forever up until this race.”

Ecclestone to learn his fate in tax case

“Telegraph Sport understands that Gribkowsky will certainly be indicted for tax evasion but that Ecclestone has been offered the opportunity to cooperate with the prosecutor by supplying evidence against Gribkowsky, in return for a lighter sentence.”

Lewis Hamilton will not be joining Red Bull, says Christian Horner (The Guardian)

“History demonstrates more often than not whether you look at [Alain] Prost and [Ayrton] Senna or [Nigel] Mansell and [Nelson] Piquet, that it doesn’t tend to work. Lewis [Hamilton] is a wonderful driver, probably currently one of the top three in the world, but presently we are very happy with the combination we have.”

Virgin Cars 2 branding, 2011

F1 Fanatic on Twitter

Picture showing the Cars 2 branding on Virgin’s cars this weekend.

F1 Fanatic live Twitter app

Pirelli seeks team input on 2012 ideas (Autosport)

Paul Hembery: “It is a problem with the testing, it is a genuine problem. Going forward it remains a problem that we cannot get access to current cars, and nobody wants to seem to give us an answer or a solution.”

Tony Fernandes on Twitter

“Hmm, interesting: Adam Parr, who told me to stay with Cosworth last year, now goes our way with Renault. Hahaha. See Adam, listen to uncle Tony.”

F1 Fanatic live Twitter app

Crash Simulation Robert Kubica (YouTube)

Follow F1 news as it breaks using the F1 Fanatic live Twitter app.

Comment of the day

Tharippa takes Ferrari’s use of statistics apart:

Ferrari again using statistics to show what they want to show.

I’m pretty sure Bahrain Grand Prix counted for the championship last year. What happens if we don’t exclude it?

If we look at the first eight races as they were (Bahrain-Canadain 2010 and Australia-Europe in 2011) both Alonso and Ferrari are actually doing even worse than last year.

Actually the championship situation is very similar to last year, with the shining exception of Sebastian Vettel. Hamilton’s deficit to last year is due to Monaco and Canada, while Webber, Button and Alonso pretty much stand where they were.

It seems that the power situation in F1 has been practically same for the last three years, with the exception of Brawn in 2009: Red Bull ahead of McLaren ahead of Ferrari.

Two things changed from 2009 in 2010.
1. the Red Bull team stopped making reliability/in-team mistakes
2. Vettel is just?? perfect.

From the forum

Jacques Villeneuve’s thoughts on F1’s “borefest”.

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to John H, sebsronnie, mitz1111 and Elliot Horwood!

On this day in F1

Nigel Mansell won the French Grand Prix at Paul Ricard 25 years ago today.

The race was notable for a dreadful fire which engulfed Philippe Strieff’s Tyrrell, which the marshals took a very long time to extinguish. It was a chilling reminder of the circumstances in which Elio de Angelis had died at the track during testing two months earlier.

Image © F1 Fanatic

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

67 comments on “Newey “baffled” by new rules interpretation”

  1. Elliot Horwood
    6th July 2011, 0:17

    Thanks Keith! :D

    1. Happy Birthday!

    2. Happy birthday Elliot!

      and also to John H, sebsronnie, and mitz1111!

      1. Happy Birthday all 4!

        1. Thanks comrades. 31 today… crikey.
          Happy birthday Eliot, sebsronnie & mitz1111.

  2. Bad jokes are good jokes
    6th July 2011, 0:19

    Most things are legal right up until they ban them Newey…. Funny that.

      1. That’s a good joke. Does that mean it’s bad?

    1. Made me laugh too.

  3. Virgin’s Cars 2 sponsorship is nice and all, but it can’t compare to Toyota’s sponsorship from the original Cars movie in the Japanese Super GT Series-

    They put a Lightning McQueen livery on their MR2!!

    1. Prisoner Monkeys
      6th July 2011, 7:27

      I haven’t seen it, but isn’t one of the villains in CARS 2 a Formula 1 car? And if so, why didn’t Virgin just paint their cars like that?

      1. He’s not actually a villain… he is a racer and rival of McQueen, whilst the villains are old cars that want to kill McQueen.
        But his character of always wanting to win and not accepting defeat makes him a little unpleasant (guess why, the only car which represents a nation, Italy, is a pain in the neck – we are not very well seen abroad).

        1. A lot of that fits perfectly with Ferrari, the ultimate italian F1 team and sports car builders!

      2. He is a bit Italian in style, so maybe we could kindly ask Ferrari to do so instead!

  4. A small logo and a picture on the side of the Virgin. How lame.

    The Star Wars Red Bull was way better.

  5. Prisoner Monkeys
    6th July 2011, 1:01

    So, what’s the deal with the Kubica crash simulation? It’s obviously a controlled test, but is this some morbid curiosity to learn what happened, or is this going to become a standard road safety test since the car was practically spitted by the armco?

    1. poland spends its entire road safety budget on reenacting a crash that happened on a closed road in italy…. makes perfect sense to me

    2. The barriers were split in two, and Kubica hit the start of the barrier which therefore entered the car. What the guard rails need to do is absorb the impact, making the car go round and back into the road. So it must not split in two.

    3. It was part of an analyses for purposes of road safety improvements.

      What happened to the guardrail might happen on thousends of km/miles of roads worldwide.

    4. The simulation was carried out in cooperation with a private company specializing in manufacturing road safety equipment, as a part of National Transportation Safety Experiment weekend in Poland.

      The widely accepted assumption is that the severity of the Kubica crash was caused by an improperly mounted (or damaged) guard rail. The simulation compared the effects of crashing into both properly and improperly mounted guard rail at 110 kmph. The differences are quite enormous, as you can see in this video: Kubica crash simulation (there is unfortunately 30s tv ad before it).

      1. thanks for posting that link.

        I really hope governments will start to check for improperly mounted barriers worldwide, because this perfectly shows how it changes from a safety device into a killing appliance on the road!

    5. I can’t believe they didn’t film it with a high speed camera…

      A bit silly, if you ask me.

      1. They did, actually.

        Properly mounted guard rail:

        Improperly mounted guard rail:

  6. I’m surprised that Richard Branson could even be bothered to be in the picture.

    1. It looks like they transported all the cars to his house for the picture so he didn’t have to make THAT much of an effort.

      1. GreeenWolf (@)
        6th July 2011, 2:57

        That’s the Household Cavalry Museum in London, out back where they hold demonstrations. Been there twice myself

        1. Yup. The section they’re on is Horseguards Parade, just next to Whitehall, and thirty seconds down the road from Downing Street and Trafalgar Square.

          It’s where Trooping The Colour is held.

          It will be an Olympic Venue next year.

          1. So when did Richard Branson move in? and will he buy Buck Palace when Virgin F1 win the constructors championship.

  7. William Wilgus
    6th July 2011, 3:28

    I’d really love it if Bernie went to jail!

    1. About that, the story does seem to say that he is going to be charged with aiding and abetting what ever the sentance will be. If something fishy did go on though he should go to prison not get a million fine or something silly that he wouldn’t even care about. This is a guy who just spent 85 mill on a second home for his daughter for christ sake.

    2. Prisoner Monkeys
      6th July 2011, 7:25

      I’d really love it if Bernie went to jail!

      Why? The sport would come to a crashing standstill. And who would take over in his place? The saying “better the devil you know than the devil you don’t” springs to mind.

      1. William Wilgus
        6th July 2011, 8:58

        I’m sure they’d find someone, and perhaps that someone would not be so greedy. Who knows? Someone else may be much better for the sport, and I can only think that would be very likely.

    3. Don’t be so hard on Bernie, he was just trying to feed his family.

  8. I’m glad to see pirelli suggest a qualifying tyre. It would be nice to get more than one lap per driver in Q3.

    1. McLarenFanJamm
      6th July 2011, 12:16

      Surely a Qualifying tyre would actually increase the chance of only seeing 1 flying lap per driver?

      Qualy tyres in the past were built for a huge amount of grip but extremely limited life, usually only 3 or 4 laps (depending on aggressiveness of car/driver), 1 out, 1 flying, 1 in.

      1. My guess is, that they would just bring extra pieces the softer tyre to use only in Qualifying, taking away the advantage of using less tyres during qualifying and saving them for the race.

  9. JamieFranklinF1
    6th July 2011, 7:18

    I’m not a huge fan of Webber, but I’d say what Christian Horner is saying there speaks volumes.

    1. Yes, team Vettel need a driver who can bring an unreliable car from the back of the grid to the podium or who can start on the front row and finish on the podium without actually threatening their lead driver, you’ve got to say Mark is doing a brilliant job in that role.

  10. Prisoner Monkeys
    6th July 2011, 7:23

    “I’m slightly baffled by it because it had been declared legal forever up until this race.”

    I think this is a bit mislaeding. OTBDs have been legal forever until now, but they have only very recently been seen in action. It’s not like OTBDs have formed a fundamental part of racing car aerodynamics for the past two and a half deacdes …

    1. Actually I see some small glimmer of hope in all these noises from Red Bull being upset about the rule change, that maybe they will really lose the most. Before quickly gaining that back that is.

      Agree with you on the OTBDs not having been used up until last year. Only now did engine builders manage to get the mapping figuered out, and the engine parts constructed to resist this. Not to mention new heat resistant materials being used to enable this.

    2. It’s not new, much was made of Michael Schumachers left foot braking allowing him to keep his Ferraris throttle open to maintain exhaust flow, improving downforce, as against Rubens lack of same.

      1. yes, but that is not off throttle boosted diffusor any more then when the driver is on the throttle.

        That is the driver managing his car around the corner, great driving to stay ahead instead of using the engine mapping to make it easier.

        1. exactly true, and schumacher wasnt the only left foot breaker then, and neither is he now. also maybe he doesnt realise, everyone will still be left foot braking at this coming race – to keep their cars “throttle open to maintain exhaust flow, improving downforce” lol

  11. Adrian Newey said in the same interview: Everybody else has, generally speaking, copied somebody else’s principal – mainly ours – and adapted it to the car they had in pre-season.

    Well, if you’d like to know I can explain where he copied my solutions.

    1. McLarenFanJamm
      6th July 2011, 8:40

      I’d like to know :)

  12. Did Horner really say that on Tuesday because its almost word for word what he said six weeks ago. I read another article yesterday which was on the same subject that was old quotes put out again in the build up to the British GP.

    1. I haven’t checked the stories, but it could well be that Horner is repeating his own words. Many of these guys in F1 get asked the same question over and over, and it seems they just prepare an answer once, and then use it over and over.

  13. I call smoke and mirrors from Newey. Red Bull have already blown hot and cold about the impact of the rule change (not to mention with their diffuser too :))

    There will be a few unpredictable factors like how it affects the car’s balance (see the MP4-24 for what a car with no rear grip looks like), but I don’t think it’ll do too much unless McLaren and Ferrari can find some other way of increasing their own rear downforce.

  14. WRT the blown diffuser: I really think it is unfair to change the rules on this mid-season. As Newey said, they designed their car around it, as all teams design their car around the regulations. They should not have to change that design mid-season. Except for exceptional safety-related ammendments, and with unanimous support from all the teams, the regulations should stay fixed.

    That said, I hope this does affect Red Bull more than the rest (although as Icthyes said, it’s probably smoke-and-mirrors). It’d help close the championship up and make for more exciting races.

    1. I think Ross Brawn explained it well somewhere: the problem is that the FIA suddenly discovered it was (arguably) illegal, and that they either had to ‘clarify’ the rule mid-season, or deal with protests from the smaller teams that don’t use it.

    2. In 2009 Red Bull were trying to ban double diffusers mid-season. Hypocrisy at it’s finest for them to complain now.

      1. Weren’t the protests at the double diffuser leveled prior to the start of the season?

        1. Not quite. Ross Brawn brought it up at the pre season meetings they all have, and it was ignored. So he kept it on his car, no-one else used it and Jenson became world champion.

      2. McLarenFanJamm
        6th July 2011, 12:21

        The protests began in Australia after the other teams realised how much of a performance advantage Brawn GP were getting.

        Ross Brawn had actually advised the other teams of the loophole in the regulations way before the beginning of the season and they ignored him. So, Brawn GP, Toyota and Williams used the design and then the other teams challenged it (unsuccessfully).

        I agree that it is hypocritical of Newey to complain about the ban now, but it’s also a lack of consistancy from the FIA, as they banned the double diffuser at the end of 2009 but they’ve banned the exhaust blowing mid-season in 2011.

  15. Would this upcoming ban also deal with the ‘dirty air’ coming out of the rear of the cars? If so, I am all for the change (and if I’m wrong, ignore my comment :p )

    1. Short answer no not entirely anyway. There will still be air flowing into and out of the diffuser.

      How ever i have read that the exhaust blown diffuser cleans up the air flow at the back of the car. With out seeing windtunnel data i can’t confirm that but, if it is the case taking it away *could* mean the airflow becomes more chaotic and there for worse. It could also mean that since there is less air (or engine gas) being forced out the back it might be made better. Either way there will still be a finite ammount of air coming from the back of the car so the issue will still be there. It’s just a question of if it’s an improvement or not for the following car.

      My guess is any change will be almost unnoticeable but fingers crossed. ;)

      1. The ban is only for off throttle blowing as well. So thats only in breaking zones.

  16. happy birthday elliot all the very best from sa

  17. If Vettel takes the championship soon business will be affected. Bernie and FIA surely know the consequences. But never be too sure as Newey is the best In F1. So Silverstone is like a new half of the season, I hope so for the fans sake.

  18. Aren’t baffles the whole problem here?

    *runs away*

    1. You mean how Newey “baffles” everybody.

  19. For someone apparently so intelligent, it seems as though Newey is rather easily baffled. Heck, I can understand why the rules have now been enforced, so why can’t he?

  20. Such a shame that a group of people have good brain then the rest of the field,they come with something clever approved by the FIA but just as they are dominating with their brain they are now given a brain washed.There should be some rules regarding mid season rule change.& the FIA needs to be more clever then before.

  21. Thanks Keith/all for the wishes! It was a nice day

  22. The changes should be made at the end of the season. Its clearly aimed at taking Red Bulls aerodynamic advantage away but will make the racing closer. As we’ve heard Mark Webber say in the past Red Bull don’t have the same horsepower as the bigger teams so they need to be innovative. If McLaren and Ferrari dominate because of a horsepower advantage will they change the rules to limit their advantage. I think not. F1 becoming a joke.

  23. That’s one hell of a simulation :/

    Really quite violent.

Comments are closed.