Aston Martin, Hungaroring, 2022

Aston Martin: FIA had no concerns over novel rear wing design

2022 Hungarian Grand Prix

Posted on

| Written by and

The FIA raised no concerns over an unusual change to Aston Martin’s rear wing which the team introduced this weekend, the team has said.

Aston Martin’s AMR22 is sporting a novel change to its rear wing element which is intended to increase the downforce it generates at a track where the penalty for producing drag is low.

The development prompted questions over whether it is in line with the intended goal of Formula 1’s 2022 regulations which are intended to promote overtaking. However Aston Martin team principal Mike Krack said the team took care to ensure the FIA had no concerns over its design.

“Developing a wing or developing ideas, you normally do not wait until the last moment before you show it [to the FIA],” he said today. “So we were in touch with the FIA all along the development to understand if this is something that would be accepted.

“It finally was, so that was for us the moment we said, ‘okay, we go for it’. I think there’s nothing special, at the end of the day. It’s an interpretation of the rules and we developed the wing according to that in conjunction with the FIA and that’s it, basically.”

Aston Martin, Hungaroring, 2022
Aston Martin’s unusual rear wing end plate
Rival F1 teams could seek to outlaw the development for future seasons if there is enough support for the change at the F1 Commission. Changing the rules would require a ‘super-majority’ – 28 votes in favour from a total of 30, including 10 representatives each from FOM and the FIA, and one from each of the 10 teams.

“I’m not concerned about a super-majority or anything,” said Krack. “If the rules are changing, or if these kinds of designs are not allowed, we will cope with it.”

Red Bull team principal Christian Horner said they were prepared to follow Aston Martin’s design leads. “I guess if it complies with the regs, that’s the main thing,” he said. “It opens up another avenue that’s interesting.”

Aston Martin introduced an extensive upgrade for their car at the Spanish Grand Prix which closely resembled Red Bull’s RB18. “Maybe for once we’ll copy something off an Aston Martin, rather than the other way round, you never know!” Horner joked.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

2022 Hungarian Grand Prix

Browse all 2022 Hungarian Grand Prix articles

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...
Claire Cottingham
Claire has worked in motorsport for much of her career, covering a broad mix of championships including Formula One, Formula E, the BTCC, British...

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

4 comments on “Aston Martin: FIA had no concerns over novel rear wing design”

  1. Lawrence Stroll seems to get away with everything . Likely some palm greasing going on.

  2. There is no such thing as the intent of the regulations. You’re either inside or outside the rules. If the high paid FIA technical personnel have omitted to be precise – remember these days they use CAD designs not only written rules – in certain areas then it’s not the teams faults to exploit those areas.

    On the the other hand, the story that have emerged from the paddock contradicts what Mike Krack is reporting about the FIA being satisfied with their interpretation of the rules. Tombazis was almost speechless when he received CAD design of the AM rear wing. He never saw this coming because the solution is legally clever but it’s in total contradiction with what they call “the intent of the regulations” with the additional efficiency it gives to the rear wing.

    As a Ferrari fan, I’m used to Tombazis being caught by surprise. He designed conservative cars to the letter of the rules that missed performance aspects that other teams used a core concepts and designed their cars around them. For example, the Ferrari 150º Italia was a conservative car that didn’t incorporate the EBD which was the performance differentiator in that era. McLaren and especially RBR designed their cars round that concept.

    As for the “super majority” to get Aston Martin novel rear wing design banned. The FIA has already gone down the Max Mosley safety card route. With that logic, the new Aston Martin rear wing will produce more downforce and give the car more speed. More cornering speed is dangerous and can lead to serious safety issues. Bingo ! The wing gets banned on safety purposes…

    We will see how the FIA – already captured by Wolff – will deal with this clever interpretation of the rules. I suspect Wolff will not try to upset his dear friend Lawrence and pull his strings at the FIA for that purpose the way he did with both RBR and Ferrari. Let’s wait and see how my prediction will age and I have no crystal ball.

  3. @tifoso1989

    There is no such thing as the intent of the regulations

    I am guessing you may have worded things a little poorly there as perhaps you mean that there is ‘no consequence’ of not keeping to the intent of regulations.

    Obviously all rules/regulations have intent, and I think it is relevant to discuss things that may fall within and outside of the intent. Essentially this is what leads to new or revised rules and regs.

    1. @cairnsfella
      That’s exactly what I meant. Thanks for correcting me. English is my third language !

      The intent of the rule here is that the rear wings are designed to throw the car’s turbulent wake high into the air and away from the front wing of the following car in order to allow for close racing. The dimensions and elements of the wings are specified and CAD designs were shared with the teams.

      In Aston Martin’s case, they have added a new element to the rear wing which might goes against the intent of the rules as it will add more downforce the wing and throw more dirty air. Though if in the written rules, there is nothing that prevents them from adding the element in question in that specific area, then they are perfectly within the rules even if they are violating the intent of the rules.

Comments are closed.