New front wings will show if F1 is on the right track – Isola

46 comments on “New front wings will show if F1 is on the right track – Isola”

1. 

   MrBoerns (@mrboerns)
   7th February 2019, 0:47

   Maybe buying the ol’ 14 might be an option for McLaren?
   1. 

      MrBoerns (@mrboerns)
      7th February 2019, 0:49

      I hear it also comes with title sponsors already applied :^)
2. 

   @HoHum (@hohum)
   7th February 2019, 0:47

   A look at that AMG video will show you how restrictive are the rules to build an F1 car. This virtual one-design rule set evolved with the dual aims of preventing 1 team dominating and reducing the budget required to be competitive. What a great success, not. This hugely restrictive rule set actually ensures that the only way to gain an advantage is to refine, refine, refine ad nauseum every little bit of the car, that requires a huge staff and a huge budget.
   1. 

      RogerA
      7th February 2019, 0:51

      @hohum this and i fear it is only going to be worse under a budget cap. i think that this is going to result in less risks, less innovation and more cars looking the same. i fear f1 is going to become a pseudo spec series, open but so restrictive in regulations and budget that it’s basically a spec indycar+.

      it is all the wrong direction indeed i feel. open up regulations a bit and let teams innovate and be inventive and if this leads to dominance or something so be it as this is a big part of the sport, doing a better job to beat your rivals by as big a gap as possible. all this talk of equal performance, parity and closer racing/title fights is ruining the sport as far as i am concerned, it is ripping it’s heart out and putting show ahead of sport!

      sad times indeed it is. the greats from the past must be tuning in there graves indeed.
      1. 

         JohnH (@johnrkh)
         7th February 2019, 6:48

         i fear it is only going to be worse under a budget cap. i think that this is going to result in less risks, less innovation and more cars looking the same. i fear f1 is going to become a pseudo spec series, open but so restrictive in regulations and budget that it’s basically a spec indycar+.
         I think so as well, there was a time when F1 used to brag about being as technically advanced as a car could possibly be, some even comparing it to latest in aero technology. Genuine cutting edge stuff with the best automotive engineers competing to get a job in F1, innovation was king.
         But why would the best engineers bother with one arm tied behind their back. Not being allowed to explore all of the possibilities, constantly being told to keep costs down and having to design within rules that restrict even the smallest advancements.
         1. 

            Biskit Boy (@sean-p-newmanlive-co-uk)
            7th February 2019, 11:58

            But why would the best engineers bother with one arm tied behind their back

            Because they are paid megabucks. Their skills might be better used elsewhere methinks.

            There was a time when F1 technology helped road car development and technology from aerospace was used in F1. There may continue to be some examples of this, but I think this no longer relevant. Money is King and there isn’t enough of it in F1 for 10 teams so how best to go forward?

            I’ve said this before, components developed by a team or suppliers should be available at a fixed cost to other teams. That way the costs can be dictated.
      2. 

         ColdFly (@)
         7th February 2019, 8:49

         Actually a proper budget cap (if that can be achieved) allows you to be less restrictive. In the end money rules it all.

         Restricting costs through prescriptive design will leave you with a pseudo spec series (all look the same) without the benefit of lower costs.
         1. 

            rsp123 (@rsp123)
            7th February 2019, 14:22

            Spot on. Either F1 is an open formula in which teams can be inventive and bold when building their cars, or it has to be one in which all the components are off the shelf, including the chassis. Having each team do the same things, as they do now, is needlessly expensive.
      3. 

         Robbie (@robbie)
         7th February 2019, 14:10

         @RogerA I think you are making some unnecessary assumptions about the budget cap and about restrictions to innovation. I believe Liberty and Brawn have already spoken on this. Let’s give them some credit for understanding the difficult balance they need to try to achieve, and one that BE didn’t. They know that F1 cannot and will not be a spec series ala IndyCar. Nobody wants that and the teams would never go for that. Nobody is suggesting ‘equal’ performance, as you attempt to fear monger. A little more parity amongst the big have teams and the little have not teams…sure. Necessary. Closer racing? Sure, that to me just means make the cars less clean air dependent.

         They have talked about more standardized parts, but those parts are quite mundane amongst the teams and would not be performance differentiators. They understand fully the need to leave the teams some room for innovation, while at the same time understanding that the more innovation that is allowed, the more advantaged the bigger money teams will be. Some of that differentiation will be dealt with by capping the big teams somewhat, and distributing more to the lesser teams. Standardizing some parts that would not negatively affect the product on the track, might free up money for innovation in areas that the teams are able to work on.

         It didn’t take for Liberty to take over for us to know all these things, for they were discussed well before any of us even knew there was a Liberty Media. And if it wasn’t Liberty Media it would be somebody else that would also be having to improve everything from BE’s last 10 years of unsustainable money grab and giving over of too much power to the top 4 teams who now don’t want to let that go.

         I hear you complaining, but I don’t hear you offering a better way for F1 moving forward given the number of complex issues they have to deal with all at once. Easy for you to say just allow more innovation and let the best team be rewarded for doing their best, with the big trophy. That won’t change in spite of your fears, but it is just not that simple. And there is a better way, and changes that are vitally necessary for the long term health of the sport.
         1. 

            DaveD (@daved)
            9th February 2019, 3:15

            As usual, @robbie is the voice of reason and reality. Thank you.
         2. 

            Kurik
            27th July 2019, 13:09

            Thank you and well said. I was beginning to think rational ppl are not on this forum.
   2. 

      Robert S
      7th February 2019, 5:23

      Well said
3. 

   RogerA
   7th February 2019, 0:47

   disagree with cotd, teams change owners & names and i don’t think one should really be a continuation of the prior so dont see what a franchise system would really do.

   i don’t consider toro rosso a continuation of minardi, to me there completely different entities running under completely different circumstances. minardi never would have won at monza in 2008 as they would never have had that budget, that chassis and maybe not even sebastian vettel. it’s a different team, yes the facilities & many staff are the same but everything else is different.

   and where do you stop. do you keep calling mercedes tyrrell, british american racing or honda? and are red bull stewart? no there mercedes & red bull, the past is the past and there totally different teams now.

   teams change owners, they change names and we should move on with them. yes it is sometimes sad to see historic names go away but it’s part of the sport and clinging onto a name just because even after a change of owner & change of team name seems silly to me.

   would also be confusing to newer fans if we have to explain that toro rosso is the racing name but there also known as the minardi franchise or something.

   just seems pointless.
   1. 

      MrBoerns (@mrboerns)
      7th February 2019, 0:54

      Well, the point where it gets confusing is when Mercedes, which of course is Brawn/Honda/BAR/Tyrell, now claim their continuation of the traditional Mercedes team. Of course even more so with Renault being a continuation of the traditional Renault F1 team yet the original Renault actually fought Toleman which of course is now renault. Not to mention the very same team won races in 2012 and 2013 that were counted towards Team Lotus’ tally which is of course a completely different team altogether which also competed against said Toleman-Lotus-Renault-Benetton AND the original Renault.

      Damn.
      1. 

         hobo (@hobo)
         7th February 2019, 22:58

         @mrboerns

         Sadly a few years out of date and slightly ugly but… here’s a chart.
   2. 

      petebaldwin (@)
      7th February 2019, 2:30

      I’m 50/50 on it. In some cases, it feels like a new team with new ideas but in other cases, it’s literally just a new name and livery.

      As you say, Minardi wouldn’t have won in Monza but at the same time, Minardi could have bought Honda in 2009 instead of Brawn and would have won in Australia…. Mercedes have since made the team their own and it feels different now.

      Would you say Racing Point are making their debut this season in the same way that Haas did a few years ago?
   3. 

      socksolid (@socksolid)
      7th February 2019, 4:51

      Ship of theseus. Just saying.

      With f1 teams I think the frontman of the team matters more than the name or the personnel. Sauber was peter sauber’s team and as long as peter sauber was involved you could make the claim that it was THE sauber team. Lotus was about colin chapman and without him it maybe wasn’t the lotus anymore. With ferrari that is different as it is the business entity who is the frontman and not any single person, not even enzo himself.

      Same goes to williams although with a catch as we generally see that when the children take over the business of their parents it is seen as continuation of their work. Even if williams is not fully owned by frank williams anymore you can still see the continuity there with frank still being involved directly and through his children. Mclaren I think is more about the business than about the frontman person although I was born a lot after bruce was killed which could skew my opinion on it. But at the same time mclaren is not about a person, not about bruce as it is not about ron either. Things are different with mclaren nowadays because they are a car manufacturer and a business which was not always the case.

      But with minardi/red bull that is not even closely true. Having the same mechanics in my mind makes no difference. Having the same owner who runs it to me is what being the same team is all about really. It is their team.
      1. 

         tony mansell
         7th February 2019, 9:58

         The 30 year old broom that’s never let me down. 5 new heads and 4 new handles.
   4. 

      Matt Jones (@mattj)
      7th February 2019, 9:14

      I’ve no problem with the name changing – I mean companies change names all the time – but I do have a problem with discarding the history: No. of races, wins, championship.

      As has been mentioned below Mercedes claims that they are the continuation of the 50s mercedes team – but they aren’t. The current Mercedes-Benz Grand Prix Ltd company was established in 1964 as Tyrell. Yes they’ve changed names as is shown in their company history.

      I guess what I’m trying to say is if it’s a new company then start fresh. If its just renamed then change the name but keep the history.
   5. 

      BlackJackFan
      8th February 2019, 4:57

      RogerA – completely agree – I’ve never understood this almost desperate need by some to hang on to a past entity which no longer exists
      If I had bought Force India I might have renamed it BlackJackF1 and it would have become my (all mine…!) company regardless of who might continue to work for me. To suggest it remains something shrouded in the mists of time I might even find offensive… ;-)
4. 

   MaliceCooper
   7th February 2019, 1:16

   “New front wings will show if F1 is on the right track” (SPOILER: they’re probably not)
   1. 

      juan fanger (@juan-fanger)
      7th February 2019, 7:56

      The target is to reduce downforce, to try to increase the number of overtakes on-track

      Is that correct? I thought the idea was to reduce turbulent air for the following car, to try to increase the number of overtakes on-track.

      If the target was to reduce downforce then they wouldn’t have widened the wing.
      1. 

         tony mansell
         7th February 2019, 10:22

         the target was to reduce wash, the by product is reduced downforce
      2. 

         hobo (@hobo)
         7th February 2019, 23:02

         I thought it was to reduce turbulent air to allow closer racing. Increased overtakes may or may not occur, but at least racing would be closer. Maybe I am misremembering.
         1. 

            DaveD (@daved)
            9th February 2019, 3:21

            IMO, they made some bad assumptions. They wanted to reduce the outwash of the front wings….which would therefore reduce the total turbulence for following cars and thus enable more passing.

            The wider front wings will make them just as dependent on the front wing downforce as before… and defeat the purpose. Sigh.

            Eventually, they plan to reduce the need for downforce from the front wings and *probably* reduce the overall downforce and use the underbody for a higher percentage of downforce. But that’s a HOPE for the 2021 rules. This 2019 rule was a knee jerk attempt to make things better and I doubt it will help. We shall see.
            1. 

               Robbie (@robbie)
               9th February 2019, 14:34

               When he says ‘target,’ Isola might be speaking of the overall target for 2021 and beyond, not just the 2019 target. As he states, this year will be useful to see if they are heading in the right direction, but it is only part one of an experiment as far as I am concerned. He states 2020 will be another step. Remember that Brawn has to work right now with cars that are built for these junk tires, with drs, and that are heavily dependent on clean air. There is only so much that can be done to improve closer racing with these cars without costing the teams a ton more money than this front wing and it’s resultant tweaks to the rest of the car have. Interestingly, I haven’t heard one criticism from those within F1 that this new front wing and resultant tweaks will be bad for the racing this year. Those taking the negative side have at best just said it may not help much. So this experiment can’t hurt. Yeah it has cost the teams a bit of money. The overall goal is well worth it.

               The overall goal for 2021, from what I gather, and strictly speaking about the cars, is to achieve less downforce, or at least less clean air dependence, have cars that make less wake, no drs for there will be no need for a gadget to mask extreme clean air dependence, resulting in closer racing, which is not to say they want a hundred passes per race…just closer racing and drivers able to follow without ruining their day.

               Nobody should expect miracles from this year’s alteration, and I don’t agree that it is knee-jerk, because this is one discovery amongst no doubt many, that Brawn and his team have made by having two cars nose to tail in a wind tunnel. I am glad he is experimenting now, but fully appreciate that he is putting lipstick on a pig in a way, but at least is trying something in an attempt to sort out a better way when they really really can affect change positively with a ground up restoration for 2021.

               All I expect is that Brawn and his team learn a lot from this year that will help them toward the overall main goal of much better racing from 2021 onward. I suspect they already have a ton of things they would do tomorrow if they could just snap their fingers and make it so. That’s not how it works and for now I am glad that Brawn is already taking some steps toward a better way, rather than doing nothing. We’re also getting badly needed slightly sturdier tires this year under Brawn’s watch.
            2. 

               DaveD (@daved)
               11th February 2019, 1:13

               @robbie

               I hadn’t thought of it that way. It’s at least a good set of data as they try to get ready for the 2021 season. I guess I was just hoping for a narrower front wing as well but that would have probably cost them too much downforce on the front end of the car with no way to compensate and lots of understeer.

               Anyway, you’re right and I shouldn’t be so negative. I’m just eager for the 2021 rules and a chance to see better racing with a lot less dependence on clean air for downforce. But I shouldn’t be one of the negative voices without waiting for results. I get frustrated enough when others do that. :)
   2. 

      [TR]
      7th February 2019, 8:48

      One would think that F1 wouldn’t mess up like that. But in case they do, all they have to do is look at the current date, then look at the race calendar. If they’re at the right track for the next calendar race, they’re fine.
      I don’t see how a front wing will help in that situation.
5. 

   Phylyp (@phylyp)
   7th February 2019, 2:42

   A big shout-out to Dr. Hubbard. The HANS device is such an ingenious solution to secure drivers’ heads & necks – ingenious in its simplicity. The first time I read about how it operates, I came away impressed with how it “just worked” with the existing multi-point harness.

   I think just as Sid Watkins was responsible for revolutionizing safety in F1/motorsport in the last century, Dr. Hubbard’s contribution can be the one of this century. (Interestingly, I found out that the HANS device was designed and built in the 80s and 90s, but only became popular this century.)
   1. 

      Bullfrog (@bullfrog)
      7th February 2019, 12:41

      I wish the new front wings would “just work” but nobody seems to know… Surely someone can perform a decent simulation or even a track test, but it all seems to be suck-it-and-see, and I fear that they’ll be as useless as the adjustable wings about 10 years ago.
6. 

   Fer no.65 (@fer-no65)
   7th February 2019, 4:46

   RIP Dr. Hubbard. One of the biggest contributors to motorsport, certainly the most important man in terms of safety over the past 20 years… God knows how many people’s lives his invention saved and will continue to save.
   1. 

      tony mansell
      7th February 2019, 9:59

      I call your Dr Hubbard and raise you a Sid Watkins
7. 

   Ericglo
   7th February 2019, 4:52

   I grew up in Atlanta and heard about the Hans device probably in the early ’90s. I thought it was a great idea then. Now it is indispensable.
8. 

   JayMcG (@jaymcg)
   7th February 2019, 7:34

   Don’t think the new front wings are going to make much of a difference. Bigger changes are needed.
9. 

   tonyyeb (@tonyyeb)
   7th February 2019, 8:51

   Anyone know why Lotterer is missing the WEC race? Is it because it is close to the Formula E race in Hong Kong? If so does that mean Formula E is now more important than WEC to teams / manufacturers?
   1. 

      Joao (@johnmilk)
      7th February 2019, 11:16

      Unless you are in a toyota, yes
10. 

    Jere (@jerejj)
    7th February 2019, 9:48

    I thoroughly agree with Horner. Things that might work in the States indeed don’t automatically necessarily work the same way elsewhere. BTW, was it necessary to have two separate articles of the same topic up there on this round-up?

    ”The target is to reduce downforce”
    – Not quite true. To my knowledge, the target of these interim changes is/was to reduce the outwash effect when following another car.

    That’s an interesting launch dress code by Haas, LOL.

    I disagree with the COTD. @RogerA pretty much summed it up perfectly.
11. 

    Alec Glen (@alec-glen)
    7th February 2019, 12:25

    I’m not sure if I agree with COTD or not but I would point out that franchises are normally based on the name/branding rather than their physical location or ownership. It’s common in franchise based sports for franchises to move location and change ownership but it’s always the same team of people and name. I think it would be valuable to F1 if there were franchises as they’d build more value than some of the frankly poor team names we’ve seen more recently. That said, the revenue distribution structure is the biggest thing holding F1 back from proper growth as displayed by the empty slots at the back of the grid.

    If starting F1 today I think franchises would be the way to go but as F1’s not actually very exciting and is really based on prestige, ripping up that history would be bad for business.
12. 

    Maisch
    7th February 2019, 13:12

    If they wanted more overtaking, why increasing the wing width? It makes it even harder to do close racing, with the largely increased risk of damaging the front wing and ruining the race.
    1. 

       JayMcG (@jaymcg)
       7th February 2019, 15:05

       It’s the usual F1 way of doing things… Create an additional problem while doing something else to “help”.
    2. 

       MrBoerns (@mrboerns)
       7th February 2019, 17:05

       if you slice someone’s rear tyre and he falls back, is it counted as an overtake?
       because that will be aided by these wings
    3. 

       hobo (@hobo)
       7th February 2019, 23:01

       @Maisch – They want the larger front wing so that the car following has front downforce and can turn while following a car rather than losing so much downforce they run wide or have to slow down. Whether it works or not, we’ll see. It didn’t last time.
13. 

    J.A. B
    7th February 2019, 15:28

    L’ANCIENNE DOUANE IS BACK!! For the first time since 1938!
14. 

    Tristan (@skipgamer)
    7th February 2019, 17:16

    I think one thing Liberty finds frustrating is a lot of this business is conducted through the media.

    This is something I’ve suspected for a while, nice little quote by Horner…
    1. 

       @HoHum (@hohum)
       7th February 2019, 22:45

       @skipgamer, thank goodness it doesn’t happen here.
15. 

    Shimks (@shimks)
    11th February 2019, 9:27

    I really enjoyed that video with James Allison. The excitement pouring out of that guy!

Comments are closed.