Red Bull RB18

[organic]

Old:


New:


New ducting only present on one car this weekend. Probably just for max

[organic]

Unlisted floor edge detail changed at Singapore. The blade on the edge has been curtailed. I think the Z-shaped edge to the floor has become more aggressive too (sharper cut-in), but I can't find any photos to verify



Side-on view of new Singapore profile showing shorter blade

[SmallSoldier]

Completely opposite packaging between MCL/RB, even though both have a compressor at the back of the tub, & use air air intercoolers. MCL puts the coolers so far forward* & away, with no undercuts on their tub, while RB did everything to put them right at the compressor, and dug large indurcuts in the sides for this purpose, & created those exotic floating mounting points (number 3 & 4) to make even more room (for the opposite compressor duct, I guess, & other things)

https://i.imgur.com/gouSIM2.jpg

https://twitter.com/NicolasF1i
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FeJZhxPXEAE ... name=large

Good shot of the tub, showing the undercut on the sides:



Via: n_mode_log

[organic]

Single element beamwing surprises me but they have quite a big wing, same floor configuration as Singapore with the shortened/modified floor edge blade. Still haven't got a good look at the floor fences which have been revised. Wing level same as Zandvoort.

[Just_a_fan]

Single element beamwing surprises me but they have quite a big wing, same floor configuration as Singapore with the shortened/modified floor edge blade. Still haven't got a good look at the floor fences which have been revised. Wing level same as Zandvoort.

They actually have two beam wings. One immediately above the diffuser lip that obviously acts to extend the diffuser - a nice detail. And they have a "beam" significantly above that which, presumably, is intended to act as the beam part of the beam wing. No doubt the two interact to some degree.

[organic]

Single element beamwing surprises me but they have quite a big wing, same floor configuration as Singapore with the shortened/modified floor edge blade. Still haven't got a good look at the floor fences which have been revised. Wing level same as Zandvoort.

They actually have two beam wings. One immediately above the diffuser lip that obviously acts to extend the diffuser - a nice detail. And they have a "beam" significantly above that which, presumably, is intended to act as the beam part of the beam wing. No doubt the two interact to some degree.

Good point, I'm blind. This type of configuration first appeared on the Alpine at Baku I believe:


Credit: Our own Blackout

[Just_a_fan]

Single element beamwing surprises me but they have quite a big wing, same floor configuration as Singapore with the shortened/modified floor edge blade. Still haven't got a good look at the floor fences which have been revised. Wing level same as Zandvoort.

They actually have two beam wings. One immediately above the diffuser lip that obviously acts to extend the diffuser - a nice detail. And they have a "beam" significantly above that which, presumably, is intended to act as the beam part of the beam wing. No doubt the two interact to some degree.

Good point, I'm blind. This type of configuration first appeared on the Alpine at Baku I believe:
https://i.imgur.com/uWDycKT.png

Hey, you're bringing these photos to the forum so need to apologise.

The split beam is interesting and I wonder what it does compared to the double flap beam wing normally used.

[organic]

They actually have two beam wings. One immediately above the diffuser lip that obviously acts to extend the diffuser - a nice detail. And they have a "beam" significantly above that which, presumably, is intended to act as the beam part of the beam wing. No doubt the two interact to some degree.

Good point, I'm blind. This type of configuration first appeared on the Alpine at Baku I believe:
https://i.imgur.com/uWDycKT.png

Hey, you're bringing these photos to the forum so need to apologise.

The split beam is interesting and I wonder what it does compared to the double flap beam wing normally used.

My potentially flawed intuition is that the top beam is mostly used to help evacuate hot air from the exhaust, in the centre between the RW and the lower BW element - the least bad place to do it. Also it may help to separate the "upper" flow from the lower flow. My assumption is that they are attempting to separate the upper flow from lower with the shoulder of the engine cover, brought at Silverstone. Deliver good airflow to the lower BW element and remove lossy air along the engine cover shoulder. This sort of engine cover shoulder was present on the Alpine when they first brought this BW config, and now RB have the sculpted engine cover they also bring this BW..

[organic]

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... ison-2022/

More about the RB's "trick" rear that causes excessive top speeds. The RB18 generates good load but very high top speeds.

Aston Martin is convinced that the outstanding top speed of the RB18 is not only due to its aerodynamic efficiency. "Look at the Red Bull's speed profile on the straights. They only really pick up speed in the second half." Charles Leclerc is also convinced: "It's not just about aerodynamics. There's something mechanical behind it."

Mercedes engineers noticed: "When stationary, the Red Bull has the highest ground clearance at the rear, and the lowest at high speeds."

The former top speed kings have refrained from taking their old trick into the ground effect era. "To do something like that with a conventional chassis takes up space and weight. We had neither one nor the other." Red Bull has wisely invested in this direction and is now getting the reward. While that may have contributed to the car's high weight at the start of the season, it's easier to shed weight than retrofit the chassis. And when you lose weight, you automatically get more lap time.

Some rear facing onboards would be useful

[Blackout]

Good point, I'm blind. This type of configuration first appeared on the Alpine at Baku I believe:
https://i.imgur.com/uWDycKT.png
Credit: Our own Blackout

Red Bull did it first. (and the pic is from NicolasF1i https://f1i.autojournal.fr/

[organic]

Good point, I'm blind. This type of configuration first appeared on the Alpine at Baku I believe:
https://i.imgur.com/uWDycKT.png
Credit: Our own Blackout

Red Bull did it first. (and the pic is from NicolasF1i https://f1i.autojournal.fr/

You're right it was Imola where we first saw that BW config and on the RB .. mb

[Bill]

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... ison-2022/

More about the RB's "trick" rear that causes excessive top speeds. The RB18 generates good load but very high top speeds.

Aston Martin is convinced that the outstanding top speed of the RB18 is not only due to its aerodynamic efficiency. "Look at the Red Bull's speed profile on the straights. They only really pick up speed in the second half." Charles Leclerc is also convinced: "It's not just about aerodynamics. There's something mechanical behind it."

Mercedes engineers noticed: "When stationary, the Red Bull has the highest ground clearance at the rear, and the lowest at high speeds."

The former top speed kings have refrained from taking their old trick into the ground effect era. "To do something like that with a conventional chassis takes up space and weight. We had neither one nor the other." Red Bull has wisely invested in this direction and is now getting the reward. While that may have contributed to the car's high weight at the start of the season, it's easier to shed weight than retrofit the chassis. And when you lose weight, you automatically get more lap time.

Some rear facing onboards would be useful

i dont understand these obsession with redbull top speed and the need to constantly qualify it,i quess the car is power by which-craft not the engine so lets get that out of the way.the same can be said about redbull the like of ferrari and merc try to undermine them at every turn.first they were using an illegal floor or their budget is over the limit.merc just can't admit they have been dethroned by a drinks company.the best or nothing right.

Back to pu that article has a lot of falsehoods its not true that merc had the pu to beat last year unless they wanted it to last for one race.Honda was better at Baku ,silverstone ,mexico,france .monza and many power hungary tracks.the media keep telling us that all top 3 pu are on par which is bs.pu built by different manufacturers across different continents or country with different budget ,skillset,infrastructure,patents can never just be magical be equal .rather than just acknowleging honda has done a better jop they wil just settle for a draw because no one can say merc or ferrari is better with a straight face.

[Sofa King]

If it’s the PU, how do you explain AT’s relative underperformance?

[Bill]

If it’s the PU, how do you explain AT’s relative underperformance?

How do you explain williams relative underperformance when merc was winning world champions.you can put the best pu on a tractor it wont transform it into champ winning race car.AT speed is still great at top speed,miami Alonzo with drs could not overtake Gasly on the straight he eventually collide into him on desperation.spa and baku were great race for them but strategy errors meant they failed to capitalise on their speed.

[Cassius]

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... ison-2022/

More about the RB's "trick" rear that causes excessive top speeds. The RB18 generates good load but very high top speeds.

Aston Martin is convinced that the outstanding top speed of the RB18 is not only due to its aerodynamic efficiency. "Look at the Red Bull's speed profile on the straights. They only really pick up speed in the second half." Charles Leclerc is also convinced: "It's not just about aerodynamics. There's something mechanical behind it."

Mercedes engineers noticed: "When stationary, the Red Bull has the highest ground clearance at the rear, and the lowest at high speeds."

The former top speed kings have refrained from taking their old trick into the ground effect era. "To do something like that with a conventional chassis takes up space and weight. We had neither one nor the other." Red Bull has wisely invested in this direction and is now getting the reward. While that may have contributed to the car's high weight at the start of the season, it's easier to shed weight than retrofit the chassis. And when you lose weight, you automatically get more lap time.

Some rear facing onboards would be useful

If Merc and Ferrari can copy this trick and RB's top speed advantage is lost next year, they need to start improving on other areas like peak DF etc to stay competitive. Could be an exciting season next year with all 3 top teams really close.