Red Bull RB22

[johnnycesup]

Is the suspension mounting point far back in the front? Or what is that thing just in front of the bargeboards?

Certainly looks that way to me, so that the piece of carbon under the place where the pushrod and the top wishbone cross is the front wing, right?

[venkyhere]

I posted something in concurrence to the below post (made a few days ago, and something which I was in agreement with, then), and am editing it now, because I have my doubts about the picture in this post :

Multi-link lower suspension for RB22

https://i.ibb.co/V0fzkyTC/20260127-185744.jpg

@organic, the two yellow coloured ones, one is looking like rear arm of lower wishbone and the other is looking like the forward arm of lower wishbone. The track rod is the 'middle-one' at a height in between the upper and lower wishbones. And, whatever 'links' we can see in the background are 'bargeboard stays' I think.
So in that case, where is the 'multi-link' ? Simple 2+2 armed wishbones, aren't they ?

[Tommy Cookers]

... vanity panel .....

modesty panel

[vorticism]

Those front lower A-arm (or control arms if truly multi link) are indeed remarkably wide-set. Contrast this to several years ago where teams had them closer together, with Merc even conjoining them. One obvious benefit would be structural efficiency--but I can't say if it's more about aero or suspension boffin wizardry.

... vanity panel .....

modesty panel

I suppose a vanity panel would need to be made out of transparent material.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_7iqskX0AA ... name=large

Remarkable that we have images this good in January. Who published it?

[Henk_v]

It allmost looks like the bluff sidepod combined with the bargeboards generate a sh+tload of df. Could they be attempting to do the high speed cornering stuff in straightline mode?

[f1isgood]

Is the suspension mounting point far back in the front? Or what is that thing just in front of the bargeboards?

Certainly looks that way to me, so that the piece of carbon under the place where the pushrod and the top wishbone cross is the front wing, right?

Yes I think you are looking at what I think it is and seems to be confirmed above.

[marcel171281]

It allmost looks like the bluff sidepod combined with the bargeboards generate a sh+tload of df. Could they be attempting to do the high speed cornering stuff in straightline mode?

The FIA decides which mode is used where on track. Team and driver have no influence on aero while driving and it will be the same for all.

[organic]

It allmost looks like the bluff sidepod combined with the bargeboards generate a sh+tload of df. Could they be attempting to do the high speed cornering stuff in straightline mode?

That's not allowed, and secondly how do you know how much df bluff sidepod plus bargeboards would generate?

[carisi2k]

I have a feeling that the bluff sidepod as people are calling it could disappear come either the second or third test.

What would be the point of a vanity panel at the first test? I'm not saying it can not be, as it certainly looks like one, but still struggling to understand what is the point? If we figure it out, then other teams on the location would know just as well.

What would be the point of hiding an undercut, when other teams could figure out there would be one?
Unless something more tricky is going on, but I don't have the imagination to take a guess what else it could be.

The render images had an undercut and maybe it's not a vanity panel but an early version of the sidepod to form an understanding of how the car operates. Something just screams to me that there will be an undercut.

[Brahmal]

Is the suspension mounting point far back in the front? Or what is that thing just in front of the bargeboards?

Bottom rear wishbone. It lines up with the front SIS wing in this picture, creating a little optical illusion.

[Stu]

I have a feeling that the bluff sidepod as people are calling it could disappear come either the second or third test.

What would be the point of a vanity panel at the first test? I'm not saying it can not be, as it certainly looks like one, but still struggling to understand what is the point? If we figure it out, then other teams on the location would know just as well.

What would be the point of hiding an undercut, when other teams could figure out there would be one?
Unless something more tricky is going on, but I don't have the imagination to take a guess what else it could be.

Interesting a series with a limited quantity of Wind tunnel & CFD runs - evenly distributed through the year - I can totally see the point of running false panels at this test.
As a rival team do you gamble precious resources on trying out this concept only to find that a month later it was fake?

[vorticism]

sidepod as front floor extension (only RBR so far, in part) https://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewt ... 1#p1298371

What I was getting at, although it's a small amount here. Seems to be the case that the floor terminates before the LE of the sidepod and is used to blend the fore chassis, t-tray, sidepod, and floor together. There should still be room to move the sidepod even further forward.

[AR3-GP]

sidepod as front floor extension (only RBR so far, in part) https://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewt ... 1#p1298371

What I was getting at, although it's a small amount here. Seems to be the case that the floor terminates before the LE of the sidepod and is used to blend the fore chassis, t-tray, sidepod, and floor together. There should still be room to move the sidepod even further forward.
https://i.postimg.cc/brmV4znC/rb22FLEXvorticism.jpg

It's an interesting suggestion. However I thought teams were trying to move the cockpit back so that they could increase the space between the front wheel and the floor entrance. So using the sidepod to move the floor forward seems counter to this.

[ClassicLivery]

With regard to the “vanity panel” and the fantastic post: https://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewt ... 1#p1298371 @vorticism shared earlier, I’m wondering whether we’ll see a tunnel under the sidepod somewhere.

[AR3-GP]

I agree that there is something "off" about the area under the "Oracle" logo.