vorticism wrote: ↑01 Feb 2026, 20:51
The lack of bodywork beneath the sidepods is remarkable. No other team has this. The width at the base of the sidepod is effectively the width of the fuel-cell/safety-cell/monocoque (note the vertical lines that descend directly from the halo mounts). Straight shot from the forward floor to the gap between the rear tyre and the diffuser. That gap can be seen from the front of the car. Straight groundline. I’ve highlighted it here.
A feat of packaging? Usually components are housed beneath the radiator ducting.
The sidepods on other cars are not squared off, or at least with a wider footprint because of "packaging solutions". I can speak more to the previous design regime/era, because we actually got to see how the front wing was used, and a few seasons of flo-vis and wet weather running... The reason wide sidepods became the "meta" was simple, the downforce, and aero engineering to get it, was ao much more consistent when the air could be channeled from higher up. They pushed the non-laminar flow from the front wings pressure differential outboard, or onto the wheels and up, or into the sidepods, basically anywhere to get rid of it. This is why the mercedes was a nightmare to setup in 2023 with the small sidepods. All it took was something as small as following in a car 2-3 seconds ahead, a tiny amount of floor damage, or just a miscalculation on balancing downforce, at some speeds, for it to start porpoising. The second the aero isnt exactly how you imagined it would be, youre chasing faeries trying to solve it.
Now the current regulations drop the importance of the floor, somewhat. Most importantly, the cars can ride higher, and wont be creating its own feedback loop of downforce increasing immensely as it gets close to the ground, etc. so this is absolutely a cool, interesting design, but... We are looking at it with a front wing that is basically in the Indy 500/low downforce config. And when the car is running a very low downforce front wing, its allowing a straight path to the tunnel, you're rewarded with a much less agitated flow, and its plausible the mid-floor and rear floor will generate more downforce. Quite probable, to be honest. This will also reduce drag somewhat, especially with the active front wings allowing the air a clear channel, something the front suspension chassis mounting points lead me to believe is a core concept here.
But things will definitely get complicated/complex in two situations. The most obvious is when theyre running on higher downforce tracks, and the sudden loss of higher pressure, laminar flow under the sidepods and on the floor, once the front wing element is producing full downforce. It will create a large low pressure area, at the front of the floor, and when the car needs front end grip and stable downforce, it may be difficult to set up the car to perform consistently. And multiply that problem by about 10 if they are also within a couple of seconds of another car in the corner.
Something i have been pondering for a few months now, is the benefits that could be gained from using the active front wing to basically make an absolute mess out of the airflow, to intentionally increase drag. Basically turning a low drag design in the straights, into a high drag design when brakes are applied, so the car can utilize not only the adhesion of the tires to slow down, but also turn the car into an air-brake. This has a couple obvious benefits. On a quali run, it might let a driver brake a few meters later... but more importantly, more air braking = less abused tires, and less heat going through them, and if there is one thing mclaren taught everyone last year, its that having tired that fall off a few laps slower than everyone else, is one hell of a cheat code. Anyways, the aston is the closest i have seen to something like an induced high drag design actually being done, although this is 100% speculation on the actual intent/theories being applied in this design.
