2021 Red Bull Racing F1 Team

[Juzh]

Things will ebb and flow throughout the season, the Mercedes is still not faster than the Red Bull.

The long runs had Perez splitting the Mercedes, which means Verstappen would have had the edge in the race. It's back to being close, and Bottas's maneuver ensured that RBR will have a hard time putting on more performance on their car. I have a feeling Mercedes will also have to deal with an engine penalty, law of averages.

Dreamland. Hamilton twice in a row beat verstappen by considerable margins in qualifying (should have been 3-4 tenths in silverstone), and that quite simply means mercedes is faster car now. We have no race data apart from sprint race which is way too short and unrepresentative. Hamilton was unable to overtake leclerc even in first stint during normal race, so running in dirty air was entirely responsible for him sitting behind Verstappen in sprint.

[Incognito]

Things will ebb and flow throughout the season, the Mercedes is still not faster than the Red Bull.

The long runs had Perez splitting the Mercedes, which means Verstappen would have had the edge in the race. It's back to being close, and Bottas's maneuver ensured that RBR will have a hard time putting on more performance on their car. I have a feeling Mercedes will also have to deal with an engine penalty, law of averages.

Dreamland. Hamilton twice in a row beat verstappen by considerable margins in qualifying (should have been 3-4 tenths in silverstone), and that quite simply means mercedes is faster car now. We have no race data apart from sprint race which is way too short and unrepresentative. Hamilton was unable to overtake leclerc even in first stint during normal race, so running in dirty air was entirely responsible for him sitting behind Verstappen in sprint.

Qualifying pace and race pace are now simply the same, regardless of tyre or environmental differences between the days?

A couple of qualifying laps are entirely representative of race pace, but a 17-lap race is way too short and unrepresentative to draw conclusions about race pace from?

I'm obviously missing something (or quite a lot) so could you clarify, please?

[LaplacesDemon]

I think he is saying it is difficult to judge Merc's pace relative to RB in the sprint race because it was running in Max's dirty air while the RB was in clean air.

[etusch]

I don't think removing the stuff from the other side would be beneficial or correct any balance issues, I think the problem would get even bigger; all those wings an deflectors are there to optimize and stabilize the air flow. Losing them will result in a decrease of stable airflow which results in a lower and unpredictable level of downforce, and probably unpredictable shifts of the center of the downforce. This will only increase the instability.

As I said I don't really know how it would end up from balance wise. But designed air flow + df at one side and no or not designed air flow + df level at other side may cause bigger balance difference both side of car.

[Incognito]

I considered that, but when they moved to different tyres he overtook Leclerc relatively easily (I may be misremembering though). Part of my problem isn't the 'noise' around the sprint race, it's the total reliance on a qualifying lap as a guide to race pace. A qualifying lap on a different day, on different tyres, when a single mistake (see Hamilton's powerslide) can ruin the time set. But I might be wrong.

I don't know which car will be fastest at the next race, I think there are too many variables I don't understand to feel confident making that prediction, so I'm always keen to learn from experienced observers, such as Juzh and Godlameroso, and to try and understand the evidence that leads to their differing conclusions.

[Juzh]

Things will ebb and flow throughout the season, the Mercedes is still not faster than the Red Bull.

The long runs had Perez splitting the Mercedes, which means Verstappen would have had the edge in the race. It's back to being close, and Bottas's maneuver ensured that RBR will have a hard time putting on more performance on their car. I have a feeling Mercedes will also have to deal with an engine penalty, law of averages.

Dreamland. Hamilton twice in a row beat verstappen by considerable margins in qualifying (should have been 3-4 tenths in silverstone), and that quite simply means mercedes is faster car now. We have no race data apart from sprint race which is way too short and unrepresentative. Hamilton was unable to overtake leclerc even in first stint during normal race, so running in dirty air was entirely responsible for him sitting behind Verstappen in sprint.

Qualifying pace and race pace are now simply the same, regardless of tyre or environmental differences between the days?

A couple of qualifying laps are entirely representative of race pace, but a 17-lap race is way too short and unrepresentative to draw conclusions about race pace from?

I'm obviously missing something (or quite a lot) so could you clarify, please?

In my opinion qualifying gaps are way more representative than one flat out stint where you're confined to running in dirty air the whole time. That's on top of just general car and driver behaviour behind the wheel and in interviews. Verstappen himself said they didn't have the pace in quali, and I'm yet to see a race this year where red bull had better race pace relative to their qualifying pace. It was either equal or worse.

I dont see anyone saying ferrari is faster than mercedes just because hamilton couldn't overtake leclerc for the first 24 laps either.

[TNTHead]

An additional argument why the sprint race is less representative for race pace comparison is the observation that the RB is normally struggling with balance on high fuel load and better balanced on lower fuel load. You can see this for instance in the second half of the French GP as well as the one lap / qualifying pace vs long runs in the FP's.

[basti313]

Things will ebb and flow throughout the season, the Mercedes is still not faster than the Red Bull.

The long runs had Perez splitting the Mercedes, which means Verstappen would have had the edge in the race. It's back to being close, and Bottas's maneuver ensured that RBR will have a hard time putting on more performance on their car. I have a feeling Mercedes will also have to deal with an engine penalty, law of averages.

Dreamland. Hamilton twice in a row beat verstappen by considerable margins in qualifying (should have been 3-4 tenths in silverstone), and that quite simply means mercedes is faster car now. We have no race data apart from sprint race which is way too short and unrepresentative. Hamilton was unable to overtake leclerc even in first stint during normal race, so running in dirty air was entirely responsible for him sitting behind Verstappen in sprint.

Qualifying pace and race pace are now simply the same, regardless of tyre or environmental differences between the days?

A couple of qualifying laps are entirely representative of race pace, but a 17-lap race is way too short and unrepresentative to draw conclusions about race pace from?

I'm obviously missing something (or quite a lot) so could you clarify, please?

I do not know why qualifying laps should not be representative for car performance alone. 90% of the races end roughly in the same order as Q if you take bad strategies, crashes and defects away.

[Craigy]

The UK is slowly reopening and I decided to pick up where I left off with one of my favourite activities, which is indoor skydiving.

The tunnel I use is an old decommissioned/repurposed military tunnel on the site of what was the Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE), Bedford. It was demobbed in the early 1990s and repurposed in 2005 for human flight. Originally I think there were 5 windtunnels on the same site including the VST (the vertical one I now skydive in). There was a supersonic tunnel and a couple of other horizontal tunnels.

Other than the VST, the site only has one other tunnel running as of 2021, and that's a large low-speed tunnel currently used by Red Bull for F1. I've never seen it being worked on externally before, but they are doing something to it at the moment involving a crane (see pic).

I wonder if they'll dismantle it and take it to the MK campus. It does look to me like it'd be possible to take it apart in sections for road transport then reassemble it at the destination.

|https://thumbsnap.com/Ck15Vq8K

[godlameroso]

Things will ebb and flow throughout the season, the Mercedes is still not faster than the Red Bull.

The long runs had Perez splitting the Mercedes, which means Verstappen would have had the edge in the race. It's back to being close, and Bottas's maneuver ensured that RBR will have a hard time putting on more performance on their car. I have a feeling Mercedes will also have to deal with an engine penalty, law of averages.

Dreamland. Hamilton twice in a row beat verstappen by considerable margins in qualifying (should have been 3-4 tenths in silverstone), and that quite simply means mercedes is faster car now. We have no race data apart from sprint race which is way too short and unrepresentative. Hamilton was unable to overtake leclerc even in first stint during normal race, so running in dirty air was entirely responsible for him sitting behind Verstappen in sprint.

Qualifying pace and race pace are now simply the same, regardless of tyre or environmental differences between the days?

A couple of qualifying laps are entirely representative of race pace, but a 17-lap race is way too short and unrepresentative to draw conclusions about race pace from?

I'm obviously missing something (or quite a lot) so could you clarify, please?

Never mind this user, irrationally has it out for me, always feels the need to toss insults. Apparently the smack down Verstappen did in the Sprint race doesn't count for some reason. It's that severe delusion he claims I have that needs grilling and cheap shots. I guess he has something against minorities

[godlameroso]

Dreamland. Hamilton twice in a row beat verstappen by considerable margins in qualifying (should have been 3-4 tenths in silverstone), and that quite simply means mercedes is faster car now. We have no race data apart from sprint race which is way too short and unrepresentative. Hamilton was unable to overtake leclerc even in first stint during normal race, so running in dirty air was entirely responsible for him sitting behind Verstappen in sprint.

Qualifying pace and race pace are now simply the same, regardless of tyre or environmental differences between the days?

A couple of qualifying laps are entirely representative of race pace, but a 17-lap race is way too short and unrepresentative to draw conclusions about race pace from?

I'm obviously missing something (or quite a lot) so could you clarify, please?

In my opinion qualifying gaps are way more representative than one flat out stint where you're confined to running in dirty air the whole time. That's on top of just general car and driver behaviour behind the wheel and in interviews. Verstappen himself said they didn't have the pace in quali, and I'm yet to see a race this year where red bull had better race pace relative to their qualifying pace. It was either equal or worse.

I dont see anyone saying ferrari is faster than mercedes just because hamilton couldn't overtake leclerc for the first 24 laps either.

My guy, Verstappen could pull a gap at will. The team told him to slow down.

[Curbstone]

I don't think removing the stuff from the other side would be beneficial or correct any balance issues, I think the problem would get even bigger; all those wings an deflectors are there to optimize and stabilize the air flow. Losing them will result in a decrease of stable airflow which results in a lower and unpredictable level of downforce, and probably unpredictable shifts of the center of the downforce. This will only increase the instability.

As I said I don't really know how it would end up from balance wise. But designed air flow + df at one side and no or not designed air flow + df level at other side may cause bigger balance difference both side of car.

I think you are only looking at a symmetric positioning (left vs. right) of the downforce. In that optic an symmetrical design is better, as long as the airflow is stable. But it's not, and if both sides are unstable, the balance may shift from the right to the left (left and right are separated, and they behave independently of each other)
If one side is unstable but the other side is stable, the difference between both is limited and the balance shifts are only slighlty to the left.

I think that if removing the aero parts on the other side would be beneficial, the would have done it during the red flag period.

[Wouter]

Steve Jones [the "taxidriver" from Channel 4] sits down with Red Bull Racing's title chasing Max Verstappen after taking him on a taxi ride from hell.
They discuss the championship race, what he does away from the track, the Dutch fans who support him,
future team mates and of course the rivalry with Lewis Hamilton.

[etusch]

I think you are only looking at a symmetric positioning (left vs. right) of the downforce. In that optic an symmetrical design is better, as long as the airflow is stable. But it's not, and if both sides are unstable, the balance may shift from the right to the left (left and right are separated, and they behave independently of each other)
If one side is unstable but the other side is stable, the difference between both is limited and the balance shifts are only slighlty to the left.

I think that if removing the aero parts on the other side would be beneficial, the would have done it during the red flag period.

Yes. I am looking it in symetric point of view. I accept if it is wrong but to accept it is completely wrong is a bit harder for me. At turns maybe both side plays different roles but one side is not in the game so if both are designed in a balance I thought it should be worse.
I am more confident about that it affects balance more at straights. One side plays with air and I think it cause some drag while otherside is not causing any drag.

[mkay]

Qualifying pace and race pace are now simply the same, regardless of tyre or environmental differences between the days?

A couple of qualifying laps are entirely representative of race pace, but a 17-lap race is way too short and unrepresentative to draw conclusions about race pace from?

I'm obviously missing something (or quite a lot) so could you clarify, please?

In my opinion qualifying gaps are way more representative than one flat out stint where you're confined to running in dirty air the whole time. That's on top of just general car and driver behaviour behind the wheel and in interviews. Verstappen himself said they didn't have the pace in quali, and I'm yet to see a race this year where red bull had better race pace relative to their qualifying pace. It was either equal or worse.

I dont see anyone saying ferrari is faster than mercedes just because hamilton couldn't overtake leclerc for the first 24 laps either.

My guy, Verstappen could pull a gap at will. The team told him to slow down.

I agree with this. Verstappen definitely looked like he had it all under control during the sprint race. Yes, Merc was faster during the 'real' qualifying, but I think that's mostly due to track temps taking Red Bull out of the window and Merc in theirs.

Merc just wasn't as quick with track temps at or above 50C on mediums. Hamilton unable to pass Leclerc (and not getting a single DRS, IIRC) in the first stint sort of proves that, especially when you compare the pace differential on hards (when Merc truly came alive). And I think that's why Hamilton went for broke on L1 because he probably thought that if he didn't make it count on L1, Max would probably run away with it.