Red Bull RB22

[Owen.C93]

Looks like it gets quite sharp as the sidepod reaches the floor, forming a strake.

I would have thought that would violate the minimum radius rules, but maybe it’s relaxed lower down.

Could you be more specific? I'm not seeing what you are referring to.

This bit where the outer sidepods goes into a floor strake. Normally these sidepods have always had to have a healthy radius.

[SB15]

https://i.postimg.cc/3Rg14dkL/20260430-231320.jpg

THAT IS MASSIVE!!! LOVE IT

[venkyhere]

My novice understanding of macarena open position is that the 'size of opening' has nothing to do with drag benefit. Both the main plane and the 270 degree inverted flap are in 'free stream' air and will have pretty 'attached' boundary layers. Only Q is, depending on the flap's shape and position, is there going to be some separation (as a tradeoff penalty to the flap's downforce producing shape in the original position) that ruins the 'attached' nature I described above.
The teams are going to calculate how much 'more than ideal' drag this is going to induce and might be ready to live with it, considering how much lesser it would be, than the drag value if the flap is opened in the vanilla-DRS way.

I would rather assume that the 'how much gap' question w.r.t SF26 and RB22, is more answered by the choice of hinge positioning rather an than 'aimed for drag benefit' choice made by the two teams.

[sucof]

Looks like it gets quite sharp as the sidepod reaches the floor, forming a strake.

I would have thought that would violate the minimum radius rules, but maybe it’s relaxed lower down.

Could you be more specific? I'm not seeing what you are referring to.

This bit where the outer sidepods goes into a floor strake. Normally these sidepods have always had to have a healthy radius.

https://i.ibb.co/F4TFzhSX/IMG-0270.jpg

What about the rule that stipulates maximum curve angles? Those inhibits teams to create sharp edges on surfaces like the sidepods, wings.... This one seems to be a sharp edge for pretty long...?

[AR3-GP]

It's like a hybrid of Ferrari and Alpine solutions. The best of both worlds.

The Red Bull wing would already start to recover the flow attachment and the pressure after maybe only 130 degrees of back rotation (of the full 180 degrees required to close) which is what Alpine was after. From 130 degrees onwards it is behaving like a transition from a high downforce rear flap to a medium downforce angle when it closes (which goes beyond what Alpine achieved). So they are not only getting the straight mode and speed brake (like Ferrari) but they are also recovering the downforce faster (like Alpine) and generating even more load momentarily (unique and unlike anyone else).

Ferrari's wing doesn't work as efficiently (imo). They have the straight mode benefit, but the drawback of closing it in the "wrong" direction. There's no downforce until the wing is almost fully closed:



If I would rank the systems it would be:

(1) Red Bull (straight line gain and fast pressure recovery)
(2) Ferrari (because of the straight line gain)
(3) Alpine/Audi (because of the faster pressure recovery)
(4) Everyone else.

[AR3-GP]

The pivot point at the outboard end of the flap is a floating hinge.

[AR3-GP]

The pressure recovery is demonstrated perfectly here. Both of these wings have rotated by a similar angle. The Red bull wing reaches a high downforce position while the Ferrari wing doesn't have any meaningful position until it's nearly closed.

[AR3-GP]

[fourmula1]

The pressure recovery is demonstrated perfectly here. Both of these wings have rotated by a similar angle. The Red bull wing reaches a high downforce position while the Ferrari wing doesn't have any meaningful position until it's nearly closed.

Balance under braking maybe?

[Badger]

It's faster at closing, as expected.

[napoleon1981]

The Ferrari wing must give lift, before creating downforce, while closing. I think the Red Bull rotation direction makes way more sense.

[AR3-GP]

The Ferrari wing drops its load faster because of that rotation direction, but since the straight-line mode is activated at low speed where the drag is the lowest, there's isn't much benefit to dropping the drag a split second faster. There's a significant benefit to the braking stability from restoring the load immediately because it's the difference between the wheels locking and sending the car around, or not at higher rear braking loads.

Ferrari will have implemented mitigating elements in the system to prevent the rear brakes from applying too aggressively, but this comes at the expensive of braking performance. You want to get max pressure instantly. The cars are doing a significant amount of deceleration in a very short amount of time which means restoring the load a split second earlier is worth more than dropping it a split second faster.

[mzso]

It's faster at closing, as expected.

Seems like. But by how much. Did anyone measure?

[Emag]

If you want an upside down wing, I think this solution is the best way to do it. Ferrari's is a bit over-engineered and I am not convinced it's any better for all that trouble it takes to make it work.

[Brahmal]

If you want an upside down wing, I think this solution is the best way to do it. Ferrari's is a bit over-engineered and I am not convinced it's any better for all that trouble it takes to make it work.

The disadvantage of Red Bull's design will probably be when in corner-mode. Having the central pod, and those very prominent hinges/swing-arms at either side of the flap will almost certainly reduce overall efficiency. Ferrari's wing is so much cleaner and unencumbered in comparison, but it's impossible to tell which trade-off is superior at this stage.