Red Bull RB8 Renault

[gilgen]

When I saw that I thought it was illegal as well. I thought the front wing endplate had to be parallel to the reference plane?

If that is the case then I wonder if the new exhaust isn't allowing them to run with the rake angle they wanted so they've adjusted the front wing to still give close to the performance they're expecting whilst running the rest of the car with less rake so that the diffuser doesn't stall.

Your right to assume its illegal and its by far breaking the rules... has to be parrallel that clearly doesn't show such evidence.

The FIA will have a field day, very nice angle though i must say...just illegal xD

In testing, the cars can be run in any configuration. So, it is not illegal, unless used in a race.

[myurr]

Definitely not broken then, that is clearly by design as the aero neutral centre section is still in line with the reference plane.

I think that they're working on a new wing for Aus with aero characteristics not unlike this high angle of attack wing. So they're simulating it now (a bit like McLaren running with the 2008 rear wing in 2009, simulating the downforce level they thought they'd achieve). Given the flo-vis on the trailing edge of the wing and all over the splitter it sounds like they're checking everything downstream of the wing rather than the wing itself.

[Crucial_Xtreme]

ESPN writer Chris Medland reports: it was on his return to the pits after something fell off down the pit straight. RBR mechanic recovered it late

[Rikhart]

ESPN writer Chris Medland reports: it was on his return to the pits after something fell off down the pit straight. RBR mechanic recovered it late

Like I said above, wonder if something failed, and it didnt reset to normal position like intended? This is very fishy.

[Hail22]

ESPN writer Chris Medland reports: it was on his return to the pits after something fell off down the pit straight. RBR mechanic recovered it late

Like I said above, wonder if something failed, and it didnt reset to normal position like intended? This is very fishy.

If its a wing adjustment made by the driver or something I won't be a happy chap. I don't like grubby cheats.

[Rikhart]

12:30 Now we know why the Red Bull-wing was in the morning so wrong and why Vettel was so long in the box. The world champion had made a small ride off the track, team boss Christian Horner told us. The car had to be checked only after complete, which took time.

From AMuS. Nice excuse? Or true, who knows.

[Hail22]

12:30 Now we know why the Red Bull-wing was in the morning so wrong and why Vettel was so long in the box. The world champion had made a small ride off the track, team boss Christian Horner told us. The car had to be checked only after complete, which took time.

From AMuS. Nice excuse? Or true, who knows.

What an absolute crock, they are struggling. Autosport would of spotted it straight away.

[eurocentric]

12:30 Now we know why the Red Bull-wing was in the morning so wrong and why Vettel was so long in the box. The world champion had made a small ride off the track, team boss Christian Horner told us. The car had to be checked only after complete, which took time.

From AMuS. Nice excuse? Or true, who knows.

I smell something and it's not pleasant. The wing supports did not look damaged as was said the neutral section in the ceantre was parallel with the ref plane so why were the outer sections at that angle of attack, sorry I don't buy the "he had an off" reason for it.

[illario]

OK...i dont want to offend anyone's intelligence but "i think" from the video, it looks like it has a small angle.
http://www.gpupdate.net/en/videos/1907/ ... -exhausts/

[Hail22]

@ScarbsF1 Red Bull, there's something very odd about the failure mode of this front wing http://bit.ly/Asnyve for it to fail tail up & not nose down?

[myurr]

So the list of things to protest on this car so far stands at:

- Bodywork and channels expressly for channeling the exhaust air. Whilst not strictly illegal the FIA have said they would not be happy with such bodywork.

- Channels and holes into the diffuser, either building a double deck diffuser of some description or allowing exhaust gas into the diffuser, depending on who you ask.

- Flexing AOA adjustable front wing of some description.

- Failure to adhere to RRA spending limits and resigning from FOTA over this.

Anything else we need to add to this list?

(lights blue touch paper and retreats to safe distance...)

[Hail22]

So the list of things to protest on this car so far stands at:

- Bodywork and channels expressly for channeling the exhaust air. Whilst not strictly illegal the FIA have said they would not be happy with such bodywork.

- Channels and holes into the diffuser, either building a double deck diffuser of some description or allowing exhaust gas into the diffuser, depending on who you ask.

- Flexing AOA adjustable front wing of some description.

- Failure to adhere to RRA spending limits and resigning from FOTA over this.

Anything else we need to add to this list?

(lights blue touch paper and retreats to safe distance...)

I find it from a technical point of view its a great car/concept however i hope the FIA under the technical regulations that govern the sport will hammer down hard on the FW and some other points of this car.

From an honorable/moral point of view, this is an utter disgrace while other teams (Save maybe Ferrari) are adhereing to a common understanding to fall under the RRA Red Bull/Ferrari flout about making new chassis, and leave FOTA to prevent being accused of misappropriations.

They were accused of doing this last year.

[PhillipM]

Tbh, it might just be a reflection, but I think I can see two small cracks across the front wing pylons.

[beelsebob]

Tbh, it might just be a reflection, but I think I can see two small cracks across the front wing pylons.

I think I can see what you're pointing out too – looks like cracks to me as well:

[Wisdom]