2026 Scuderia Ferrari HP F1 Team

[WardenOfTheNorth]

I repeated so many times:
Why not allow flexible wings, instead of active aero??
Much less complex, much more reliable.
Just allow more flexing than is currently in the regs. But have an upper limit of course.

More expensive and complex to develop and harder to police.

Wow... the complete opposite is true!
You think letting wings flex, as they always did and do, so it already works and exists, is more complicated and expensive than develop and electronic, electro or hydraulic mechanical system???
Did you ever do any engineering?
Also, flexing wings is a lot easier to model and predict aerodynamically, than mechanical ones. Hence cheaper too.
And safer, as it is demonstrated with the crashes lately...

Erm, yeah sure, developing a wing that uses existing technology is somehow more complicated and expensive than developing flexible wings capabale to shedding as much drag as the teams need. Motors, actuators etc are somehow more complicated and expensive than cutting edge fluid dynamics and CF layup to achieve exactly the required results...... No wait.....

Your arrogance is incredible!!!

[WardenOfTheNorth]

I repeated so many times:
Why not allow flexible wings, instead of active aero??
Much less complex, much more reliable.
Just allow more flexing than is currently in the regs. But have an upper limit of course.

More expensive and complex to develop and harder to police.

You're posting a video from an amateur YouTuber who is trying to explain what happened to a single car with a unique design of active aero......what exactly are you trying to prove with that??

It certainly doesn't prove that active aero is somehow more expensive and complicated than flexible wings....

[WardenOfTheNorth]

This is just a guess, and is also false.

Tell me how many degrees you think a wing would have to flex backwards, to nullify all the DF it generates in it's normal orientation. Now Compare that to a wing element that can flip to almost any orientation the team desires to nullify the DF it generates in it's normal orientation.

You are also forgetting extremely flexible wings would be a big problem on corners like 130R, Copse, Eau Rouge. Active aero doesn't have this issue because the driver has control of the wing elements.

I think you approach this from the wrong direction.
With active aero, you only have 2 different modes. You do not complain about which is how good or bad or perfect in this or that situation. While it is also a system that needs adapting to.
A flexi wing is also something that is not optimal in every scenario, so it also needs adapting.
None of these will be perfect, and one shall accept this.
However with flexi wings, the car will have a much more gradual change in situations, to which even the driver can develop a feeling. It will be a lot more predictable.
It might have less downforce in high speed corners, but F1 cars always had different levels of downforce throughout the history, when rules changed or cars developed.
The main thing is if your downforce is predictable and does not do like the RB wing, suddenly loosing DF. It also does not have any mechanical or electrical or timing errors.
It has much less weight to it. Etc etc.
Wings always did flex, so there would be nothing new, just its strength.

You are contradicting yourself. Active aero has 2 modes. Flexible aero has many, many, many modes depending on speed, yaw etc.

So how is flexible aero easier to model, as you claim?

[hollus]

There will be warnings for anyone continuing with the aggressive personal - ad hominem tone. You know who you are.

Discuss respectfully, thank you.

[LM10]

More expensive and complex to develop and harder to police.

You're posting a video from an amateur YouTuber who is trying to explain what happened to a single car with a unique design of active aero......what exactly are you trying to prove with that??

It certainly doesn't prove that active aero is somehow more expensive and complicated than flexible wings....

Amateur? He was an F1 aerodynamicist at Mercedes from 2018 to 2020.

[f1316]

This is also, like, waaaay off topic at this point.

The points I was making previously as this relates to Ferrari are:
1) there’s been no issue with the Ferrari wing - which also functions differently to the Red Bull one, so is a false equivalency
2) these flawed regs require max drag reduction, so it’s against the FIA’s interests to be overly broad with their proclamation here
3) “traditional” DRS’s broke when first introduced (see Alonso at Bahrain 2013 as just one example), so it’s not a question of one design being inherently safer than another
4) Gary Anderson has since done a good write up for the Race on RB’s actual issues, which are only partly related to the wing (and, again, not shared by Ferrari)


So to the person who made the extreme claim about drivers dying, the objection to the idea that Ferrari’s wing could be banned is based on it being fundamentally separate from the issue RB are having (not a lack of care for safety).

[kenshi_blind]

This was not on my bingo card