2023 Oracle Red Bull Racing F1 Team

[TEHNOS]

So, fundamentals of RB 17 (to be in 2021), were set in stone in 2019, there were no limitations in WT and CFD then, big ones spending like crazy.
After 2020 postponement due to Covid, they were not allowed to work on the car till 2021. Destined long time ago.

[Juzh]

They are talking about a significant step for Baku. At that point they might decide the advantage is enough to hold until the championships are won. If so it does make complete sense to switch to the rb20 immediately as the rb19 is very mature already; as others have pointed out the development potential will likely be lower as they will have exploited the easy avenues already

Then again it's easy to talk like that after Baku. Saudi Arabia will give a clearer picture how close Ferrari will be at other types of track

Doesn't 2023 development at least indirectly translate into 2024? As of this time there's no noticeable rule changes planned for 2024 so I don't see a point switching to new car in march. Anyway, RB will have known exactly when it is best to switch. In my opinion not before summer break.

side note:
here's pole lap with telemetry, only car of the top 4 that i've not yet posted.
https://streamable.com/on6dkd

[mendis]

I am willing to believe that some people would say in 2026, RB22 work already started in 2023. You heard it first here.

[Zynerji]

If 2023 chassis is good enough, maybe 24 is RB19B to deal with budget constraints?

[AR3-GP]

If 2023 chassis is good enough, maybe 24 is RB19B to deal with budget constraints?

I feel like 2023 is the RB18B. RB19 is heavily derived from the RB18.

I wonder what they will do for 2024? Is there any point trying to go "revolutionary". The regs cycle ends in 2025. If you show up with a bad idea in 2024, you'll likely not fight for the remainder of the regulations cycle.

[Henk_v]

In 25 only the engines change. Aero will remain sorta the same.
The game seems to be aero effeciency. That takes CFD and windtunnel. As RB seems to plan an era of dominance, thats exactly what they'll have in short supply.
Looking at the long game, they prioritised well. They emerged in 21 with arguably the lowest drag car concept. Thats the one sure thing you can do as long as you dont have real life data on racing the concept. Then they used the data from 21 to reduce the weight of the car.
Their proposed 23 dominance may give them the opportunity to take the next (hard and costly) step in increasing aero efficiency, which will carry over nicely also after 25.

[Aesop]

That’s savage reading for anyone really if it’s true. The fact they putting minimal effort into this years car means they know it’s fast. Seriously fast

That's not really what Marko says. They have been as efficient as possible on the RB19 with the aim not to compromise the development of the RB20. No room for mistakes, no experimenting, but maximum effort with the developments they were certain of would work.

[dxpetrov]

They are talking about a significant step for Baku. At that point they might decide the advantage is enough to hold until the championships are won. If so it does make complete sense to switch to the rb20 immediately as the rb19 is very mature already; as others have pointed out the development potential will likely be lower as they will have exploited the easy avenues already

Then again it's easy to talk like that after Baku. Saudi Arabia will give a clearer picture how close Ferrari will be at other types of track

Doesn't 2023 development at least indirectly translate into 2024? As of this time there's no noticeable rule changes planned for 2024 so I don't see a point switching to new car in march. Anyway, RB will have known exactly when it is best to switch. In my opinion not before summer break.

side note:
here's pole lap with telemetry, only car of the top 4 that i've not yet posted.
https://streamable.com/on6dkd

Lol, this looks like a warm up lap! No steering correction whatsoever!

[AR3-GP]

I thought I found something strange in Max's radio from Bahrain:



Lap ~38
GP: Okay 37.0s please Max, Leclerc 37.2
GP: Target 37.0
Max: Uhh, I'm happy to go slower, but we both go slower.
GP: *pause* There is no race at the moment Max, so target 37.0.


We must have really missed something last season.

[ringo]

When he says we both, is he talking about Perez?

[organic]

Perez was at the same time as this radio ignoring his deltas, so max is keeping the gap constant rather than listening to GP. He's saying he will follow delta if it doesn't compromise his position Vs checo

[Henk_v]

Max probably wanted at least a delta that gave him the opportunity to pit unde SC without losing position.

[mendis]

I thought I found something strange in Max's radio from Bahrain:



Lap ~38
GP: Okay 37.0s please Max, Leclerc 37.2
GP: Target 37.0
Max: Uhh, I'm happy to go slower, but we both go slower.
GP: *pause* There is no race at the moment Max, so target 37.0.


We must have really missed something last season.

He didn't want a "Button 2010 on Hamilton" or "Multi 21" on himself.

[Henk_v]

They were just before their last pitstop. I think Verstappen wanten a Delta that would be ebough to keep track position under unfavourable SC scenario's;
-If Verstappen pitted first ans a SC would come before Perez pitted, he'd have lost postion to Perez.
-If Perez would be able to pit under SC conditions and Verstappen would miss the opportunity, he'd lose position if the delta was smaller too.

So I think he was just being sensible.

[Juzh]

Random piece of info I gathered by looking at onboards: radio callsign "display 7" or "display 8" corresponds to shift duration. Display 7 is faster shifting than display 8. Perez started the race in display 7, but already in second lap he developed a problem with car lurching forward on upshifts. This can be heard as extremely fast shifts and seen by his head similarly jumping forwards and backwards. They switched to display 8 not long after and shifts calmed down.

Unusual naming conventions in my opinion, what's "display" got to with shifts