Flexing wings and more reliability woes (Red Bull race review) (Video)

Mark Webber, Red Bull, Hockenheimring, 2010

As at Silverstone, Red Bull’s front wings were the centre of attention before the race at Hockenheim – but for a very different reason.

The new front wings were observed to be flexing at high speeds, allowing parts of the wing to move closer to the ground and operate more efficiently.

Sebastian Vettel Mark Webber
Qualifying position 1 4
Qualifying time comparison (Q3) 1’13.791 (-0.556) 1’14.347
Race position 3 6
Average race lap 1’18.567 (-0.574) 1’19.141
Laps 67/67 67/67
Pit stops 1 1

You need to upgrade your Flash Player

Open lap times interactive chart in new window

Sebastian Vettel

Started from his sixth pole position of the season and third in a row. But, just like at Silverstone, he didn’t so much as lead a lap of the race.

Vettel got away slowly and darted right in a fruitless attempt to keep Fernando Alonso behind, which ended up letting Felipe Massa through as well.

With the front runners setting a fast pace his team were able to bring him in early in an attempt to get past Alonso. But it didn’t work, and Vettel was seldom close to the Ferraris from that moment on.

Compare Sebastian Vettel’s form against his team mate in 2010

Mark Webber

The movement of Red Bull’s much-discussed ‘flexi-wing’ was clear to see on their cars during the race – and Vettel’s at Silverstone. The same movement was not apparent at Valencia.

Watch how the top of the endplates on Webber’s front wing slowly dip as he builds up speed on the straight, then quickly rise as he begins to decelerate:

The FIA tests wings to ensure they do not deflect excessively and had Red Bull’s wings not complied with those tests then they wouldn’t have been allowed to race them. The same goes for Ferrari who had a similar wing, though the degree of deflection was harder to spot on video.

In other words, the wings are legal to the letter of the law and if the FIA wishes to ban them it’ll have to change its rules to do so. In the meantime expect other teams to show up with their versions of the wing very soon.

If the flexi-wing shows one of Red Bull’s characteristics this year – aggressive development in the pursuit of better performance – Weber’s race was spoiled by their other defining trait: unreliability.

Webber was told by the team to leave a four-second gap to Jenson Button, who he was chasing, in order to keep his oil temperatures down.

He had led Button before the pit stops but lost time behind Nico Rosberg, allowing Button to get ahead of him.

Webber ended the race in sixth and the two Red Bull drivers are now level on championship points.

Compare Mark Webber’s form against his team mate in 2010

2010 German Grand Prix

Browse all 2010 German Grand Prix articles

Image (C) Red Bull/Getty images

Advert | Go Ad-free


66 comments on Flexing wings and more reliability woes (Red Bull race review) (Video)

  1. hawkfist said on 27th July 2010, 0:46

    Not as bad as Button’s with that superduper wing camera he had on this weekend ;)

    • Spectator said on 27th July 2010, 21:08

      at least at the european gp ferrari wings dont flex as much as red bull or mclaren maybe because it isnt that developed smaller bridge than mclarenswww.youtube.com/watch?v=iPIFZ2oxPRs

  2. SoLiD said on 27th July 2010, 0:49

    Wow that is very very clear. You see it flex really hard.
    Never tought it could be this hard.

  3. Calum said on 27th July 2010, 0:49

    Maybe redbull has a flexifloor too. This would be good for te rear of the car when accompanied with EBD and DDD. Flexifloor was used by Ferrari in 2007 so has been seen in f1 before but I’m not 100% if it’s even legal nowadays…

    • Johnny Legg said on 27th July 2010, 1:04

      i’m wondering if its not the wing thats flexing. maybe the section of nose cone is the part that dose the flexing, like the flexi floor?

      or maybe some sort of clever fixing on the nose that allowed a bit of flex: remember Vettel’s fancy new wing falling of in practice at silverstone? looked a bit odd

      • Mike said on 27th July 2010, 1:52

        Maybe it’s not the wing or nose cone that flexes, maybe it’s the joiner between the nose and chassis, but I’m not sure that would work.

    • John H said on 27th July 2010, 1:17

      Wasn’t it used at Melbourne for Kimi’s win and then banned from then on? So I’m guessing a flexi-floor is not legal.

    • Lee said on 27th July 2010, 12:48


      Ferris flexifloor was not legal in 2007. It was the whole reason that Stepney decided to leak the info to Maclaren. I am pretty sure Ferrari got away scott free with it though apart from being ordered to take it off for subsequent races. Apparently there were aspects of the design that were specifically designed to hide the function from the FIA. This however was back when Ferrari and the FIA were lovers, I am not sure they would get away so lightly this season.

      I am baffled by the wing decision though unless there is allowance for a certain amount of natural flex from high loading.

  4. The pressure on that front wing, with that flexing, could have had something to do with the mounting failure at Silverstone.

  5. US_Peter (@us_peter) said on 27th July 2010, 0:51

    That’s some impressive engineering if they can make it flex enough for a performance gain, but not enough that it would be illegal.

  6. SoLiD said on 27th July 2010, 0:57

    not enough to be illegal… well they know how it’s tested and work around that.

    Now we know why Newey wanted it to be raced so hard.

  7. Josh1999.94 said on 27th July 2010, 1:04

    I’m not convinced by this video alone. I’m always watching onboard footage of cars and you can see the wings going down as the cars accelerate, and then go up again as they brake. That’s just downforce. I’m not denying that their wings do flex, I’m just saying I don’t think this video is the best evidence.

    • Josh1999.94 said on 27th July 2010, 1:07

      Hmm, actually, watching it again, it is as though it is slanting to one side, and it is wobbling around more than it does with just downforce. I’m more convinced now…

    • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 27th July 2010, 1:16

      As I said in the article, compare it to an onboard video from Valencia and the difference is clear to see.

  8. Bernard said on 27th July 2010, 1:44

    I have been banging on about the RB6 wing flex since as far back as the Chinese grand prix. I even made an animated gif to highlight the extent of it at the time, for thoes interested here it is:

    RB6 china

    The same amount of flex has also been observed at several GP’s since.

    The fundimentals of this design was being clearly tested during the winter as shown here with the load sensors:

    here and here.


    • Alex Bkk said on 27th July 2010, 2:22

      Nice work Bernard, you can clearly see from the red reference lines just how much that wing is flexing.

      It would be lovely to be able to measure it.

    • f1yankee said on 27th July 2010, 4:43

      nicey done. it appears the range of movement has increased since china.

    • US_Peter (@us_peter) said on 27th July 2010, 7:04

      Great sluthing! I wonder if that was what they were testing. The second picture kind of gives me the impression that they may have been testing the torsional flex of the front wing.

    • Bernard said on 27th July 2010, 16:06

      Here is the German grand prix version:

      RB6 Germany

      I chose the lap with the telemetry in order to dispel the theory that the car is under braking or similar irrelevancies. :)

      Also, as noted by Alex the red lines (and arrows in this image) are to prove that the wing is moving relative to the monocoque.

    • Bernard said on 27th July 2010, 16:54

      I’ve now also added Valencia to the mix:

      RB6 Europe (Valencia)

      • BasCB (@bascb) said on 27th July 2010, 17:21

        Nice comparisons Bernard.

        It seems the tips of the wing really duck down under load, although part of the difference in height compared with the tyres is due to load on the suspension (look at the position of the wishbones, straight/down) it is very large.

        • Pigloo said on 28th July 2010, 12:24

          Comparing to the tyres is not a good idea hence why the images compare the flex to the monocoque as shown by the red lines.

          The tyres seem to gain diameter at speed probably due to the centrifugal forces exerted on them.

  9. Bien said on 27th July 2010, 3:06

    There was a video of this at the beginning of the season that was pointed out at a forum I visit often. I think the footage was taken during Malaysia or China but it certainly showed this same effect.

  10. Butler258 said on 27th July 2010, 6:05

    If they are now equal on points, who will get priority with any upgrades if they screw it up like in gbr?

  11. Hamish said on 27th July 2010, 8:08

    I think Kudos must however go to Adrian Newey.

    • graigchq said on 27th July 2010, 8:36

      yeah right on..

      no other team is coming up with these developments themselves, but he is able to not only have the idea, but make it work well before any other team gets near. McLaren’s F-Duct being the only exception really. Everyone else is just copying him over the course of the season.

  12. Guio Oblepias said on 27th July 2010, 9:08

    you said that the wings weren’t doing flexing in Valencia, but that was where I first observed this. I was watching the onboard footage of one of the Red Bulls and I noticed that the wing was dipping on the straights. I thought it was really cool but assumed that it was normal for the wings to do that at high speeds. their wings at Germany do dip a little lower though, and look quite wobbly.

    • Patrickl said on 27th July 2010, 11:47

      The Red Bull front wing flex was observed early on in the season.

      I saw it myself too when looking at comparisons to check the ride height. It was pretty obvious that at speed the winglets on the Red Bull front wings disappeared from the on-board camera view.

  13. Calum said on 27th July 2010, 9:51

    While newer is an excellant designer, he is just the head of a whole team of designers. I think it’s unfair that he is always the one given credit for the success of the RB6 when there are at least another 30 people on the job!

  14. I have heard that the front wing is flexing only in an area where, at the moment, there are no deflection tests carried out.

    Very clever, but I expect the FIA will quickly shift the goalposts (as they did with Ferrari’s floor) to stop this loophole being exploited.

  15. matt90 said on 27th July 2010, 11:48

    I don’t understand properly the benefit of this wing. I assumed it gave extra downforce, as if it flexes in a way which makes it more efficient as speed builds I thought that would give downforce and drag at the wrong time when you want straight line speed. And if the wing coming closer to the ground and becoming more efficient actually reduces downforce and drag, then it has not been of much benefit as McLaren still have a massive straight-line speed advantage. Unless having it flex in the straights means they can increase the wing for cornering without harming their straight-line performance. Can somebody please explain how/why the flexi wing works? (I also assumed that the wing woud have to angle slightly as it flexed in a way which would increase wing angle and drag rather than reduce it)

    • LuvinF1 said on 27th July 2010, 23:13

      I believe you are right – the flexible front wing is detrimental to straight line speed but highly advantageous for high-speed cornering. But you need to look at the combination of tools available to the drivers – f-duct, exhaust blown diffuser, engine mapping, adjustable flap, flexible front wings, and probably a myriad of other things still unknown to us – when used in different combinations produce different results.

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.