For the first time since Formula 1 introduced its Aerodynamic Testing Restriction rules in 2021, Mercedes will not be the team which is permitted the least amount of development time for its new car.
The rules are designed to handicap the top performing teams each season and bring about closer competition throughout the grid. Therefore this year Red Bull are allowed the least development time, as the reigning champions, while Williams get the most having ended 2022 in last place.Red Bull finished last season with by far the strongest car in the field, which won all bar one of the last 11 races. A crucial question heading into the new season will be whether the disadvantage they face as a result of their reduced development allocation will be enough for their rivals to close on, catch or even overhaul them.
“Is it enough? We’ll find out in a couple of weeks’ time as a starting point. But it’s certainly a significant handicap that we carry for the majority of the year.
“The team have obviously accepted that, we’ve looked to adapt to ensure that we’re as efficient as we possibly can be. We’ll see when RB19 runs on the track in anger if we’ve done enough.”
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
How F1’s aerodynamic testing restrictions change for each team in 2023
F1’s aerodynamic testing restrictions are unchanged for 2023: The amount of development each team may conduct based on their championship finishing position the year before remains the same.
Coincidentally, the seventh place Aston Martin finished in is the position where a team receives 100% of the permitted wind tunnel and computational fluid dynamics development time. This is equivalent to 320 wind tunnel testing runs and 2,000 aerodynamic test geometries for restricted computation fluid dynamics simulations.
The three teams which finished behind them get more, up to Williams on 115%. Those who finished ahead get less, which ordinarily would put Red Bull on 70%, as Mercedes had last year.
However Red Bull are at a further disadvantage as a result of their penalty for exceeding the budget cap in 2021. As part of their sanction, the team’s testing allocation for 2023 was reduced by a further 10%, putting them on 63%.
While Red Bull have the lowest allocation, Alfa Romeo have seen theirs cut the most, falling from 110% to 95% as they rose from eighth to sixth in the constructors’ standings. AlphaTauri are in the exact opposite situation.
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
How seriously will Red Bull’s lower development restriction affect the reigning champions? The experience of other teams which had low allocations of development time last year was that it limited the extent to which they could explore different concepts. However if a team is confident in the philosophy of its design and is developing a proven quantity, the development restrictions are less of a headache.
This may well be the situation Red Bull is in, as it had the car to beat at the end of last year and the changes to the technical regulations this year are minor. The team has already indicated the RB19 – which was not presented at its launch event last week – will be an evolution of last year’s car.
If the champions begin the new season in much the same shape they ended last year, it will call into question the effectiveness of the recently-introduced ATR scheme. Moreover, it will be grist to the mill for those who felt Red Bull’s budget cap penalty was too lenient.
*Due to their penalty for exceeding the budget cap in 2021, Red Bull’s allocation this year is reduced from 70% to 63%
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
2023 F1 season
- FIA president cleared of alleged interference in two 2023 races
- First week viewing figures for new Drive to Survive season fall again
- Max who? Drive to Survive season six prefers its favourite faces
- RaceFans’ complete 2023 season review
- The F1 drivers who pulled off the 10 biggest charges through the field in 2023
Biskit Boy (@sean-p-newmanlive-co-uk)
6th February 2023, 8:28
Any form of handicapping leaves me cold. It shouldn’t be needed. Why is it there?
I suspect it’s to stop one team dominating and give the bottom teams a leg up, but this is a symptom of the technical regulations. It should be addressed with technical regulation and not a sporting one.
When lap time is perhaps about 98% car and 2% driver this seems the most obvious place to start.
S
6th February 2023, 9:12
Because although this is a sports (based) competition, it is also entertainment for the masses.
Most people aren’t completely content just witnessing a good sporting effort, they also want a good on-track competition to watch. It makes it better….
Handicapping provides both.
Biskit Boy (@sean-p-newmanlive-co-uk)
6th February 2023, 10:09
Stating the obvious.
It’s sad that this is the best solution F1 can come up with, when there are so many other solutions.
S
6th February 2023, 10:26
Yeah, I totally agree.
This is what happens when they let the (biggest) teams write the rules, though.
They’ll compromise a bit, but never come up with anything that actually neutralises their advantages. It will never be a completely equal and fair competition under this arrangement.
Meanwhile, the Bathurst 12 hour just had 3 cars (2 Mercs and a Porsche – vastly different technical approaches) finish a nail-biter within 1.5 seconds of each other after more than 4 and a half hours of non-stop green flag running….
I guess handicapping isn’t all bad, is it?
All things considered, one would have to ask – is F1 doing enough of it?
DB-C90 (@dbradock)
6th February 2023, 10:04
In reality, it probably doesn’t do much as the bottom teams are limited in how much money they have to spend and probably don’t get close to the maximum hours they are allowed.
It might clip the top teams a bit but my guess is they’ll just work a bit smarter. RBR pretty much got their aero right last year so probably don’t need to use an excessive amount this year to tweak what they’ve already got.
drmouse (@drmouse)
6th February 2023, 16:01
True. Also, considering their advantage last season, they likely put a decent amount of that year’s budget and testing time into this year’s car. If this hurts them at all, I suspect it will be the back end of this year at the earliest, more likely next year.
Fraz
6th February 2023, 12:37
Was your opinion the same with the chassis freeze and rear floor cut outs & the removal of Party Modes from PU.
F1 operates a handicap for years. Rich teams always started from a leg up position. which almost guaranteed them a 1 second advantage. since 2010 only 4 teams have stood a realistic chance of winning a championship and those are the 4 wealthiest teams. Is that not a handicap advantage in itself.
As long as the system is treats all teams the same. e.g. if McLaren won in 2023 they are dealt the same card as RBR then its a fair system. All competitors being treated the same under the regs.
Biskit Boy (@sean-p-newmanlive-co-uk)
7th February 2023, 8:56
No, this rule applies to all teams at the same time. It is not handicapping even if it affects one team more.
I would rephrase that to “As long as the system is treats all teams the same at the same time“. For example you have success ballast in some categories. That’s handicapping in my mind because whilst two cars are in the same race they must comply to different regulations. That’s not quite the same as the aero testing time in F1, but the effects are the same.
S
7th February 2023, 9:11
They are exactly the same regulations for everyone. You get more points, you carry more weight. Those points are equally available to everyone, and each competitor has the option to decline them (ie, slow down and finish in a lower position).
It’s a great system as it puts a price on success that directly translates to better competition.
Nobody – not even a dominant team – truly gains from dominance.
Look at Red Bull and Mercedes in F1 – they are the two most polarising teams in the entire series, passionately disliked due to their dominance.
Besides, handicapping in every sport is done based primarily on actual, sustained performance. The more successful you are, the more the challenge increases.
Biskit Boy (@sean-p-newmanlive-co-uk)
7th February 2023, 12:55
You are talking sporting regulations which are the same for everyone at the same time, I’m talking technical regulations which could be different for everyone at the same time depending on the success ballast required.
Besides, however you frame it, there is no getting away from the fact that if one car is required to be heavier than another it’s a handicapping system, which is what I’m against.
A system for better competition? Closer competition yes, but in the pinnacle of the sport? No need. F1 should be a meritocracy.
Handicapping isn’t in every sport. I’m glad it’s not. Why would anyone put in a massive effort to gain an advantage and then have it taken away by a dirty great lump of lead?
S
7th February 2023, 13:48
No, I was definitely talking about the regulations – technical and sporting.
They remain the same for everyone – the only variable is the competitor’s own performance-based results.
I still think it’s a joke when people describe F1 as the pinnacle of motorsport.
Regardless – F1 is a entertainment-based sporting competition. It’s made predominantly for an audience, not for the competitors.
F1 is anything but a meritocracy, anyway. Without any doubt, it is one of the least merit-based racing series on the planet.
No, it’s not in every sport, but it’s used in a very large number of them. Sometimes even in ways that don’t seem like a handicapping system.
Winning isn’t the only reason people participate in things – it’s only a part of it.
Yes, that includes F1 too – the pinnacle of motorsports marketing and money-making.
They can still win, and their next challenge will be even greater. That doesn’t prevent them from continuing to win, either – they just have to push even harder and do better. Every time, they further prove to themselves and everyone else just how good they can be.
Think of it as a motivator, rather than a penalty.
Have you noticed how many manufacturers participate in GT series? All handicapped….
Several have quite happily stated that wouldn’t compete without the BoP systems that make those series possible and competitive.
And despite those technical/sporting handicaps, they still update their cars every year or so…. No loss of drive to win – but still the constant self-motivation to produce a better product, to learn more, to extend their capabilities, to train their engineering staff, or whatever…. Even just for the satisfaction of participating and competing – because that’s what sport is really about.
Biskit Boy (@sean-p-newmanlive-co-uk)
7th February 2023, 19:10
WYULWM :)
S
8th February 2023, 1:05
Is that supposed to mean something?
Rob
6th February 2023, 13:12
Because the train of thought it gives the smaller teams a change to catch up.
IMHO I’m with you. If you want to be in F1 and play with the high rollers then you have to compete with them. No feel sorry for coming last. You might as well make F1 a stock series at that point.
It’s a bit of a schizophrenic view in F1. The FIA and Liberty want all the top teams to win but you have to punish them for doing a good job.
Rob
6th February 2023, 13:13
Sorry chance to catch up!
Should read before hitting send
Adrian Hancox (@ahxshades)
6th February 2023, 9:00
Because they cheated, and cheats should be punished?
slowmo (@slowmo)
6th February 2023, 10:38
They have been punished, it’s on the other teams that they allowed such a pathetic penalty for the breach that Red Bull made.
Andy (@andyfromsandy)
6th February 2023, 12:49
Helmet has pretty much claimed it is no big deal, Verstappen thinks the car will not suffer much. Only Horner is trying to play it all down and make it look like it is a tough penalty.
MichaelN
6th February 2023, 13:23
Red Bull doesn’t have a “handicap”, as though this was somehow beyond their control. Red Bull instead carries a penalty for breaking the rules. It probably won’t do much, but one can expect Horner to talk about it endlessly regardless.
drmouse (@drmouse)
6th February 2023, 17:23
To be completely fair, they have a handicap for finishing first last year, plus a “penalty” for breaking the rules.
Jere (@jerejj)
6th February 2023, 14:46
Just to be more precise, the allocations change every six months (every January & July 1, meaning each January-June & July-December phases have the same order throughout, with the former always based on previous-season final WCC standings & the latter on the last race before June-end/July-beginning), so Mercedes didn’t have the least wind tunnel time for 2021’s latter six-month period as they didn’t lead the WCC post-Styrian GP that season, nor after last season’s Canadian GP that determined the reverse order for last year’s equivalent July-December period.
The current order will be effective until the next June/July shift, meaning the Canadian GP will again determine July-December allocations.
Alpine, Mclaren, AM, Haas, & AT have different allocations presently than they had before New Year’s day.
The Dolphins
6th February 2023, 18:07
Realistically Red Bull can start with the RB18 design (such was the pace it had in the second half of 2022) and use their aerodynamic testing time to develop the RB19 throughout the 2023 season.