Fight for F1 championship places or finish lower for extra aero testing? The choice is clear, say teams

F1

The higher up the F1 championship a team finishes, the more prize money and prestige. But the lower it goes, the more aerodynamic testing it gets. Could some be better off scoring fewer points? asks Adam Cooper

McLaren of Daniel Ricciardo alongside Alpine of Esteban Ocon in the 2022 Brazilian Grand Prix

McLaren still have hopes of overhauling Alpine in the constructors' championship

Dan Istitene/F1 via Getty Images

The two world championship titles have long been decided but there is still plenty at stake in Abu Dhabi this weekend, not least the runner-up spot in the drivers’ championship, with Charles Leclerc and Sergio Perez currently equal on points.

There’s also a fight in for second in the constructors’ version, with Ferrari heading Mercedes by 19 points. There’s a similar margin in the fight for fourth between Alpine and McLaren, while it’s even closer further back, with sixth-placed Alfa Romeo five points clear of Aston Martin. Meanwhile Haas is 13 points behind Aston, and just two clear of AlphaTauri.

This is pretty serious stuff for all the teams, given the prestige associated with constructors’ championship positions and the 2023 pitlane pecking order. And then of course there’s the money – depending on the overall size of the Formula 1 prize pot each position is worth an estimated $10-12m.

Constructors’ Championship standings

Team Points
Red Bull 719
Ferrari 524
Mercedes 505
Alpine 167
McLaren 148
Alfa Romeo 55
Aston Martin 50
Haas 37
AlphaTauri 35
Williams 8

However these days there’s another aspect to championship positions that takes a little edge off missing out on a position at the finale – and while it might not be quite enough to encourage a team to underperform, it certainly takes the edge off losing out in a head-to-head.

The FIA’s sliding scale of aero testing restrictions, designed to rein in the development of the top teams and giving those down the order a chance to catch up, is arguably one of the best F1 initiatives of recent years.

Introduced in 2021, it’s a gentle form of handicapping that doesn’t extend to unpopular concepts such as reversed grids or a weight-based balance of performance system.

“I’m pleased with it, because I think it’s a gentle correction,” F1 boss Ross Brawn told me before the system clicked into use.

“It still maintains the meritocracy, you’ve still got to go out on the track and win the race. We’re not doing anything to handicap the driver when he’s out on the track – it’s not success ballast.

“It’s rather like the NFL with the draft, where the least successful teams get the greatest opportunity initially, but they still have to deliver. It’s not like they have points given to them. I think it will have a gentle effect on correcting the competitiveness of the field, without distorting it.”

Williams and Haas at Interlagos in the 2022 Sao Paolo Grand Prix

Williams is set to get the most testing time in early 2023: Haas is in a battle for eighth in the championship

Grand Prix Photo

Indeed along with the cost cap it has contributed to levelling the playing field, and while the same three teams of 2022 are the usual suspects, they are not light years ahead of the rest. And until the next major regulation change in 2026 there is at least a chance that others can join them in the battle for the top six positions.

The first six months of the year are based on the previous season’s constructors’ championship, and then there’s a re-set halfway through the season, after June 30. The significance is that’s when teams really start ramping up development on their cars for the following year.

The system takes seventh place in the constructors’ championship as a notional 100% of wind tunnel time and CFD usage. Either side of that the scale extends from 70% for the champions, to 115% for 10th place.

Related article

In the case of Red Bull the team’s cost cap penalty of minus 10% means that figure actually becomes 63.

It’s worth noting that from 2022 onwards the range of this scale has been much wider. In 2021, when the current cars were being designed, it ran from 90% to 112.5%, with the mean of 100% set at fifth place. In other words there’s now a bigger gap between the most and least successful teams this year – and that may be reflected in the form of next year’s cars, when they first roll out.

To give you an idea of what it all translates into in practical terms, the year is split into six periods. The 100% value per period is 80 hours of wind-on tunnel time, or 320 runs. CFD usage operates on a similar scale, although the terminology used to measure it is a little harder for the layman to grasp.

The full table is as follows, listed with the teams as they now stand in the order and thus their theoretical allocation for January-June next year, unless positions change this weekend, including the tunnel hours for one of the six annual periods:

Position Aero allowance Testing time
1 (Red Bull) 63%* 50.4hr
2 (Ferrari) 75% 60hr
3 (Mercedes) 80% 64hr
4 (Alpine) 85% 68hr
5 (McLaren) 90% 72hy
6 (Alfa Romeo) 95% 76hr
7 (Aston Martin) 100% 80hr
8 (Haas) 105% 84hr
9 (AlphaTauri) 110% 88hr
10 (Williams) 115% 92hr
*Includes cost cap penalty of 10%

 

The four-hour difference between neighbouring teams in the order, or 24 hours over the six periods of the year, is not necessarily a game changer. But once you jump two or three spots, the extra time becomes significant, and indeed the gulf between Williams at 92 hours per period and Red Bull at 50.4 is huge.

Of course it’s also a question of quality as well as quantity. No disrespect to Williams, but given where the two teams are as of now, and the fact that by definition RBR has some of the smartest guys aero around, one could assume that an hour of wind tunnel work in Milton Keynes could be more effective than an hour logged by the Grove outfit. Nevertheless, the sheer number of extra hours will help Williams.

“We should prioritise the position in the championship, no?”

As you can see that cost cap penalty will hit RBR hard, and the delta of 50.4 hours to 60 or 64 hours depending in whoever finishes second and third out of Ferrari and Mercedes really could make a difference, given that we can probably assume that those three teams have broadly similar levels of capability.

As noted earlier all of this has opened up a debate – given the aero advantages do you really want to jump a place in the order at this stage in the season? It’s bit like football tournaments where teams look at who they might face in the next stage and have to decide whether it’s better to win the group, or to finish second.

Drivers admit they find the suggestion of not wanting to achieve the maximum a little alien.

“Obviously, there are pros and cons,” says Valtteri Bottas. “And yeah, I think it is the fact that we’re not quite fully at the budget cap. And we could do with some more cash. So for sure, that would help.

“Actually, how much is the difference with the wind tunnel time? For me, it’s hard to calculate. I don’t know the number in detail. I think still we’re pushing to be sixth and to take the money and use that for quite a bit of development. And driver salaries!”

Alfa Romeo of Valtteri Bottas in 2022 F1 season

Prize money is key for teams like Alfa, which spend less than the cost cap

Grand Prix Photo

“I think we would take P2,” says Carlos Sainz. “I think these kinds of things, we should prioritise the position in the championship, no? If not, we wouldn’t be fighting for positions in the championship.

“I think the competition is the number one priority and finishing ahead of your competition should always be more satisfying than finishing one position behind and then not getting the wind tunnel or the money.

“So I hope the rules are also designed that your main motivation is to finish ahead. If not, I wouldn’t understand it.”

Teams also say that the increased allowances are not worth sacrificing championship position for. McLaren technical director James Key says that the team is entirely focused on beating Alpine in the constructors’ race: “I don’t even think about that, to be honest How are you going to use extra windtunnel time – to get yourself further up the championship?

“It’s a small percentage, which I guess is kind of useful, it doesn’t compensate for not being a position ahead in the championship wherever you are, because that’s what your ultimate aim is, you know, to climb the ladder. So it’s not even something we thought about.”

Red Bull wind tunnel

Red Bull wind tunnel will see reduced use in 2023, but is it a “draconian” penalty?

Red Bull

The aerodynamic testing regulations came into focus when the Red Bull penalty was announced. So how much difference will it really make? And was Christian Horner exaggerating when he called it “draconian”?

“The scale of that penalty isn’t much more than what you would lose if you were just one place higher up in the championship,” said Mercedes track engineering boss Andrew Shovlin. “So, it’s not as big as the penalty if your position is two places higher.

“I think, describing it as draconian is an exaggeration. Reducing the number of runs does limit your freedom when you’re developing a concept, but we’re in reasonably well-explored regulations now. But you definitely have to be more efficient.

“But if it were [worth] half a second, which I’ve heard mentioned, then a team at the back of the grid would have over three seconds advantage to one at the front, and that that simply isn’t the case.

“But it depends on how well you make decisions during the year. I’d have thought a tenth, or a bit more than a tenth is probably… Maybe two-tenths at the upper end, is realistically what that would cost you.”

Still that is a difference, and one that Red Bull will now have to overcome. It will be intriguing to see how the formbook looks come the first race in Bahrain.

You may also like