Formula 1 is deploying new jargon for 2026
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
One thing that seems to be missing is that DRS gave a visual indication to viewers that a car is using some kind of boost to attempt to pass. Having the active aero on straights and corners is nice, but having something on the car to show overtake mode is in use would make it much better to watch a battle. Hopefully they have on-screen graphics for that at least, but something on the care would be even better IMO, because I want to watch the cars during a battle, not graphics overlays.
Upvote
55
(59
/
-4)
You know, they could install lights and smoke effects on the cars to get special effects tied to each mode. That would increase the spectacle allright!
Tie that with a soud effect on the tv broadcast and we could see a car intermitently glow while an off voice calls BOOOST MODE!
Bonus points if the phisical changes are actually perceptible!
Tie that with a soud effect on the tv broadcast and we could see a car intermitently glow while an off voice calls BOOOST MODE!
Bonus points if the phisical changes are actually perceptible!
Upvote
16
(26
/
-10)
ubercurmudgeon
Ars Tribunus Militum
Who at the FIA is coming up with this terminology? Drax the Destroyer? I can imagine the live commentary:
"The two leaders are going through the final corner, in corner mode, and will switch to straight mode for the straight. Now the one behind is going to try to overtake. What mode do you think he'll use for that, Martin? I think probably the overtake mode, David."
Do they really think everything will go over F1 viewers' heads if not made completely literal?
"The two leaders are going through the final corner, in corner mode, and will switch to straight mode for the straight. Now the one behind is going to try to overtake. What mode do you think he'll use for that, Martin? I think probably the overtake mode, David."
Do they really think everything will go over F1 viewers' heads if not made completely literal?
Upvote
14
(23
/
-9)
Is it just me or does every time they introduce regulations to make the racing closer/more exciting; all they do is actually make it harder to overtake and the racing much duller?
Couple this with the fact that huge reg changes lead generally lead to a single team gaining a massive advantage over multiple seasons and these changes normally arrive at a point where the rest of the field is just starting to close the gap. I'm not really all that excited about next season.
Couple this with the fact that huge reg changes lead generally lead to a single team gaining a massive advantage over multiple seasons and these changes normally arrive at a point where the rest of the field is just starting to close the gap. I'm not really all that excited about next season.
Upvote
-3
(13
/
-16)
- Add bookmark
- Featured
- #7
I'm really looking forward to these regs because at least for the first couple races, bizarre outcomes are guaranteed. Active aero is neat and I'm glad its finally here. It's a bit annoying that it's primarily here to make up for the boneheaded energy decisions on the engine/regen/electrical side.
The fundamental flaw is still that they want 50/50 power split, yet banned the most effective ways for teams to harvest electrical energy: front regen brakes and the MGU-H. So each car is going to only be able to make use X% of the chemical energy in their fuel, and that X is going to be way lower than needed to actually achieve the electrial/ICE power split the FIA wanted. On top of all that, the megajoule-per-lap ceiling is bizarre. If a team can figure out a way to get more energy, let them.
Allegedly, the not-Audi teams were terrified of Audi's experience with front-axle regen, and Audi didn't want to start from nothing on the MGU-H that the other teams have 11 years experience with. So a ton of energy is going to depart the exhaust and be burnt up by the front brakes rather than make the cars go fast.
The cherry on top is that since these decisions are going to be baked into the engines and cars, it's not going to be like knockout quali where they said "oops that was a mistake" and reverted things after a couple races. Even the efforts to bring back V8s and V10s this year hit the brick wall of "well sure, but we'd have to get tooled up and that'll take years".
The fundamental flaw is still that they want 50/50 power split, yet banned the most effective ways for teams to harvest electrical energy: front regen brakes and the MGU-H. So each car is going to only be able to make use X% of the chemical energy in their fuel, and that X is going to be way lower than needed to actually achieve the electrial/ICE power split the FIA wanted. On top of all that, the megajoule-per-lap ceiling is bizarre. If a team can figure out a way to get more energy, let them.
Allegedly, the not-Audi teams were terrified of Audi's experience with front-axle regen, and Audi didn't want to start from nothing on the MGU-H that the other teams have 11 years experience with. So a ton of energy is going to depart the exhaust and be burnt up by the front brakes rather than make the cars go fast.
The cherry on top is that since these decisions are going to be baked into the engines and cars, it's not going to be like knockout quali where they said "oops that was a mistake" and reverted things after a couple races. Even the efforts to bring back V8s and V10s this year hit the brick wall of "well sure, but we'd have to get tooled up and that'll take years".
Last edited:
Upvote
11
(17
/
-6)
Outsider here.
Does the driver make the choice to enter these modes? Do they usually choose these modes when available?
Do they get notified by their team over headset, if they qualify for a mode? Or does a driver get a 'feel' for it (like being within 1 second from another)?
Does the driver make the choice to enter these modes? Do they usually choose these modes when available?
Do they get notified by their team over headset, if they qualify for a mode? Or does a driver get a 'feel' for it (like being within 1 second from another)?
Upvote
14
(14
/
0)
Jakelshark
Ars Tribunus Militum
Speaking of which they occasionally show graphics of if the driver is deploying/harvesting and estimated battery level. More of this please and thank you.
Upvote
16
(16
/
0)
I'm still not sure if I'm sold on these new rules. There was a time when the car regs were pretty loose and up to teams' own interpretation, and we got some pretty wild and fast designs. Now it just seems like Formula 1 is getting closer and closer to identical spec cars across all teams.
Not to mention, each race will now be all about "managing" the entire thing, rather than all-out racing. Yes, there has been management in the past, but certainly not to this level.
Not to mention, each race will now be all about "managing" the entire thing, rather than all-out racing. Yes, there has been management in the past, but certainly not to this level.
Upvote
3
(12
/
-9)
Jakelshark
Ars Tribunus Militum
They def let them know if DRS is avaliable, so the new overtake would be a similar radio message.
A car has multiple setup programs in it and the driver can adjust on the fly (things like qualifying mode, defense mode, different levels of how aggressive to harvest/deploy energy, etc).
I think the active aero stuff is more automated by the race program loaded onto the car? I'm not entirely clear on how much the driver controls all of the active aero vs it's done for them.
Upvote
4
(6
/
-2)
normally butters
Ars Praefectus
The FIA has made a late-breaking change to the active aero regulations to add a "partial activation" mode that can be enabled by race control for specific "straight" zones in wet conditions. When partial activation mode is engaged, only the front wing elements open, and the rear wing stays closed. Also, each activation zone can have two sets of start/end boundaries, with the activation zone being shorter when partial activation is enabled.
The need for this emerged when it became clear that the teams would optimize their low-downforce active aero configuration with just enough downforce to handle any curves or kinks on the "straights" in dry conditions, and full activation would be dangerous in wet conditions. But if they kept the wings closed all the way down the straight, they'd exceed the design downforce levels and overload the suspension, causing underfloor plank wear disqualifications and possibly also causing problems with fuel consumption and energy management.
Seems like this should have been a more foreseeable problem, but better to come up with these awkward and complicated rules now rather than in the middle of the season after a problematic and possibly dangerous wet race.
The need for this emerged when it became clear that the teams would optimize their low-downforce active aero configuration with just enough downforce to handle any curves or kinks on the "straights" in dry conditions, and full activation would be dangerous in wet conditions. But if they kept the wings closed all the way down the straight, they'd exceed the design downforce levels and overload the suspension, causing underfloor plank wear disqualifications and possibly also causing problems with fuel consumption and energy management.
Seems like this should have been a more foreseeable problem, but better to come up with these awkward and complicated rules now rather than in the middle of the season after a problematic and possibly dangerous wet race.
Upvote
38
(38
/
0)
Another scenario that comes to mind, what if potions of the moveable active aero fail in a closed or open position, potentially giving a competitive advantage to somebody? What happens then? More penalties? Stop & gos? I can see all these movable parts malfunctioning from time to time.
Upvote
6
(6
/
0)
Hold up... did that guy say that air turbulence from the insides of the front brake drums was a significant cause of worse downforce for the next car behind?
Upvote
5
(7
/
-2)
I hear that. Heck, I miss 1960s and 1970s F1 cars and rules.
Upvote
-12
(4
/
-16)
It'd be a safety issue as opposed to a competitive advantage.
In proper operation, a car will be faster around corners in cornering mode and faster on straights in straight mode.
Straight mode on a corner would lead to unexpected lack of grip. Cornering mode on a straight would lead to extreme drag. Neither would be faster. If only one wing screws up, having the front in high-downforce but rear in low-downforce might be dangerous since it'd cause massive front grip and lead to oversteer. Jack Doohan experienced this all the way to the wall in Suzuka this year when he forgot to close his DRS on a special-case corner where that wasn't automatic.
This'll be interesting since it means a lot of kinks that are currently flat-out are going to have the car getting a bit squirmy. Hopefully it doesn't mean that if you're within 5s of the car ahead you stop making all progress because they can stay flat in clean air while you've got to lift.
Upvote
19
(19
/
0)
I'm picturing some bright LED effects on or under the car (or the driver's helmet lights up like they went Super Saiyan), or maybe something that shoots flames from the back of the car (but doesn't provide any real thrust)...
Lots of fun things to imagine, however unlikely.
Upvote
0
(3
/
-3)
That sort of depends on the track I imagine. If the aero fails and you're stuck in low-downforce mode, at Monza, you can manage the very few corners it has, and blast it down its many straights.
Upvote
1
(3
/
-2)
I believe that is automated - when crossing into the allowed DRS zone, the driver hears a beep from the car to let them know they can activate DRS.
Historically these sorts of things must be controlled by the driver, so I would guess it is up to them to reply the different modes.
Upvote
9
(9
/
0)
I’m just waiting to see how close the new Formula E cars over a single lap get to these Frankenstein’s, and whether it leads to any awkward conversations for 2027, 2028, 2029, etc.
Upvote
3
(9
/
-6)
Normally they end up retiring the car hen DRS fails if they can’t repair it. The problem is it doesn’t give a competitive advantage without also causing a disadvantage: if it fails in high drag, everyone will pass you one the straights and out of corners. If it fails in low drag, you won’t be able to corner as fast and everyone will pass you going into corners (you have to brake more or you will run off the road). The car is fastest when it is all working (broken wings speeding cars up not withstanding).
Upvote
15
(15
/
0)
Even at Monza, the teams will be setting the nominal "high" downforce levels so you can just barely make it through the corners at the speeds they computed will result in the fastest race. Getting stuck in low downforce mode might let you still make it around the circuit, but you'll be way slower than intended since all your cornering speeds will fall. Doing 110mph instead of 160mph around parabolica won't make you faster.
There's actually a bit of precedent: When McLaren's F-Duct let them effectively have a "low downforce" mode on straights in 2010, their Monza wing configuration looked like a Monaco configuration. Since they could basically disable the rear wing's drag on straights, they configured the car to have very high downforce for the corners.
Upvote
9
(9
/
0)
I wonder what the reliability rate will be. DRS failures are quite rare, so the underlying tech is probably well known. But DRS isn't used half as often as the new modes, as they will be changing on nearly every part of the track.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
A lot of sections are going to be driven in new ways thanks to active aero. Corners in Vegas are going to be (possibly much) faster, for example. It will be interesting to see how that plays out.
Unfortunately, I imagine this will also make the comprise setups less distinct at tracks with a mix of high and low speed sections. I would think this will simplify aero setup. Maybe that will be replaced by energy harvesting/deployment strategy.
Unfortunately, I imagine this will also make the comprise setups less distinct at tracks with a mix of high and low speed sections. I would think this will simplify aero setup. Maybe that will be replaced by energy harvesting/deployment strategy.
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
The 90's had all sorts of rules and restrictions implemented because of teams technical innovations at the time, just some examples of things banned or rules implemented:
- Active suspension
- Electronic drive aides
- Plank wear limits were strictly enforced
- Flexible Aero became more strictly enforced
- ECU's became tightly regulated
If you were a fan of the teams that had developed any of these technologies or ways around existing rules and were successful because of it, you would have been fuming. Let's not pretend the 90's was free of any F1 regulation changes that drastically changed how a team could succeed.
Upvote
28
(32
/
-4)
Keith Tanner
Ars Tribunus Militum
That's found in the WEC rules as well as existing F1. You can only harvest and deploy so much per lap. It's similar to a fuel flow limitation.
I would prefer the active aero be under full driver control, not just at certain points. It'll probably end up being much the same, but letting the driver have full control opens up more strategy the same way that battery deployment is used now.
Upvote
3
(3
/
0)
Not exactly the first time in history. The cars had driver adjustable front wings in the 2009 and 2010 seasons.
Upvote
3
(3
/
0)
I'm pretty disappointed with the 2026 aero rules. Calling this "active aero" feels like overselling it, it's more like two mode aero. I suspect it's going to be just another thing for the drivers to do in the cockpit without introducing any real choice. There's no reason to be in corner mode on the straights and the car will switch to corner mode outside of the straight zones. So it's just DRS drivers will have use in more places on every lap.
I would much rather see computer controlled active aero without discrete modes that controls the wings independently without driver intervention. It could even work within the same aero envelope available to the 2026 cars. It lacks purity but if you want road car applicability figuring out how to make the software compliment the driver is where it's at these days. I think we'd also see some clever software strategies come out of it. I also suspect it'd be safer. We saw DRS failures and some distressingly wobbly bistable rear wings this year as teams tried to optimize. Instead, constantly actuated wing elements would need to be built stronger for more authority not to mention the driver/pit wall might get some telemetry warning if something isn't working right versus DRS where you just had to assume it would shut and you were SOL if it didn't.
I would much rather see computer controlled active aero without discrete modes that controls the wings independently without driver intervention. It could even work within the same aero envelope available to the 2026 cars. It lacks purity but if you want road car applicability figuring out how to make the software compliment the driver is where it's at these days. I think we'd also see some clever software strategies come out of it. I also suspect it'd be safer. We saw DRS failures and some distressingly wobbly bistable rear wings this year as teams tried to optimize. Instead, constantly actuated wing elements would need to be built stronger for more authority not to mention the driver/pit wall might get some telemetry warning if something isn't working right versus DRS where you just had to assume it would shut and you were SOL if it didn't.
Upvote
-1
(4
/
-5)
What happens when KITT has a few too many quarts with the boys...
Upvote
-1
(1
/
-2)
I've never been a massive follower, but I yearn for the old days, sometimes.
The biggest one for me, as an Antipodean, is the shift from Adelaide to Melbourne - and a corresponding shift from the last race of the season to the first. It's never been the same, since.
Maybe it's nostalgia talking, but the rivalries back then - Senna/Prost, for example - seemed more visceral, more exciting. Maybe it was the fact that Adelaide was a street circuit that literally took over the city. Being the last race, where the championship was sometimes decided probably factored too.
The biggest one for me, as an Antipodean, is the shift from Adelaide to Melbourne - and a corresponding shift from the last race of the season to the first. It's never been the same, since.
Maybe it's nostalgia talking, but the rivalries back then - Senna/Prost, for example - seemed more visceral, more exciting. Maybe it was the fact that Adelaide was a street circuit that literally took over the city. Being the last race, where the championship was sometimes decided probably factored too.
Upvote
-5
(6
/
-11)
The problem remains the same: F1 cars are too damned big. F1 cars are 5.5 m long; this is 20 cm short of a Chevy fucking Suburban. At 2 m, they are as wide as a suburban, as well.
Rule changes should focus on making cars smaller first of all. As it is, races are a parade of very fast, incredibly aerodynamic whales.
Rule changes should focus on making cars smaller first of all. As it is, races are a parade of very fast, incredibly aerodynamic whales.
Upvote
24
(25
/
-1)
At some point does fiddling with all these modes mid-battle cause an unsafe distraction to the drivers? Throw in weather changes on the fly, failures, etc...
Upvote
-4
(1
/
-5)
I'm a long, long time F1 fan and engineer and I'm having trouble parsing the different modes. I'm honestly not that optimistic on these new regs.
Upvote
2
(5
/
-3)
I hate it that various racing series are playing these contrived “boost mode” games with engine power. Get the power you want through the long, skinny pedal only. If you’ve artificially hamstrung an engine, your not really racing anymore, your just putting on a show.
Its like an amplifier that goes to 11…
Its like an amplifier that goes to 11…
Upvote
2
(8
/
-6)