Firstly, it showed that Liberty Media’s era in F1 is not afraid to think outside the box, and hasn’t left anything out, when it comes to ensuring Grand Prix cars are as raceable as possible.
The 1978 Brabham fan car, in which Niki Lauda triumphed at that year’s Swedish Grand Prix, remains an iconic machine and will forever be a talking point due to its uniqueness.
Second, it proved that the battle rule-makers have always faced—in coming up with regulations that help produce a great spectacle—is something that is unlikely to ever end.
Here we take a look at fan car selection, and the problems F1 is trying to solve.
The thinking behind the car fan option
The news about the fan car appeared in International Autosport Show last month, when F1’s chief technical officer Pat Symonds spoke about how open the sport is about the future direction of the cars.
With the current rules largely in place until 2025, plans are well underway to do something different for 2026.
Looking at the work done on potential changes, Symonds said: “When we looked at Project 26, we had another clean sheet of paper, and we checked all sorts of things.
“We really went back to a curvy ground-effect car to kind of get an idea of where the final was. We looked at fan cars, all sorts of exotic things. The 26 is going to be quite traditional, because that’s the way we want it to be. But the next performance could be Actually better than “22 cars”.
Formula 1 designers have a knack for looking to the past for inspiration, so it’s really no surprise that with the modern development tools at their disposal, Symonds and the art working group decided to take a look at how skirts and fans could be used. In the latest Earth Impact Era.
Companion to Lotus 78 and Lotus 79
Photo from: Giorgio Piola
Comparison of Lotus 78 and 79
Photo from: Giorgio Piola
Undoubtedly, when contemplating the mechanism of ground effect, we need look no further than Lotus 79, or “Black Beauty,” as it was better known at the time, due to its stunning black-and-gold visitor.
It should be noted, however, that the 79 owed much of its success to its predecessor, given the growing pains that had to be overcome in order for the team to extract performance from the ground-effect venturi tunnels and take advantage of the sliding skirts.
Ground effect comparison of the 1978 Lotus 79
Photo from: Giorgio Piola
The trials and tribulations of the 78 were actually a good thing for Lotus, as its competitors didn’t quite count on being able to find the level of performance it had achieved with the 79. This left everyone else a late adopter of the model and their need to catch up. above.
This is how the other concept studied by FOM came about, Brabham deploying its B-spec BT46, or fan car as it is widely known, at the 1978 Swedish Grand Prix and immediately ‘blew up’ the competition.
The propeller sucked the car to the ground, so the faster it went the more downforce it had.
View details of the 1978 Brabham BT46B fan
Photo from: Giorgio Piola
Not only was the BT46B fast, but it was also an innovative solution to a problem for which Brabham had no quick answer regarding the use of ground-effect Venturi tunnels.
Its problem is the car powered by the Flat-12 Alfa Romeo The engine that broke into the space needed to make the tunnels.
The performance was so strong that the opposing teams got upset. And with pressure mounting on Bernie Ecclestone, who not only owned a Brabham but was also chairman of FOCA (Formula One Constructors’ Association) by that point, the car was withdrawn after that outing and victory.
Ultimately motor racing’s governing body would go ahead and see fit to ban slip skirts and introduce a minimum ride height, due to safety concerns as teams continued to look for more performance.
In the 40 or so years since these concepts were last used in the sport, F1 technology and safety have improved so much that there can be reasons to come back.
But in the end, FOM is only interested in delivering cars that can race – and there are better solutions to allow that to happen.
Historic F1 problem
The main driving force is the answer to the age-old problem of addressing the wake-up disturbance caused by a leading car, and its effect on the cars that follow.
The sport’s last major attempt to deal with this was in 2009, when the cars’ complexity was significantly reduced compared to their predecessors.
However, while the intentions of this set of rules were grand, they were not as comprehensive as the plan for 2021, which has been inevitably postponed until 2022, due to the effects of the pandemic.
2009 Ferrari F60 (660) front view compared to the 2008 F
Photo from: Giorgio Piola
Ferrari F60 (660) 2009 top view comparison with F2008 (bottom)
Photo from: Giorgio Piola
In 2009, an Override Working Group (OWG) was tasked with finding ways to reduce the problem, but it lacked the time and resources it had at its disposal this time around.
It resulted in a sound but wide-ranging approach that teams decided to quickly overcome, eroding those efforts through technical and political will.
Another recalibration of the car’s aerodynamics occurred in conjunction with the introduction of turbo-hybrid power units in 2014.
But, given the loss in performance relative to the cars’ previous era, an unusual reaction followed, resulting in the formation of an even more aerodynamically aggressive organization for 2017, with structures much larger than barge boards one of the key ingredients in the recipe.
Top view comparison of the Ferrari SF70H and SF16-H
Photo from: Giorgio Piola
The outcome of this change required the Board to make another course correction, using some of the information already gained in the 2021/22 draft study to reduce the effectiveness of the front and rear wing.
Rules 2018 vs. 2019 front wing comparison, top view
Photo from: Giorgio Piola
2018 vs. 2019 rules, front wing comparison, bottom view
Photo from: Giorgio Piola
This resulted in the removal of the flaps from the front wing, the reduction of the lines on the underside of the wing, and the number of elements prevailing.
Meanwhile, the rear wing vents that teams have used for over a decade to help alter the tip vortex have been banned, and the wing dimensions have also been significantly altered.
2018 vs 2019 back wing regulation
Photo from: Giorgio Piola
The plan for 2022 was more comprehensive, as not only was a larger team tasked with redesigning the car’s platform, but the regulations were also rewritten from the ground up.
This sought to resolve some of the shortcomings that had been caused by years of overlapping organizational changes, which often opened the door for loopholes to be discovered.
To further these efforts, changes were also made to the sporting regulations, in order to change the power dynamic between the teams.
And while the current regulations were put in place to limit the issues at hand, there is an inevitable point where teams will always find ways to reduce those efforts and another reset will be required.
Knowing this, 2026 has been set as the waypoint for the operation, which is poignant given that the curtain will also fall on the current crop of turbo-hybrid engines, having graced the sport since 2014.
Mercedes PU106 power unit and power shop
Photo from: Giorgio Piola