Sidepodcast

All Up in the Air

Whilst Mr C and I have settled for discussing the launches briefly in the podcast, and scoring them out of 10, new guest writer KerbRider has taken a more detailed look at the teams we've seen so far.

2010 has promised to be a great year for F1 since Sebby V took the chequered flag in Abu Dhabi. The off season has now ensured this will be the case.

A lot of people have gotten excited over the game of musical chairs the drivers like to play every few years. Some even more so because a certain driver, I like to call Voldemort, decided he wanted to play again.

Although all these changes have been great to see, and have whet my appetite for what is promising to be a great season, the real excitement for me is launch season.

I love the smell of Duco in the morning!

The reason I love launch season is because I'm a 'details' man. I will study photos of the new cars for hours on end to see their subtleties and nuances, and speculate as to why they did this, or that, and then formulate how I think a particular design philosophy might work.

Different strokes for different folk I guess.

I'll start with the fundamentals of design philosophy, and I'll thank Mr Codling for his insightful article in this months F1 Racing. Cant wait to get the book.

The way I see it, the fundamental concept of designing a quick car is to have the air under the car moving a lot quicker than the air on top. This is basic aeronautics. What an F1 designer must try to achieve is to have four separate airflows to make a car work effectively. Underneath, above, and the two sides of the car.

The idea is to keep these "chunks" of air as independent of each other as possible. So in other words, we don’t want air flowing from the side of the car bleeding into the air flowing over or under the car. As there are four big black squares on a car, the philosophy is to minimise this "bleeding" as much as possible.

It all about compromise.

So on to the cars that have been launched to date.

Ferrari

Ferrari seem to have a simple and sleek design. Quite an attractive car I think, and it hurts me to say that. Love the lighter red colour, and the white wings are bearable for sponsorship purposes. Not a bad deal for Ferrari to get Alonso basically for free, when Santander are obviously footing the bill for him. So can we now class Fernando as a pay driver!

Average height for the nose. Not as high as others and about even with Mercedes. The all important front wing is clearly not as detailed as Mclaren, Red Bull and Sauber, but maybe it doesn’t need to be because the rest of the car deflects the air where needed. Fat, and weighty sidepods are well streamlined, and have the bulk purely for side impact crash testing. A feature most cars have this season.

Where I think Ferrari have excelled is the rear end. Although they haven't chosen to go the "sharkfin" path, there is so much free space at the back for clear airflow over the rear wing. Of course the "sharkfin" is subject to crosswind buffeting that can affect pitch and yaw mid-corner, and more importantly, under braking. What might let them down is the lack of cover over the rear suspension. This may cause turbulent air affecting the air that exits above the diffuser.

McLaren

For one, I am glad McLaren kept their silver and red livery. Its effective, sexy, and unique. Even if the Mercedes has tried to replicate without copying.

McLaren have boldly copied the splitter/divider underneath the nose that Williams had last year but strangely decided to opt against this year.

If we look at a front on view on the MP4-25, it is clear that this device will divide the air to flow more cleanly through the suspension arms and steering column, and swiftly into the sidepods. It will have the effect of forcing more air faster into the sidepods, which explains in a fashion as to why they are so small compared to other teams.

The front wing is, in layman's terms, off its face! Incredibly detailed, and obviously Mclarens' philosophy this year was to not be caught out by last year's mistakes. They learned a lot last year as a design team. Although they seemingly have "borrowed" ideas from RBR and Brawn, they have made them uniquely Mclaren. The Sharkfin is high, and long, and a bit fatter at the bottom. This is to accommodate the exhaust exits that, again unique to Mclaren, exit horizontally, rather than vertically like the rest of the grid. It will be interesting to see what benefit this has. The MP4-25 is vastly different in appearance to anything else this year which means that this year Mclaren will go either one of two ways - that is poor, or win the lot.

Mercedes

My overall view is that I'm largely unimpressed by Mercedes. I was expecting big changes in this year's car. The Mercedes livery is average, and hopefully will be updated next year.

They have gone with a higher nose than the Brawn, and the design remains largely unchanged. Of course as Ross alluded to last year, the nose has the air channelling veins. This seems to be a large talking point, although I think its effectiveness is overrated. I can only assume the concept was born out of a need to direct airflow away from the drivers helmet, which is a rather large obstacle.

The most noticeable change is the air box. Low and broad with a splitter. There is a semi-sharkfin, and I expected tighter packaging at the rear considering they have had a year with the engine and drive train. All this being said, I still believe they will be a top four team.

Sauber

This one gets me excited. BMW obviously did a lot of work before the withdrawal. A great looking front wing that should be successful in diverting airflow around the front wheels and into the rear sculpted body work. A high nose to increase the amount of air flowing underneath the car, and unique sidepods that have the idea of moulding airflow back inward toward the rear wing.

A large and bulky sharkfin as per Mclaren, but inspiringly sculpted sidepods and tight rear packaging. All in the name of rear stability and front end grip. I believe the Sauber should have great traction with the low sitting rear, and as F1 is mainly made up of slow to medium speed corners, this will be a great advantage over the course of 19 races. I think they will be the surprise of the year. Kubica left too early. Which leads me to...

Renault

U-G-L-Y they aint got no alibi, its ugly!! For a team that pulled out as late as they did officially, I think they must have pulled out mentally beforehand as this year's car will be the joke of 2010. My heart sinks for Kubica, it really does. Ugly cars rarely do well in F1, and I don’t think this year will be any exception.

Of course I'm saying this under the impression that this is the car that will actually race.

It looks quite uninspiring, and a bit too bulky at the sides. Like a driver, the car needs to be fit, and trim the fat. It looks shorter than the rest, as does the RBR at first glance. Go Renault engine efficiency!!

The rear wing is left of field, and might suit their own philosophy, but I expect design changes early on in the year, if not before Bahrain. The front wing endplates are also a tad bland, and are the least detailed of the already established teams.

Let's not expect much unfortunately.

Williams

I always hold high hopes for Williams. Shouldn't everyone? Real racers, battlers and sadly of late, the perennial underachievers. This all stems from their brief encounter with a walrus, and they have never recovered fully from that.

I'm a bit befuddled as to why they went with a clean sheet, as last year's car was quite decent, and an evolution of that may have pushed them up the grid. I hope it works for them, but as strange as it sounds, the car seem too clean to be a top performer.

It seems as of late, to find real performance and aero gains, a car needs to look messy. But I guess the 2009 Brawn put that to rest too. Nose is high, which in the past meant high centre of gravity, but with the double diffuser malarkey, this is necessary to maximise air flow underneath the car. I suspect that with this year's cars most performance will be found from the floor, and suspension geometry.

Interesting to note the Williams front wing sits backward from the mounting pillars, whereas the other teams have their mounting pillars attached closer to the front of the front wing main plane. There are some interesting components on the end fences that look successful in dispersing airflow around the tyres.

Toro Rosso

Nothing to see here folks! Keep moving. Seriously, not much change from last years RBR. Not expecting great feats from the driver pairing, although Buemi has some potential. I expect them to be toughing it out with Williams and or Renault at best, Virgin and Lotus at worst.

Virgin Racing

There will be some bad headlines printed about this team this year. My impressions of the car are that it might surprise. Well packaged at the rear, and sidepods of a Mclaren nature. The real sticking point will be suspension geometry and heating the tyres in unison. The front wing looks large, and dual channel end plates look as though they will get the desired result there. Except for one fine point. Sure the CFD would have calculated big downforce levels, but as our friend Mr Saward mentioned in a podcast last year, how will it go in turbulent air? There are no intricate details that suggest it will cope well in traffic, and there is a massive space behind the front wing that has no details to direct air straight toward the floor splitter and onward and downward toward the diffuser.

The car itself looks fantastic. I love the livery, the addition of the Yorkshire rose is just brilliant. I'm Australian, and it means nothing to me, but it’s a beautiful design. For me it harks back to the first Jordan in '91. Clean and unpretentious (even though it is a Branson baby). I think they will score points for sure, but not more than 10 unless they get lucky in the wet.

Red Bull

The one we were all waiting for. The thread for the launch was full of negative comments which surprised me. Sure it looks like last year's car, but they were the quickest last year, so the only thing they had to concentrate on was the rear end because they missed the double diffuser boat. Additionally if RBR can get Total to incorporate into blue, why did Renault insist on that hideous red?

Firstly the front wing. Equal in development man hours of the Mclaren I would imagine, and running in turbulence was an issue for them last year until they introduced the stepped top wing. The nose is almost round once we get past the yellow tip, and the airflow channels on top are more pronounced and sharper at the front than other teams who have copied the idea. The rear end is even more tightly packaged than last year and it looks low thanks to the pull rod suspension geometry. This will assist with traction out of the slower corners, as last year, the RBR was an oversteer car compared to the understeering Brawn.

The sharkfin has now been filled in underneath the rear wing, and comprises the rear wing support post. It should be quick, but will it be the quickest?

Force India

With the Mclaren association, I am expecting big things from this team this year. The front wing is nicely detailed and there is plenty of space under the high nose to get lots of under the car and into that diffuser. High chunky sidepods like the Ferrari, and the rear packaging looks too high. First impressions are that it has a higher centre of gravity than the others as the exhaust exits sit high in the bodywork.

No change in livery, which is fine by me. Its effective, if not attractive. I'm also expecting over the course of the season for Liuzzi to beat Sutil resoundingly.

It really is all up in the air this year, and anyone who thinks they know who will win at this stage is kidding themselves. There will be some good guesses only in prediction land, and I for one am predicting a Lewis WDC and a Red Bull WCC.

What is CFD?

This article was originally written for BellaOnline, but is republished here for posterity.

When it comes to making a car fast, you need a good driver, a decent engine and aerodynamic efficiency. These threee things combined will bring you wins, or see you at the back of the grid. The aerodynamics is one of the most scientific aspects of the car, with every bump and groove examined in minute detail.

At the moment, wind tunnel usage is still predominant, despite the FIA's attempts to restrict usage. Measuring how the air flows around the car will present enough data to work out what changes need to be made to make you go a bit faster. This requires a lot of precise engineering though. Scale models need to be made, and the results measured accurately.

CFD, or Computational Fluid Dynamics, can provide similar data using computers instead of the massive wind tunnels.

The three areas that need to be measured are downforce (the pressure keeping the car on track and not spinning off), drag (the airflow around the car, specifically that which slows it down), and balance (that which affects the air when sudden changes occur, such as braking and cornering).

Rather than build a physical model of the car, a computer simulation is created, and then masses of data is input to represent the physical exertions placed on a car as it would in real life. Each component of the car can be tested, or the whole thing can be put under pressure, and the elements - drag, downforce and balance - can be measured separately or together. The bonus to using a simulation rather than a wind tunnel and real life testing, is that there is complete control over the elements. Rather than sitting in a garage, waiting for the rain to pass, the CFD engineers can simulate sunny weather, and see how the car will react. Another bonus is that instead of modelling various additions, or changes, to the car, tweaking things on a computer is much simpler, and cost-effective. If it doesn't work, it is easy to return to a previous version.

Although extremely useful, and much more technical than my brief description, there are drawbacks to the use of computers. The nature of F1 is that things are unpredictable, and sometimes the data just doesn't correlate to what happens when a car is run out on track.

CFD is just a part of the process for building an F1 car. It is usually the first step in a long design procedure - which will then lead onto the wind tunnel, when the data is acceptable. Once out of the wind tunnel, then track testing can be the next step. At the moment, the three processes work together to shave milliseconds off a team's laptimes. Reducing one or the other methods, as the FIA are trying to do, will mean reliance on another, and at the moment, it's unclear what effect that will have on development.

More McLaren Testing Today

The McLaren team are running some more straight-line tests, at that old familiar haunt - Kemble Airport. As you can see from the picture above, the test team have relocated further towards the middle of the airfield.

According to those in the know, this may have something to do with a collection of pictures appearing on the interweb last week, although I can't imagine who'd do such a thing. Mind you, this time last week I couldn't imagine why a team, known to be so secretive they religiously encrypt all of their radio traffic, could be so dumb as to run aero tests right next to a main public road. So what do I know?

Anyhow, it looks like I'm going to have to rent a longer lens and hope the team stick around for the rest of the week. It's still possible to get up close and personal to the car in it's new location, although that would mean taking pictures on what may or may not be private property, and honestly I don't really want to open that can of worms right now.

I can tell you that this morning very little happened. The team spent a lot of time sitting around doing nothing while the engine was repeatedly started and stopped. Eventually Pedro de la Rosa broke cover, revealing that McLaren are still running the slightly crazy "birdcage" to the left of the cockpit, and a full set of green striped Bridgestone tyres. I guess that particular innovation is with us for the rest of the year.

Given how exposed the area is, and that the team appear to be in it for the long term, I'm baffled as to why an agency such as Sutton Images don't send a junior photographer along to the site, complete with a massive lens and buckets more patience than I have?

Come to think of it, why aren't rival teams sending people out there too? Seems like an opportunity missed to me.

World Motorsport Council Decisions

This article was originally written for BellaOnline, but is republished here for posterity.

The FIA have been pushing cost cutting as one of the main objectives for Formula 1 for the future. Max Mosley has been introducing radical concepts such as the standard engine, and asking the FOTA for their opinions as well. A meeting between the World Motorsport Council and FOTA saw some of the ideas confirmed and the way Formula 1 is heading is much clearer. Here are some of the regulations we'll see going forward.

Engines
We already knew that engine life was to be lengthened to three races, and this has been confirmed. Teams will also be limited to twenty engines each year. That's eight for each driver and four for testing. For 2010, the standard engine will be introduced as a low cost option for independent teams.

Aerodynamics
There will be no in season testing, which means all on-track improvements will be done during the off season or the Friday of each race weekend. Wind tunnel activity is being limited, and there is the possiblity of a standard chassis in 2010. This all depends on whether teams consider the chassis a performance differentiator, so this is something that will be discussed nearer the time.

Factories and Personnel
Factories will have to close for six weeks per year where that is the local law. They will also be reviewed in a couple of years to see whether any more cost-cutting can be done. Personnel attending races is to be reduced by teams sharing information about tyres and fuel.

Race Weekend
In 2010, the ban on tyre warmers will be in place, along with a ban on refuelling. That is quite significant, as although pit stops will still take place for tyre changes, this eliminates the strategy aspect of fuel loads. Team radio will also have to be a standard system, which means as fans, we should get radio from all the teams, rather than some keeping their radio communications secret. The FIA are also going to conduct market research to investigate the public reaction to a change to the qualifying format, and also to Bernie's medal idea that would replace the current points system.

Some of these are progressions of things we already know about, others are quite radical changes. The idea of a standard chassis is not something I'm happy about, but it is still quite a long way off, and things change so quickly in F1, there's nothing to worry about just yet.

We Never Change, Do We?

It’s a rollercoaster ride for Formula 1 drivers at the moment, especially for those who are teetering on the brink of expulsion from their teams. We already know Heidfeld is being observed closely, and with the Alonso-to-BMW rumours getting stronger, he’s probably quite worried right now. Bourdais is also under scrutiny, having been told to shine just that little bit more.

Le Seb has hit back, though, and said to his team that there’s no point keeping him if they think he’s going to adapt to a car that he doesn’t like and isn’t working.

If they believe in my potential and my perception of things, which I personally believe can lead to an even better car because it has always been the way I function, then yes, we should definitely give it a try, keep on working and make it better.

It does seem as though Bourdais (despite the luck) has picked up his game, so perhaps the car is working now, and maybe he does like it. Whether that gets him a place for next year, we don’t yet know, but this has made me think. Is it possible for a driver to not suit a car so much that he has to leave?

Restructuring

Some drivers are a bit too tall, aren’t they? Kubica is tall, and Webber has to fold himself in half to get into the car. Wurz has also suffered for his height. In 2005, McLaren designed their car around Raikkonen and Montoya, obviously, and believing third driver Wurz was moving on, they ignored him. He just didn’t fit in the cockpit.

It’s not just about height, either. Kubica (him again) was very vocal about his weight loss at the start of this season, something he undertook specifically to help the balance of the car.

Personality

You don’t have to look very far back at all to find a driver struggling to fit in with his team. Alonso and McLaren in 2007 were just a complete mismatch almost from the word go. Forget about battling with your team mate, if you’re not fitting in with the bosses, then it’s going to be a tough season. If you last the season. Scott Speed saw the harsh realities of this in 2007 as well.

Flavio has never been one to support a driver if he's not pulling his weight, and Kovalainen never seemed to fit in at Renault, whereas he's slipped into the McLaren role very nicely indeed. Raikkonen went the other way, presumably glad to see the back of Mr Dennis, given how relaxed and happy he was donning the red suit instead.

Mechanics

What I’m curious about is a driver just not getting to grips with the car itself. If I remember correctly, Alonso campaigned for McLaren to change his brakes from one supplier to another because they suited him better. Does that mean he would never have been as fast last year if they had refused to budge? How far should a team adapt for their driver, and does it depend on whether they rate his chances or not?

You can imagine Toro Rosso would be willing to tweak their designs slightly for Vettel, but apparently not for Bourdais. Have there been any other examples of this in the past? Does it mean that I’m judging some drivers harshly when really it’s just a bad fit?

Switching to 2009 Development

This article was originally written for BellaOnline, but is republished here for posterity.

There have been rumours circling in the paddock that some of the teams have given up on developing this year’s car and are now concentrating on getting their 2009 contender up to scratch.

It’s not unusual for teams to begin preparation on next year’s car very early, because these things take time to develop, but 2009 is a special situation. The regulations are changing so heavily, with the reintroduction of slick tyres, and banning of many aerodynamic devices, that teams need all the time they can get.

It wasn’t a surprise to read the rumours that Honda were abandoning development on this year’s car, considering how poorly they have shown so far this season. However, they denied it and said they were continuing to fight for every point they could get.

It’s a difficult balance to strike. For a team like Honda, you could understand if they had given up on this year, with very few results to show for their hard work. For a team like BMW, however, they can still fight for a lot of points, for wins even, and shouldn’t concentrate on 2009 yet. At the same time, though, you don’t want to get left behind, when you know other teams are working on their newest designs, and coming up with radical ideas.

But again, on the other hand, it’s not going to be interesting for the fans to be left watching the cars fight it out for exactly the same positions all the time. A little aerodynamic wing can make all the difference in this championship, and it’s so close that the smallest setup error can lead to sacrificing the win. It’s not fair to focus on 2009, when there is still a very competitive championship going on under our noses, one that the fans are really excited about. Surely the teams still want to compete in this year as well?

Ferrari have recently announced that they are working on the 2009 chassis, but also that they have the resources to work on both cars at the same time. As one of the teams with enormous budgets, it makes sense that they would be able to afford to develop two completely different concepts. However, this does mean that other teams will be on the back foot, and that Ferrari will no doubt be one of the top championship competitors in 2009.

F1 Digest - Hungary Free Practice

• Length: 8:44 
• Size: 8.1 MB 
• File: digest42.mp3 
• Transcript: digest42.pdf 
• Torrent: digest42.torrent 

We knew it was going to be a slow start to proceedings, but thankfully things livened up for the Free Practice sessions in Hungary. Listen to F1 Digest for a completely rundown of the action.

Free Practice 1

No action for 30 minutes, but once it got started there were some interesting things to note. Ferrari seemed to have the edge on McLaren, but how much of that was true pace and how much setup? Also, Vettel broke down.

Free Practice 2

This time round it was McLaren working their magic to take the lead, with Piquet in a ridiculous second. Plenty of tyre work, and also, Vettel broke down.

Conclusions

Some new aero updates to several of the cars were being evaluated today, so we get thoughts on those, whilst some drivers are keeping quiet about how they feel.

F1 People - Colin Chapman

• Length: 4:43 
• Size: 4.4 MB 
• File: people8.mp3 
• Transcript: people8.pdf 
• Torrent: people8.torrent 

Welcome to the second series of F1 People, seven short shows brought to you by Sidepodcast, chronicling the lives of important people in the world of F1. Last time round we looked at Michael Schumacher, Enzo Ferrari, Frank Williams and others. Obviously there are more than seven VIPs in F1, and we had several comments last time round suggesting people we may have missed. Thus, F1 People, series 2, is here to expand on our list, starting with Colin Chapman.

Anthony Colin Bruce Chapman was born on the 19th May 1928, in London, where he grew up and went to University to study mechanical engineering. While he was a student, he learnt to fly and joined the Royal Air Force when he was 20. He wasn’t there for long, although the experience gave him a taste for aeronautical engineering that transferred to his love of cars. After leaving the RAF, Chapman became a member of the 750 Motor Club, a UK based racing club that specialises in Austin’s.

The first car that Chapman built was based around a 1930 Austin Seven and he named it Lotus. The car was entered into some minor races and was so successful that more versions were built. At this point, Chapman was working at the British Aluminium Company, but his girlfriend lent him the money to start up the Lotus Engineering Company. He partnered with Michael Allen and in 1953, Frank Costin joined the company to help create the Lotus Mk 8. The success of this car allowed Chapman to leave his job and work for Lotus full time. Whilst building and producing road and race cars, Chapman’s expertise was sought by Vanwall and BRM who both used him as a consultant to their racing teams.

In 1956, Chapman combined his experience with building cars, and working with the teams, to build his first single-seater, and two years later, he entered the car in its first Grand Prix at Monaco. Graham Hill and Cliff Allison were the first to drive the Lotus 12s in F1. A couple of iterations later, Chapman switched the engine from the front of the car to the rear, and in 1960, the Lotus 18 won its first race with Stirling Moss at the wheel. Team Lotus, however, didn’t win until the next year, at the US GP.

The 1960s were a dominant period for Lotus. Jim Clark won seven races in 1963 with the Lotus 25 – the first chassis to feature a monocoque. This came from Chapman’s aeronautical engineering background, and helped make the cars lighter and stronger. They were also much better for the driver in the event of a crash. Graham Hill was world champion in 1968 with the Lotus 49 – the first car to feature commercial sponsorship. Chapman’s desire to have commercial backing was a key factor in building the big-business sport that F1 is today.

Also in 1968 came the death of Jim Clark. He and Colin Chapman had become close friends through their many races and wins together. Clark died after his Lotus veered off the road and crashed into some trees. Chapman was very publically devastated, saying he had lost his best friend. He ordered the green and yellow Lotus badge to be replaced on all Lotus cars to a black badge for a month after Clark’s death.

The world championship wins continued into the 70s, and as the successes rolled in, the company began to grow, moving to Norfolk, and building up its sports car infrastructure. In the middle of the 1970s, Lotus began to look at ground-effects, successfully harnessing the innovative technology to help the Lotus 79 win the world championship with Mario Andretti at the wheel. Whilst ground effects were a major advancement in terms of the technology, they were also surrounded by controversy, and eventually banned in the 1980s.

In 1982, Chapman began work on active-suspension technologies, but this was never completed. He died of a heart attack in December that year, aged just 54 years.

After his death, a scandal emerged involving the DeLorean Motor Company. In 1992, Fred Bushell, a close colleague of Chapman’s pleaded guilty to “conspiring with the late Colin Chapman and others to defraud the DeLorean Motor Company.” He went to prison for four years, and it’s assumed that had Chapman been alive, he also would have received sentencing.

None of that takes the edge off the fact that he was one of the great innovators of Formula 1. Without Chapman, and his Lotus team, several of the major stepping stones in F1 technology may never have been made. He remains the engineering mind that all others look up to.

Thanks for listening to this first episode of F1 People (series 2). Don’t forget you can leave your thoughts on Colin Chapman on the blog, you can leave a voicemail on 0121 28 87225, or you can email me on christine @ sidepodcast.com. Join me tomorrow when we’ll take a look at another important name in F1.

Theme music: Natives of the New Dawn, People.

Nuances of Downforce

I've just been dipping into the latest issue of F1 Racing, the one with Lewis Hamilton looking mean and moody on the front cover. I started from the back, as I always do, consuming Nick Heidfeld's recollections of meeting Shaquille O'Neal, the anatomy of a pit stop, and Ross Brawn's to do list.

Tucked away in that last article are two sentences that are both incredibly enlightening, and at the same time, comedy gold.

"The former senior technical director, Shuhei Nakamoto (now deputy MD technical reporting to Ross Brawn)... had no prior F1 experience."

"Nakamoto admits he didn't grasp the nuances of downforce..."

Hang on a second, the technical director didn't understand downforce? Doesn't this seem slightly odd and/or scary?

I don't know the interview technique for positions of this level, perhaps they don't ask about your aerodynamic knowledge, assuming that if you're applying for the job, you might have a clue what was going on. I'm wondering what my chances are of blagging my way in to a top level job.

It's no wonder Honda struggled so badly last year, isn't it?

History of F1 - 1970s

• Length: 3:49 
• Size: 3.6 MB 
• File: history4.mp3 
• Transcript: history4.pdf 
• Torrent: history4.torrent 

Welcome to Sidepodcast’s History of F1. So far we’ve travelled from the 1900s through to the end of the 1960s, and seen the Formula 1 World Championship begin to take shape, and some of the legendary drivers stamp their mark on it. Now we take a look at the 70s where safety concerns and car development were top of everyone’s priority list.

In 1970, the revolution of aerodynamic engineering began to take place. It started with the creation of wings, which meant more downforce for the cars. Essentially this meant they had more grip and could coast round corners much faster than previously. In the early days, the wings were not fastened particularly securely, and it wasn’t unheard of for them to fall off at unexpected moments. After a few too many accidents, wings were banned for a short time.

The early 70s saw the rise of a new star for Lotus, Emerson Fittipaldi, a young man from Brazil who won his first race in 1972. The rivalry between he and Jackie Stewart meant that the next four championships were alternated between the two of them, until Stewart retired in 1973. Stewart almost made it to the 100 Grand Prix mark, but gave up one short of the feat. Why would you do that?

In 1975, Ferrari began to make their comeback – despite the fact that the season was littered with protests about driver safety. In the Spanish race, a car came off the track and actually hit the crowd, killing four people, and causing some drivers to refuse to continue to participate.

Ferrari driver Niki Lauda won five races and had nine pole starts to take his first championship. He went on to win two more. The next year, 1976, Lauda was involved in a horrific accident at the Nurburgring, which saw his car burst into flames. Lauda suffered facial burns and inhaled toxic gases, so much that he was not expected to survive. However, Lauda did manage to pull through and was miraculously driving again only six weeks later. The Nurburgring track was taken off the calendar, but returned in a dramatically altered and much shorter state.

Niki Lauda’s main competition came in the form of James Hunt, a British driver for McLaren. He won the 1976 championship, but only just. Lauda was leading the championship by 3 points in the last race, but had to retire after torrential rain. That handed the championship to Hunt, who finished the race in the terrible weather, without knowing where he had placed or if he had clinched the title.

Lauda reclaimed the crown the next year in 1977, despite quitting the team with two races to go. The team calculated the position he needed to finish in to claim the title – 4th – at the US Grand Prix, and Lauda delivered and then joined Bernie Ecclestone’s Parmalat Brabham team.

In development terms, the cars began to sport air boxes above their heads to increase flows around the engines. Engineers changed their titles to designers, and began to increase their knowledge of aerodynamics. The cars began to take shape, using a streamlined body and undertray developments to the downforce and speed things up. There developments were called “ground effects” and impressed a lot of the drivers.

They were not without their problems though, because the new developments meant the setup of the car was incredibly important. One tiny degree the wrong way would mean the cars were unstable and ultimately not race worthy. F1 became a highly sophisticated balancing act. Eventually, the effects were banned in 1983, to make F1 more about driver skill and less about car setup.

That’s all for this episode of Sidepodcast’s History of F1, join me for the next instalment were we look at the 1980s.

Theme music: Friction Bailey, Hope in my History.