Ferrari tested an innovative rear wing solution, taking advantage of regulatory differences compared to the old DRS system under Formula 1’s updated technical rules.
The inverted movable rear wing introduced by Ferrari was arguably the most intriguing technical development of the second day of testing. For the Maranello-based team, it was a straightforward experiment, as the team reverted to the conventional rear wing used in previous days during the afternoon session. Even so, the concept was so unusual that it initially led many to suspect a technical issue, especially when the car was later forced into the garage.
Inside the regulations
The rules governing the movable rear wing are among the many changes introduced this year in Formula 1. Under the old DRS system, for example, the regulations imposed a maximum opening between the main plane and the movable flap. The FIA measured this using a specific gauge disc, remembered by many fans due to Lewis Hamilton’s famous disqualification after qualifying at the 2021 Brazilian Grand Prix.
Today, that maximum opening limit no longer exists, meaning teams are free to open the rear wing profiles as much as they wish. The new regulation instead states that activation of the system must correspond to a reduction in flap incidence. In Ferrari’s case, the incidence decreases to the point of becoming negative.
The updated rules also explicitly state that, during adjustment, movable flaps are not required to comply with the standard geometric constraints. In theory, this even allows them to exceed the maximum height imposed when the wing is in its closed configuration. The key limit that remains concerns timing: the wing must fully open or close within four tenths of a second. However, it is in every team’s interest to make this transition as quick as possible, restoring aerodynamic downforce to the driver without delay.
The new wing tested by Ferrari is easily identifiable by the absence of a central actuator. Removing it is necessary to allow the full rotation of the wing profiles and simultaneously reduces drag even further. Instead, the actuator is mounted on one of the lateral endplates and, in compliance with the regulations, only a single actuator is permitted.
Finally, the system must satisfy the most important safety requirement: in the event of a failure, the wing must automatically return to the maximum downforce configuration.
Greater freedom than before
Comments from FIA single-seater director Nikolas Tombazis, reported by The Race, help explain why the regulations now allow greater freedom compared to the past.
“In general, we encourage solutions that reduce drag. That is why last year’s DRS rules, which limited the opening, have not been retained for this season, with the aim of giving more freedom. Regarding the Ferrari solution, we believe it is OK.”
The results of this regulatory flexibility are already visible. Ferrari’s inverted wing joins several other creative active aerodynamic solutions seen on the new-generation cars. Alpine, for example, has developed a rear wing that lowers backwards rather than lifting forwards like the old DRS. Audi’s system rotates the movable flaps into an oblique position.
The objective remains consistent: to partially stall the rear wing and, where possible, reduce the load generated by the diffuser as well, thereby cutting drag on the straights.
Active aerodynamics is one of the most closely monitored development areas among teams, and as the regulations evolve, further innovations could emerge. Even under the previous DRS era, careful study of the system allowed teams to gain valuable top-speed advantages. Now those gains could be even greater, given that the movable wing is more effective and used more frequently than in the past.
Having a more efficient solution is not only about overtaking performance. It also plays a crucial role in energy management on the straights, allowing drivers to save energy that can later be deployed under acceleration. After all, teams have been repeating since last season that movable wings are no longer just overtaking tools, but have evolved into genuine energy management devices.
Leave a Reply