The FIA has opened discussions with both Ferrari and Red Bull over the increasingly controversial “Macarena” rear wing concept, following concerns that emerged after a series of incidents involving Max Verstappen. While the governing body is examining whether additional safety measures are required, any attempt to prohibit the concept entirely would inevitably raise questions, particularly given the very different development paths taken by the two teams.
The rotating rear wing first attracted widespread attention when Ferrari introduced the concept during pre-season testing. At the time, the unusual anti-clockwise movement of the upper element appeared to be one of the most innovative aerodynamic solutions seen under the current Formula 1 regulations. Unsurprisingly, rival teams quickly began studying the design, with Red Bull developing its own version and McLaren also reportedly exploring a similar concept.
The objective is clear: improve drag reduction on the straights while maintaining sufficient aerodynamic stability through the corners. However, transforming such an ambitious concept into a reliable race-ready component has proven far more challenging than initially expected.
Ferrari identified the limitations before introducing the concept in competition
Ferrari originally intended to race the new rear wing during the Chinese Grand Prix weekend. However, after gathering extensive data during practice, the Scuderia chose to postpone its competitive debut after engineers concluded that the original specification was not sufficiently robust to withstand an entire Grand Prix.
Among the issues discovered were rear-end instability and concerns regarding the speed at which the movable flap returned to its closed position. Rather than forcing the component into service, Ferrari decided to continue its development programme, redesigning key elements of the system before approving it for race use.
That cautious approach has ultimately paid dividends. Following months of refinement, Ferrari produced a revised specification that preserves the aerodynamic advantages of the concept while significantly improving stability. The anti-clockwise rotation now helps recover rear downforce while directing airflow away from critical areas of the car, giving the SF-26 a far more predictable balance throughout high-speed corners.
This improvement has also helped provide Charles Leclerc and Lewis Hamilton with a more stable rear platform, an area that had previously caused difficulties during earlier stages of development.
Red Bull’s version has produced very different results
While Ferrari continued refining its concept behind the scenes, Red Bull pursued its own interpretation of the rotating rear wing. However, the Milton Keynes-based team’s solution has generated significant reliability concerns, culminating in two high-profile incidents involving Max Verstappen.
During qualifying for the Austrian Grand Prix, Max Verstappen lost control of his RB22 at the penultimate corner after an apparent rear wing failure contributed to a sudden loss of rear stability. Only one week later, a remarkably similar incident occurred at Silverstone when Verstappen spun at Stowe after another suspected failure of the same aerodynamic component.
According to reports, Max Verstappen subsequently described the situation internally as extremely dangerous, prompting the FIA to begin formal discussions with both Ferrari and Red Bull regarding the safety implications of the new rear wing concept.
What options does the FIA have?
The FIA’s immediate priority is to establish whether additional technical safeguards should be introduced before the concept becomes more widespread across the Formula 1 grid. Officials are currently evaluating whether teams should be required to strengthen the design, introduce further testing procedures or comply with additional technical checks before race weekends.
In theory, the governing body also possesses broader regulatory powers. Article C1.2 of the FIA Technical Regulations allows officials to prevent the participation of any car whose construction is considered dangerous. Although this represents the most extreme option available, such a measure would only be expected if a design were found to present an unacceptable safety risk.
Ferrari’s solution and Red Bull’s problems are not the same story
The current debate highlights an important distinction that should not be overlooked. Ferrari encountered many of the same challenges during the early phases of development, including instability and operational concerns, but elected not to race the original specification. Instead, engineers returned to the factory, analysed the weaknesses of the concept and introduced a significantly revised design before allowing it to compete.
Red Bull, by contrast, now appears to be dealing publicly with issues that the Italian side had already identified and resolved months earlier. The incidents involving Max Verstappen suggest that further refinement is still required before Red Bull’s version can deliver the same combination of performance and reliability.
For that reason, treating every rotating rear wing as though it presents an identical safety risk would ignore the substantial engineering differences that now exist between the competing concepts. While the FIA is right to investigate any component that could potentially compromise driver safety, the evidence currently available suggests that Ferrari’s latest specification has operated without comparable problems during race conditions.
As Formula 1’s technical battle continues to intensify, the governing body faces the challenge of balancing innovation with safety. Ensuring that every solution meets the required standards is essential, but any future decision is likely to focus on the specific implementation of each design rather than the aerodynamic concept itself.
Leave a Reply