Why consensus on F1's impending active aero revolution remains some way off

There was a frisson of excitement among fans when Formula 1 and the FIA revealed plans for the drastic 2026 rules overhaul. It came in a palpably understated fashion when compared to the 2022 revolution, which was marked by a return to ground-effect aerodynamics and visually different cars; the extravagant launch of F1’s now-ubiquitous showcar daubed in a holographic livery was not repeated this time.

Instead, renders were shuffled out on social media displaying a blue car heavy in FIA logos, giving a very different impression – that F1 had been responsible for much of 2022’s layout, and the 2026 changes were very much an FIA-led project. And there was a step into the familiar with the reveal, particularly with the design of the front and rear wings; the smooth transition of wing elements into the endplates has been rolled back on, and the designs simplified overall.

Hints of a 2008-adjacent design emerged, without the clutter of gratuitous wing elements appearing around the car in every conceivable space. But there’s a twist: the introduction of active aerodynamics, a concept that F1 has flirted with for years, had taken centre stage.

In truth, nothing’s entirely new in F1, and the drag reduction system was a proto-form of active aerodynamics – as was the adjustable front wing flap used in the 2009 and 2010 seasons. As ancillary components, the aero package did not hinge around them; this time, however, the aerodynamicists will have a lot more to get their teeth into with the full complement of active aero parts. Thus, the days of DRS over-reliance will be numbered.

For the purist, it’ll be a cause of great celebration. The device opening the rear wing could be considered as the commodification of on-track overtakes, but this will now be gone once the new rules cycle is pressed into service in 2026.

The active aero rules are not considered as a replacement for overtaking, but instead set each car up for two aerodynamic states depending on the part of the track. A higher-downforce mode will be used to increase cornering speeds and to maintain the stopping power of the cars under braking, but the low-downforce mode can be activated on the defined straights around the track.

The imminent demise of DRS will likely be a cause of celebration for purists

Photo by: Andy Hone / Motorsport Images

In practice, it’ll work in a similar fashion to how DRS is activated: once the low-downforce mode is available, the drivers will be able to switch it on and enjoy improved top speeds thanks to the effect of reduced drag. Once under braking, the aero switches back to its higher-downforce mode to set the car up for the corners.

This will be available to every driver in the field, not just those sitting in a one-second window to the car in front. The plan was, initially, to have just an active rear wing, but it became clear that the balance between the front and rear wings shifted far too much in the initial lower-drag mode.

“One of the main changes for 2026 aerodynamically hinges on reducing the drag from the rear wing. In order to reduce the overall drag, we have an active portion of the rear wing, akin to the DRS system that we currently have, although with more moving elements, which move to a greater degree,” explained FIA head of aerodynamics Jason Somerville.

Fears were circulated by certain F1 paddock members that the drivers would have to downshift and back off into corners to fill the battery enough for the full race. Having a low-drag mode alleviates this somewhat

“From our simulation work with the teams and their drivers, as soon as you have a rear wing that moves to reach the target drag level, it was clear that you needed to have an active front wing to match the balance characteristics. There were certain conditions where the drivers didn’t feel comfortable with a large forward aero balance, meaning lots of downforce on the front and not much downforce on the rear. So, that led us towards the need for an active front wing and an active rear wing.”

Introducing a low-downforce state (which the FIA has defined as the ‘X-mode’, versus the high-downforce ‘Z-mode’) will help drivers maintain high speeds without consuming too much energy, owing to the increased reliance on the hybrid components. A reduction in the power output of the internal combustion engine, and the increase in the MGU-K’s output and regeneration capacity contributes to a near 50/50 split between ICE and hybrid elements.

This was a powertrain formula that had long been forecast, since it was developed first as a means to entice new manufacturers into F1, but the added reliance on hybrid components has had consequences on the development of the chassis regulations.

The plunge into the world of active aerodynamics seemed to be a legitimate view to address road relevance, given the concept has long been explored in multiple performance cars. It seemed cynical to suggest that it was a sticking plaster to cover off the deficiencies of the cars at top speed; previous fears were circulated by certain F1 paddock members (most vocally, Max Verstappen) that the drivers would have to downshift and back off into corners to fill the battery enough for the full race. Having a low-drag mode alleviates this somewhat, given the power to overcome drag is reduced.

Verstappen was among the most vocal critics, but his initial scepticism has been tempered

Photo by: Mark Sutton / Motorsport Images

In lieu of DRS, a ‘manual override’ mode has been included to give drivers a better shot at overtaking. The rules have defined a point at 290km/h (180mph) at which the electrical power deployment starts to reduce, dropping to zero at 355km/h (221mph) – but the override keeps the 350kW maximum output from the MGU-K up until 337km/h (209mph).

In effect, it’s not dissimilar to IndyCar’s push-to-pass in concept, but aligns more with the old KERS rules pre-hybrid, when cars had a set amount of time to deploy energy per lap. The limitations of when it can be used have yet to be fully clarified, but an extra 0.5MJ of energy will be unlocked with an override activation.

Active aero and powertrain tinkering aren’t the sole changes, as the FIA and F1 working groups have attempted to stave off multiple criticisms with the current cars; hindsight was very much 2022 when it came to the new rules’ formulation. Those rules retained the two-metre-wide cars reintroduced back in 2017 and, in the meantime, the minimum weight limit began to creep up to a peak of 798kg.

It was suggested that these made the cars less enjoyable to throw around a circuit and put overtaking opportunities around tighter circuits at a premium. Those in charge of defining the 2026 rules have thus attempted to keep the size and the mass of the cars in check – 30kg will be hacked out of the minimum weight limit, the cars will be 100mm narrower, and the maximum wheelbase has shrunk by 200mm to 3400mm to ensure the cars are marginally more compact.

Much of the weight-saving efforts will come as a natural byproduct of having smaller cars, and through the change in tyre dimensions. The 18 inch wheels remain after the FIA briefly considered dropping to a 16 inch formula, but the tyre widths have been cut by 8%. This, the FIA says, does not have a particularly noticeable effect on grip levels.

“A significant part of these regulations has involved thinking about the fans,” reckoned FIA single-seater director Nikolas Tombazis. “We believe we made a step towards closer racing in 2022, but there were also things we got wrong and we’re trying to get it completely right now. We believe the racing will be much more exciting and much closer between cars.

“We expect cars to be still very challenging to drive, there will be a bit less downforce on the cars, there will be a few more things to look after for the drivers. And hopefully that, together with the closer racing, will always keep it a drivers’ championship and a big challenge for them.”

Push to save weight has come with a move to smaller cars

Photo by: FIA

The main focus in 2022, the return of ground-effect aerodynamics, has been partly reduced in scope to reduce the reliance on overly stiff suspension set-ups. It’s not a complete reversal to a flat-floor ruleset, but the venturi tunnels will be shallower and feed into a depowered diffuser to cut some of the suction from the floor. This should give the teams more latitude with how they approach things like spring rates and rebound, and ensure the drivers don’t endure quite so much coccyx-crushing impacts from bouncing around on-track.

Although the floor has become narrower in accordance with the reduced width of the cars, a further 50mm has been taken out to restrict the efficacy of floor-edge furniture along the flanks. There’s also a different form of front wheel wake management here, as the deflectors that currently sit above the tyres have been scrapped for an inwashing bargeboard-like fin aft of the front wheels.

When you consider those changes to elements introduced in 2022, along with the simplified front and rear wings, it suggests that perhaps confidence has wavered in the ability of the current rules to produce the quality of racing desired. It’s fair to say that many of those aspects were developed to minimise the downforce losses from following other cars, and some of them had to be prescriptive to maintain the effect without compromises. As development continued, however, it started to become clear that the effect of those prescriptively designed parts began to dilute.

Teams’ opposition can be boiled down to two points of contention: the current balance between the aerodynamics and the powertrain regulations, and the projected 30kg weight drop

What remains to be seen is how tightly the bounding boxes are defined for the rest of the aero components, as the FIA has attempted to close off loopholes to keep things competitive. In any case, the teams will not be able to explore the new rules until they’re a) fully defined, with a view to doing so at the end of June, and b) until 1 January 2025.

However, it became apparent that the teams still see the proposal as being a long way away from a fully defined product. There is a disconnect between the FIA and the 10 teams on the grid in some of the details, which has taken the shine away from the anticipation of something new.

There was always going to be resistance; after all, every team has their own vested interests in developing a vision that benefits them and certain aspects should be taken with a few sachets of salt. But a unified front? That’s a very different story.

The teams’ opposition can be boiled down to two points of contention: the current balance between the aerodynamics and the powertrain regulations, and the projected 30kg weight drop – the latter as a result of the powertrains becoming heavier overall. McLaren team principal Andrea Stella delivered his assessment, eloquently laying out the crockery before pulling out the tablecloth.

Stella says the concept remains far away from what would be desirable for teams

Photo by: Francois Tremblay

“We are in agreement and we support the intent of the objectives at eye level that were stated in the press release,” he began. “However, if we look at the regulations in the draft form that has been circulated, they are still far from being able to achieve those agreeable objectives and intent. So it is the time for the FIA, F1, and the teams to work together, listen to one another, and contribute to form a solution that will allow the sport to meet those objectives.

“I think if we meet those objectives, we’re going to have Formula 1 in a good shape. But we need to make sure that when it’s the time of implementation, we actually deliver a product that meets those targets and objectives.”

Williams team principal James Vowles elaborated more on the grievances with the regulations, noting that the aero concerns involved “design freedom or physically how fast the cars will be”, and echoed his doubts previously that he “[doesn’t] think anyone will hit that weight target, and I think that needs reviewing”.

There’s an argument to make that the teams should get what they’re given and like it. And, actually, they’re pretty happy with the idea of including active aerodynamics and the general concept behind the 50/50 powertrain split.

But their simulation concerns are generally shared: Stella’s assessment that the current models were “not fast enough in the corners and too fast on the straights” have been echoed by drivers and personnel from other teams. Even though the power deployment from the MGU-K tapers off at higher speeds, the considerable slash in drag is giving the cars far more top speed than they’ve ever had before. At the same time, the cut in downforce is affecting the cars’ cornering capabilities.

Overall, this leads to a further concern that F1 will become a lot slower as a result – although suggestions that it would be comparable to the current F2 speeds seemed to be wide of the mark, many see the performance difference at this stage as too small.

“It’s imperative that we are still the leading series in motorsport,” Vowles said. “That’s how I see us, we’re the pinnacle of this, and therefore as a result of that we need to make sure we’re maintaining the performance and speed that we have.

Concern that the new breed of F1 cars will be significantly slower is shared by Vowles

Photo by: Zak Mauger / Motorsport Images

“I think Andrea summarised it well, that there’s a mismatch there, fundamentally, the performance difference to an F2 car could be starting to get a little bit tight, especially when you compare it to other series around the world. But also, as Andrea mentioned, these are draft regulations and just this week, in fact, there were two changes which took quite a bit of downforce away.

“I’m confident we’ll get to a better solution in that regard. It’s not that we’re so far away. Just a little bit more work required though.”

However, tentative support came from an unlikely source: championship leader Verstappen prefaced his comments after the 2026 rules reveal that he was “in the middle” with the projected new regulations, having been distinctly unimpressed by the early versions he’d experienced in the simulator.

The rules will continue to evolve between now and the end-of-June ratification of the new regulations. But, even after that, they’ll be subject to change

“I have to say from the first time that I saw it to the latest updates I’ve seen, I think they made really good progress in how the engine is working with the chassis, in relationship on the straights and stuff,” he said. “With some tracks I think it will look better than others, naturally, when you are more energy limited. But it’s something we have to deal with.

“It’s still a bit of a question mark for a lot of people, how everything is going to turn out. So it definitely needs a few more simulations to be run. But this is work in progress, right? We’re in 2024, 2026 is still a while, we’ll see if it’s the right way to go with things. If the racing suddenly becomes a lot better, then I guess everyone is happy.”

Assuming the FIA and F1’s teams work together, the rules will continue to evolve between now and the end-of-June ratification of the new regulations. But, even after that, they’ll be subject to change. Drivers – and teams – will retain their concerns, but it’s likely that most of them will be ironed out before the new age of F1 opens.

’Twas ever thus: those in F1 are often resistant to change but, when the time comes to adapt, they manage to do so. And they usually manage to innovate when doing so…

F1 teams can be guaranteed to innovate when the time comes

Photo by: Mark Sutton / Motorsport Images