Temporada F1 2026 🏎

[llumia]

La AMR26, bajo la lupa de N. Carpentiers:

AMR26 : le coup de génie d'Adrian Newey qui peut tout changer chez Aston Martin !



Avec son nez pélican et sa suspension arrière inédite, l'AMR26 impose déjà sa personnalité sur le plateau 2026.

L'AMR26 marque un tournant majeur pour Aston Martin. Il s'agit de la première monoplace conçue par Adrian Newey depuis son arrivée à Silverstone, après plus de vingt ans passés chez Red Bull. À première vue, la voiture apparaît comme une interprétation solide et cohérente du tout nouveau règlement technique 2026.

"C'est exactement la même chose [qu'en 2022], explique Adrian Newey. Quand j'ai découvert pour la première fois le règlement 2026, ma réaction initiale a été de me dire : mon Dieu, il ne reste pas grand-chose. Mais ensuite, quand on entre dans le détail, on se rend compte qu'il existe une marge de flexibilité raisonnable. Bien sûr, j'en voudrais toujours davantage, mais il y a une flexibilité acceptable."

Visuellement, l'AMR26 se démarque nettement du reste du plateau. Son architecture repose sur des choix fondamentalement différents, associés à plusieurs solutions aérodynamiques originales, qui en font sans doute la voiture la plus scrutée de cette première génération 2026. Reste toutefois une inconnue : le potentiel réel de ces partis pris, difficile à évaluer en raison d'un programme de roulage extrêmement tardif et limité, qui n'a pas permis de mesurer pleinement l'efficacité de ces concepts en conditions représentatives.

Fort bien, mais le développement de la première Formule 1 d'Aston Martin conçue par Adrian Newey a débuté avec un retard notable sur la concurrence. En cause : l'attente de la nouvelle soufflerie de l'équipe :

"La réalité, c'est que nous avons installé une maquette de la voiture 2026 en soufflerie seulement à la mi-avril, alors que la plupart, voire la totalité de nos concurrents disposaient déjà d'un modèle dès la levée de l'interdiction des essais aérodynamiques, au début du mois de janvier de l'année dernière."

"Cela s'est traduit par un retard d'environ quatre mois, ce qui a entraîné un cycle de recherche et de conception extrêmement comprimé. La voiture n'a réellement pris forme qu'à la toute dernière minute, ce qui explique pourquoi nous nous sommes battus jusqu'au bout pour être prêts à temps pour le shakedown de Barcelone."

Examinons les particularités de la monoplace de Fernando Alonso et Lance Stroll.



Un nez pélican et une solution identique à Mercedes

L'une des particularités les plus visibles de l'AMR26 se situe à l'avant, avec un nez au dessin très spécifique, souvent qualifié de "nez pélican" (marqué en vert ci-dessus).

Sa silhouette rappelle celle d'un têtard, évoquant notamment des solutions déjà vues par le passé, comme sur la BAR 2001 ou la Williams 2009. D'un point de vue aérodynamique, l'objectif précis de ce choix reste difficile à déterminer.

À l'arrière de ce nez, Aston Martin a également retenu une configuration d'aileron avant qui la distingue de la majorité de ses rivales. Comme sur la Mercedes W17, l'équipe a choisi de fixer les pylônes du nez non pas sur le plan principal de l'aileron, mais sur le second élément (signalé en jaune ci-dessus). Cette architecture signifie que seul le dernier élément supérieur est mobile lorsque l'aérodynamique active est déployée, alors que le règlement autorise théoriquement le mouvement de deux éléments, l'un jusqu'à 60 mm et l'autre jusqu'à 30 mm. À première vue, ce choix peut sembler restrictif, puisqu'il limite la liberté de mouvement par rapport aux configurations les plus répandues.

Plusieurs raisons peuvent toutefois expliquer cette approche. En fixant le nez au second élément, la partie structurelle du nez peut être légèrement plus courte que sur la plupart des autres monoplaces, là où ce second plan s'aplatit. Cette solution semble également offrir davantage de liberté de dessin pour le plan principal, comme le suggère le profil de l'aileron avant de l'AMR26. Par ailleurs, cette configuration s'accompagne d'une répartition plus uniforme de la charge aérodynamique sur l'envergure du troisième élément, un trait également observable sur la W17, seule autre monoplace à adopter un choix comparable à ce stade.



Aston Martin place la barre très haut

À l'avant, l'AMR26 adopte une suspension à poussoirs, comme la quasi-totalité des Formule 1 version 2026, à l'exception notable de l'Alpine A526 et de la Cadillac F1 2026. Aston Martin a par ailleurs retenu une architecture de suspension avant multibras, une configuration déjà vue chez McLaren en 2025 et reprise par la majorité du plateau 2026, dont la Ferrari SF-26 et la McLaren MCL40.

Sur le triangle inférieur, les deux bras ne convergent pas vers un unique point de fixation sur la roue. Ils sont reliés au porte-moyeu en deux points distincts, créant un axe de direction virtuel. Cette géométrie permet de faire évoluer le carrossage, le pincement et la hauteur de caisse en fonction de l'angle de braquage et du débattement de la suspension. Elle contribue ainsi à une meilleure gestion des pneumatiques et autorise le positionnement de la biellette de direction dans une zone aérodynamiquement favorable.

Sur l'AMR26, le bras avant du triangle supérieur est positionné aussi haut que le règlement l'autorise, ce qui se traduit visuellement par une légère bosse sur le capot avant (flèche jaune ci-dessus). Il est également implanté très en avant, quasiment en amont de la section AA (c'est-à-dire la première section de référence réglementaire définissant la géométrie longitudinale de la carrosserie). À l'inverse, le bras arrière du triangle supérieur est placé beaucoup plus bas (notez l'écart de hauteur entre les deux bras en rouge, différence symbolisée par la flèche blanche ci-dessus), générant un effet anti-plongée très marqué, à l'opposé de la philosophie retenue par Red Bull.

Un air de Red Bull 2023

Les pontons illustrent eux aussi une approche particulièrement agressive. Aston Martin a opté pour des pontons à fort effet de downwash, suivant une tendance globale du plateau, mais avec un niveau de compacité extrême. Le volume disponible pour loger les échangeurs thermiques semble très réduit (voyez la zone marquée en bleu ci-dessus), ce qui se traduit par un undercut à la fois très prononcé et exceptionnellement long.

"La voiture est extrêmement compacte, confirme Newey. Bien plus compacte que tout ce qui a, selon moi, été tenté auparavant chez Aston Martin."

L'examen détaillé de cette zone met en évidence la faible épaisseur verticale des pontons, tant dans leur partie supérieure qu'inférieure, accentuant encore l'ampleur de cet undercut sur toute la longueur du flanc (notez la zone vide signalée par les flèches bleu foncé).

L'entrée d'air des pontons présente une lèvre inférieure marquée, rappelant des solutions déjà observées par le passé, notamment sur la Ferrari SF-70 de 2017 ou la Red Bull RB19 de 2023. Dans leur philosophie générale, les pontons de l'AMR26 s'inscrivent dans la lignée de ceux de la Mercedes W17 et de la Ferrari SF-26, avec une surface supérieure fortement plongeante destinée à canaliser un flux d'air propre vers le diffuseur, associée à un undercut continu sur toute la longueur. L'ampleur de cet undercut apparaît toutefois particulièrement extrême en comparaison directe.

Au-dessus du pilote, l'agencement triangulaire de la boîte à air, accompagné de "cornes vikings" (flèches orange), rappelle les premières Ferrari à effet de sol conçues sous la direction de Cardile, même si l'on se souvient qu'Adrian Newey avait déjà exploité une solution similaire sur la McLaren MP4-20 de 2005.

Enfin, l'arrière de la monoplace se caractérise par une sortie de refroidissement du capot moteur particulièrement imposante, signe des exigences thermiques élevées des nouveaux moteurs.



Une suspension arrière inédite[/u]

À l'arrière, Aston Martin a dû relever un défi structurel majeur en concevant sa propre boîte de vitesses, ce qui a permis à Adrian Newey de choisir les points de fixation de la suspension arrière.

Précisément, le bras postérieur du triangle supérieur de la suspension arrière (indiqué en jaune ci-dessus) de l'AMR26 n'est pas fixé directement au carter carbone de la boîte de vitesses, mais au pilier central de l'aileron arrière.

L'objectif de cette disposition paraît avant tout aérodynamique : l'écartement des différents bras réduit l'obstruction du flux, permettant à l'air de circuler plus proprement au-dessus du diffuseur.

Ce choix permet d'augmenter sensiblement l'effet anti-cabrage de la suspension arrière, un paramètre clé pour 2026, alors que les monoplaces disposeront d'un couple nettement supérieur et devront transmettre cette puissance à l'axe arrière avec un maximum de stabilité.

D'autre part, le bras supérieur arrière, sous l'effet combiné du transfert de charge et de l'appui aérodynamique, tend à s'abaisser jusqu'à devenir presque horizontal, lui permettant d'agir comme un élément aérodynamique additionnel.



Aston Martin fait pencher les certitudes

L'Aston Martin présente d'une ouverture dans les parois externes du diffuseur (flèches violettes), une solution déjà observée sur la Mercedes W17, la Ferrari SF-26, la Red Bull RB22 ou encore la Haas VF-26.

Cette découpe permet d'injecter de l'air à plus haute énergie dans le diffuseur, améliorant l'extraction et, par conséquent, les performances du fond plat sur toute sa longueur. Notons aussi le curieux enroulement au bord du fond plat, devant le pneu arrière (flèche verte ci-dessus).

Lors du shakedown, l'AMR26 est apparue avec une hauteur de caisse très relevée à l'arrière, affichant un rake statique estimé entre 1,5 et 2,5 degrés (voyez le trait jaune ci-dessus). Si les voitures 2026 reviennent à des fonds plats globalement plus plats qu'avant 2022, la forme et les dimensions du diffuseur diffèrent sensiblement de celles des générations précédentes. Reste donc à savoir si un rake élevé constitue la solution optimale dans ce nouveau cadre réglementaire.

L'aileron arrière présente lui aussi des particularités notables, avec deux plis orientés vers le haut sur la dérive latérale de l'aileron arrière. D
es solutions similaires existaient avant 2022, mais positionnées plus bas.

Des doutes sur le moteur Honda

Des interrogations subsistent toutefois sur la partie moteur. Les ingénieurs ayant mené à bien le développement de la dernière unité de puissance hybride Honda chez Red Bull ont été dispersés au sein de l'entreprise, conséquence directe du retrait de Honda de la Formule 1 en 2021, suivi d'un retour décidé dix-huit mois plus tard.

En tant qu'unique équipe cliente, Aston Martin dispose d'un retour d'expérience encore limité sur ce tout nouveau moteur et sur ses modes de fonctionnement. À Barcelone, le kilométrage cumulé reste très inférieur à celui des moteurs concurrents, avec seulement 302,71 km parcourus, contre plus de 5 200 km pour Mercedes, plus de 4 600 km pour Ferrari et près de 2 900 km pour Red Bull.

Aston Martin aurait d'ailleurs indiqué à d'autres équipes que son programme d'essais incluait des runs volontairement effectués sans atteindre la vitesse maximale en ligne droite, afin que les pilotes adverses en soient avertis. La raison précise de cette limitation n'a pas été clarifiée.

Quoi qu'il en soit, malgré l'audace affichée par l'AMR26 à Barcelone, Adrian Newey a promis que l'Aston Martin présente au départ du Grand Prix d'Australie sera différente.

"L'AMR26 avec laquelle nous terminerons la saison à Abou Dhabi sera très différente de celle avec laquelle nous allons commencer l'année."

À ce stade, l'AMR26 semble afficher un surpoids non négligeable, ce qui en ferait, même dans le contexte des essais hivernaux, l'une des monoplaces les plus éloignées de son potentiel ultime. Son originalité ne garantit en rien une supériorité immédiate, mais elle témoigne d'une réflexion originale, bien dans la ligne du génial cerveau d'Adrian Newey.

https://f1i.autojournal.fr/magazine/magazine-technique/amr26-le-coup-de-genie-de-newey-qui-peut-tout-changer-chez-aston-martin/

[llumia]

A los motoristas "discrepantes" iniciales, parece que se les va a unir RBT/Ford. Quieren cambios para el inicio de temporada pero la FIA/FOM no están por la labor:

Mercedes' rivals are hoping to pull together a proposal to change Formula 1's engine compression ratio rules in time for the start of the season in Australia, The Race has learned.

However, even if they agree on a plan, any chance they have of new regulations being pushed through so quickly would still require support from the FIA and FOM - something that is far from guaranteed.

Amid the ongoing controversy surrounding Mercedes having potentially found a loophole to run its car at a higher compression ratio than the 16:1 limit stated in the rules, efforts have been ramping up among its competitors to stop any advantage it has.

The issue revolves around the current rules making it explicit that checks for compression ratio compliance are done at ambient temperature. It is suspected Mercedes has found a way to run at a higher level when the engines are hot.

Discussions have been ongoing over recent weeks among Mercedes' rivals to try to agree to a proposal for a different test procedure being implemented – which would involve compliance being measured when the power unit is hot.

Two further meetings have taken place with the FIA to discuss the matter in recent days. One involved technical experts on Monday and another the Power Unit Advisory Committee (PUAC) on Thursday.

There were some reports on Friday that coming out of these meetings new procedures for checking had been agreed for the start of the season. Multiple sources have said that this is not the case at all.

However, while the outcome of both meetings is that the current regulations and checks remain in place as defined in the rule book, this has not stopped efforts accelerating behind the scenes between Mercedes' rivals to get things changed.

Voting bloc
It is understood that the aim of Mercedes' competitors is to agree amongst themselves a new procedure to measure the compression ratio when engines are running hot.

Their plan would then be to put forward this new idea to the PUAC for a vote so it can be introduced - with sources suggesting it is seeking things to move in time for the Australian GP.

Several options for a different way of checking have been discussed, which include the use of sensors when the car is running out on track, or ensuring measurements are taken in the garages when engines are up to operating temperature.

And critically it has emerged that the trio who had initially been most animated about the matter and wrote a joint letter to the FIA – Ferrari, Audi and Honda – have now potentially won over the support of Red Bull too.

The fact that four manufacturers could be aligned on a proposal to tweak the regulations is significant because it opens the door for the necessary super majority vote that would be needed to make an immediate rule change.

Red Bull's stance is interesting because it was understood that it had found benefits from interpreting the regulations in the same way as Mercedes. However, it could be that it has found itself unable to produce the gains hoped for – which is why it may be more eager to shut that avenue down.

Under the governance procedures of the PUAC, for a significant immediate modification of the power unit rules to happen, it requires backing from four of the current five manufacturers, plus support from both the FIA and FOM.

Normally, the FIA and FOM vote in a bloc and it is very rare for them to not be aligned over matters.

So key to any hopes of Mercedes' rivals getting a swift rule change pushed through is whether or not any proposal they agree on would have backing from the governing body.

Up until now, every indication has been that the FIA is aligned with Mercedes' interpretation of the rules – in that compression ratios are always measured in ambient conditions.

The F1's 2026 power unit rules were altered on October 16 to emphasise this was the way measurements would be taken, and earlier this week, Mercedes boss Toto Wolff said such a viewpoint had been backed by FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem.

Asked about the risk of one of Mercedes' rivals protesting the matter in Australia, Wolff said: "The power unit is legal.

 "The power unit corresponds to how the regulations are written, and the power unit corresponds to how the checks are being done.

"The power unit corresponds to how these things are measured in any other vehicle. Everything else [the chances of a protest] I can't judge upon.

"That's how we see the world today, and that's what the FIA said. That's what the president of the FIA said, and he knows a bit about that. In that respect, let's wait and see. But we feel robust."

Too late
A sudden U-turn by the FIA in approving a last-minute rule tweak that altered the way that the compression ratio was measured would be a surprise - and could potentially have a huge impact on the competitive picture.

This is especially true because final homologation of power units takes place on March 1 so there is no time for anyone to change designs.

Despite an eagerness from Mercedes' rivals to get things changed from the start of the season, it is much more likely that if there is support for a new direction this would only be something for the longer term – potentially from the start of 2027.

But Wolff made clear earlier this week that he was frustrated about the way his team's competitors were spending so much time on this issue.

"I just don't understand that some teams concentrate more on the others and keep arguing a case that is very clear and transparent," he said.

"Communication with the FIA was very positive all along. And it's not only on compression ratio, but on other things too.

"Specifically in that area, it's very clear what the regulations say. It's very clear what the standard procedures are on any motors, even outside of F1."

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/mercedes-rivals-plotting-f1-engine-rule-change-for-melbourne/

https://f1i.autojournal.fr/infos/breaking-news/scandale-des-moteurs-en-f1-red-bull-change-de-camp-et-relance-loffensive-anti-mercedes/lotting-f1-engine-rule-change-for-melbourne/

[llumia]

Parece que los inicios de las carreras van a ser más a la "antigua"

Why F1 race starts will be much more difficult in 2026


Plenty has been said already about the energy management challenges that come with Formula 1's new 2026 cars.

But there is another key area where F1 drivers are going to face a bigger headache than before thanks to a combination of new systems and a fresh rule.

We are talking about race starts.

Anyone standing at the pitlane exit during F1's first pre-season test at Barcelona, to see drivers practicing their getaways, could not help noticing how different and clunky they looked.

From the perfectly balanced revs, clutch releases and getaways that became the norm with the previous generation of cars, early impressions of the 2026 cars are of things looking a bit more unrefined.

Once the car is stationary and the clutch is engaged, drivers are revving the engine a lot higher and for a lot longer than before.

But once the clutch is released, the high revs do not appear to translate to a lightning-fast getaway on the edge of perfect traction.

Instead the cars initially appear to bog down, and there seems to be a tremendous amount of inconsistency.

That external impression has been verified by those in the cockpit too - with world champion Lando Norris admitting that race starts are now going to be a step more difficult.

"It's quite a bit trickier," he said.

'Dodgy' gaps in power
The cause of this is three factors coming together: hardware changes on the car, reluctance to burn battery power for fear of running out later in the lap, plus a key new regulation regarding the initial getaways.

On the power unit front, F1's removal of the MGU-H has made turbo lag much more of a problem with the new generation of engines.

The MGU-H had previously been used as an electric motor to help spin up the compressor turbine, meaning it filled in power deficits triggered by lag so that acceleration remained instant and constant.

This is why starts were so good previously - because the turbo was primed to deliver the peak power for the getaway.

As Norris said about the new cars losing that tool: "You don't have the perfect amount of battery to kind of fill in the dodgy gaps."

Without the MGU-H, turbo lag can now only be overcome through two means.

One is to use the MGU-K and battery power to spool the turbo up, but this risks wasting energy that could be more useful later in the lap.

The other is to simply keep engine revs high, something which we have seen happening in corners as drivers aim to ensure the turbo is kept spinning so it's ready for the exit.

For the start, the option of using the MGU-K to keep the turbo spooled up is totally off the table.

Article 5.2.19 of the technical regulations states that when the car is on the grid prior to the start "the MGU-K torque may only be negative" - that is to say, charging the energy store - "except for torque requested by an MGU-K active damping strategy whose sole purpose is to protect the MGU-K mechanical transmission".

So drivers are not allowed to use the MGU-K to prep their turbo on the grid.

The only way to do it therefore is by keeping the revs super high so the compressor is spinning perfectly the moment the clutch is released.

But even once the clutch is released, restrictions remain in place for drivers which mean that any turbo lag still left in the system because they didn't execute things perfectly cannot be filled with the MGU-K.

In a perfect world, as the MGU-H did previously, the MGU-K would help fill in any power deficit to deliver the perfect start if drivers got it wrong before the lights went out.

Now, an all-new rule for 2026 outlaws any use of the battery power for the initial start phase.

Article 5.2.12 states: "During a standing start from the grid the MGU-K may only be used once the car has reached 50km/h."

The end result is that any driver that has not balanced the revs, clutch release and turbo speed perfectly for the getaway is going to have no means of recovering until they are up to at least this speed.

But even past the 50km/h point, it's not a given that drivers will want to tap into using battery power to help dig them out of a hole.

Right now, F1's 2026 cars are energy-starved, and that means drivers need to keep their batteries as charged as possible for the best points on each lap.

So while burning through energy would be logical in helping fill in for turbo lag on the run to the first corner, it would be wasted if that meant being left with an empty battery that makes you a sitting duck coming out of it.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/why-f1-race-starts-are-about-to-get-a-lot-less-predictable/

[GoVal]

Entrevista a Fernando en el AS.


Alonso: "Vamos a ir de menos a más y eso me motivará para seguir"

El bicampeón habla con AS en la presentación del AMR26 del nivel actual del coche, "el factor Newey" y el futuro: "Me gustaría decidir en septiembre".

Jesús Balseiro · Corresponsal de Fórmula 1
Ithra (Arabia Saudí) Actualizado a 9 de febrero de 2026 22:26 CET


En la trastienda de la presentación del AMR26, después de cumplir con los compromisos televisivos, Fernando Alonso (Oviedo, 44 años) habló en exclusiva con AS. Desgrana en qué punto de desarrollo se encuentra este Aston Martin en comparación con otros monoplazas más rodados, explica qué es "el factor Newey", que tanto miedo infunde a rivales, y aclara cuándo le gustaría tomar una decisión sobre su futuro, dentro o fuera de la Fórmula 1.

—¿Qué nivel de ilusión le genera este coche? Porque es nuevo, porque lo ha diseñado Newey, porque cambian las reglas, porque entra Honda...

—Mucha ilusión, sobre todo por la llegada de Newey y por trabajar con él por primera vez. Al ser una nueva reglamentación está todo por descubrir y el piloto tendrá su factor de decisión en los puntos débiles del coche y en donde hay que trabajar. Eso te despierta un chip interior, por el hecho de que voy a ser importante no solo este año, sino también en los próximos cuatro o cinco años del equipo. Y tienes que ponerte las pilas.

—¿En qué punto está el AMR26 ahora? ¿Es grave, o irrelevante, el retraso antes de Barcelona?

—Estamos por detrás, seguro, estamos en el punto cero. No creo que hayamos ni empezado. En Barcelona pudimos rodar pero yo me lo tomé más como un 'filming day', un 'shakedown' que otros equipos hicieron en privado en Silverstone con 200 kilómetros que nosotros no pudimos hacer. Entonces Barcelona fueron esos 200 kilómetros para nosotros. Algunas partes del coche no estaban validadas para ir a la velocidad máxima y tuvimos que limitarnos a 280 kilómetros por hora en las rectas. Es solo un ejemplo de cómo la preparación iba al límite. Es difícil sacar ninguna conclusión, Bahréin será para nosotros el primerísimo test, la primerísima toma de contacto. Barcelona era solo arrancar el coche y ver que todo funcionaba.

—Entonces todavía no tiene una estimación, la sensación de si el coche puede ser bueno o no tan bueno.

—No, todavía no la tengo. Tomo Bahréin como esa primera toma de contacto. Soy consciente de algunos retos que tenemos y no los digo yo, los ha dicho Newey. Que íbamos unos meses por detrás de lo que él piensa que los demás equipos estaban haciendo; y lo mismo Honda, que han tenido más dificultades de las que esperaban en cuanto al motor. Creemos que tenemos algunos puntos que resolver en cuanto a competitividad del proyecto y no tenemos mucho tiempo, queda un mes hasta Australia. Algunos no se podrán resolver antes de Australia y tendremos que lidiar con ellos en las tres o cuatro primeras carreras.

—De cualquier equipo se hablaría de forma crítica cuando un coche llega con retraso o rueda poco. Pero el Aston despierta máxima expectación, ya escuchamos a Russell y a otras figuras del paddock. ¿Por qué?

—Esto es el factor Newey, siempre ha sido así. Nosotros lo hemos vivido en nuestras carnes siempre; cuando él presentaba el coche en unos test, fuesen bien, mal o regular, siempre tenías un ojo puesto en ese coche y en lo que podían hacer o lo que se podía copiar. Ahora le pasará a nuestros rivales. Aunque creo que este año, con el cambio de reglamentación y la importancia de la unidad de potencia y la gestión de energía; no digo que el coche sea menos importante que el motor pero necesitamos una buena unidad de potencia para optimizar el paso por curva. Me preocupa un poco menos, porque sé que Adrian tardará más o menos, o ya lo tendremos ahora, pero el coche no será un problema y hay que estar seguros de que todo el conjunto no lo sea (un problema).

—¿Cambiará la forma de correr por la gestión de baterías? ¿Habría sido muy diferente su pelea con Checo en Brasil 2023?

—No lo sé. Me queda un poco por ver eso, ya tenía dudas después de dar alguna vuelta en el simulador y sigo teniendo la misma duda. Creo que adelantar va a ser más difícil este año porque todo el mundo tiene el DRS en las rectas, el coche de atrás tiene el mismo DRS que el de delante. Y lo único que tienes es un poquito más de energía, pero no tienes libertad para usarla como quieras y donde quieras. Sigue dictado por la FIA y eso limita las batallas y la libertad del piloto. Está sobrerregulado.

—¿La experiencia será un factor a favor del piloto?

—Como está sobrerregulado, habría más diferencias si hubiese más libertad. Pero siempre ayuda. Si esto fuese tenis o atletismo, preferiría tener 25 años a tener 40. Pero en el motor, si estás bien físicamente, prefiero los 40 antes que los 25. He corrido en todos los circuitos, conozco muchas reglamentaciones diferentes y en cambios de energía como los que habrá, prefiero estar en mi posición a ser un rookie este año.

—Si su carrera deportiva fuera un partido de fútbol, ¿cuánto tiempo queda para marcar un gol? ¿Estamos en el descuento? ¿En la prórroga?

—Queda mucho partido. Estamos empezando la segunda parte, 45 minutos.

—Se hablará mucho de coches nuevos hasta Australia, pero luego se hablará mucho de mercado de pilotos porque todos los asientos están libres para 2027. ¿En qué momento se planteará si le apetece seguir a partir del 2027 o ha tenido suficiente?

—No lo sé, creo que este año hay que esperar un poco más porque la progresión y la evolución de los coches va a ser increíble. En vez de mejorar una o dos décimas con un paquete de mejoras, quizás mejoras ocho décimas o un segundo. Entonces creo que a lo largo de la temporada veremos grandes cambios de prestaciones por parte de los equipos. Tomar una decisión en abril o mayo puede ser acertada o equivocada en septiembre, depende de cómo vayan las evoluciones. Cuanto más se pueda esperar, mejor. Esa sería mi intención, esperar a septiembre para tomar una decisión. Pero lo veremos, no creo que sea solo por las prestaciones. Tengo que ver cómo me encuentro, cómo estoy de motivado, cuánto me pesan los viajes, los eventos, el márketing y todo lo que se hace fuera de la pista. Creo que el equipo va a mejorar mucho desde el principio del año, vamos a ir de menos a más, claramente. Eso va a ser motivador en cuanto a la posibilidad de continuar, ver que el coche va mejorando e iremos mejorando los resultados. Pero de eso a poder tomar una decisión cien por cien segura hay que esperar lo máximo posible... si el equipo aguanta. Porque una cosa es lo que tú quieras, pero si el equipo quiere saber en primavera si vas a continuar o no en primavera, para no quedarse sin opciones de otros pilotos que estén en el mercado, tendré presión por parte del equipo para tomar una decisión lo antes posible.


https://as.com/motor/formula_1/alonso-vamos-a-ir-de-menos-a-mas-y-eso-me-motivara-para-seguir-f202602-n/

[McHouserphy]

—Si su carrera deportiva fuera un partido de fútbol, ¿cuánto tiempo queda para marcar un gol? ¿Estamos en el descuento? ¿En la prórroga?

—Queda mucho partido. Estamos empezando la segunda parte, 45 minutos.

  No me lo creo,  , si la primera parte va desde 2001 hasta 2025  , le quedan otros 25 años antes de retirarse???    Se va a retirar con 69 años???  ...

Oye!, que por mi, como si no se retira         

[llumia]

Why Aston Martin's talking about a 2026 'long game' so early

Aston Martin has indicated it could begin the 2026 Formula 1 season "a bit behind" its rivals, but insists a potentially slow start will not mean its hopes for the entire campaign are over.

Amid uncertainties about the potential of the new Honda-powered AMR26, which only joined the first pre-season test at Barcelona late on the fourth of five days, Fernando Alonso has talked openly about a need to play the "long game" this year.

So even if weaknesses emerge in its package over the two forthcoming Bahrain tests, the first of which starts this week, there remains scope in both car and engine development to make a strong recovery.

It is why Alonso has played down early expectations; he stressed that early headaches will not necessarily mean that the Aston Martin project has failed in its ambitions to move forward in F1, as the true judgement for that can only come later in the year.

'Long-game' thinking
Aston Martin became the final team to reveal its 2026 livery in Saudi Arabia on Monday night.

Having been late to testing, the team is short of the same level of understanding of both its chassis and power unit as its rivals, especially as there have been suggestions that engine supplier Honda could be on the back foot.

But while he did not rule out a challenging start to the year, Alonso said on Monday that the mindset was not one that meant it was make or break for Aston Martin to hit the ground running for the start of the season in Australia in early March.

Instead, he suggested it was important to consider the amount of progress that can be made over the season.

"The unique thing this year is that the rate of development is going to be very, very high for everyone, because of the new regulations and the complexity of the power units as well," he said.

"So I'm not really too concerned about Bahrain or the first couple of races, because the championship and having a good or bad season is going to play a little bit more in the second half of the season than in the first half of the season.

"For us it's important, finishing Bahrain [testing] with a good understanding of the car.

"And then from that point, think more in race seven or 10 or 12 or whatever, and have a clear path of development."

Designer Adrian Newey, who has also taken over as team principal, echoed Alonso's view that the rate of development would likely be intense this season.

"I'd imagine that for many teams, including to an extent ourselves, the car that they ran the Barcelona pre-season with will be a fair bit different to the car they actually race in Melbourne," he said.

"And that pace, I'm sure, will continue through the season."

The uncertainties about the AMR26 are matched by questions over where Honda stands. Alonso said that the constant-speed running he was doing on the straights at Barcelona meant the team has no clue yet where its power unit lies against the competition.

"Obviously we don't have much information," he said, when asked by The Race about what feedback he had from Honda on its progress.

"As I said in Barcelona, even with the limitation that we had on the straights with the constant speed and things like that, as it was a shakedown for us, we didn't have a clear picture of our power differences and things like that.

"I only know the information that you know, the messages that they were saying that they were a bit behind.

"This is, as I said, a long game and I'm sure even if we start a bit behind, there is plenty of time to catch up.

"The second part of the season is going to be more important than the first part, in my opinion."

Crunch week looming
While other teams were racking up the miles from the start of the Barcelona test, Aston Martin was in a race against time to even get out on track.

It only got its AMR26 into action at the end of the penultimate day of running after it elected to push manufacturing of the new challenger to the final minute.

That late arrival has left the team lacking miles compared to most of its competitors, which means it needs a smooth week in Bahrain.

For Alonso, who drove on the final day at Barcelona, the lack of performance running there meant there was no way to draw any conclusions about the car.

"It was really the first kilometres on the car, and we were not pushing the limits either," he said about the Barcelona test.

"We had to run a constant speed on the straights. There are different factors that were difficult for us to have an estimation, and we didn't really pay too much attention to that.

"We found things to improve from Barcelona to Bahrain. Some things are just pure comfort things, in the driving cockpit, seat, feet and things like that.

"There's more things that we need to investigate deeper or improve the cooling or improve the vibrations, whatever the things that are very normal for the first day of testing."

Alonso acknowledged though that the Bahrain tests would give the team a clear idea of what sort of state it was going to start the year in.

"I think by the end of Bahrain we will know where we are," he said.

"Yes, I think we have plenty of days and plenty of data and laps to really understand some of the strengths and for sure some of the weaknesses of the car.

"I think we will have more or less a picture of the first, let's say, three to five races of the championship."

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/why-aston-martin-is-talking-f1-2026-long-game-so-early/

[llumia]

Mark Hughes explains F1 2026's key car design differences



Outwash and its opposite sibling, inwash, are the driving aerodynamic themes of the 2026 new generation of Formula 1 car.

Although in many cases the cars which ran at the Barcelona shakedown will be quite different come Bahrain and Melbourne (notably Ferrari and Aston Martin), there was enough to strongly infer the aims of the various design teams in response to these all-new regulations.

Perhaps the most influential FIA stipulation within the regulations is that of the 'inwashing' boards at the front corners of the floor beneath the sidepods.



The idea was to massively limit the amount of outwash around the car so as to make the wake cleaner for the following car. The problem is, outwashing brings greater performance - and so the motivation of every team is obviously to counteract that regulatory intention.

It happened this way with the 2022 regulations, too; the teams found a way around the intent because they are competing. The '26 'inwash' boards are just a regulatory reaction to that. So almost by definition, subverting their intent is going to be where the low-hanging performance fruit is. We see that in the design of every '26 car.  But how each of the teams has gone about achieving that subversion varies greatly.

In simplistic terms, inwashing the turbulent wake from the front wheels to the underfloor reduces the amount of downforce the underfloor can generate. Ideally, that front wheel wake needs to be pushed out away from the car, giving it the chance to smooth out as it is then channelled inwards again (towards the rear) to meet the flow coming off the sidepod tops and the floor edge – with that combined flow then channelled between the rear wheel and diffuser wall to create a pressure differential which helps the air exiting the diffuser to speed up, thereby boosting the underfloor downforce.

The impact upon the overall designs of that one bit of floor board regulation is quite profound. It has varied the choices the teams have made regarding cockpit and front axle positioning, front wing design, nose design, sidepod design and the geometry of the boards themselves.

Even if we just confine ourselves to five of the 11 new cars – from McLaren, Mercedes, Red Bull, Ferrari and Aston Martin – the divergence in those choices is big.

Cockpit/front axle




Within the 250mm leeway in how the cockpit is positioned relative to the front axle, McLaren (like Mercedes and Red Bull) appears to have brought them closer together than Ferrari and Aston Martin and because of the way the dimensions are defined, this has allowed a higher nose.

The higher the nose, the greater volume is available to feed the underfloor and the more the nose underside can be scalloped out with an undercut (creating a low-pressure area to speed up the flow).

McLaren has not taken as full advantage of the nose height as Mercedes, which has chosen to mount the W17's nose to the middle element of the wing rather than the conventional bottom element. This allows the nose to stop earlier and therefore leave more space beneath it.



https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1600/2026/02/comaparison-front-end-top-teams.jpg

While there are benefits to feeding the underfloor, bringing the front wheels closer to the cockpit brings with it the downside of having even less distance to outwash the airflow around the wheels and thus there are concomitant limitations minimising the inwash caused by the regulation floor boards.

McLaren appears to have attacked this limitation with its aggressive treatment of the front wing and endplates to create spinning vortices. The wing is contoured with a highly-cambered mid section, with the elements dropping away in volume dramatically at the outboard and inboard ends. Although this will limit the overall wing-created downforce, the way the profile drops away at the outboard, in combination with dramatically-proportioned winglet-topped endplates, is clearly part of the outwash-aiding vortex creations.  The inboard drop-away clears some volume beneath the nose.

Mercedes, meanwhile, is using a wide sidepod top to create a massive undercut beneath, the low pressure of which will be pulling as much airflow as possible away from the in-washing floor boards. This undercut continues throughout the length of the sidepod, leaving a huge channel beneath to feed the airflow inside the rear wheel.



McLaren has a similarly wide sidepod top but the pods are much shallower and angled more steeply downwards. In contrast to the Mercedes, the undercut stops short of the coke bottle section.

Angling the pods downwards in this way creates a pressure drop which speeds up that airflow. A bigger undercut speeds up the flow along the floor edge. But those flows meet ahead of the rear wheels and their energy combines as it feeds into the gap between the tyre and diffuser.

Working out the best trade-off between the two will be key – and much of that will be determined by how the team has decided to package its radiator cooling.

Cooling/sidepods



Although the Red Bull's cockpit/front axle choice appears very similar to those of Mercedes and McLaren, the choices made elsewhere are very different.

Like the Aston Martin, the RB22 features a much wider nose than the Mercedes or Ferrari (with McLaren somewhere in between). While this effectively gives less front wing area, the nose underside is a useful downforce generator in itself. Furthermore, it will tend to push a high-pressure region further outward behind the front wheels. The higher this pressure, the more the air flowing around the outside of the front wheels will be encouraged to stay outward, avoiding the high-pressure area.



The RB22's sidepod treatment is quite startling, with a tiny, heavily downwashing pod around the horizontal radiator inlets and an initially big undercut beneath. But with the lower part of the body then heading outwards to cut off the pod well before the coke bottle section – much further forwards than that of the McLaren and in sharp contrast to the Mercedes, Aston Martin and Ferrari which all have undercuts running the full length of the pod.

It would appear that Red Bull is manipulating the pressures in that three-dimensional triangle beneath the shallow 'tube' pod to pull the air away from those floor boards. Footage of the car running in the Barcelona rain suggested it was achieving this very effectively.

The very small radiator inlets, combined with a big airbox inlet, suggest that much of the Red Bull's radiator surfaces – probably including the intercooler – are further up around the centreline than on the others, something it shares with the related Racing Bulls car.





The Aston Martin AMR26 has a similarly wide nose and thin 'tube' pods to the Red Bull, but with a fuller undercut and less extreme downwash. The free volume of exposed floor ahead of the rear tyre is enormous and should make for a powerful airflow, especially given the extreme lengths Adrian Newey has gone to in clearing a path once it gets through that gap.




The super-high mounting of the upper wishbones into the rear wing pillar (together with the extreme offset plan-view spacing of the upper and lower wishbones) has left wide expanses in which to train the air. So far up are the upper wishbones that there could be some beneficial aero effect to the rear wing underside, thereby partly replacing the lower beam wing (deleted in the '26 regs).

The Aston Martin front suspension (a switch to pushrod, just like everyone except Williams, Alpine and Cadillac) is also extreme in its layout, with the rear upper wishbone mounting point stretching far, far back.

Quite how the vehicle dynamicists are going to want to move the centre of pressure at varying speeds is going to be interesting and the front suspension layout can be a big part of this. It should in theory be much easier to achieve a good balance at low-speed corners and high- than with the previous generation ground effect cars. The assumption that this would result in anti-dive front geometries falling out of fashion looks misplaced, given the layouts of the Aston Martin and McLaren.



Ferrari has gone for a low narrow nose/generous front wing combination and its sidepod shape – together with the generously proportioned radiator inlets and small airbox opening – suggest it's carrying most of its radiator cooling low down. But that's still left space for a big, full-length undercut and significant downwashing sidepod top. It's perhaps the least extreme looking of all the top team cars but there's nothing to say that won't bring a winning combination of qualities.

Like the Mercedes and Red Bull, there is a generous 'mousehole' in the diffuser wall, which is usually done to introduce some external flow into the diffuser to keep the flow better attached. This is a little giveaway that generically the in-washing regulation may indeed have hurt the energy flow to the underfloors.

Floor boards
Interestingly, the McLaren didn't have this diffuser feature at Barcelona. It's been speculated that this might be connected to its very different treatment of the floor boards.

Teams create their own designs here within the boxes and dimensions stipulated in the regulations. In general outline they have to align inwards by 15 degrees but within the stipulated area the geometry is free and can contain up to three elements.

Teams have generally adopted the three elements horizontally and have placed them strategically to encourage outwash through the gaps between them so as to minimise the inwash of the board as whole.



McLaren is the outlier here, having adopted a huge triangular upper element and two very compressed ones at the bottom. The aim seems to be to induce upwash, pulling as much flow as possible from entering the underfloor by pushing it upwards towards the undercut in the sidepod.   

Divergence is normal at the beginning of any new regulation set. It will be fascinating to observe which of these various approaches turns out to be the most influential.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/mark-hughes-explains-f1-2026-key-car-design-differences/

[llumia]

Hoy comienza una tanda de entrenamientos de pretemporada, que consta de 3 días. Algunos punos de interés pueden ser los siguientes:

Seven things to look out for at first Bahrain F1 2026 test

Launches are done. All 11 Formula 1 teams have (finally) run on track.

In this peculiar F1 2026 pre-season, the first of two tests in Bahrain is at the very least a step into the more serious stuff, now we're less than a month out from the season-opening Australian Grand Prix.

The three-day test begins on Wednesday at 10am local time and is the first 'official' pre-season running - although we know from the Barcelona 'shakedown week' test that some teams are heading into it with very different objectives to others.

So what should you expect and what are we keen to learn?

Are cars evolving already?

The early nature of the January Barcelona test plus the big production challenge of getting brand new cars ready meant some teams went for deliberately early sign-offs for their launch-spec designs.

Ferrari openly talked about having a Spec A to start with, while others are notably more basic than others (like Audi or new team Cadillac). This is all with the intention of layering on more detail deeper into pre-season.

Well, there's not actually much time to do that. We expect some teams to hold back on Australia-spec upgrades until the very last test in Bahrain as they will have wanted to maximise development time, but it will be interesting to see which cars are already evolving and by how much.

Of course, that doesn't mean teams will be immediately copying interesting things they spotted at Barcelona because the turnaround time is too short to have reacted already - at least in terms of big, meaningful designs. - Scott Mitchell-Malm

Is the Aston Martin-Honda package close enough?

The late-arriving AMR26 was on a different schedule to anyone else at Barcelona, and didn't run a whole lot. The laptimes were of pretty vague significance all across the pitlane in that test, but for Aston Martin that significance was a flat zero.

But that won't be the case in Bahrain. And though testing is testing and racing is racing, we should find out pretty quickly whether the package is competitive at all, and whether the Honda engine - which didn't get pushed on the straights at Barcelona - is potent enough as it stands.

Adrian Newey's AMR26 chassis design is clearly extremely ambitious. But as anyone who plays grand strategy games will know, an army only moves at the speed of its slowest unit.

We should know fairly quickly if the whole thing together is close enough to where any individual design flourishes can make enough of a difference. - Valentin Khorounzhiy

First real look at the battle out front

Bahrain will be our first real look at anything, never mind the battle to be top dog! But in all seriousness we should at least begin to get a better indication of who's nailed ground zero of this new ruleset.

I say 'better' because there's bound to be some sandbagging going on. If Mercedes really does have a three-to-four-tenth advantage lurking in that new power unit, there's no way the works team, defending world champion McLaren, or the Williams and Alpine teams are going to reveal that hand.

What we should get a half-decent read on is whose car looks well-balanced on track, whether any of the frontrunners are running into some early limitations - cooling, handling, stint length, tyre management etc - and perhaps who is in the best shape when it comes to all-important energy management.

Whatever performance runs on the softer compounds happen over the next three days will be useful to note, but keeping a close eye on those long runs and how the cars behave on track will be even more revealing. - Ben Anderson

Do engines really look close?
An interesting early takeaway from the first test was the notion from Mercedes and its customer team McLaren that the Ferrari and Red Bull engines look close.

This could just be a political play: being humble, for one thing, but also bigging up the notion that the playing field is quite equal given the background noise swirling about a sudden compression ratio rules clampdown that could impact Mercedes' design.

But it could be genuine. Bahrain should give us more of a clue. It's a second circuit, for starters, so another challenge in terms of charging the battery and managing energy deployment. Will any perceived patterns still be repeated on a very different track layout?

There is also the element of teams starting to push their packages more this week which means - while it still won't be the complete picture - we will get closer to finding out what the engines are capable of and maybe by extension how the impression of impressive reliability from Barcelona fares when everything get turned up. - SMM

How far off is the first Cadillac car?

The novelty of an actual honest-to-goodness Cadillac F1 car is still going strong - but it could be a long first season.

My colleague Edd Straw described Cadillac's shakedown pace, 4.6s off the test-topping Ferrari time, as "gently encouraging". It certainly is in terms of clearing the 107% start requirement - but not, as it stands, in terms of actually fighting anyone and having any more realistic ambitions than "reliable start and finish".

But the new team's mileage was also on the lower end at Barcelona, as was to be expected, and Bahrain should offer a much clearer picture of just how much of the deficit it can shave off - and what it can really dream of in its first season. - VK

How much did Barcelona absence hurt Williams?
There's enough pre-season testing this year that missing three days of warm-up running at a cold Barcelona need not be an irreversible blow, especially with two experienced, trustworthy drivers and a dependable race team around them.

The worry will be that missing Barcelona will be a symptom of something bigger at Williams. And there'll be no better time to dispel that notion than in the Bahrain test, marking the first public appearance of the FW48 and its ambitious front suspension design (bucking the pushrod trend).

Primarily, the car just needs to do laps and laps and laps, a target which the impressive new Mercedes engine should be very accommodating to.

But you'd also hope for it to be generally in range of its expected midfield rivals in terms of laptime, at least by the end of the test. - VK

The first public test

No more 'is it a test or just a Shakedown Week?' No more secret testing that isn't really secret because F1 keeps showing the world what you're up to because it makes good 'content'. This week is proper pre-season F1 testing as we've all come to know and expect.

That means the Bahrain desert, it means live timing that is readily available rather than pirated by YouTube streamers, it means a proper TV broadcasting of the final hour each day (budgets and attention spans won't stretch to full days for this week at least, it would seem), and fans can even buy tickets to get in.

I don't really know why you'd bother though, honestly - save your hard-earned money for an actual grand prix ticket and just let The Race fill in the gaps for you!

Testing is a mine of information and decent clues about the season to come, but a worthwhile public spectacle it really ain't. - BA

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/f1-2026-bahrain-test-one-what-to-expect/

[GoVal]

Onboard de Leclerc.


https://x.com/F1BigData/status/2021641145991016493

[GoVal]

PJ @SmilexTech · 1h

La Ferrari ha portato in pista quest'oggi le prime novità sulla sua SF-26: ecco la nuova ala anteriore e il nuovo fondo. Domani in pista tutta la giornata Leclerc. Altro nell'articolo #AutoRacer #F1Testing

https://autoracer.it/ferrari-sf26-p

[GoVal]

Jon Noble @NobleF1 · 1h

Aston Martin has said that it was a data anomaly with the Honda power unit that limited Lance Stroll's mileage in testing on Wednesday to just 36 laps. Team will be back in action on Thursday with Fernando Alonso at the wheel. #F1

[GoVal]

En el test de hoy, Lando ha sido el más rápido y Verstappen el que más ha rodado y ha marcado la mayor punta de velocidad.

[GoVal]

Los mejores tiempos de hoy y total de vueltas dadas.

[GoVal]

Mejores sectores.

[GoVal]

Velocidades.