Q: Why don’t the new F1 2026 regulations require an aeroscreen?
Marv, State College, PA
CM: Put simply, because it’s not homologated as a solution by the FIA. The FIA worked on and devised the Halo, and has a number of requirements and tests that it needs to pass that it feels is safe enough for F1. Small debris can obviously still get through but there are fewer incidents of cars driving through flying debris at high speed in F1 compared to IndyCar because of the absence of close racing on ovals.
I think both series have got very good solutions for themselves as it stands, and I know the FIA do pay attention to the Aeroscreen (that was first developed by Red Bull don’t forget, when F1 was looking at different options), but feel the Halo works as the best solution for F1.
That’s also partly due to the aerodynamic impact of an Aeroscreen that makes it harder to incorporate in F1 where everyone designs their own cars, compared to the spec aero in IndyCar.
Q: Your article on the 2026 F1 chassis regulations said no aero work was allowed until 1/1/25. Am I correct in assuming this means no CFD or wind tunnel work? You are never going to stop Adrian Newey and his counterparts from thinking about them or doing napkin sketches.
What defines curves and straights for aero purposes? Just the driver with a switch, or does the FIA set up zones similar to current DRS?
Doug Farrow, Plymouth, MN
CM: You are correct, Doug – I actually spoke to Nikolas Tombazis from the FIA about this over the weekend and it’s policed just the same way as the aerodynamic testing restrictions (ATR) are, with the governing body having access to all of the teams’ different runs in CFD or the wind tunnel.
On the aero purposes question, those details are not defined yet. It sounds like it’s actually going to be sensor driven, with cars automatically taking on the low drag configuration once the car is not so heavily loaded or sliding.
Q: I understand that there is a contract for F1 to race at Montreal’s Isle Notre Dame into 2031. But given the crowd control, parking, and other technical issues there this past weekend, is there any consideration given to running the Canadian F1 event at the Circuit Mont-Tremblant? F1 did run there in the late ‘60s and 1970. Mont-Tremblant is a wonderful natural terrain road course. I haven’t been there in over 20 years, since the Grand-Am days. Could this track host a very large spectator event?
Don Velocity, Cleveland, OH
CM: As great as the track layout is Don, it just doesn’t have the infrastructure to host F1. Both from the requirements in terms of likely safety changes, but also pit and paddock buildings, hospitality etc. And that’s before you get to the surrounding area and trying to get fans in and out.
Austria springs to mind as similar in terms of great terrain and being far from a significant population center with hotels and accommodation options, but that is at least a race right by a major road. Paul Ricard was a recent example of a venue that was inaccessible for a large number of spectators despite acceptable facilities.
There are so many great circuits but they need to be handle so much more than just the cars on track, so I’m afraid Mont-Tremblant is not an option. It could do with some more major investment (because solutions are tough with the track location on the island) but I think Montreal is the priority, just with some improvements.
Q: Several years ago, I was watching a NASCAR race where during a pit stop, I believe one team’s tire chargers had individual air tanks for their air guns. NASCAR confiscated the equipment and later ruled that the system was too expensive and banned it. It seems like it would be a good idea to stop dragging hoses around and get them out of the way. No more trip hazards, or some that could be run over. Some series have their hoses hanging down from a support arm.
Individual air systems may have been too expensive then, but with time and experience couldn’t the cost have come down? And not tossing guns around should reduce wear and tear on them. Why can’t we replace the current system?
Tim Davis, Detroit, MI
KC: I’ve always subscribed to the notion that if it’s not broken, don’t fix it, and as far as I can tell, there haven’t been suggestions that the system on pit road needs to be any different. However, I wanted to get the input of a pit crew member who would know better than I, so I reached out to Ryan Flores of Ryan Blaney’s group from Team Penske. Here is what Flores said: “I’d say the biggest reason we don’t do that is because of safety. Compressed air in your back while playing in traffic could be a recipe for disaster. The current system is simple and effective. No real need to change it.”
THE FINAL WORD
From Robin Miller’s Mailbag, 11 June, 2014
Q: The book “Black Noon: The Year They Stopped the Indy 500” has recently been published. It is always great to see more Indy-related books being written and this book covers the tragedy that occurred during the 1964 race. Do you have any stories related to that day and about the author, Art Garner?
Denny Z. Dallas, TX
ROBIN MILLER: I never met Art until last month but he did an amazing job of talking to all the right people and recreating one of the most pivotal and emotion Mays of all time. My dad finally talked my mom into attending the race and, as fate had it, we were sitting just south of the crash and across from Ronnie Duman, who jumped out of his burning car. My mother said she wanted to leave and I begged dad to stay, so we made it halfway before heading home. And Ronnie, who lost his life at Milwaukee in 1968, had a son, Rick, who was my mechanic on the first midget I ran in USAC in 1975. His sister, Rhonda, was the president of my fan club and I think it had 11 members.