DBMotorsport

  Abstract The 2025 Singapore Grand Prix exposed several well-known issues in the paddock and among fans: the return of flexible wings, the reduced spectacle resulting from the increased difficulty of staying within one second of another car, and the immature implementation and management of the Heat Hazard Device. Although these three elements are distinct, they converge on one common point: the need for all stakeholders to take a clear stance and act decisively to prevent these problems from undermining the future success of the sport in the long term. *Disclaimer* Like every other piece written by this author, this article aims solely to highlight critical issues with the constructive intent of fostering dialogue and finding solutions to problems that emerge throughout the season. The return of flexible wings: the new Mercedes front wing One of the most debated topics during the Singapore weekend was the return of the so-called flexi-wings. In particular, Mercedes introduc...

  Abstract This paper examines the regulatory precedent and legal framework of the FIA’s cost cap in Formula 1, evaluates the plausibility and correctness of introducing a rule excluding incident-related costs from the cap, and contrasts this with the implications of the proposed reverse grids for Sprint races from 2027. Drawing on previously enforced Financial Regulations (teams and power unit manufacturers), “accepted breach” cases, exclusions under the cost cap, and statements from stakeholders, it argues that the exclusion of costs from accidents can be designed coherently within existing legal frameworks and may offer a more sustainable reform than reverse grids, which pose risks to competitive integrity and contractual expectations. 1. Regulatory Precedents in FIA Financial Regulations 1.1 The Structure of the Cost Cap & Relevant / Excluded Costs The FIA Financial Regulations define Relevant Costs as those spent on performance-related activities (design, ...

  Abstract Starting from the 2026 season, Formula 1 will introduce a new mechanism known as Additional Development and Upgrade Opportunities (ADUO). The aim of this rule is to help balance performance between different Power Unit (PU) manufacturers, ensuring that no competitor is left too far behind during the early stages of a championship. This article will explore the functioning of the system, its potential benefits for competition, and the challenges or risks it might create for the future of the sport. The introduction of ADUO: A system designed for balance The Formula 1 technical regulations for the 2026–2030 era will include a significant innovation in the management of power units. For the first time, the FIA will monitor the performance of Internal Combustion Engines (ICE) during the opening five Grands Prix of each season. The goal is to establish a baseline for all manufacturers supplying power units. If a manufacturer’s average ICE performance is found to be more tha...

  Abstract The 2025 Miami Grand Prix provided racing as well as controversy, particularly in the battle between Max Verstappen and Lando Norris. While Norris emerged victorious, several incidents throughout the race raised questions about Verstappen's adherence to the rules. In particular to Article 2(b), Chapter IV of Appendix L of the 2025 International Sporting Code, regarding drivers behaviour. This article breaks down key moments from the race using official frames and rules - from the start of Turn 2 on Lap 1, through the clash with Oscar Piastri on Lap 13, to the final battle between Verstappen and Norris on Laps 15 and 17 - and explains why the Race direction should have intervened with a penalty. Turn 2, Lap 1 Clash The most important episode of this article, and the one that triggered all the others in a domino effect, happened at the beginning of the race, when car no. 1 forced the breaking point in turn 1 to maintain the position on car no. 4. This manoeuvre caused ...