Mercedes thinks Red Bull is using illegal engine trick

[strad]

Yes indeed.
It does sound funny. But when in car it doesn't sound particularly odd..but from outside it sure does

[raymondu999]

Mercedes has asked the FIA for clarification over Renault's engine behaviour, but governing body is happy http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/98262

[megz]

My point is that when in threads about B194 like recent with Verstappen's statement, someone mentions that Senna and other people in the paddock suspected that B194 was illegal because of it's sound (TC), than we get salves of "Shut up, FIA did not find anything".

Now, when Brawn or whoever from his current team says that there is something illegal on RB8, same people who shut us up on B194, expect us to accept such claims despite no evidence at all.

That is hypocrisy.

Some people in F1 have infamous history, and they should be the last with right to raise voice demanding truth and honesty from others.


Yes, in 2009. DDD exclusivity was given to Japanese manufacturers in order to prevent their abandoning F1 due to crisis. That is why Honda was given clearance to develop car on DDD, Toyota too, including Williams since they were supplied with Toyota engines, while other teams who had it were said that it is illegal. "Strangely", in 2009. Todt leaves Ferrari to become president of FIA, Brawn buys Honda team like it was an icecream, and wins both championships with previous season's back-marker team. In 2008 Honda scored 14 points, in 2009 172 points, dominating whole season. Such thing has never happened in F1 before, nothing even similar. Now, those titles can be engraved in gold and approved by God, but it will stink on fraud just as 1994 still does and ever will.

How's about this Mr. Manchild?

All teams are given the same rule book. Some people do this, some people do that. At the end of the day it is down to the FIA to scrutinise the cars at any given race meeting. If the FIA say "all good" it's all good. The teams know what they are doing, and what they are allowed to do. If the FIA don't do their job properly, FIA's fault. Innocent until proven guilty.

I don't know about you but I'd be guilty from time to (as would a number of you fine people here) time for temporarily speeding on public roads (admittedly it's small infractions 5-10kph but it's still a no-no and I'm not advocating or condoning). It's only when I'm caught that I am proven guilty that I am identified as breaking the rules.

At the moment Renault are speeding (just a little) - at least that's what it looks like from the outside. The problem is, the police (FIA for all of you playing at home) aren't necessarily around to get them. Not yet, anyway but that's their job. Not yours, not mine. The other teams can protest (the same as a civilian calling the police to report an incident) but it comes back to the police (FIA) to action on it.

TL;DR, Renault appear to be being naughty, FIA aren't watching, Mercedes are calling on the FIA to do something.

Why/how did the conversation manage to descend to 1994 and a team that exists only by decent?

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Horner will not let it drop.


http://formula-one.speedtv.com/article/f1-red-bull-continues-challenge-to-mercedes-design/?

He wants clarity. I'm pretty sure the FIA scrutineering have cleared it up?
I'm also sure Horner isn't after clarity at all....He wants it banned.

[raymondu999]

He wants clarity. I'm pretty sure the FIA scrutineering have cleared it up?
I'm also sure Horner isn't after clarity at all....He wants it banned.

You don't know that for sure. He could just be asking on how "on-edge" their interpretation of the ruling can be - so that they will come up with a fairly extreme iteration of the device.

[beelsebob]

He wants clarity. I'm pretty sure the FIA scrutineering have cleared it up?
I'm also sure Horner isn't after clarity at all....He wants it banned.

You don't know that for sure. He could just be asking on how "on-edge" their interpretation of the ruling can be - so that they will come up with a fairly extreme iteration of the device.

No, that's pretty clear – the FIA have said it's legal to use the DRS flap to drive other aero devices, as long as it's the DRS flap doing the movement, that's pretty clear and simple. Horner very clearly wants it banned. Either red bull know they don't understand exactly what it's doing, or they know it'll be very hard for them to implement. My bet would be on the fact that the RBR's beam wing is separated from the crash structure making it very hard to implement passing air from the rear wing back to the rest of the car.

[strad]

Why did Speed say that as long as they are running on no less than 4 cylinders they are legal? WHy do they want to run on less than all the cylinders?
I guess there is something in the new rules?

[raymondu999]

Apparently it's not about downforce - it's that with 4 cylinders - you'd help the engine drivability in the traction phase

[WhiteBlue]

There is little doubt that the FiA view will prevail in this dispute. Drag reduction systems are legal and there is no word in the regulations that the DRS cannot be a stacked system consisting of a flap and a piggy back F-duct. The F-duct also reduces drag. So it is simply seen as part of the DRS system.

Red Bull are still grumbling because Newey thinks he has been taken for a ride by Brawn. Apparently they agreed in the TWG that F-ducts would be outlawed. But we don't know what was agreed and in the absence of a code or rule you have to go by the wording of the rules.

[xpensive]

...
Red Bull are still grumbling because Newey thinks he has been taken for a ride by Brawn. Apparently they agreed in the TWG that F-ducts would be outlawed. But we don't know what was agreed and in the absence of a code or rule you have to go by the wording of the rules.

Wouldn't be the first time, Newey never seem to learn not to trust Ross Brawn, this situation is just the DDD revisited?

[snoop1050]

*COUGH* RRA *COUGH*

those in glass bottles shouldnt throw stones

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Wouldn't be the first time, Newey never seem to learn not to trust Ross Brawn, this situation is just the DDD revisited?

How?

The wording of the law is that the driver may not influence the aerodynaics of the car unless operating the DRS system.
As the "f-duct" is still exposed to air when the DRS is shut, if partially, it circumvents the law. Thats ingenuity.

Far better this than having a flexing piece of bodywork that circumvents the test.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

*COUGH* RRA *COUGH*

those in glass bottles shouldnt throw stones

?