Renault protests against Haas

Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
User avatar
Sniffit
1
Joined: 05 Feb 2015, 23:42

Re: Renault protests against Haas

Post

ESPImperium wrote:
03 Sep 2018, 13:40
Sniffit wrote:
03 Sep 2018, 02:45
ESPImperium wrote:
02 Sep 2018, 22:20
Seemingly Sauber have a few non compliant parts as well.
Do you have any source for these claims?
Jennie Gow said something on Twitter. But apart from that, nothing. I’m sure there are are Chinese Whispers in the paddock that we don’t know of.
Ah thanks, well I assume it could be a similar issue as Haas, not having had time to fix the floor or maybe something connected to their rear wing "fix" after the DRS locked open and noone reported it since they weren't competitive at all. Just speculation though.

User avatar
turbof1
Moderator
Joined: 19 Jul 2012, 21:36
Location: MountDoom CFD Matrix

Re: Renault protests against Haas

Post

bill shoe wrote:
03 Sep 2018, 18:21
Autosport has a good clear description of the technical issue itself. The front corners of the tea-tray are required to have a 50mm radius when seen from below. Issue in contention is whether this radius can be covered/eliminated by the mounting strut of nearby (and otherwise legal) bodywork such as foot plates, vortex generators, etc.?

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/13849 ... ed-illegal

Apparently Haas only went into the gray or illegal area when they introduced a new floor at the Canadian GP, so for Italy they obviously could have reverted to the pre-Canada floor to ensure their legality. I don't really blame Haas for taking a bit of a calculated risk in Italy, but if it didn't work out there's nobody to blame but themselves.

This may have been the first time that a Technical Directive was actually used to support a protest, and it was good to see the TD upheld. Yes the overall rules process and lack of TD transparency still stinks.
I believe, not completely sure, that Red Bull in 2014 was also punished on the base of a TD. So there is precedence. Infact, during the appeal Red Bull put the legality of the technical directives into question. They got declared legal.

HAAS will loose the appeal. Even if a message from Whiting magically pops up that they got more time past Italy, they will still loose the case. It's quite a black and white case in all honesty.
#AeroFrodo

ESPImperium
64
Joined: 06 Apr 2008, 00:08
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Renault protests against Haas

Post

Sniffit wrote:
04 Sep 2018, 13:51
ESPImperium wrote:
03 Sep 2018, 13:40
Sniffit wrote:
03 Sep 2018, 02:45


Do you have any source for these claims?
Jennie Gow said something on Twitter. But apart from that, nothing. I’m sure there are are Chinese Whispers in the paddock that we don’t know of.
Ah thanks, well I assume it could be a similar issue as Haas, not having had time to fix the floor or maybe something connected to their rear wing "fix" after the DRS locked open and noone reported it since they weren't competitive at all. Just speculation though.
I never thought of the DRS on the Sauber. That makes a lot of sense. I wonder if the fix was illegal to the regulations.

But I find it funny that Sauber have not been protested against and that the Haas was. Is it that Renault are punishing Haas for the way they have gone about the Force India situation? I hear that Renault had supplier issues for the same part, but they solved the issue, and they pushed.

Politics in F1, I'm sure that is one of the reasons we all love this damn twisted sport!!!

User avatar
Phil
66
Joined: 25 Sep 2012, 16:22
Contact:

Re: Renault protests against Haas

Post

Renault has protested Haas because they are battling over 4th and millions.
Not for nothing, Rosberg's Championship is the only thing that lends credibility to Hamilton's recent success. Otherwise, he'd just be the guy who's had the best car. — bhall II
#Team44 supporter

roon
412
Joined: 17 Dec 2016, 19:04

Re: Renault protests against Haas

Post

Happens sometimes. Remember when Sauber were disqualified from the Australian GP a few years back? I think it was due to the rear wing top flap upper surface radius being slightly too small.

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/saub ... 56/?nrt=54

User avatar
strad
117
Joined: 02 Jan 2010, 01:57

Re: Renault protests against Haas

Post

I think it goes back quite some time to what is a "hole" which can back then anyway, fixed by a small slit that then makes a hole a slot.
To achieve anything, you must be prepared to dabble on the boundary of disaster.”
Sir Stirling Moss

User avatar
strad
117
Joined: 02 Jan 2010, 01:57

Re: Renault protests against Haas

Post

3.7.1D
Have a 50mm radius (+/-2mm) on each front corner when viewed from directly beneath the car, this being applied after the surface has been defined.
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
To achieve anything, you must be prepared to dabble on the boundary of disaster.”
Sir Stirling Moss

User avatar
Jackles-UK
17
Joined: 06 Mar 2012, 06:02

Re: Renault protests against Haas

Post

strad wrote:
05 Sep 2018, 00:50
3.7.1D
Have a 50mm radius (+/-2mm) on each front corner when viewed from directly beneath the car, this being applied after the surface has been defined.
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Worded this way to stop teams putting a different shaped piece beneath the plane in question just back from the leading edge so it still would count as “the front” - the whole radius must be visible from beneath the car looking up (as though the car is on a crane above your head) with no obstructions.

My question is why the FIA allows such a gigantic tolerance in this instance? “+/- 2mm” in a 50mm radius equates to an 8% tolerance window in an industry which works to tolerances of tenths or even hundredths of a percent!

gibells
3
Joined: 08 Apr 2009, 16:23
Location: Andalucia, Spain

Re: Renault protests against Haas

Post

Phil wrote:
04 Sep 2018, 23:32
Renault has protested Haas because they are battling over 4th and millions.
Why make it personal in this way? If we're all competitors, and 9 of us have to stick to the ruling, but somehow the other guy who's competing for the same prize is able to get away with a cheat (which produces a minor performance gain), we are entitled to say something.

roon
412
Joined: 17 Dec 2016, 19:04

Re: Renault protests against Haas

Post

gibells wrote:
05 Sep 2018, 09:09
Phil wrote:
04 Sep 2018, 23:32
Renault has protested Haas because they are battling over 4th and millions.
Why make it personal in this way? If we're all competitors, and 9 of us have to stick to the ruling, but somehow the other guy who's competing for the same prize is able to get away with a cheat (which produces a minor performance gain), we are entitled to say something.
It's not even a cheat, it's just acknowledging that all entrants are spending millions trying to conform to a complex, opaquely written rulebook, and no one should be exempt from that standard. It's less about performance advantage in this case, more about maintaining consistent attention to detail across the grid.

User avatar
Big Tea
99
Joined: 24 Dec 2017, 20:57

Re: Renault protests against Haas

Post

roon wrote:
05 Sep 2018, 21:29
gibells wrote:
05 Sep 2018, 09:09
Phil wrote:
04 Sep 2018, 23:32
Renault has protested Haas because they are battling over 4th and millions.
Why make it personal in this way? If we're all competitors, and 9 of us have to stick to the ruling, but somehow the other guy who's competing for the same prize is able to get away with a cheat (which produces a minor performance gain), we are entitled to say something.
It's not even a cheat, it's just acknowledging that all entrants are spending millions trying to conform to a complex, opaquely written rulebook, and no one should be exempt from that standard. It's less about performance advantage in this case, more about maintaining consistent attention to detail across the grid.
If a boxer is one gram over the stated maximum weight, they do not fight. Its not a gray area, it is a black line.
They were pulled up by the FIA a month ago, and were told when the deadline was, and still raced after this time.
Not taking a side with Renault, but if you drive through a 30mph zone at above this, you have no comebacks. If you have previously been 'let off with a warning', all the more so.

Having said that, so often in F1 there is no black and white, as we are not given the whole page. So I may change my stance :D
When arguing with a fool, be sure the other person is not doing the same thing.

User avatar
djos
113
Joined: 19 May 2006, 06:09
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Renault protests against Haas

Post

Big Tea wrote:
05 Sep 2018, 21:39
If a boxer is one gram over the stated maximum weight, they do not fight. Its not a gray area, it is a black line.
They were pulled up by the FIA a month ago, and were told when the deadline was, and still raced after this time.
Exactly right, they were told their tea-tray was illegal and chose to run it anyway - they could have taken an angle grinder to it and been legal with 10 minutes effort (and likely a minimal performance impact), yet they elected to run an illegal car and risk a protest.

Image
"In downforce we trust"

User avatar
lio007
312
Joined: 28 Jan 2013, 23:03
Location: Austria

Re: Renault protests against Haas

Post

Do you think we already get a decision today? (Remember, today is the hearing by an FIA court in Paris)

User avatar
Scorpaguy
6
Joined: 04 Mar 2010, 05:05

Re: Renault protests against Haas

Post

Verdict scheduled to be announced Friday AM is what I have read.