FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

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.
Post Reply
User avatar
hollus
Moderator
Joined: 29 Mar 2009, 01:21
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

IF this is what was going on...
... wouldn't the pressure pulses driving any flow increase move at the speed of sound?


Pre post edit :D

I was going to argue that at 2000 sampling points pr second the speed of sound would not allow for a quick enough increase and decrease of the actual flow given that the senor has a certain lenght, blah, blah, blah...

And then I checked, the speed of sound in gasline is well over 1000 m/s. So it is theoretically possible. Theoretically.
Rivals, not enemies.

User avatar
dans79
267
Joined: 03 Mar 2013, 19:33
Location: USA

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

bluechris wrote:
17 Mar 2020, 20:06
No its a cheat because the cousin of the sister of a friend said so to the courier that passed a letter to an old lady.
That is no different that saying it's not a cheat because a guy in a red shirt says it isn't.
197 104 103 7

Mandrake
14
Joined: 31 May 2010, 01:31

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

dans79 wrote:
16 Mar 2020, 22:58
izzy wrote:
16 Mar 2020, 22:39
so I'm not throwing "cheating" around but it was off limits i think, to a point where FIA didn't want to admit to it or that they weren't taking it too seriously, and beyond finding a loophole like DAS or double diffuser or something. It was naughty and secret :-$
It's not a loop hole, using a system that does this would be a slam dunk cheating conviction as it violates this rule clearly.
5.10.5 Any device, system or procedure the purpose and/or effect of which is to increase the flow
rate or to store and recycle fuel after the measurement point is prohibited.
The only way Ferrari could escape being penalized, would be if the FIA couldn't prove the system was actually used. This is shades of Benetton 94. The FIA announced that within Beneton's software where illegal systems, but it couldn't prove that the systems had been used, just that they existed and could be activated at any time.
If it's the fuel pump it is designed to pump fuel to the engine, it's not a device that has the purpose to mingle with the fuel flow. It's a bit like with the steering wheel....

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

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

within Beneton's software where illegal systems, but it couldn't prove that the systems had been used, just that they existed and could be activated at any time.
Never understood that reasoning. Shouldn't have to prove the system was used. Just by virtue (odd word to use in talking F1) of it being available should be considered a breach of the rules. It has no business being on the car at all.
To achieve anything, you must be prepared to dabble on the boundary of disaster.”
Sir Stirling Moss

User avatar
dans79
267
Joined: 03 Mar 2013, 19:33
Location: USA

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

Mandrake wrote:
18 Mar 2020, 01:43
dans79 wrote:
16 Mar 2020, 22:58
izzy wrote:
16 Mar 2020, 22:39
so I'm not throwing "cheating" around but it was off limits i think, to a point where FIA didn't want to admit to it or that they weren't taking it too seriously, and beyond finding a loophole like DAS or double diffuser or something. It was naughty and secret :-$
It's not a loop hole, using a system that does this would be a slam dunk cheating conviction as it violates this rule clearly.
5.10.5 Any device, system or procedure the purpose and/or effect of which is to increase the flow
rate or to store and recycle fuel after the measurement point is prohibited.
The only way Ferrari could escape being penalized, would be if the FIA couldn't prove the system was actually used. This is shades of Benetton 94. The FIA announced that within Beneton's software where illegal systems, but it couldn't prove that the systems had been used, just that they existed and could be activated at any time.
If it's the fuel pump it is designed to pump fuel to the engine, it's not a device that has the purpose to mingle with the fuel flow. It's a bit like with the steering wheel....
I pretty strongly disagree with that.

If Ferrari was using an algorithm to process the fuel flow sensor output, and then using the output of the algorithm to adjust the pump, then that is for sure against the rule I posted earlier.
197 104 103 7

User avatar
dans79
267
Joined: 03 Mar 2013, 19:33
Location: USA

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

strad wrote:
18 Mar 2020, 02:40
within Beneton's software where illegal systems, but it couldn't prove that the systems had been used, just that they existed and could be activated at any time.
Never understood that reasoning. Shouldn't have to prove the system was used. Just by virtue (odd word to use in talking F1) of it being available should be considered a breach of the rules. It has no business being on the car at all.
Teams can have legitimate reasons for having subroutines/algorithms/procedures that might be illegal is used during the race, for example testing.

If anything the FIA should be controlling/tracking/monitoring the software, and validating any changes to it, just like they do PU components.
197 104 103 7

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

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

One could dream up all kinds of reasons to try to have it on the car but there should be no way to access it during qualifying or races.
To achieve anything, you must be prepared to dabble on the boundary of disaster.”
Sir Stirling Moss

User avatar
McG
-19
Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 17:45

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

TAG wrote:
17 Mar 2020, 18:45
Is it okay to call it a cheat now?
Ferrari are being punished for it. A light punishment but still punished.

It was cheating. Let's not begin to pretend the FIA don't favour Ferrari. They have done for decades. Sad times again to be a "fan" of F1.
F1 is dead.

izzy
41
Joined: 26 May 2019, 22:28

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

McG wrote:
18 Mar 2020, 10:30
TAG wrote:
17 Mar 2020, 18:45
Is it okay to call it a cheat now?
Ferrari are being punished for it. A light punishment but still punished.

It was cheating. Let's not begin to pretend the FIA don't favour Ferrari. They have done for decades. Sad times again to be a "fan" of F1.
it used to be worse. The whole spygate saga was because FIA refused to do anything when Nigel Stepney was whistleblowing about the Ferrari bendy floor. Fernando was penalised for obstructing a Ferrari from 4 seconds in front!! A Ferrari rival had their suspension invention banned for being aero even while it wasn't in the airstream! Now at least they stopped it, so it's progress. And after the big fuss it'll probably be a bit better again next time

User avatar
Chene_Mostert
-2
Joined: 30 Mar 2014, 16:50

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

strad wrote:
18 Mar 2020, 02:40
within Beneton's software where illegal systems, but it couldn't prove that the systems had been used, just that they existed and could be activated at any time.
Never understood that reasoning. Shouldn't have to prove the system was used. Just by virtue (odd word to use in talking F1) of it being available should be considered a breach of the rules. It has no business being on the car at all.
Just by virtue of you owning a butchers knife, you should be considered psychopathic serial killer?
"Science at its best is an open-minded method of inquiry, not a belief system." - Rupert Sheldrake

Just_a_fan
591
Joined: 31 Jan 2010, 20:37

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

Chene_Mostert wrote:
18 Mar 2020, 11:28
strad wrote:
18 Mar 2020, 02:40
within Beneton's software where illegal systems, but it couldn't prove that the systems had been used, just that they existed and could be activated at any time.
Never understood that reasoning. Shouldn't have to prove the system was used. Just by virtue (odd word to use in talking F1) of it being available should be considered a breach of the rules. It has no business being on the car at all.
Just by virtue of you owning a butchers knife, you should be considered psychopathic serial killer?
A butcher's knife is used to cut up meat. He's allowed to cut up meat. Ergo, having the knife is legitimate.

Traction control software controls traction. Traction control was not allowed. The traction control software was illegal.

Simple difference. #-o
If you are more fortunate than others, build a larger table not a taller fence.

aran.vtec
1
Joined: 23 Mar 2017, 12:10

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

Chene_Mostert wrote:
18 Mar 2020, 11:28
strad wrote:
18 Mar 2020, 02:40
within Beneton's software where illegal systems, but it couldn't prove that the systems had been used, just that they existed and could be activated at any time.
Never understood that reasoning. Shouldn't have to prove the system was used. Just by virtue (odd word to use in talking F1) of it being available should be considered a breach of the rules. It has no business being on the car at all.
Just by virtue of you owning a butchers knife, you should be considered psychopathic serial killer?
I would look as this situation like some software company's fine company's , They don't fine them on the "5" PC's that were caught with the software on they would fine them on the potential use/abuse so all the PC's on site/department that could of used the software.

User avatar
bl4zar_
6
Joined: 04 Mar 2013, 10:28

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

My God, I did not lurk on this forum for a while and in the meanwhile it has become literal trash. This thread in particular is the pinnacle of people coming to conclusions with literally zero evidence and bending reality to their preferred way:
  • Ferrari definitely cheated on the engine - like if, in the case there was even slight evidence on this other than suspects, teams wouldn't have assaulted the FIA
  • the Spygate was Ferrari's fault - honestly WTF
  • FIA being colluded with Ferrari from the beginnig of time - like if all the measures, fair and unfair ones, taken against Ferrari or at advantage of Ferrari's rivals magically disappeared, and only the ones in the opposite direction ever existed
One would expect facts and evidence or nothing on f1technical.net

3jawchuck
37
Joined: 03 Feb 2015, 08:57

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

bl4zar_ wrote:
18 Mar 2020, 12:56
My God, I did not lurk on this forum for a while and in the meanwhile it has become literal trash. This thread in particular is the pinnacle of people coming to conclusions with literally zero evidence and bending reality to their preferred way:
  • Ferrari definitely cheated on the engine - like if, in the case there was even slight evidence on this other than suspects, teams wouldn't have assaulted the FIA
  • the Spygate was Ferrari's fault - honestly WTF
  • FIA being colluded with Ferrari from the beginnig of time - like if all the measures, fair and unfair ones, taken against Ferrari or at advantage of Ferrari's rivals magically disappeared, and only the ones in the opposite direction ever existed
One would expect facts and evidence or nothing on f1technical.net
There's a reason this thread is not a voting thread. It's the designated cancer thread.

User avatar
SiLo
130
Joined: 25 Jul 2010, 19:09

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

I think we are all in agreement that the FIA likely could not prove that Ferrari actually cheated, only that they COULD cheat. They would have to be caught in the act or be provided evidence of the actual cheating happening for them to really come down hard.
Felipe Baby!

Post Reply