FIA wants to ban qualifying modes in 2021

[nzjrs]

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/arti ... UFncL.html

Why is this rule being implemented now - and what impact will it have?
To assist policing. The FIA has to police a number of power unit parameters through very detailed data analysis, and it is felt that this directive will help them achieve that – and have more confidence of power unit legality as a result. Of course, a consequence of the move would be to clip the wings of the power unit which shows the biggest power boost between normal and qualifying modes. At this point that's believed to be Mercedes, with Ferrari showing the least difference between the two modes. Renault and Honda are quite similar in between those two extremes.

I find the underlined part to be quite interesting. Although if there are questions in regards to the legality, I would think the it would easily concern the race-modes as much as the qualifying mode - just that the race modes the effect is less pronounced because everyone is concerned about reliability and this narrows the gap between the more powerful engines and the lesser ones.

I agree this has echoes of the Ferarri 'agreement'. At the time my hypothesis was that the FIA could not reproduce some of the illegality in static bench, or inspection conditions, but found enough evidence that something illegal could be induced through configuration in the race.

[dans79]

In the past TDs and slowing down of certain cars was ok, but now it hits Mercedes it is bad? The usual time was always middle of the season, please see the flexi wings, FRIC or the fuel flow last year as GOOD examples.

But it's not going to hit Mercedes more than the others, is it?

They seem to have the best engine. If you take away the highest engine mode, then they still have the best engine. But, instead of having the chance to create an engine offset with good driving and clever strategy, Mercedes will just have more power than the opposition all the time. I fail to see how removing the ability to outfox or outdrive Mercedes hurts Mercedes.

In the worst case nothing will change, so why not a try?

Because a governing bodies job is to govern the sport based on the rules inplace, not make up new rules on the Fly to adjust the balance of power amoungst the competitors, or to keep the lowest common denominator of the fan base entertained.

Rules should only be introduced at the beginning of a new season so the competitors can prepare appropriately.

[63l8qrrfy6]

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/arti ... UFncL.html

Why is this rule being implemented now - and what impact will it have?
To assist policing. The FIA has to police a number of power unit parameters through very detailed data analysis, and it is felt that this directive will help them achieve that – and have more confidence of power unit legality as a result. Of course, a consequence of the move would be to clip the wings of the power unit which shows the biggest power boost between normal and qualifying modes. At this point that's believed to be Mercedes, with Ferrari showing the least difference between the two modes. Renault and Honda are quite similar in between those two extremes.

I find the underlined part to be quite interesting. Although if there are questions in regards to the legality, I would think the it would easily concern the race-modes as much as the qualifying mode - just that the race modes the effect is less pronounced because everyone is concerned about reliability and this narrows the gap between the more powerful engines and the lesser ones.

I agree this has echoes of the Ferarri 'agreement'. At the time my hypothesis was that the FIA could not reproduce some of the illegality in static bench, or inspection conditions, but found enough evidence that something illegal could be induced through configuration in the race.

Like what? if the sensors can't see it in one mode they won't see it in a different mode either ?
If the sensors and whatever measures they take to ensure compliance are not adequate, they will continue to remain inadequate regardless of the modes.

Also, how would they prevent the manufacturers from transplating a potentially illegal behaviour from the qualy mode to the normal mode ?

[El Scorchio]

For me this new rule is acceptable, but bring it in the middle of the year is bullshit. It is like saying we drive with a V6 and say before the first qualy of the year it is only allowed to use 5 of the 6 cylinder. And of course it is to slow mercedes down.

In the past TDs and slowing down of certain cars was ok, but now it hits Mercedes it is bad? The usual time was always middle of the season, please see the flexi wings, FRIC or the fuel flow last year as GOOD examples.

No, it's always bad unless it's because someone is found to be breaking or circumnavigating a rule, or doing things not in the spirit of fair competition, which it doesn't look like the case is here, because there's no widespread talk, finger wagging or accusations going on like there were last season with the Ferrari PU. This seems very out of the blue and just a reaction to the current pecking order.

IF the Mercedes engine modes aren't legal and they are gaining an unfair advantage, then provided there's a proper transparent inquest and sufficient proof, it's ok to ask them to change it.

IF it's more about just making sure Ferrari aren't upset because their engine isn't any good, or trying to slow down a team who are within the regs but just too fast, then IMO it's not OK. That's just manipulating the sport for someone's gain.

[RZS10]

There also doesn't seem to be any real suspicion that Mercedes might be doing something illegal (contrary to Ferrari over the last few years) - and if there was, then surely the FIA could ask Mercedes to explain to them how their quali mode works and how it complies with the rules - just like they gave that chance to Ferrari.

exactly!

Wrong! Anybody knows FIA tried to discover ferrari trick, but were not capable of. Hence, after mercedes-redbul protest, they force ferrari to explain what they did and went for the strange agreement they made this year without sanctions.

This is a bit off topic but apart from there not being a formal 'protest' our statements aren't at odds with each other?

[dren]

Qui bono?

Ferrari, and they have publicly said this is a benefit to them. I don't think this is the real reason, but who knows? I keep hearing commentators say it's bad for F1 when Ferrari isn't fighting for podiums/wins. I don't agree.

Concorde agreement signature. I think this is nothing more than a flex to get Mercedes to sign the agreement.

[Pany]

But it's not going to hit Mercedes more than the others, is it?

They seem to have the best engine. If you take away the highest engine mode, then they still have the best engine. But, instead of having the chance to create an engine offset with good driving and clever strategy, Mercedes will just have more power than the opposition all the time. I fail to see how removing the ability to outfox or outdrive Mercedes hurts Mercedes.

In the worst case nothing will change, so why not a try?

Because a governing bodies job is to govern the sport based on the rules inplace, not make up new rules on the Fly to adjust the balance of power amoungst the competitors, or to keep the lowest common denominator of the fan base entertained.

Rules should only be introduced at the beginning of a new season so the competitors can prepare appropriately.

that is why I am not watching races; many people like me. There is no competition in front since long time. Something exceptional has to be done. At least is worth a try

[Big Tea]

In the worst case nothing will change, so why not a try?

Because a governing bodies job is to govern the sport based on the rules inplace, not make up new rules on the Fly to adjust the balance of power amoungst the competitors, or to keep the lowest common denominator of the fan base entertained.

Rules should only be introduced at the beginning of a new season so the competitors can prepare appropriately.

that is why I am not watching races; many people like me. There is no competition in front since long time. Something exceptional has to be done. At least is worth a try

But competition is catching the leaders, not crippling them. Also, it is not as if they do it through spending as Ferrari used to with unlimited testing on their own track with a gang of spare drivers, it is on a relatively level field among the top 3 financially. Red Bul are at least making a showing, and if Merc were not there there would just be the same domination by another team, as it was year after year previously

[dans79]

Because a governing bodies job is to govern the sport based on the rules inplace, not make up new rules on the Fly to adjust the balance of power amoungst the competitors, or to keep the lowest common denominator of the fan base entertained.

Rules should only be introduced at the beginning of a new season so the competitors can prepare appropriately.

that is why I am not watching races; many people like me. There is no competition in front since long time. Something exceptional has to be done. At least is worth a try

But competition is catching the leaders, not crippling them.

Yep, if there's no competition then it's just a show.

Most competitions are not interesting to those only looking for entertainment, so trying to make them show like never works out well.

[basti313]

Qui bono?

Ferrari, and they have publicly said this is a benefit to them. I don't think this is the real reason, but who knows? I keep hearing commentators say it's bad for F1 when Ferrari isn't fighting for podiums/wins. I don't agree.

Concorde agreement signature. I think this is nothing more than a flex to get Mercedes to sign the agreement.

I think it is bad for F1 if a normal race is always a 1-2 for Mercedes. And this now for 6 years. Honda and Renault are still too far away to ever really compete in this engine formula. Ferrari is gone.
We are coming to a development stop with the V6 hybrid as we had it with the V8, but they need to level the engines before that.

[dren]

Qui bono?

Ferrari, and they have publicly said this is a benefit to them. I don't think this is the real reason, but who knows? I keep hearing commentators say it's bad for F1 when Ferrari isn't fighting for podiums/wins. I don't agree.

Concorde agreement signature. I think this is nothing more than a flex to get Mercedes to sign the agreement.

I think it is bad for F1 if a normal race is always a 1-2 for Mercedes. And this now for 6 years. Honda and Renault are still too far away to ever really compete in this engine formula. Ferrari is gone.
We are coming to a development stop with the V6 hybrid as we had it with the V8, but they need to level the engines before that.

There is a lot more to it than just the PU. Renault hasn't put together a competitive chassis for a while, yet Red Bull won races with a Renault and Honda PU. Ferrari has been in the mix for a few seasons. Mercedes as a team beat them when you could argue at times Ferrari might have had a better or equal package. But as Henry said above, this has been the way of F1 since forever. The only year I remember it being a total crap shoot was when Pirelli brought tires teams struggled to understand. Hell, Maldonado won that year in a Williams, and could have had two. F1 is not a spec series, thus there will always be an 'order'. Even in spec series like Indy or NASCAR, the best teams typically finish at the front.

[dans79]

Qui bono?

Ferrari, and they have publicly said this is a benefit to them. I don't think this is the real reason, but who knows? I keep hearing commentators say it's bad for F1 when Ferrari isn't fighting for podiums/wins. I don't agree.

Concorde agreement signature. I think this is nothing more than a flex to get Mercedes to sign the agreement.

I think it is bad for F1 if a normal race is always a 1-2 for Mercedes. And this now for 6 years. Honda and Renault are still too far away to ever really compete in this engine formula. Ferrari is gone.
We are coming to a development stop with the V6 hybrid as we had it with the V8, but they need to level the engines before that.

an equalization of the engines, like they did with the v8s is fine. However they are not attempting to do it in anything even close to the way they did for the v8s.

Instead of spreading it out across multiple seasons like they did with the v8s, they're looking to do it across three weeks.

[basti313]

Qui bono?

Ferrari, and they have publicly said this is a benefit to them. I don't think this is the real reason, but who knows? I keep hearing commentators say it's bad for F1 when Ferrari isn't fighting for podiums/wins. I don't agree.

Concorde agreement signature. I think this is nothing more than a flex to get Mercedes to sign the agreement.

I think it is bad for F1 if a normal race is always a 1-2 for Mercedes. And this now for 6 years. Honda and Renault are still too far away to ever really compete in this engine formula. Ferrari is gone.
We are coming to a development stop with the V6 hybrid as we had it with the V8, but they need to level the engines before that.

There is a lot more to it than just the PU. Renault hasn't put together a competitive chassis for a while, yet Red Bull won races with a Renault and Honda PU. Ferrari has been in the mix for a few seasons. Mercedes as a team beat them when you could argue at times Ferrari might have had a better or equal package. But as Henry said above, this has been the way of F1 since forever. The only year I remember it being a total crap shoot was when Pirelli brought tires teams struggled to understand. Hell, Maldonado won that year in a Williams, and could have had two. F1 is not a spec series, thus there will always be an 'order'. Even in spec series like Indy or NASCAR, the best teams typically finish at the front.

Sure there is more than the PU and I totally agree with the point that Merc can and will still win.

My point is that the time of the PU is gone:
Always in F1 the manufacturer preparing a rule change best won the next years. We saw it with McLaren in the 90s, Ferrari round 2000, then a short glimpse with Brawn, then RedBull dominating on blown diffusors.
But all of these dominance periods were ended and this was good in every case.
Now Merc had fun for 6 years after building the best engine 2014. Now the engine development ends as cost needs to go down. Thus 6 years is enough and the engines need to be leveled.
Merc can still put another 6 years of dominance by building the best 2022 aero concept. Nothing wrong with this. But it would be wrong if this is again just based on the superior engine concept they set up in 2014 and that noone can overcome due to a freeze in development.

[basti313]

Qui bono?

Ferrari, and they have publicly said this is a benefit to them. I don't think this is the real reason, but who knows? I keep hearing commentators say it's bad for F1 when Ferrari isn't fighting for podiums/wins. I don't agree.

Concorde agreement signature. I think this is nothing more than a flex to get Mercedes to sign the agreement.

I think it is bad for F1 if a normal race is always a 1-2 for Mercedes. And this now for 6 years. Honda and Renault are still too far away to ever really compete in this engine formula. Ferrari is gone.
We are coming to a development stop with the V6 hybrid as we had it with the V8, but they need to level the engines before that.

an equalization of the engines, like they did with the v8s is fine. However they are not attempting to do it in anything even close to the way they did for the v8s.

Instead of spreading it out across multiple seasons like they did with the v8s, they're looking to do it across three weeks.

Two years ago oil burning tricks, last year fuel sensor tricks, this year mappings tricks?
I do not see this happening fast.

[nzjrs]

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/arti ... UFncL.html



I find the underlined part to be quite interesting. Although if there are questions in regards to the legality, I would think the it would easily concern the race-modes as much as the qualifying mode - just that the race modes the effect is less pronounced because everyone is concerned about reliability and this narrows the gap between the more powerful engines and the lesser ones.

I agree this has echoes of the Ferarri 'agreement'. At the time my hypothesis was that the FIA could not reproduce some of the illegality in static bench, or inspection conditions, but found enough evidence that something illegal could be induced through configuration in the race.

Like what? if the sensors can't see it in one mode they won't see it in a different mode either ?
If the sensors and whatever measures they take to ensure compliance are not adequate, they will continue to remain inadequate regardless of the modes.

Also, how would they prevent the manufacturers from transplating a potentially illegal behaviour from the qualy mode to the normal mode ?

If something illegal-ish was at the detection limit, and occured infrequently, that is obvioulsy harder to detect than if it were mandated to be made to occur more often.

(the second of yours was what I was raising wrt. availbility of telemetry)