Marty_Y wrote: ↑10 Mar 2022, 12:49
mwillems wrote: ↑10 Mar 2022, 12:46
FMP wrote: ↑10 Mar 2022, 12:16
Well FIA/F1 isn't that simple though. They can say whatever they want but once a protest is sent then the decision is taken. But yeah I agree. But still I don't even understand what would could be illegal about it? Don't think there is any worries as Mercedes at all.
More that the spirit of the rules wants to prevent too much dirty air pushed behind and bargeboards were limited as they were a prime culprit. So to see bargeboards v2 raises potential questions about how much is too much.
Is there a too much? Have Mercedes already asked the FIA about where the line might be drawn? Do the FIA even care?
I think they will see the racing first and decide later if clarification is required!
'We did not anticipate the Mercedes concept'
Andrew Benson
BBC Sport’s chief F1 writer
So, this Red Bull/Mercedes thing has all got a bit tasty this morning, hasn’t it? But let’s step back a bit. Ross Brawn, F1’s managing director, has told F1 TV: “There are some very extreme interpretations of the regulations which could lead to a lot of debate. We did not anticipate the Mercedes concept.” Brawn has been at pains to say in the lead-up to the new regulations being introduced this season that F1 is trying to stay on top of all the designs and ensure they do not take the cars too far away from the intent of the regulations.
Brawn has also been making a lot of the new voting structure around rule changes, which no longer out-laws changes within a season. So it’s possible that all this is the precursor of an attempt to get the Mercedes out-lawed. Red Bull have the option to protest at a race, which would leave it up to the stewards to decide.
But if Brawn feels the car is a step too far, he could try to use the rules to torpedo it. Changes within a season need eight out of the 10 teams to agree as well as F1 and the FIA for them to be introduced. This is likely to run for a while.
BBC Sport understands the FIA has looked at the Mercedes design and given it the all-clear. And it seems the FIA has also run it in CFD analysis and found it did not worsen the car’s wake - which is Brawn’s key concern with the regs, in terms of disrupting airflow for following cars.
Brilliant, same output to what I say, different method. See what is the impact and decide if it is legal based on that.
But my point from the first test and my point today is not about what is on the car now, but about where the line is drawn if a development in that area goes to far and at some point I'm sure it will.
But that's a really good quote, thanks. This also suggests to me that Brawn's and the FIAs approach around the spirit of the regs does seem to be aligned to a good degree, which is nice to see and to be honest, much needed for this kind of a situation not to become a free for all.