New FIA Front Wing Load Test

[myurr]

What's the point? If a wing flexes under load... so what? On a fundamental level it makes no difference to me.

Because it's against the rules, so if one team finds a way to make it happen despite the regulators attempts to stop it then it's cheating. Either the rules should be applied or they should not and it should be a free for all. Just because it doesn't directly affect you shouldn't mean that the rule shouldn't be applied.

If the FIA are unable or unwilling to police the flexing bodywork rules then they should relax the rules and let the teams do as they will. The status quo where teams invest huge sums to come up with clever cheats is a waste of everyones time and just makes the FIA look impudent.

[myurr]

That is far too simplistic a view [...]

Things don't have to be complicated simply because it's Formula 1. (Complicated? Simply? Yeah.) And while I understand the point you've made with the doping parallel, it's not the same at all. (For one thing, Vettel's testes aren't going to shrivel up because the front wing of his car flexes.)

Teams have always found ways around the strictest interpretation of the rules, and they always will. If it's not one thing, it's another. Should it be illegal for drivers to collect clag on their tires after the race to ensure their car weighs enough?

The best you can do is adopt a standard and stick to it so that it's the same for all teams.

So rules should only be effectively policed if they protect contestants testes?

Teams have always found ways around the strictest interpretation of the rules, but that doesn't mean the FIA should turn a blind eye when it happens. As with any ruling body for any sport they should improve their policing of the rules and amend the rules to make sure that loopholes are closed as necessary.

[bhall]

So rules should only be effectively policed if they protect contestants testes?

Obviously.

The beauty of it is that it is a free for all...to find ways to subvert the rules.

And I'd argue that it's the FIA who are keeping that idea from being "fair," because the smaller teams can't afford to use resources on their own "shady interpretations" as long as there's the possibility that a change of inspection parameters by the FIA could render such an investment moot.

Looking for 100% compliance to the intention of the rules is a wild goose chase. Not only that, it's boring.

[radosav]

FIA should impose 10 mm thick and 70 mm wide carbon-fibre plank under each front wing

[myurr]

It's only boring when the rules are too strict. And by your own admission it's too financially dangerous for the small teams to invest in edge case technology in case it is banned. And so the boring status quo is maintained with some teams being allowed to cheat whilst others race on as best they can without the resources to be able to copy the dodgy paths forged by the grandees.

How is that a good solution for F1 or the fans?

[Crucial_Xtreme]

It's only boring when the rules are too strict. And by your own admission it's too financially dangerous for the small teams to invest in edge case technology in case it is banned. And so the boring status quo is maintained with some teams being allowed to cheat whilst others race on as best they can without the resources to be able to copy the dodgy paths forged by the grandees.

How is that a good solution for F1 or the fans?

For the most part, I'm with you about the flexi wings. Although I will say it's not the flexi wings that are holding back these smaller teams. They would still be in the same relative position regardless.

McLaren & Mercedes obviously have the resources & capabilities to construct these wings yet they don't. So I wouldn't say these wings are the end all be all but I think the FIA should get on top of it and come up with a fair test that the teams can't circumvent.

[Caito]

Because it's against the rules, so if one team finds a way to make it happen despite the regulators attempts to stop it then it's cheating.

It's not cheating. As per FIA rules a car is legal if it passes all the tests.


Example: FIA says, wings shall not move. Test= 100kg on end plate, 10mm max deflection.

Every wing that passes that test is considered as per the rules so FOR THE RULES it does not move. That's how it works, it's not cheating.



First of all, the fact that it flexes doesn't mean it's an expensive wing made from unobtanium. Maybe it's a very simple solution that someone came up with.

There have always been poorer teams in the formula1, and there will always be. Unless they make it a spec series, which I dope they don't.

[bhall]

How is that a good solution for F1 or the fans?

It's not. So the FIA should either stop changing its tests - the mature response - or rewrite the regulations in an attempt to remove all doubts - if they're up for that wild goose chase.

[myurr]

Because it's against the rules, so if one team finds a way to make it happen despite the regulators attempts to stop it then it's cheating.

It's not cheating. As per FIA rules a car is legal if it passes all the tests.


Example: FIA says, wings shall not move. Test= 100kg on end plate, 10mm max deflection.

Every wing that passes that test is considered as per the rules so FOR THE RULES it does not move. That's how it works, it's not cheating.



First of all, the fact that it flexes doesn't mean it's an expensive wing made from unobtanium. Maybe it's a very simple solution that someone came up with.

There have always been poorer teams in the formula1, and there will always be. Unless they make it a spec series, which I dope they don't.

There are two rules, one says that parts cannot flex at all and a second that says the test for this rule is x. There is a further rule that says that x can be modified at any time to enforce the non-flexing of body parts.

This is the same as the rules for athletics stating that nobody may take steroids or certain other substances, and that the test for these will be random urine samples. Someone coming up with a clever way to get around that test does not make the taking of those substances legal. It just means that they haven't been caught.

[myurr]

How is that a good solution for F1 or the fans?

It's not. So the FIA should either stop changing its tests - the mature response - or rewrite the regulations in an attempt to remove all doubts - if they're up for that wild goose chase.

But they are changing their tests to ensure their rules are enforced. If they want flexing wings then the answer is not to stop changing their tests, it is to explicitly allow flexing wings by changing the rules.

You should never ever get into the situation where rules are selectively applied. F1 falls into this trap often enough as it is.

[bhall]

Yes, the logic behind the test change is to better enforce the rules. I'll agree with you that much. However, the real-world effect from the test change will be that the wings simply flex in different ways, and maybe a bit less overall. And teams will have to spend more money.

Consistently having one test, however, is not a situation where rules are selectively applied. The test, for all intents and purposes, IS the rule. In that way, constantly changing the test is a selective application of the rule.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

I can see it now, if a team has managed to interpret the blown diffuser rule ingeniously, it still doesn't stop them from blowing the darn diffuser.
You still need tests, but the FIA have written that all test are subject to change to enforce the rule.

The changed the load test for the wings. But how can they drag their feet so slowly?
We saw Mercedes and Ferrari devise their own flexing wing in response to FIA impotence.
There is a chasm in the FIA's policing, and its written rhetoric.

Whiting is due in Jerez this week, and the rumour mill is overdrive over what is alleged to be an abuse of the exhaust rules.
Lets see what happens.

[Trocola]

The second year after Mclaren introduced the bridge-wing (I think 2008), everybody started to protest because that bridge wing was flexing. That was clear on a video of a lap in Melbourne. I found a link from this forum:

viewtopic.php?t=5574

That video was enough to make the FIA order a change on those bridge wings, that they had to be physically attached to the car's nose.

There are lots of videos showing Red Bull's front wing flexing. We all saw Ferrari´s wing on India... but no actions were taken.

It would be so easy to avoid this flexi wing thing: extend the front wing endplates to the ground 30 mm. If I uploaded it correctly, the image should be this:



If not, this is the link: http://i41.tinypic.com/1051lac.jpg


Trocola

P.S.: sorry for my English

[radosav]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxtZlgLb ... re=related[/youtube]i found this animation made to explain old FIA flexing limitations : if these rules were true then FIA legalised flexing that year.

[Caito]

I think extending the endplate down, making it touch the ground would actually be worse. Wouldn't that act as a skirt?