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.
User avatar
subcritical71
90
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 7:04 pm
Location: USA-Florida

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

dans79 wrote:
Fri Mar 20, 2020 1:20 pm
saviour stivala wrote:
Fri Mar 20, 2020 12:03 pm
So the FIA approves the software being used without them knowing what it contains because of the hug effort it takes for the FIA to verify what it contains. And even so the FIA technical regulations states “8.2.1 that ECU may only be used with FIA approved software”.
I'm sure they review it, but not at the level of detail you are assuming. Simply put, the teams are better staffed, better funded, and more skilled than the FIA, so slipping things by them would not be hard. Specially if what you are trying to get past them is obfuscated.
You don't even have to be difficult about it. Renault thought their brake bias software was legal for years before it became known it even existed, the whole time being 'approved' by the FIA. I think the only reason they found out was a former team member knew about it.

saviour stivala
saviour stivala
-17
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 11:54 am

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

dans79 wrote:
Fri Mar 20, 2020 1:20 pm
saviour stivala wrote:
Fri Mar 20, 2020 12:03 pm
So the FIA approves the software being used without them knowing what it contains because of the hug effort it takes for the FIA to verify what it contains. And even so the FIA technical regulations states “8.2.1 that ECU may only be used with FIA approved software”.
I'm sure they review it, but not at the level of detail you are assuming. Simply put, the teams are better staffed, better funded, and more skilled than the FIA, so slipping things by them would not be hard. Specially if what you are trying to get past them is obfuscated.
If as you say you are sure they, the FIA ‘review it’ it means that even so they see ‘obscure, unclear and unintelligible codes they still approve it for use.

User avatar
subcritical71
90
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 7:04 pm
Location: USA-Florida

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

saviour stivala wrote:
Fri Mar 20, 2020 5:05 pm
If as you say you are sure they, the FIA ‘review it’ it means that even so they see ‘obscure, unclear and unintelligible codes they still approve it for use.
... or upon being forced into an investigation settle with a team because it would take too much time to pursue.

User avatar
Mudflap
238
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

Keep in mind this is control software we are talking about. It is not something that can be 'reviewed' in isolation from the complete mechatronic system that it is part of.

To properly test it FIA would need access to the actual hardware it goes with, along with testing facilities, HIL rigs, etc.

For example something as simple as a PID can or cannot be a traction controller depending on how its terms are tuned. Without testing it on the hardware it goes with no one can say what it does!
How much TQ does it make though?

dans79
dans79
224
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 6:33 pm
Location: USA

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

Mudflap wrote:
Fri Mar 20, 2020 5:50 pm
Keep in mind this is control software we are talking about. It is not something that can be 'reviewed' in isolation from the complete mechatronic system that it is part of.

To properly test it FIA would need access to the actual hardware it goes with, along with testing facilities, HIL rigs, etc.

For example something as simple as a PID can or cannot be a traction controller depending on how its terms are tuned. Without testing it on the hardware it goes with no one can say what it does!
Some of the wiring/harnesses are regulated, but for sure not all of them.

Brake Horse Power
Brake Horse Power
14
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2017 8:36 pm

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

subcritical71 wrote:
Fri Mar 20, 2020 5:17 pm
saviour stivala wrote:
Fri Mar 20, 2020 5:05 pm
If as you say you are sure they, the FIA ‘review it’ it means that even so they see ‘obscure, unclear and unintelligible codes they still approve it for use.
... or upon being forced into an investigation settle with a team because it would take too much time to pursue.
Why can't the FIA just be authorized to say: "hey Ferrari, we noticed that you have gained an enormous amount of power. We want you to tell us how you did it and we will approve the method or not. If not a logical explanation can be given the car will be disqualified."

I mean how can you expect the FIA to go this deep into investigating the conformity of the regulations?

dans79
dans79
224
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 6:33 pm
Location: USA

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

Brake Horse Power wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 1:12 pm
I mean how can you expect the FIA to go this deep into investigating the conformity of the regulations?
Because its their job!

User avatar
subcritical71
90
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 7:04 pm
Location: USA-Florida

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

Brake Horse Power wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 1:12 pm
subcritical71 wrote:
Fri Mar 20, 2020 5:17 pm
saviour stivala wrote:
Fri Mar 20, 2020 5:05 pm
If as you say you are sure they, the FIA ‘review it’ it means that even so they see ‘obscure, unclear and unintelligible codes they still approve it for use.
... or upon being forced into an investigation settle with a team because it would take too much time to pursue.
Why can't the FIA just be authorized to say: "hey Ferrari, we noticed that you have gained an enormous amount of power. We want you to tell us how you did it and we will approve the method or not. If not a logical explanation can be given the car will be disqualified."

I mean how can you expect the FIA to go this deep into investigating the conformity of the regulations?
I remember (mis-remember?) during the battery saga that the FIA said it was the teams responsibility to be able to explain their systems to the satisfaction of the FIA. But how do the FIA, not fully understanding what they are looking at, ask the right questions. I would say that the... resourcefulness... and knowledge of the teams has surpassed the FIAs ability to police.

User avatar
markc
6
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2011 12:30 am

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

I think thats always been the case, the teams have far greater resources than the governing body. I was impressed with Liberty when they appointed Ross Brawn - Poacher turned Game Keeper. Red Bull still smart over the Double Diffuser, robbing them of an other double championship!

User avatar
strad
269
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 12:57 am

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

the teams have far greater resources than the governing body.
Kidding right?
In 2011 the FIA had revenues of 1.5 BILLION with a profit of 358 Million dollars.
To achieve anything, you must be prepared to dabble on the boundary of disaster.”
Sir Stirling Moss

ENGINE TUNER
ENGINE TUNER
18
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 5:07 pm

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

strad wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 8:59 pm
the teams have far greater resources than the governing body.
Kidding right?
In 2011 the FIA had revenues of 1.5 BILLION with a profit of 358 Million dollars.
Are you confusing FIA and FOM?

User avatar
bluechris
5
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 7:28 pm
Location: Athens

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

Brake Horse Power wrote:
subcritical71 wrote:
Fri Mar 20, 2020 5:17 pm
saviour stivala wrote:
Fri Mar 20, 2020 5:05 pm
If as you say you are sure they, the FIA ‘review it’ it means that even so they see ‘obscure, unclear and unintelligible codes they still approve it for use.
... or upon being forced into an investigation settle with a team because it would take too much time to pursue.
Why can't the FIA just be authorized to say: "hey Ferrari, we noticed that you have gained an enormous amount of power. We want you to tell us how you did it and we will approve the method or not. If not a logical explanation can be given the car will be disqualified."

I mean how can you expect the FIA to go this deep into investigating the conformity of the regulations?
+1 Yeah I'm with you on this.

User avatar
markc
6
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2011 12:30 am

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

strad wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 8:59 pm
the teams have far greater resources than the governing body.
Kidding right?
In 2011 the FIA had revenues of 1.5 BILLION with a profit of 358 Million dollars.
Ok, I'll take that at face value (because I don't have the data, and because you know your onions Strad!), but how much of that was spent on CFD, scale models, windtunnel data, in the loop simulation, single cylinder proof of concept engines, lubricants, fuels, etc, etc? How many staff do they have building a car to compete in F1? How much time and effort do they spend on fighting the other teams? I'll wager not a lot, they're in this to make money and pay wages, the teams on the other hand each have 100's of employees dedicated to specific parts of the cars to make them faster, and spending every penny they have to do just that, so they're always going to be ahead of the police force, and just to add to that their minds are tuned to eaking out any advantage they can muster as they've been fighting this war since the beginning! That's F1 and that's why the FIA are incapable of understanding this technology with out the team's input.

I probably should have quoted subcritical as well to make it clear which part I was refering to, my bad!

User avatar
strad
269
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 12:57 am

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

Are you confusing FIA and FOM?
No and I'd have to a bit of research but I'm thinking salaries like Todt's is a big chunk. :wink:
To achieve anything, you must be prepared to dabble on the boundary of disaster.”
Sir Stirling Moss

toraabe
toraabe
16
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2014 9:42 am

Re: FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

Post

RZS10 wrote:
Thu Mar 19, 2020 1:30 am
There's various possibilities why Merc left "the seven" ...
one hinted at by our italian friends: Merc were the ones who had access to information they shouldn't have had
another one could be that they did not have anything to win by further going after the FIA and Ferrari since they once again won both championships and Elkann was able to assure that they cannot do what they were doing previously, thus giving Mercedes the coinfidence that the unfair advantage was gone - all possible political/power struggle reasons aside, that's probably what they really wanted...
Mercedes apparently tried the trick themself last year when they got the inside information on how they did it. Whoop alot more hp.... 50 at least..