siskue2005 wrote: ↑
Fri Sep 25, 2020 6:03 pm
Moore77 wrote: ↑
Thu Sep 24, 2020 4:18 am
adrianjordan wrote: ↑
Wed Sep 23, 2020 12:02 pm
If they do (turn up with a W11 clone), surely they'll be banned as cloning is against the 2021 rules.
Other than vague statements so far, there are no actual rules implemented that can stop copying or cloning. It seems almost impossible to define clear rules in this direction.
Yes correct, i dont think they can ever stop teams copying, nearly impossible if you ask me.
In the entire history of F1, I can only think of one car where copying led to significant legal and sporting issues - when the Arrows FA1 was ruled to be a direct copy of the Shadow DN9 in 1978. Arrows had to rapidly design and build a new car.
Teams have always copied other teams' designs and key features. Patrick Head was quite open about the Williams FW07 being a development of the Lotus 79 when the car first appeared. However, there is a big difference between copying and understanding. Without a understanding of how the part or concept you are copying works, copying usually gets you nothing but trouble. Other teams copied the Lotus (except for Ferrari, whose 12 cylinder inline engine was too wide to implement the concept), but their cars were not successful. The Williams FW07 was a very successful car, proving that Williams might have copied a lot of the concepts of the Lotus 79, but that they understood how that car worked and could implement the concept successfully.
On the other hand, the 2003 Toyota TF103 was, based on side-by-side visual analysis, an almost perfect copy of the Ferrari F2002. The Ferrari had won the previous years' championship; the Toyota TF103 never won a race. Ferrari muttered and threatened legal action but Toyota was not directly punished.
We have seen teams rapidly copying other teams' features, such as the S-duct/F-duct from a few years ago, and many aero features such as wings, barge-boards, brake ducts, double diffusers etc. However, sometimes the team does not understand why and how the parts actually work with the aero concept of the rival car, so the copied parts do not work as hoped and expected.
F1 has kind of shot itself in the foot on the subject of trying to ban copying, since they introduced the Listed Parts concept. Teams can buy identical copies of significant portions of another team's car and use them on their own cars. The whole idea of Listed Parts was supposedly to allow teams to use common parts where those parts do not confer a competitive advantage. The challenge is that any listed part is potentially a competitive advantage. Like, um, er, brake ducts...
My own personal opinion is that banning copying is (a) next to impossible, without expensive proactive inspections and pre-approval of almost every aspect of a team's design (b) misses the point that copying and understanding do not necessarily coincide.
This is merely another reflection of the dysfunctional attempt to regulate and equalize performance of cars based on design and technical regulations, instead of regulating performance by limiting the total amount that can be spent on the car design and team operations. If F1 can reliably police a cost cap, then it should be possible to open up the regulations and tell the teams "have at it, if you think you can build a faster car within the cost cap".