F1technical.net

turbof1 wrote:Interestingly, Pirelli pasted some data to Mercedes in an email. I find that really a stupid decision to do so.

The YDT is probably significant; teams are free to hold them whenever they want. Mercedes could have tested mid-season, and brought new parts without ever getting into trouble. I think the the punishment is heavier then the advantages they got out of the Pirelli test.

The Tribunal does accept that Mercedes and Pirelli acted out of good faith, by misqualified approval.

YDT is not significant with the changes for next year and Merc not rly being this championship chase so they dont need updates for the fall, and the YDT is to be done on the 17-19 July on Silverstone this year with all teams.

FIA as incompetent as ever!!

Huntresa wrote:

turbof1 wrote:Interestingly, Pirelli pasted some data to Mercedes in an email. I find that really a stupid decision to do so.

The YDT is probably significant; teams are free to hold them whenever they want. Mercedes could have tested mid-season, and brought new parts without ever getting into trouble. I think the the punishment is heavier then the advantages they got out of the Pirelli test.

The Tribunal does accept that Mercedes and Pirelli acted out of good faith, by misqualified approval.

YDT is not significant with the changes for next year and Merc not rly being this championship chase so they dont need updates for the fall, and the YDT is to be done on the 17-19 July on Silverstone this year with all teams.

Still significant for this year. IMO, not being in the championship race doesn't mean they can't settle for spot 2 or 3. And of course you can run as much as you want, what you want (including parts for next year). 1200-1300km on 3 days is a realistic goal.

turbof1 wrote:Interestingly, Pirelli pasted some data to Mercedes in an email. I find that really a stupid decision to do so.

The YDT is probably significant; teams are free to hold them whenever they want. Mercedes could have tested mid-season, and brought new parts without ever getting into trouble. I think the the punishment is heavier then the advantages they got out of the Pirelli test.

The Tribunal does accept that Mercedes and Pirelli acted out of good faith, by misqualified approval.

That's a good summary.

A "fine mess" like Laurel & Hardy.

Pirelli helped Mercedes. They confirmed Mercedes wanted to use the 2011 car, but it wasn't representative to test the tyres in Pirelli's opinion. Brawn did a good job with his answers - as always. I think Mercedes will be happy with this decision.

turbof1 wrote:The YDT is probably significant; teams are free to hold them whenever they want. Mercedes could have tested mid-season, and brought new parts without ever getting into trouble. I think the the punishment is heavier then the advantages they got out of the Pirelli test.

Maybe the YDT will get rained out and no useful testing could be done. :p

A good outcome and one that was anticipated. It makes a lot of sense all round. The FiA had a great part in creating this mess. If the secretary of the WMSC is the only correct addressee for any request for out of schedule testing - as the tribunal stipulates - the own legal advisor of the FiA to Charlie Whiting should have known that obscure factoid. He should have advised all parties accordingly. That way the whole mess would have been avoided. So the FiA have some reason to look at their own procedures and the way they communicate.

But this is also a good outcome from another point of view. The air has been cleaned by the tribunal and all parties have been heard. So unless one teams lodges an appeal in the next 7 days the issue is now put to bed without big damage to anybodies face. I thought the tribunal was primarily called for that purpose in the first place. To open up a way to re balance the relatively small competitive advantage in testing that Mercedes gained from the Pirelli test. This has now been achieved by banning them from the young drivers test. The small penalty which was suggested by the Mercedes lawyer in the first place acknowledges that there was no malicious intend on behalf of Mercedes and Pirelli. So even Mercedes face was saved when they accepted the ban.

From a third angle it is also satisfying that Mercedes have not been made the scapegoat of the conflict between Todt and Ecclestone over the appointment of a tyre supplier. Ecclestone has said it with clear words that he already made a contract with Pirelli for next year regardless of the decision of the FiA. That makes it difficult for Todt to appoint Michelin or another firm which is his right under the ownership of the series. Normally this decision would be made by the F1 commission but it currently does not exist due to a lack of a signed concord agreement. So the right to make that decision goes back to Todt as the series owner. He is probably a bit pissed off by Pirelli and Ecclestone for pre-empting his decision by putting Pirelli signage around every circuit for the next three years. I'm glad he did not take it out on Mercedes to be the fall guys of this conflict.

And finally the aspect of the other teams must be considered. They all non consciously conspired to prevent Pirelli from adequate testing and created this situation in the fist place. Then they suffered a setback by seeing Mercedes gathering some data from the test. So there was some justified grievance because the sporting equity was distorted by the way this tyre test was implemented. They called for blood but did not get it. But they got the sporting equity re balanced. I think they can be satisfied with the outcome if they think about it. If the tribunal had looked a bit more critical at the role the FiA played in this mess Merc could have gone without penalty at all. That would have been a lot worse for them. So my conclusion is it was a good decision all round.

Does this mean that Mercedes can use the data it collected?

Yeah; the tribunal decided it would have been impossible for Mercedes that they didn't learned from it, so Mercedes might just as well go ahead and crack the private server of Brawn open. There is no reason, legal or otherwise, not to use it now that they have a verdict.

WhiteBlue wrote:The FiA had a great part in creating this mess.....Charlie Whiting should have known..... He should have advised all parties accordingly. So the FiA have some reason to look at their own procedures and the way they communicate..

On the money!

CBeck113 wrote:Does this mean that Mercedes can use the data it collected?

Which was the general idea, just check where MGP is now and were before those three race-distances worth of testing?

xpensive wrote:

CBeck113 wrote:Does this mean that Mercedes can use the data it collected?

Which was the general idea, just check where MGP is now and were before those three race-distances worth of testing.

I believe you are a bit over emphasising that aspect. Even before the test became public knowledge many drivers and experts expected MGP to take the win in Monaco. The improvements they made in Canada can also be partially attributed to the characteristics of the track that has no long and fast sweeping corners putting too much energy into the rear tyres which was MGP's problem. One can also assume that they will naturally make some progress in solving this problem. After all Red Bull was having a similar problem and also slowly got to grips with it. It tells me we should not be jumping to extreme conclusions about the usefulness of the Pirelli test to Mercedes problem solving of the over heating problem.

Christian Horner was in good humour about the whole thing today. At the Red Bull #OPENHOUSE he was asked 'what 1 change would he make in F1' and he said he'd relax some of the rules, adding with a grin "as Mercedes have already done".


p.s a lot has been made of Horner's appearance at the hearing in Paris but he was there for another reason (as well);


http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2013/06/21/r ... f1-engine/


So not entirely surprising.

What amazes me most in this, as it often does, is the way the forums react to these soap operas.
IF your favorites team or driver is adversely, even if just in the beholders eye, affected, then it's the end of the world . A very big deal.
Whereas, IF your fanboy preferences are the one perpetrating the perceived crime against F1 and humanity, it was not only not wrong but perfectly acceptable and explainable. No big deal.
And this from people who have nothing more invested than a TV subscription, and a huge bias and prejudice.

Good interviews with Ross Brawn, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTmXBg4CbKY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4Qcu_PDOcQ