F1technical.net

n_anirudh wrote:
Post race scrut? random checks over the weekend. They can have people in the pit garages..No big deal..Fines/bans can be imposed as they go against the tech directive..

How post race is gonna help against someone who used swap in the middle stint? They can't control 22 cars, this is a ridiculous situation.

Actually you can. If markings are present, and I think they will, it is very easy to verify at any time, including during the race, that they run the tyres in the correct position. Chances are very high you will get caught doing it, especially the bigger teams, who get the most tv time.

Running more camber requires set up changes. Charlie whiting would only need to take a walk along the starting grid to check if the cars comply.

Tyre pressures are readable through telemetry.

Sevach wrote:

n_anirudh wrote:
Post race scrut? random checks over the weekend. They can have people in the pit garages..No big deal..Fines/bans can be imposed as they go against the tech directive..

How post race is gonna help against someone who used swap in the middle stint? They can't control 22 cars, this is a ridiculous situation.

Camber means uneven wear across the tread. Run the tyres on the wrong side and the wear will be incorrect for the tyre's correct position. Camber can't be changed mid race and the cars are untouched by the teams after the race until parc ferme rules are ended.

Excellent point! +1 from me.

MOWOG wrote:

Tyres should primarily provide grip and traction. The suspension is better equipped to apply the springing and damping properties that engineers need.

Those statements are so obviously correct, it is a great mystery why the masters of Formula One reject both concepts out of hand.

If I'm not mistaken the 13" rim is still in use, so the FIA can control brake size and stopping distance,
I'd like to see F1 switch to the 15 inch rim used in Indycar

n_anirudh wrote:Post race scrut? random checks over the weekend. They can have people in the pit garages..No big deal..Fines/bans can be imposed as they go against the tech directive..

If it's a tech directive then non-compliance is an automatic disqualification. As per Hamilton and Vettel falling foul of the fuel rules and being sent to the back of the grid.

http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 11017.html
Another interesting report from AMuS saying:
McLaren asked repeatedly whether tyre swapping was a concern and got it in writing that there was no concern.
McLaren warned Pirelli after the practise failures that there could be problems in the race, which was disregarded by Pirelli.
Whitmarsh apparently was on the verge to stop both cars and make them DNF.

The rest you can easily figure out. Hembery accused McLaren together with other teams to have caused the failures by malpractice. One can assume that Whitmarsh had a word with him and told him he would make the facts public unless Pirelli would own up to their responsibility. Hence the sudden turnaround. Bottom line: Pirelli only give in when they are with the back to the wall and have no way out. Until that time they will tell half truth and lies.

WhiteBlue wrote:http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 11017.html
Another interesting report from AMuS saying:
McLaren asked repeatedly whether tyre swapping was a concern and got it in writing that there was no concern.
McLaren warned Pirelli after the practise failures that there could be problems in the race, which was disregarded by Pirelli.
Whitmarsh apparently was on the verge to stop both cars and make them DNF.

The rest you can easily figure out. Hembery accused McLaren together with other teams to have caused the failures by malpractice. One can assume that Whitmarsh had a word with him and told him he would make the facts public unless Pirelli would own up to their responsibility. Hence the sudden turnaround. Bottom line: Pirelli only give in when they are with the back to the wall and have no way out. Until that time they will tell half truth and lies.

It was quite remarkably how Whitmarsh stated he would have backed the drivers' boycott if it came to it. So it could be linked to that.

it certainly is! It's all in the report.

WhiteBlue wrote:http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 11017.html
Another interesting report from AMuS saying:
McLaren asked repeatedly whether tyre swapping was a concern and got it in writing that there was no concern.
McLaren warned Pirelli after the practise failures that there could be problems in the race, which was disregarded by Pirelli.
Whitmarsh apparently was on the verge to stop both cars and make them DNF.

The rest you can easily figure out. Hembery accused McLaren together with other teams to have caused the failures by malpractice. One can assume that Whitmarsh had a word with him and told him he would make the facts public unless Pirelli would own up to their responsibility. Hence the sudden turnaround. Bottom line: Pirelli only give in when they are with the back to the wall and have no way out. Until that time they will tell half truth and lies.

If that's true, it's just undone their good work on taking responsibility... because they didn't take it upon themselves. If its true, I'm done with Pirelli for ever. How anyone can now associate with a company like that is astounding.

I don't see any other way to interpret the facts at this time. I'm sure in a story like this there will be plenty of investigative journalism. So eventually the truth will come out. McLaren are deep in the doldrums and have very little reason to protect Pirelli after they have accused them falsely. In this case the UK and German interest is aligned. Both want to know who effed up. And the German press will not be taking prisoners. AMuS have no interest to help Pirelli to weasel out of this. The company is based in Italy and the UK. They will not have to consider any sensibilities.

Thanks WB for tracking that down.

Pirelli have basically tried to take a moral stand - only to be found out having to being pushed into it by force - because they again did the wrong thing. Astounding. I'll no longer question Pirelli and their motives, as they're bright and clear for the world and consumers to see. If anyone wants to deal with a company like that - you only have yourself to blame now. The real question now is why, knowing all this, does the FIA and the teams continue allow themselves to be in contract with such a lying, manipulative, scheming company where the negative PR, based on proven facts, is so much, it makes you wonder if anyone has any morals in F1 anymore? Actually, it's pretty much what F1 is now isn't it - one big political debacle, surround in half truths and misdirection.

Thanks Pirelli

Actually, it's pretty much what F1 is now isn't it - one big political debacle, surround in half truths and misdirection.

Yup.

It really does seem as though the sport is bound and determined to tear itself apart to the point where no one will want to watch it anymore. It would not be the first time that egos and money have turned a good thing into a pile of horse manure. I say not only thanks Pirelli but thanks to Bernie too for being so unremittingly greedy that he would sacrifice the sport we love for a few sheckels more.

turbof1 wrote: It was quite remarkably how Whitmarsh stated he would have backed the drivers' boycott if it came to it. So it could be linked to that.

Being cynical, one wonders if he'd have been quite so happy if his cars were at the front of the field at every race. He has nothing to lose from a driver boycott or from pulling his drivers in early because of tyre failures.

As I see things, the hopeless tire-quality was formulated by MrE to spice things up, why Pirelli went long with it is a mystery.