F1technical.net

Just_a_fan wrote:

Professor wrote:RBR's secret is the bib stays.

http://www.formula1journal.com/2010/08/ ... lood1.html

It that is the case (and a friend of mine who spent many years as an F1 engineer suggested it as a method to me several weeks ago) then they are cheating pure and simple.

A flexible wing is cheating and a flexible floor is also cheating.

If the FIA does find the flexible bib is beingnused by the teams then a suitable punishment might be removal of points from those involved. And perhaps a £50million fine too.

Its NOT cheating, if the car has passed all the tests, and there is NO rule prohibiting an item. It is just innovative engineering, something we all want in F1.

Regarding the steering debate, I understand the comments about "pro" ackermann, and "anti" ackermann. But to expand further. If the RBR inner wheel does not have as much steering angle on it, this could be an effort to ensure that the tyre is kept hot, by inducing side slip. Otherwise, when lightly loaded, the tyre could be cooling down a few degrees, before being next loaded. Could I be right??

I think I know how the flexible wing works... There was a cable protruding from the broken wing. I think when car is stationary it's stretched when the car is moving the cable gets loose and lets the wing go down.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

xpensive wrote:There you go, imagine that crooked carbon-fibre worm, being loaded ahead of itself or behind, helluva difference, no?
Twisting "forward", wing bends up, Twisting "backwards", wing bends down.

They made it a friggin lever, brilliant!

Cable? Remember the above Strad?

gilgen wrote:
Its NOT cheating, if the car has passed all the tests, and there is NO rule prohibiting an item. It is just innovative engineering, something we all want in F1.

It is cheating. An analogy for you to help you understand: if you drive along the public road at 20mph more than the speed limit you are breaking the law. Just because you slow down for the speed trap doesn't alter the fact that you are breaking the law elsewhere.

Everyone can see the thing does not abide by the rules just as everyone can see a car speeding on the road before and after the speed trap.

However, the FIA need to figure out where to put the test (the "speed trap") to catch the rule breaking. If they can't then RB get away with it just as the motorist gets away with speeding on the road.

Hopefully that's clear enough for you. They are cheating but have yet to be caught, with appropriate evidence, by the FIA.

Just_a_fan wrote:

gilgen wrote:
Its NOT cheating, if the car has passed all the tests, and there is NO rule prohibiting an item. It is just innovative engineering, something we all want in F1.

It is cheating. An analogy for you to help you understand: if you drive along the public road at 20mph more than the speed limit you are breaking the law. Just because you slow down for the speed trap doesn't alter the fact that you are breaking the law elsewhere.

Everyone can see the thing does not abide by the rules just as everyone can see a car speeding on the road before and after the speed trap.

However, the FIA need to figure out where to put the test (the "speed trap") to catch the rule breaking. If they can't then RB get away with it just as the motorist gets away with speeding on the road.

Hopefully that's clear enough for you. They are cheating but have yet to be caught, with appropriate evidence, by the FIA.

Not a good analogy really.

The law or rule about speeding says you must go the limit all the time. Not just when cops are there.

The rule about flexing bodywork is it must pass the test. That is the only rule. Any work around of that rule is not cheating, just an acid test of a rule that might need to be rewritten.

gilgen wrote:Its NOT cheating, if the car has passed all the tests, and there is NO rule prohibiting an item. It is just innovative engineering, something we all want in F1.

The rules are explicit and you cannot get away from it. The bib, the splitter, etc. must all be statically mounted to the car. Due to material limits the tests for this allow some flex - but, and this is very important, the test is secondary to the main rule (that is also explicitly stated) and the intention is that all parts are statically mounted. Red Bull have not come up with some innovative new solution, they've come up with an innovative way of deceiving the FIA and getting past their tests. In accordance with the rules the FIA are updating the tests to stop Red Bull cheating.

Giblet wrote:The rule about flexing bodywork is it must pass the test. That is the only rule. Any work around of that rule is not cheating, just an acid test of a rule that might need to be rewritten.

That is incorrect. There is a rule (I forget the number but it's early in the Flexible wing test thread) that states all parts must be statically mounted. The test is a separate rule later in the regs, and explicitly states that the FIA reserve the right to change the test at any time to ensure that teams obey the static bodywork rule. Red Bull clearly are not obeying that rule and so the tests are being modified.

Giblet wrote:The rule about flexing bodywork is it must pass the test. That is the only rule. Any work around of that rule is not cheating, just an acid test of a rule that might need to be rewritten.

Wrong. The rule about flexible bodywork is quite separate from the rule about testing for the flexibility of bodywork.

To return to my earlier analogy. There is a 'rule' outlawing speeding and there is a 'rule' about how the Police carry out their tests of your speed. The FIA have to test the car in a certain manner just as the Police must follow certain procedures to legally catch you speeding. That's why people get off speeding tickets using the 'loophole' of Police procedures.

Just_a_fan wrote:

Giblet wrote:The rule about flexing bodywork is it must pass the test. That is the only rule. Any work around of that rule is not cheating, just an acid test of a rule that might need to be rewritten.

Wrong. The rule about flexible bodywork is quite separate from the rule about testing for the flexibility of bodywork.

To return to my earlier analogy. There is a 'rule' outlawing speeding and there is a 'rule' about how the Police carry out their tests of your speed. The FIA have to test the car in a certain manner just as the Police must follow certain procedures to legally catch you speeding. That's why people get off speeding tickets using the 'loophole' of Police procedures.

I totally agree that the Red Bull is breaking the rules and Ross Brawn agrees too! "bib stays that hinge, buckle, slide and have dampers. So I think it should end that particular trend and that is the mission really. That will be good.".
Bodywork must be fixed! The test is like the speed camera to catch someone breaking the rules and the FIA are having to introduce more tests to catch them cheating.
Red bull will not be ahead after monza in the way they were in hungrey again!

I noticed the cable when his front wing came off and thought it odd too. Could it also be connected to the floor and pull the front up as the wings move down or just to a spring of some sort?

ptennisnet wrote:I noticed the cable when his front wing came off and thought it odd too. Could it also be connected to the floor and pull the front up as the wings move down or just to a spring of some sort?

After that incident Ted said that they had problems attaching the cable to the new nose in the pits and said that it was the control cable for the front wing adjustment.

just an outside thought -

what if the two pillars connecting the front wing to the nose cone isn't actually connected to the nose cone? What if they go through two slits into the nosecone and are connected to some sort of spring/lever structure inside the nosecone, allowing the front wing to deflect downwards at any rate they want it to?

I am not talking about the entire nose,just the detachable nose cone. The mechanism would be independent of the rest of the car.

Also, the mechanism could be set up so that deflection is linear until 200N and then becomes non-linear, thus complying with FIA rules. And the most elegant thing would be that the whole thing is neatly packaged inside the front section of the nosecone, so no one would see a thing if they had to change nose cones or the nosecone broke.

Think about it, the nosecone of the redbull is pretty massive anyway. Enough volume for a spring me thinks.

Frankly I have no idea if this could work or what this implies, so feel free to find any holes in this (no pun intended )

It contravenes the rules.

myurr wrote:

gilgen wrote:Its NOT cheating, if the car has passed all the tests, and there is NO rule prohibiting an item. It is just innovative engineering, something we all want in F1.

The rules are explicit and you cannot get away from it. The bib, the splitter, etc. must all be statically mounted to the car. Due to material limits the tests for this allow some flex - but, and this is very important, the test is secondary to the main rule (that is also explicitly stated) and the intention is that all parts are statically mounted. Red Bull have not come up with some innovative new solution, they've come up with an innovative way of deceiving the FIA and getting past their tests. In accordance with the rules the FIA are updating the tests to stop Red Bull cheating.

What you have mentioned is , presently, speculation. The cars have been minutely examined by the FIA, and nothing untoward has been found. I would safely say that FIA have been well primed by Brawn and Whitmarsh, as to what to look for. If there is anything hidden, then Adrian is a very good illusionist. Paul Daniels, watch out!

Just an update. The FIA technical report states that the Red Bull was fully checked, including the stay bars, wing etc, and all were found to be in conformity.