Australian Formula 1 Grand Prix 2009
- Thread starter GT4 genius
- 606 comments
- 29,193 views
- 1,326
- Orange County C
- GTP_Im_Sorry
wrcsti
(Banned)
- 1,181
- elmataplata
mustang245
(Banned)
- 480
- mustang245
Ha! What a golden video...
Nigel should have known better!
Nigel should have known better!
- 87,582
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
- 10,837
- Belgium
- bramturismo
This is something typical for the teams to protest against right at the start of the season to not give those teams a chance to design a new and proper diffuser...
So much for credit a team gets when designing clever parts...
So much for credit a team gets when designing clever parts...
- 7,177
- Lisboa
- FLAT_TWELVE
They can't do it before, I think ... test cars can have whatever parts the teams want (2008 rear spoilers, diesel engines, you name it), so the only way to know if a team is trying to get an illegal car to an official race is ... when the car is delivered for pre-race scruteneering.
- 10,837
- Belgium
- bramturismo
When a car is unveiled and presented with a diffusers that others think are illegal, you could easily force those teams to develop a diffuser well early in the testing season before the new season gets underway.
They all could've complained back in February, that way, both Toyota, Williams and BrawnGP could've designed a new diffuser.
They all could've complained back in February, that way, both Toyota, Williams and BrawnGP could've designed a new diffuser.
- 1,192
- Columbia, SC
- carolina2001 & GTP_carolina2001
Is it likely that the "illegal" teams have a backup diffuser design in case the current ones are somehow deemed unfit to race?
- 453
As far as I've heard (somewhere in www.thef1.com), the reason Renault and RBR are complaining is 'cuz they showed similar diffuser concepts to the FIA earlier this year, were told they were illegal and, thus, had to work on simpler designs. So, they're in their right to complain if other teams are "allowed" to do what the FIA said could not be done...
... That is, if the story is real.
... That is, if the story is real.
- 7,719
No, they couldn't. The best they could do was "seek clarification" from the FIA - which delivered a highly ambiguous response: "It might be legal, but then again, it might be illegal." During an official weekend only, can the teams lodge a protest against a car should it pass the scrutinizers. It might even not pass these, though.
T/W/B could've (and perhaps should've) designed a spare one just-in-case, but out of their own free will - no team could be forced to change their cars: In pre-season testing (and in any sessions outside the official Friday-Sunday sessions), teams can run whatever they want as long as it conforms with safety-regulations: A V12-engined ground-effects go-kart on Michelin slicks, if so they wish. Or, more recently, McLaren's slightly-too-wide front wheel fairings, or indeed, the T/W/B diffusers: They were 100% legal before the latest amendment to the rules, but are now in a gray zone which, hopefully, will be cleared by tomorrow. Toyota, rest assured, already stated that they have a backup design - the only question remaining is how good it is without testing.
And one last thing: The major complaint Renault and Red Bull raised wasn't just the part itself: It was mainly that they themselves asked the FIA, just like Toyota and Williams, if such a part was legal - way back in 2008 - and received a negative reply. Could've been the wording, or a small difference in the details - but they stated that they came up with this part, but were told it will be illegal.
- 7,719
They'll:
Note that option A is only possible if it's declared illegal after the scrutinizing. If they don't pass it in the first place, they won't be allowed out of the pitbox.
- Race with a knowingly-illegal part, and either hope to appeal the decision later on or because there's nothing better to do.
- Not race at all, and sit it out in the garage, saving money, parts and engine-life.
- Use a makeshift diffuser from earlier stages of the design - by now, you can be certain that Brawn have at least a "standard" diffuser ready somewhere in their container.
Note that option A is only possible if it's declared illegal after the scrutinizing. If they don't pass it in the first place, they won't be allowed out of the pitbox.
- 1,230
The suspense is killing me....
The scrutineering will probably end up being the most exiting part of the season
The scrutineering will probably end up being the most exiting part of the season
mustang245
(Banned)
- 480
- mustang245
Too stupid, or perhaps, too desperate. For at least a few teams, this season is about survival more than ever before. BMW, Renault, Red Bull had their hands full contending with the frontrunners, already... and sponsors don't want 'their' liveries at the back where they won't get much love from veiwers (potential customers)! The ramifications of the scrutineers decision could be profound, I think. I can't really blame the 'cheaters', per se. More than likely it's their survival on the line... not just winning! And to be clear, I don't expect the teams I mentioned to just sit by and not protest while these guys come outta nowhere and put them out of business, potentially.
Last edited:
- 87,582
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
I guess McLaren have heard the phrase "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em" then.
Apparently the Renault, Red Bull and Ferrari phrasebook has the alternate "If you can't beat 'em, whine to any bugger who'll listen."
Tuned Mass Dampers.
And if I recall correctly, they were deemed legal by FIA-appointed race stewards, against whom the FIA then appealed to the FIA court of appeal. Whereupon the stewards' decision was overturned and the part was banned.
Apparently the Renault, Red Bull and Ferrari phrasebook has the alternate "If you can't beat 'em, whine to any bugger who'll listen."
Tuned Mass Dampers.
And if I recall correctly, they were deemed legal by FIA-appointed race stewards, against whom the FIA then appealed to the FIA court of appeal. Whereupon the stewards' decision was overturned and the part was banned.
- 7,719
Thing is, it's unclear what that McLaren diffuser is. It looks like it has some Brawn-ish lines - but also lacks the sculpting around the rear crash structure that is required for such a diffuser...
Also, don't forget Renault and RBR asked the FIA if such a part could be legal early on in their development, and received a negative reply - apparently contrary to what Toyota and Williams heard.
Also, don't forget Renault and RBR asked the FIA if such a part could be legal early on in their development, and received a negative reply - apparently contrary to what Toyota and Williams heard.
Tired Tyres
Premium
- 12,602
- West Yorkshire
- Tired_Tyres
- Tired Tyres
- 87,582
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
(yes. That was the point - note to whom I responded, while he was busy calling other teams who found a way to work round the rules "desperate" and "'cheaters'")
mustang245
(Banned)
- 480
- mustang245
Blake
Premium
- 10,976
- NSW, Australia
- haswell00
There’s a lot of speculation that Max has stopped a decision from being made on this subject to make sure it went to Melbourne and caused some conflict within FOTA.
I wonder though, could he have seen the opportunity to split the teams way back when teams were asking about the legality of this approach? FOTA was just gaining power and a chance to break it up would be a very strong political win. Maybe he made sure different teams got different information about the legality of the diffusers.
Kinda sad that we even have to contemplate such ideas though.
- 87,582
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
Imply. The author implies things. Readers infer them.
In either case, it's another example of what F1 is best at - creativity and innovation within a set of rules. And also what F1 is worst at - punishing creativity and innovation by making up a new set.
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
Does anybody else get the feeling that - assuming this is the teams running to the stewards because someone has better toys than they do - despite Williams and Toyota being a part of the official protest, the real target is Brawn GP?
