- 1,062
- Kansas City
And where did you see this?
Emirates Formula 1 70th Anniversary Grand Prix 2020Formula 1
- Thread starter Jimlaad43
- 398 comments
- 13,965 views
And where did you see this?
- 1,751
- Old South Wales
- numbnuts70
It's everywhere, Perez is out, Vettel's in.
Wow, compounds mean **** all to drivers. LH struggles to differentiate between weekends. Follow the engineers advice.
- 13,076
- United Kingdom
"everywhere" usually comes with a source. As for everywhere, it's nowhere on reputable sites so i truly don't believe you.
- 1,751
- Old South Wales
- numbnuts70
Put 2n2 together
- 13,076
- United Kingdom
No, you're the one coming up with the claim, bring some actual sources into the table. Don't just sit there with the lazy journalism answer of not-news such as phrases like "set to". That just means not news but we're saying something to get clicks. This thread is supposed to discuss news or rumours, not present rumours as news. You can't make a "done deal" claim without any evidence.
- 1,062
- Kansas City
- 2,976
- Columbus, Ohio
The only thing I've found on the matter is that Vettel hitched a ride with Racing Point's team boss (who Vettel says owns a Ferrari Pista, so why wouldn't you grab a free ride in that). That's about it.
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
"That's about it"? F1 managed to race in 2020 by the skin of its teeth and came back with a promise of strictly-enforced safety protocols and "bubbles"... then both drivers from one team very publicly break that, one of them with the boss of another team that's already got a positive-tested driver?
These episodes have been pretty bad for F1 in that regard, imo.
- 13,076
- United Kingdom
Perez has tested positive again, Hulkenberg to stay in the Racing Point this weekend.
https://www.racefans.net/2020/08/07...t-as-perez-tests-positive-for-covid-19-again/
https://www.racefans.net/2020/08/07...t-as-perez-tests-positive-for-covid-19-again/
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
Am I the only one who's not surprised? Everything we know about Covid so far suggests that it takes more than three days and a Lemsip to clear it up.
Anyway, big shame for Perez at a time when he needs to put in some headline-grabbing performances if it's true that Vettel is taking his seat in 2021. Good for Hulk, of course, I hope we get to see him race. If Hulk's car has a second DNS then the conspiracy theories will live long.
- 1,497
- United Kingdom
- evildave333
MagpieRacer
Premium
- 17,444
- Wymondham, Norfolk
- Seagull_Racer
While on the subject of tyres, everything is one step softer so the medium C2 tyre from the British GP is now the hard tyre, the soft C3 tyre is now the medium and the soft is the C4 tyre which is the 2nd softest compound available.
The interesting thing for me is the tyres are set in terms of quantities for each driver, 8 soft, 3 medium, 2 hard. The temperatures will be higher again, heat degradation could be high, there's a real possibility that there will be a struggle to maintain enough tyres to do qualifying, 3 practice sessions AND a 2/3 stop race. I think we will see very little running through practice and a lot of teams wanting to start on the medium.
I also wouldn't be overly surprised to see Mercedes attempt Q2 on hards.
The interesting thing for me is the tyres are set in terms of quantities for each driver, 8 soft, 3 medium, 2 hard. The temperatures will be higher again, heat degradation could be high, there's a real possibility that there will be a struggle to maintain enough tyres to do qualifying, 3 practice sessions AND a 2/3 stop race. I think we will see very little running through practice and a lot of teams wanting to start on the medium.
I also wouldn't be overly surprised to see Mercedes attempt Q2 on hards.
- 3,600
- Middelburg
Prior to this race weekend Renault wins protest against Racing Point. -/- 15 points and a substantial fine of $400K. Verdict: illegal (parts on the) car
And Nico 'the Hulk' Hulkenberg drives again after Perez has been tested positive again.
And Nico 'the Hulk' Hulkenberg drives again after Perez has been tested positive again.
Last edited:
- 1,751
- Old South Wales
- numbnuts70
"And reprimanded for 2 races", whatever that means. - EDit, for the previous rounds.
RP will appeal most likely.
RP get 400e fine and points deduction, Ferrari get nothing for a major infringement.
- 1,433
- Germany
- psychoazubi
This tweet explains it very good
MagpieRacer
Premium
- 17,444
- Wymondham, Norfolk
- Seagull_Racer
It was also legal in 2019 and the rule changed for 2020 so could have been already being designed and they got caught out by the change.
- 13,076
- United Kingdom
So the brake ducts are illegal.
But because it's a Sporting Regulation violation, not a technical one, Racing Point can keep using the brakes. The 15 point deduction and fine is their penalty and nothing more.
So the ducts are now legal? This makes no sense as a ruling.
Schrodingers Brake Ducts. Simultaneously legal and illegal.
But because it's a Sporting Regulation violation, not a technical one, Racing Point can keep using the brakes. The 15 point deduction and fine is their penalty and nothing more.
So the ducts are now legal? This makes no sense as a ruling.
Schrodingers Brake Ducts. Simultaneously legal and illegal.
- 3,926
- St.Pete, FL
- NotThePrez
- NotThePrez
Racing Point: Uses an "illegal" (by way of the sporting, not the technical regulations) brake duct: Loses constructors points, gets a fine and a reprimand, and will basically have a target on their back for the rest of the season.
Ferrari: Develops an illegal (or at very minimum less-than-legal, according to the FIA) PU component and out of nowhere wins 3 races in a row, only to suddenly lose their pace when the FIA issues new technical directives: FIA investigates and finds that the PU isn't 100% legal, no penalty, DQ, fines or loss in points, and all matters regarding the investigation are kept secret.
Seems legit.
Edit: FWIW, I don't have an issue with the punishment RP got (though it'd be great if the FIA gave a bit more clarity on the legality of the ducts), but I do have an issue with the inconsistency, especially given the very different degrees of effects both incidents created.
Ferrari: Develops an illegal (or at very minimum less-than-legal, according to the FIA) PU component and out of nowhere wins 3 races in a row, only to suddenly lose their pace when the FIA issues new technical directives: FIA investigates and finds that the PU isn't 100% legal, no penalty, DQ, fines or loss in points, and all matters regarding the investigation are kept secret.
Seems legit.
Edit: FWIW, I don't have an issue with the punishment RP got (though it'd be great if the FIA gave a bit more clarity on the legality of the ducts), but I do have an issue with the inconsistency, especially given the very different degrees of effects both incidents created.
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
Here's how I read it (and I could be wrong as you well know
). The ducts are legal in terms of material, dimensions, operation, all of that. They pass scrutineering requirements in every physical way.However, RP received CAD data from Mercedes when "designing" the ducts. The FIA therefore finds that RP could not have created the ducts they did (which have "minimal" differences from the Mercedes ducts) without the knowledge they gained from Mercedes. Therefore the part can be said to have been designed by Mercedes and modified by RP. That's where it gets weird - the part is legal and so can race. Owning the part is not legal, but should RP be punished for the single instance of obtaining the part (once they had it they had it) or for every appearance their car makes with the part on?
Personally I think the penalty seems quite light, and the whole affair has shown teams how much they can "purchase" a part for.
andrea
(Banned)
- 5,858
- Japan
- virtualnao
Just 15 points. Ferrari should pop the illegal engine back in.
- 3,600
- Middelburg
Here's how I read it (and I could be wrong as you well know
However, RP received CAD data from Mercedes when "designing" the ducts. The FIA therefore finds that RP could not have created the ducts they did (which have "minimal" differences from the Mercedes ducts) without the knowledge they gained from Mercedes. Therefore the part can be said to have been designed by Mercedes and modified by RP. That's where it gets weird - the part is legal and so can race. Owning the part is not legal, but should RP be punished for the single instance of obtaining the part (once they had it they had it) or for every appearance their car makes with the part on?
Personally I think the penalty seems quite light, and the whole affair has shown teams how much they can "purchase" a part for.
Someone asked a question: If Mercedes 'gave' them the CAD data then why are they not part of the penalty? Or does Mercedes give all their data to all the teams for them free to use?
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
Apparently it was/is legal for Mercedes to give that information to Racing Point. It's illegal for Racing Point to use it.
EDIT: Found this on Reddit, interesting that he doesn't know how many points they've been fined!
MagpieRacer
Premium
- 17,444
- Wymondham, Norfolk
- Seagull_Racer
Here's how I read it (and I could be wrong as you well know
However, RP received CAD data from Mercedes when "designing" the ducts. The FIA therefore finds that RP could not have created the ducts they did (which have "minimal" differences from the Mercedes ducts) without the knowledge they gained from Mercedes. Therefore the part can be said to have been designed by Mercedes and modified by RP. That's where it gets weird - the part is legal and so can race. Owning the part is not legal, but should RP be punished for the single instance of obtaining the part (once they had it they had it) or for every appearance their car makes with the part on?
Personally I think the penalty seems quite light, and the whole affair has shown teams how much they can "purchase" a part for.
I think had this whole saga taken place after the rule changed the penalty would have been harsher.
In F1 terms we're talking tight margins, at the time Mercedes supplied the info its was completely legal. RP were adamant they were inside the rules, the penalty is relatively speaking light, but it is a sporting issue not technical, which all tells me that firstly there's a grace period to reflect ongoing development during the regulation change and also a potential lack of clarity around what could or couldn't be done in terms of parts design.
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
That's very much RP's argument (see the video I edited into my above post). However, 400k Euros and 15 championship points is very clear. RP will surely appeal?
- 1,497
- United Kingdom
- evildave333
Corruption in F1 and society are very similar the more money the less repercussions there's a definite correlation...
- 12,900
- Cambridge
- Moglet85
- Moglet
Didn't the FIA back down because they couldn't prove anything conclusively and they were concerned about having a legal case brought against them if they continued to push it? It was all very strange and definitely feels like a case of them giving in to such a huge name but they can't quite be compared directly.
Last edited:
- 415
- Hofuf
- Fishylocked
Am I the only one who is starting to get disturbed by the amount of Crofty justifying Alex Albon?
