FRIC suspensions to be banned. Merc domination in danger?

  • Thread starter Hun200kmh
  • 99 comments
  • 4,563 views
Peasantslayer
I've read the article but I can't see anything which says whether the teams have to unanimously agree for or against FRIC for the remainder of the season.
Click to expand...

Okay then let's put it this way...if the FIA could make a sweeping decision saying this was done with, one why haven't they? Two, explain to me how traction control, active suspension, various aero devices big ones being double decker, f-duct, and EBD and now FRIC all were threatened during a season that they became supposedly too great and thus ended up being ban after that season. Though coming under threat early, mid or 3/4ths of the season through.
 
Perhaps they want to be fairer than simply handing out a ban, wasn't a form EBD banned at the start of 2012 and it meant that RB started on the back foot?
 
Peasantslayer
Perhaps they want to be fairer than simply handing out a ban, wasn't a form EBD banned at the start of 2012 and it meant that RB started on the back foot?
Click to expand...
Yes, but the teams knew that the blown diffuser was going to be banned. The FIA tried to ban it in the middle of 2011, and it ended in disaster - the teams agreed to it, then immediately tried to find ways around it, which ended with everyone claiming that they needed to retard the throttle and produce the blowing effect in order to protect the engines.

And Red Bull were hardly on the back foot, given that they managed to recreate the effects whilst being within the letter of the regulations.
 
I think you guys are wrong and autosport is right. In fact, all info I find everywhere is consistent with the way autosport is reporting it.


ESPNF1

An FIA technical directive was sent to the teams following the British Grand Prix warning that cars running such systems from Germany onwards would be reported to the stewards. FRIC systems link the front and rear suspension to help control the pitch of the car under braking and maintain its ride height for aerodynamic advantage, and is believed to be one of the strenghts of the dominant Mercedes car.
Read more at http://en.espnf1.com/williams/motorsport/story/166751.html#S30y3L3tmUPrY3p4.99


An FIA technical directive was issued to the teams following the British Grand Prix warning that cars running such systems may be reported to the stewards from the German Grand Prix onwards if they are believed to be in breach of a rule that outlaws moveable aerodynamic devices. However, if the teams agree unanimously to run their current systems until the end of the season, the FIA will allow FRIC systems to remain on the cars.
Read more at http://en.espnf1.com/f1/motorsport/story/166621.html#8csqfcRWbyK6tH7K.99



F1 Technical

Earlier this week it was reported that the FIA, by means of F1 technical delegate Charlie Whiting had written to teams, noting that thorough investigations of the team's different interlinked suspension implementations could all be considered moveable aerodynamic devices.

As such, the FIA aim to consider the systems illegal as of the upcoming German Grand Prix, but did leave the door open for teams to find unanimous agreement to postpone the ban until the end of the season.



I'm still looking for the technical directive's actual text, I guess that'll be the one clearing this issue once and for all
 
FOUND IT

“Having now seen and studied nearly every current design of front-to-rear linked suspension system, as well as reviewing future developments some teams have shared with us, we are firmly of the view that the legality of all such systems could be called into question, particularly with respect to compliance with Article 3.15 of the F1 Technical Regulations.

“As these systems, in one form or another, have been in use for some time we are inclined to permit their continued use for the remainder of the current season, however, we feel we would need the agreement of all participating teams to take this approach. We would therefore be very grateful if you could indicate whether you may be in a position to agree with such an approach.

“Failing this, we would have to consider making a report to the stewards about the non-compliance of any car fitted with a system which appears to allow the response of the suspension at either or both of the rear corners to drive the response of the suspension at either or both of the front corners (or vice versa).”

Source: http://adamcooperf1.com/
 
Obviously they're approaching things differently this time. The technical regulations have always maintained that the FIA have to get approval first. I guess they want to avoid a repeat of the farce that was the OTBD ban. This way, the burden of responsibility rests with the teams. The FIA have phrased this as a reasonable request. If the teams reject it, that makes them out to be the villains.

Also, just because Autosport print it, that doesn't make it gospel truth. They are susceptible to bias, and there have been occasions in the past when their agenda has been brazenly obvious, like when Lotus sponsored the Autosport International Show.

And bear in mind that lots of other publications simply re-print what Autosport say. That byline in the ESPN article, "by ESPN staff", is a tell-tale sign that they have simply re-written something.
 
Amus saying they don't expect Merc or RB to use FRIC in Hockenheim. http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/...-red-bull-in-hocknheim-ohne-fric-8453531.html

Lauda quotes from the same article:

"The system has been used for two and a half years and has been all technical inspections happened without objection, it is difficult to understand why suddenly changes the perspective of things.."

Lauda calls on FIA race director Charlie Whiting to take a stand. "We do not want to continue to invest in a technology that is guided by the rules of absurdity.'s Why it is so important that we, the FIA specifies clear guidelines in this case. We want to know whether it is legal or illegal."
 
Last edited:
FormulaKimball
This is VERY ANNOYING ... seems like everyone just spammed the Autosport angle and I can't locate that article I saw on formula1.com anywhere. It's almost like "let's not let the truth get in the way of a good story that will drum up attention for the sport." Either that or Formula1.com had to pull the article because it was inaccurate (how likely is that)? Guess we'll get clarification in the next week or two...
Click to expand...
Isn't it in your browser history?
 
Peasantslayer
Amus saying they don't expect Merc or RB to use FRIC in Hockenheim. http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/...-red-bull-in-hocknheim-ohne-fric-8453531.html

Lauda quotes from the same article:

"The system has been used for two and a half years and has been all technical inspections happened without objection, it is difficult to understand why suddenly changes the perspective of things.."

Lauda calls on FIA race director Charlie Whiting to take a stand. "We do not want to continue to invest in a technology that is guided by the rules of absurdity.'s Why it is so important that we, the FIA specifies clear guidelines in this case. We want to know whether it is legal or illegal."
Click to expand...

Sounds like they knew this was coming and already had contingent traditional setups in place. Really interesting developments - really expensive chess game.
 
Wardez
Sounds like they knew this was coming and already had contingent traditional setups in place. Really interesting developments - really expensive chess game.
Click to expand...
At the start of the season Merc had so many different bits to test they looked like the best prepared team, with the way F1 teams are it would make sense to have thought about the possibility of something like FRIC being banned.
 
F1 is far too political. It's entire existence has been marred by the FIA introducting rule changes to stop dominating teams. Why can't a team that is doing so well be allowed to do well? The other teams should have to compete by building better cars, not by waiting for rule changes that make everyone equal. It's like socialism; the government, the FIA, restricts success.

As a NASCAR fan I despise Johnson's domination, but if NASCAR ever tried to stop the domination of Johnson and Hendrick (through changes to the cars, not the point system) it could hardly be called a sport. My man Stewart snapped Johnson's streak with his own team in 2011, and that's what F1 teams should have to do as well. But they have to rely on car changes, that's why Vettel's streak will end.
 
JMoney689
F1 is far too political. It's entire existence has been marred by the FIA introducting rule changes to stop dominating teams. Why can't a team that is doing so well be allowed to do well? The other teams should have to compete by building better cars, not by waiting for rule changes that make everyone equal. It's like socialism; the government, the FIA, restricts success.
Click to expand...

Well part of the problem is different interpretations of "fairness" and "sporting competition", which can get carried away with egalitarian attitudes that make people angry or bored if all the teams aren't neck-and-neck all the time. The other is the FIA's amazing ability to make counterproductive rule changes, such as the current engine situation (the other teams can't close the gap to Merc because thank you FIA for freezing engine development).

Interesting dilemma though, how do you balance performance of the field without becoming intrusive or just being a spec series? How do you keep competition alive but maintain an incentive to perform as well as possible (rather than getting into sandbagging and such thanks to conditions created by the rules which penalize success)? How do you encourage innovation without opening up bottomless pits of diminishing returns where only big wealthy teams can accomplish anything?
 
Hun200kmh
^^^That's (literally) the million dollar question!
Click to expand...

Personally I just want to introduce a redundancy limit in the FIA rule changes. Maybe one guy who merely considers how rule changes that make other rule changes pointless should be thrown out. Again with the engines - they can max at 15,000rpm, but thanks to the fuel flow limit, they'll barely see 12. They can use 100k of fuel in the race, but thanks to the fuel flow limit, the way they use that total of fuel is limited and keeps cars from racing each other as much as they could. In the end, the difference between qualifying and race pace is almost depressing (between engine/fuel consideration and the fact that the even harder Pirelli compounds *still* have race engineers barking "look after your tires" if a driver so much as does a lap a half second quicker). Hammy's fastest lap was on the harder tire with half a tank of gas left.

At the same time, I'd like to limit the opposite problem, how FIA often have knee-jerk sweeping bans on what would be really cool technology rather than merely limiting it somewhat to avoid the bottomless pit of diminishing returns. FRIC could merely be limited in its complexity rather than being banned altogether.
 
Last edited:
JMoney689
F1 is far too political. It's entire existence has been marred by the FIA introducting rule changes to stop dominating teams. Why can't a team that is doing so well be allowed to do well? The other teams should have to compete by building better cars, not by waiting for rule changes that make everyone equal. It's like socialism; the government, the FIA, restricts success.
Click to expand...
The problem with that statement is that you're assuming the change was only introduced to limit one team's performance. However, if that is true, why didn't the FIA do it to Brawn in 2009, or to Red Bull in 2011 or 2013?
 
Peasantslayer
Amus saying they don't expect Merc or RB to use FRIC in Hockenheim. http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/...-red-bull-in-hocknheim-ohne-fric-8453531.html

Lauda quotes from the same article:

"The system has been used for two and a half years and has been all technical inspections happened without objection, it is difficult to understand why suddenly changes the perspective of things.."

Lauda calls on FIA race director Charlie Whiting to take a stand. "We do not want to continue to invest in a technology that is guided by the rules of absurdity.'s Why it is so important that we, the FIA specifies clear guidelines in this case. We want to know whether it is legal or illegal."
Click to expand...

Looks like I was right as far as Lauda is concerned because they've already invested money it's paid for, why make them take it off pay again to do alternative work that passes a made up out of thin air sniff test for the FIA.

Peasantslayer
At the start of the season Merc had so many different bits to test they looked like the best prepared team, with the way F1 teams are it would make sense to have thought about the possibility of something like FRIC being banned.
Click to expand...

After two and half to three years...? Just like teams should have expected traction control to be out and then back in with in less than 10 years? Also FRIC is even older than the mainstream use it received so I could see it returning in the future, and for giggles this is just to make the "show better"

Hun200kmh
^^^That's (literally) the million dollar question!
Click to expand...

Depends on who you ask, teams in the mid tier would say use the cost cutting measure that they are trying to push. The top tier teams (MGP, RBR, Ferrari and McLaren would say something else).
 
Last edited:
MHPALA
http://www.f1technical.net/news/19482
Click to expand...
Peasantslayer
You'd expect TR to do whatever RB does so it might be down to Caterham, FI and Sauber.
Click to expand...

Supposedly FI said they would go the route of the majority, I still haven't found anything that says they've done this since the majority is those who would wait until next year. I see this as a power play on FI's part since they're so close to the front they may think if the others lose this they'll pick up the pieces and win races. If so that's stupid on their part because I'm sure RBR and MGP and even McLaren as well as Williams have contingency plans to make sure they don't start going backwards.
 
hawkeye122
Apology accepted.
Click to expand...
You can't accept something that was never offered. If you think I owe you something because I made the wrong call, and if you think it is somehow acceptable to put words in my mouth like that - much less both at the same time - then you have another thing coming. I will be the judge of what I owe to others, and I will be the one who decides when I will offer an apology.

I will, however, be waiting on YOUR apology for your rudeness, your arrogance and your blatant disrespect in the above post. The fact that you think such a cynical attack on my person was somehow appropriate beggars belief, and speaks volumes about your character.

I suggest you think long and hard as to what an APPROPRIATE response would be before you post it.
 
prisonermonkeys
You can't accept something that was never offered. If you think I owe you something because I made the wrong call, and if you think it is somehow acceptable to put words in my mouth like that - much less both at the same time - then you have another thing coming. I will be the judge of what I owe to others, and I will be the one who decides when I will offer an apology.

I will, however, be waiting on YOUR apology for your rudeness, your arrogance and your blatant disrespect in the above post. The fact that you think such a cynical attack on my person was somehow appropriate beggars belief, and speaks volumes about your character.

I suggest you think long and hard as to what an APPROPRIATE response would be before you post it.
Click to expand...
It's one thing to be wrong and gracefully acknowledge you were wrong by posting it yourself.

It's another when you belittle other people who quoted multiple sources, tell them they're wrong multiple times, and then not apologize for being so obstinate.

Could I have addressed this in a more proper manner? Most likely.

While my delivery was less than gentlemanly, I feel that my point holds itself up.
 

Similar threads

Clayton Hardy
CRC Offline Canon | 2022 Open Wheel Championship Seasons
Replies
4
Views
2K
Clayton Hardy
Clayton Hardy
Eh Team
VRR Fujitsu GT300 Cup
Replies
16
Views
3K
Iamgroot1989
I
Eva
2021 VRR Firestone 400 Mile Race | Congrats to Race Winners!
2
Replies
36
Views
4K
RoadRageDudez
RoadRageDudez
Eh Team
VRR Repsol Touring Car World Series Season 4 - The End of the GT Sport Era
Replies
12
Views
3K
Mindaugas
Mindaugas
Eva
VRR Autobacs Super GT Championship Season 8 | USA 300km on 17 July 2021
2
Replies
58
Views
6K
NoirAntares
NoirAntares

Latest Posts

Back