Irony of Ferrari

[senamic]

Link
From BBC Formula 1 page

Ferrari boss demands improvement

Kimi Raikkonen finished in 14th place in Malaysia
Ferrari president Luca di Montezemolo has warned his team against becoming the laughing stock of Formula 1.

The Italian team have suffered their worst start to a season since 1992, finishing out of the points in both the Australian and Malaysian Grands Prix.

Di Montezemolo presided over a two-and-a-half-hour crisis meeting at Ferrari's headquarters in Maranello on Tuesday.

"I don't want to find us on some sort of TV comedy video programme after each race," he said.

The Italian giants have won eight of the last 10 constructors' championships, but have endured a miserable start to the 2009 season.

Felipe Massa finished ninth in Sepang following a mistake in qualification, while 2007 champion Kimi Raikkonen was five places further adrift in 14th place.

"It would be a euphemism to say people here were very angry, but these same people are also very determined to react," said Di Montezemolo.

606: DEBATE
Ferrari have gone downhill since Brawn left

tintin696
"I know that this group is known for its strong sense of pride and that will help us get out of this situation.

"The team remains united and I have every confidence in it."

Ferrari are one of the teams protesting against the controversial rear diffuser used by Brawn GP - winners of first two Grands Prix of the season - and Toyota, which they feel is illegal.

"There is an awareness of a need to react to close the performance gap, even if part of it is down to the presence of an interpretation of the regulations which many teams feel is incorrect," said a team statement.

"Therefore the next few days will see the team working energetically to anticipate as much as possible the aerodynamic development of the F60 (car)."

Wait... Reread this bit:
Ferrari are one of the teams protesting against the controversial rear diffuser used by Brawn GP - winners of first two Grands Prix of the season - and Toyota, which they feel is illegal.

"There is an awareness of a need to react to close the performance gap, even if part of it is down to the presence of an interpretation of the regulations which many teams feel is incorrect," said a team statement. .....


Doesn't that seem a bit ironic? Seeing as Ferrari almost killed F1 just a few years back. It seems a bit like the way that the Chaparral 2J was banned after McLaren claimed it would destroy Can-Am, a thing that McLaren had been doing in the years before it. Can't Ferrari seee the irony of their claims?

 

[Ardius]

No because they came up with the new regulations? (along with Renault, BMW and McLaren).
They were attempting to improve overtaking by reducing downforce and reducing the wake produced by the car's aerodynamics, they seem to believe this new diffuser doesn't improve such things.

But their case isn't very good seeing as Brawn recently said he had approached them with the loophole last year and offered a solution to close it up, making it less of a grey-area - so it's their own silly fault for not accepting to close the loophole and for not thinking of the same system.

I don't see how they are being ironic, if they were complaining about one car dominating, perhaps they would be. But they are complaining about what they think is out of the rules, and although its a grey-area, thats the problem with grey-areas, its vague and people can do what they want. All they can hope for is for the rules to be "clarified" for next year.

 

[Metar]

No because they came up with the new regulations? (along with Renault, BMW and McLaren).
They were attempting to improve overtaking by reducing downforce and reducing the wake produced by the car's aerodynamics, they seem to believe this new diffuser doesn't improve such things.

Indeed it doesn't. Rory Byrne gave an excellent explanation on why the diffuser-three cars are more sensitive to turbulence than the other cars - which, incidentally, is further strengthened by Timo Glock's complaints about how hard it was to follow even compared to last year, while the other cars were visibly closer to each other through the fast corners.

But their case isn't very good seeing as Brawn recently said he had approached them with the loophole last year and offered a solution to close it up, making it less of a grey-area - so it's their own silly fault for not accepting to close the loophole and for not thinking of the same system.

Ross Brawn himself said that he didn't offer them to close the loophole directly. You can bet your ass and grandmother they would've agreed to change the rules if he said, "Hey guys, we've found a way to increase the diffuser's effectiveness by over 40%, so let us close the loop and prevent it."

I don't see how they are being ironic, if they were complaining about one car dominating, perhaps they would be. But they are complaining about what they think is out of the rules, and although its a grey-area, thats the problem with grey-areas, its vague and people can do what they want. All they can hope for is for the rules to be "clarified" for next year.

Except in this case, as one put it, "Toyota, Brawn and Williams read the rulebook using a thesaurus, and the others using a dictionary." The rules clearly state that in the underbody, only fully-enclosed holes are permitted, provided no part of the car is visible from directly below the reference plane. The Diffuser Three are arguing that:
A) These aren't holes in our cars, these are slots.
B) "Directly below" means "directly perpendicular", so the fact that you can view the suspensions just next to it isn't relevant.
These are both interpretations that go against the way everyone read them for the past 15 years, ever since the rules on T-shaped underbodies, planks, and the post-Senna cars.

 

[Omnis]

Why don't they just shut up and make a similar diffuser?

 

[Tired Tyres]

I'd like to see all the diffusers made illegal. I think it would improve the racing.

 

[Metar]

Omnis, because of two reasons:

A) The whole car has to be built in order to work with it. That means new designing and testing new floors, rear suspensions, gearboxes and diffusers - and that's just in order to fit it in the first place. In order for it to work well, you'll need new noses and front wings, new sidepods, rear wings, and so forth. Essentially, a new car.

B) If this new interpretation is accepted, there's nothing stopping the teams from moving the rear suspensions forwards (similar to the '60s cars, for different reasons) in order to create further channels, and as many decks as they want (Toyota already run three), and turn the whole underbody into a giant diffuser - essentially, we'll go back to the era of ground-effects.

 

[tupacrulez]

I don't see a problem here.
some of the other teams have made a very good engineering move. Ferrari hasn't. Ferrari is therefore whining and moaning because they aren't the top dog.(isn't it always that way when they're losing?)

I seethe diffusers as an ingenious design where the engineers of the car found a way to do what they wanted and still play by the rules. those aren't holes, those are slots. they aren't 90 degrees to the car, they're angled away, etc. essentially, they've bent but not broken the rules. and if the Stewards and administration get involved and start reversing MORE races, F1 will lose a fan in me.

I've personally become tired of it being "Ferrari/Mclaren racing". this season it's been mixed up, and I'm glad for it.

 

[Ardius]

Ross Brawn himself said that he didn't offer them to close the loophole directly. You can bet your ass and grandmother they would've agreed to change the rules if he said, "Hey guys, we've found a way to increase the diffuser's effectiveness by over 40%, so let us close the loop and prevent it."


Except in this case, as one put it, "Toyota, Brawn and Williams read the rulebook using a thesaurus, and the others using a dictionary." The rules clearly state that in the underbody, only fully-enclosed holes are permitted, provided no part of the car is visible from directly below the reference plane. The Diffuser Three are arguing that:
A) These aren't holes in our cars, these are slots.
B) "Directly below" means "directly perpendicular", so the fact that you can view the suspensions just next to it isn't relevant.
These are both interpretations that go against the way everyone read them for the past 15 years, ever since the rules on T-shaped underbodies, planks, and the post-Senna cars.

Well, yes, obviously Brawn didn't reveal to the other teams the advantage of the loophole, but he did point out there was one and offered a proposal to close it, apparently the other teams rejected it apparently claiming they would like to see some invention within the rules (according to a Renault engineer - I don't have a source so I'm leaving this as a rumour).

To be fair to the diffuser three, as has been mentioned several times, they were not part of the OWG talks but I certainly don't see this as an excuse to interpret the rules differently, the rules have a grey area and they aren't technically breaking any - spirit of the rules isn't a rule in itself.

It should be just accepted that they left a loophole despite being somewhat warned about it and they should close it for next year.

 

[Metar]

tupazrulez, did you also complain when the Ferrari's flexible floor was banned? It was an "ingenious way" to make the car do what they wanted". Or Ferrari's automatically-adjustable brake-bias systems? Their special fridge-gasses in the tyres?


"They're not holes, they're slots - and those aren't murders, sir! They're deaths by stabbing!"

If they're vertical, they're illegal due to other sections. If they're horizontal, they're holes. If they're angled, then they clash into several rules at once. It's not a grey area - it's a confusing area in which they chose to play dumb and claim it's not what it obviously is: A hole.

I have no qualms with extending vertical sections under the crash-structure - and I would agree that this is legal. But the holes and extra planes aren't, if they're fed by these slots and holes.


Even if found legal, the FIA will have to answer to Renault and Red Bull as to why exactly they were told it wouldn't be legal, last winter.


Also, Brawn GP underbody, from above, viewed from the front:

And from the rear:

Go ahead. Explain to me how this isn't a hole on the reference plane, ahead of the rear wheel centreline?

 

[Peter]

Ferrari is trying too hard to do good now that they're gambling huge amounts and losing. Sending Raikkonen out on full wets 4 laps before rain began is all their fault. At least inter mediates or keep him out until things actually started to happen. They need to step up or step down.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Why don't they just shut up and make a similar diffuser?

Because it's easier to get the Brawn, Williams and Toyota dffusers banned than it is to re-design the rear of the F60 to accomodate a new deisng of their own?

 

[homeforsummer]

If teams find loopholes in the regulations then good on them. Lord knows the FIA tries to stifle creativity as it is (in the name of improving the sport, which they singularly fail to do). In my own personal opinion, if a particular device found on a car at the start of free practice in the very first race of the season is not deemed illegal outright, then a team should be allowed to run it throughout the rest of the season and complaints from other, apparently less creative teams should be dismissed.

I never remember Ferrari complaining as much as they have the past few years when Schumacher was driving for them. Perhaps with losing a truly excellent driver they've found themselves lacking that extra competitive edge and have to make up for it by screwing over the other teams.

You can bet your bottom dollar that if McLaren remain uncompetitive this season, Ferrari won't lodge a single complaint against them, unlike in previous years. And yet, when was the last time someone complained about Honda? Yet now they're Brawn and now they're winning, all of a sudden their methods are deemed suspect by teams that are struggling to match their pace.

And let's hope this diffuser battle goes the right way and the FIA don't strip teams of points. Way to ruin the series, changing race results after they've finished. It's happened so many times before and manages to p*** everyone off without fail.

F1 is really starting to grate on me of late.

 

[bicycleshorts]

And let's hope this diffuser battle goes the right way and the FIA don't strip teams of points. Way to ruin the series, changing race results after they've finished. It's happened so many times before and manages to p*** everyone off without fail.

F1 is really starting to grate on me of late.

Exactly how I feel. It's bad enough watching a race and knowing that the result will probably change the following day - but the following fortnight? :/

 

[Peter]

The diffuser 3 won't get any race points taken away, but the FIA will put up a new rule"NO BENDING RULES" and the 3 will have to change their diffusers or retire from the entire season.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I like the way Ferrari's lawyer has slammed Ross Brawn for "extreme arrogance" when arrogance is what has defined this whole "Spirit of the Rules" argument from the start. Ferrari, Red Bull and Renault can't tell me that they were motivated by some deeply altruistic inner quality when they filed the protest to begin with and that they stand to gain absolutely nothing from having the diffusers banned.

 

[Metar]

Ferrari, Red Bull and Renault can't tell me that they were motivated by some deeply altruistic inner quality when they filed the protest to begin with and that they stand to gain absolutely nothing from having the diffusers banned.

I do wonder why you repeated this sentence twice? The complaining four (plus McLaren) never once said they're being altruistic. They said, directly: The Diffuser Three will be hard to catch otherwise, and/or we'll have multi-million dollar redesign of essentially new cars. That's not a legal reason to ban it, but it's a motivator to complain.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I do wonder why you repeated this sentence twice? The complaining four (plus McLaren) never once said they're being altruistic. They said, directly: The Diffuser Three will be hard to catch otherwise, and/or we'll have multi-million dollar redesign of essentially new cars. That's not a legal reason to ban it, but it's a motivator to complain.

I'm pretty sure someone said it, that the diffusers were not in the spirit of competition or some such. It was really early in this little saga, right when the protest was first lodged.

 

[Metar]

I'm pretty sure someone said it, that the diffusers were not in the spirit of competition or some such. It was really early in this little saga, right when the protest was first lodged.

They said it's against the spirit of the new rules - which indeed it is, as something that potentially increases turbulence, and certainly increases the car's sensitivity in wake.

 

[Joylord]

Surely the FIA checked the cars before the season started, why wasn’t anything raised then? If so then there’s only them to blame.

 

[Metar]

Surely the FIA checked the cars before the season started, why wasn’t anything raised then? If so then there’s only them to blame.

Can't raise a protest before the scrutineering for the first race. Until then, teams can run illegal parts all day - V10 engines, grooved tyres, underweight cars, or, more commonly seen in every test, radio-communication boosters.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

They said it's against the spirit of the new rules - which indeed it is, as something that potentially increases turbulence, and certainly increases the car's sensitivity in wake.

But you can't tell me that when they filed those protests, they stood with nothing to gain from it.

 

[Metar]

But you can't tell me that when they filed those protests, they stood with nothing to gain from it.

You're turning 'round and 'round in circles: No. They very clearly stood to gain from it, it's obvious, and it's the reason why they filed them in the first place. Nobody protests a borderline-legal part that makes you go slower.

This gave them the will to protest - but "We're slower" isn't a court-admissible excuse, whereas talks about strange interpretations and spirits of rules are.

 

['11R' Skippy]

I am entirely on Meter's side. Nobody can say no to the fact that the image that he has posted of the Brawn's Rear Diffuser is in short... A HOLE. 💡

 

[Ardius]

At the very least I am celebrating the return of the Ferrari I used to know and love when I was younger, a team with drivers like Mansell and Alesi, hard charging, always trying to score points and podiums but failing miserably till that one race every now and again each season which made it so special. They were full of spirit and determination but also limited by their management who were quick to press the fire button once someone could be blamed.
It made the team one of the characters of F1, with constant driver and staff changes who knows what they would achieve each year? They were never bad enough though to be gobbled up by the pay-driver teams which kind of helped.

Once Todt, Schumacher and Brawn had fixed the teams problems, especially from 1999-onwards, they became too professional and too dominant. Wins were no longer surprising or special, the determination to succeed became a determination to maintain their domination and their Ferrari, Italian-like spirit faded.

So I say, continue on this path Ferrari! Then I can like you again! All you have to do is ditch the Marlboro red paint (and the sponsorship altogether, horrible barcodes) and bring back the Italian red and we're all set for some proper retro seasons. We already have a hard-charger in Massa.

Who could say any of their wins from 2001-onwards were as special or emotional as Alesi's Canada 1995?

 

[Hun200kmh]

Lauda is also talking about this, but on a more ethnic/bordering racist approach. It's sad, because:

a) If I recall correctly, his dominant 3 years with Ferrari (75-76-77) were at a time when Mauro Forghieri was the technical director and Luca di Montezemolo was team principal (although he left at some point, but I don't know who replaced him).

b) There are other teams with serious difficulties this year, like McLaren and BMW, and they're not italian.

 

[Skygrasper550]

what does the rear diffuser actually do??

 

[Tornado]

Substantially improves downforce compared to the "normal" diffusers without adding much drag.