Abu Dhabi Grand Prix 2014, Yas Marina - Race 19/19

Skeeter said:
Perhaps Force India should boycott the race then?

Oh, no wait that might mean they lose a place in the championship and lose out on some money. Also, all of the teams are paid. A rather childish rant from Vijay.
Click to expand...

Yeah agreed. I do feel sorry for some of the teams. They thought genuine cost cutting was coming and control of what was going to be spent. Years later we still have a competition where the big boys dominate and the rest are racing for 8th. The days when you could fund that are long gone. The bigger teams have done nothing to preserve the life of the sport or promote decent competition.

Nothing will change until they can't fill the grid anymore and they run multiple cars and more and more fans find something more interesting to do.
 
The issue I have with the Force India/Sauber/Lotus clan is they just whinge. They aren't coming up with suggestions, they aren't seeking a unification of all the teams for the greater good, they are just complaining.

They are no different to any other team, they are selfish. The difference is they are struggling.

F1 teams cannot govern their own sport. They are simply unable to put other teams priorities above their own, no matter how noble they try and appear on Twitter.

I do feal for the little team, the sport needs them. But throwing stomping tantrums like a child isn't the answer.
 
So, Red Bulls excluded from qually and going to start from the back (and possibly the pit lane, since they may need to break Parc Fermé rules to make the cars legal). Funny how that now they aren't in the title hunt they get pulled up for having flexible wings, given that they had them when they were winning titles.

LOL Red Bull International Assistance!!!1111oneoneoneeleven LOL

Pitpass said:
Ironically, only yesterday, the Austrian team mischievously tweeted a picture of the front wing on the McLaren along with the words "Red Bull gives you wings", a reference to the new nose (and wing) on the McLaren designed by (former Red Bull designer) Peter Prodromou who is now with the Woking team.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

Here's an idea RBR - more time spent with Renault sorting out why they are so far behind the Merc units, and less time posting random crapola on social media. 'mmmmkay? :p:D
 
CaptainRAVE said:
Shame this didn't happen four years ago when it was just as obvious.
Click to expand...

This sounds very different to what they were accused of previously. This looks like a designed pivot point in a mounting, as opposed to the previous flexing of the CF.

dannyjo22 said:
Yep, that is why a breakaway would last about 12 races tops. :D
Click to expand...

The problem is, the FIA aren't capable either!
 
Skeeter said:
This sounds very different to what they were accused of previously. This looks like a designed pivot point in a mounting, as opposed to the previous flexing of the CF.
Click to expand...

Guess they've gotten so used to being able to flirt with illegality that they went full retard :o:cool:
 
CaptainRAVE said:
Shame this didn't happen four years ago when it was just as obvious.
Click to expand...

All the front running teams have flexible bodywork of some kind, they're just clever enough to design it in such a way that it usually passes the FIA tests. The only interesting issue here is that Red Bull got caught out. Whether someone tipped off the officials or whether the team screwed up will probably never be known.
 
For anyone wondering what Technical Reg 3.15 is...

3.15 Aerodynamic influence :

With the exception of the driver adjustable bodywork described in Article 3.18 (in addition to minimal parts solely associated with its actuation) and the ducts described in Article 11.4, any specific part of the car influencing its aerodynamic performance :

a) Must comply with the rules relating to bodywork.

b) Must be rigidly secured to the entirely sprung part of the car (rigidly secured means not having any degree of freedom).

c) Must remain immobile in relation to the sprung part of the car.
Any device or construction that is designed to bridge the gap between the sprung part of the car and the ground is prohibited under all circumstances.

No part having an aerodynamic influence and no part of the bodywork, with the exception of the skid block in 3.13 above, may under any circumstances be located below the reference plane.

With the exception of the parts necessary for the adjustment described in Article 3.18, any car system, device or procedure which uses driver movement as a means of altering the aerodynamic characteristics of the car is prohibited.
Click to expand...

3.15b distinctly rules out a leaf spring and rubber mounting point.

Scarbs thinking that it's to do with the entire wing tilting backwards at speed reducing it's angle of attack into the airflow rather than the rear elements moving.

I like this, don't have to use the word flex... it's full on movement. :D ;)
 
Last edited:
Skeeter said:
The problem is, the FIA aren't capable either!
Click to expand...

The lesser of two evils for me. :o


kaiowas said:
The only interesting issue here is that Red Bull got caught out. Whether someone tipped off the officials or whether the team screwed up will probably never be known.
Click to expand...

Best to try that stuff when you can't win anything, especially in the last race they have nothing to lose. Even if they have ran it all year nothing will happen now. I would say they have had a result if they have ran something illegally and only got caught when it doesn't matter and at the last race of the season.

They seem so inept at checking the cars Newey probably had to tip them off himself ;)
 
Skeeter said:
You say that as if pushing the limits of what's legal is a new thing?
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with pushing limits. Nothing that wrong with outright doing an end-run around the rulebook. Just. Don't. Get. Caught! :)

I mean, at least make it somewhat believable that you've found some wiggle room in the rule. It seems that this time they've built a wing that is actually designed to move under load, rather than flexing merely as an entirely unintended and unforeseen consequence (;)) of the laws in our physical universe.
 
dannyjo22 said:
Best to try that stuff when you can't win anything, especially in the last race they have nothing to lose. Even if they have ran it all year nothing will happen now. I would say they have had a result if they have ran something illegally and only got caught when it doesn't matter and at the last race of the season.
Click to expand...

Depends on whether you believe it's a tip off (wait until Melbourne, surely) or whether the FIA have discovered it's just failed the tests. I struggle to believe a whacking great lump of rubber covering a bit of carbon fibre is that hard to pick up. The FIA may be a step behind the teams, but it sounds like something you'd struggle to hide from a camera hundreds of metres away, let alone the technical inspectors with a magnifying glass.

There's something odd about this one. How can you hide a rubber shroud on a fundamental aero device with the worlds photographers focussing in on it?
 
Last edited:
Rbr at the back means less chance of someone getting in the way of the mercs at the 1st corner. It's not a good outcome for the viewer as the race is destined to be pretty boring. Or in fact the coverage will mostly be that of the mid field where most the action will be and the two potential WDC contenders will just cruise ahead and no coverage at all. That would be a sad end to the season considering how much the two mercs have entertained us by competing with one another all the way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom