This is just it , it wasnt.
This was in the highlights program this afternoon to camera. Talked about the disqualification and what will happen and then immediately after included DR in the result / driver standings lol
Australian Grand Prix 2014, Melbourne - Race 1/19
- Thread starter Shimmy
- Start date
This is just it , it wasnt.
This was in the highlights program this afternoon to camera. Talked about the disqualification and what will happen and then immediately after included DR in the result / driver standings lol
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 12,488
- Location
- Bath
I don't get what the deal is with Ricciardo's fuel flow sensor? I thought the new [stupid] rule was that you can only have 100KG of fuel in your tank at the start… but how you used it during the race didn't matter and hence the different mixes?
Nope. Its 100kg max and a max fuel flow rate of 100kg per hour.
And its far from a stupid rule. Its given us awesome racing, where cars aren't glued to the track, they have so mush torque now, drivers spin the rear wheel all time and brings much mire driver skill back into the game, as its back to mechanical grip limited, rather than aero grip limited.
And its far from a stupid rule. Its given us awesome racing, where cars aren't glued to the track, they have so mush torque now, drivers spin the rear wheel all time and brings much mire driver skill back into the game, as its back to mechanical grip limited, rather than aero grip limited.
Enjoyable race. Feel sorry for Ricciardo after a solid performance. Some great performance from some of the other rookies too! Great work Magnussen and Kvyat. Great to see Bottas do well also.
Liking the variation in car sounds, the Ferrari engine sounds like a rotary, really odd exhaust note. Merc sounds great though, especially onboard.
Puzzled by the fuel flow rule, seems unnecessary when they already have a maximum amount of fuel they can carry.
Liking the variation in car sounds, the Ferrari engine sounds like a rotary, really odd exhaust note. Merc sounds great though, especially onboard.
Puzzled by the fuel flow rule, seems unnecessary when they already have a maximum amount of fuel they can carry.
I can't see Merc doing another Red Bull and just sailing away with it though somehow...
I sincerely hope they don't have a 30 second lead over everyone else otherwise it will just be another season of someone winning it because the car is miles ahead of anyone elses and all the focus will be on the battle for 2nd - 5th in the Championship.
I sincerely hope they don't have a 30 second lead over everyone else otherwise it will just be another season of someone winning it because the car is miles ahead of anyone elses and all the focus will be on the battle for 2nd - 5th in the Championship.
More to do with indirectly limiting power than anything to do with fuel usage.
Mandating a certain flow rate means there is effectively a limit to how much power can be made, however there is still a lot of engineering skill required to get the maximum rather than the FIA just saying 'All the engines can be 500kW with 200kW from KERS'
Bit of a revelation that they had a sensor problem and now a misfiring problem though in the space of one weekend after all that "rock solid" testing time in Jerez and Bahrain though, eh!
I'd rather they didn't care about the flow rate too. If you can build a car to win a race on 100kgs max you should be able to use whatever power you want and flow rate. The 100kgs will still limit them over the race.
I don't see why that would be a problem, provided that the racing behind them is actually enjoyable. What we had for the second half of last year was Vettel walking it and a deeply uninteresting championship behind him, which is of course something to be avoided. But now we've got unreliable, twitchy cars that haven't yet been developed to perfection. We've got technical rules that (engine layout moaning aside, I've obviously lost that battle!) at the very least offer something rather more interesting than Happy Fun Time With Diffusers™. We've got rookies in (so far) good cars, experienced drivers in (so far) lesser ones. Hell, until the Ricciardo penalty wasn't that the first podium without a current or former champion on it for a few years?
If Rosberg goes on a string of easy wins and takes the title incredibly early, I won't feel short-changed. Sure, a battle for the title is a good thing - but it counts for ****-all if the actual racing is as fun to watch as cancer.
I see your point but I still don't want the Championship to be sewn up by a ridiculously massive defecit to everyone else. That said, as I said before, I don't think that'll happen anyway, there's reliability factoring in massively this year unlike the last 4 years and the fact that the teams are venturing into the unknown. I also believe that whilst Merc are definitely ahead on pace at the moment - and I'd say the same for Williams in the dry, I feel Mclaren and the other teams will catch up quickly and we'll see a really close fought battle for both Championships.
Interesting to hear Brundle saying that we'll be talking about gaps of seconds as opposed to tenths straight away.
Interesting to hear Brundle saying that we'll be talking about gaps of seconds as opposed to tenths straight away.
Bit of a revelation that they had a sensor problem and now a misfiring problem though in the space of one weekend after all that "rock solid" testing time in Jerez and Bahrain though, eh!
You better hope they find out what happened as they MAY share it with other Merc teams.
But I believe Merc are 1.5 seconds faster over a single lap and 0.5 faster in race mode.
As long as they get the WCC I don't mind.
Isn't it all down to they can only use 100kg during the race however, the getting to the grid, warm up lap and cool down lap aren't included in the 100kg count so they can put 110kg as long as they don't use more than 100kg during the race.
I still don't understand the word "consistently" in the DQ though. I thought it was a set maximum, so a team/driver could use as much or as little fuel as they wanted as long as they don't exceed the 100kg at the drop of the chequered flag.
They exceeded max permitted FUEL FLOW consistently, not max permitted FUEL QUANTITY.
There is a limit on flowrate of fuel at any given point as well as absolute quantity during the race.
The confusion stems from it being 100kg total and 100kg/h flowrate.
There is a limit on flowrate of fuel at any given point as well as absolute quantity during the race.
The confusion stems from it being 100kg total and 100kg/h flowrate.
Don
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 17,045
- Location
- In a house
Greboth;reasons4397 said:
its not the total fuel used that is the issue, its breaching the max fuel rate at higher throttle positions.
Its one of the reasons we have such a low rpm ceiling. The turbo engines love using a load of fuel above (around) 15k.
The marshals asked RBR to correct the flow levels, RBR gambled and disputed the FIA sensor. It didn't pay off!
Well the hardest tracks on fuel flow will be the ones with most time at full throttle, which are Spa and Monza at 70% of the lap, so in those at full flow you'd use up 70kg in an hour effectively.
So yes, chances are those races will have to be fun at considerably less than 100kg/h flow at full throttle.
What a sad twist after a cracking race. Redbull seem to be bang to rights here. I can only think they thought that making the switch as requested by the race co-ordinators would have ruined their chances of a big points finish and it was worth chancing their arm. Reading the FIA decision I can't see how their appeal stands much hope of success.