Im sure early reports were saying they had to appeal no later than Thursday
Australian Grand Prix 2014, Melbourne - Race 1/19
- Thread starter Shimmy
- Start date
Im sure early reports were saying they had to appeal no later than Thursday
Was in a briefing on Tuesday and 4 day cooling off was all they said on the matter, maybe no earlier? *shrug*
Either way it isnt about 0.1 over etc etc it will be more "How many times did RB disobey the FIA"
Nailed shut imo.
Caporegime
On the gear strategy thing: Williams seems to have gone for a set of ratios that is tuned to be fast on most circuits and shrugged their shoulders at losing a bit of straight line speed. Force India have decided to choose theirs to maximise the top speed on all circuits, presumably to ensure they minimise DRS-vulnerability and maximise their own DRS-threat. The others seem to have gone for more of an all rounder strategy.
It'll be interesting to see how it plays out. I suspect it means we'll see more significant swings in the relative performance of cars between tracks.
It'll be interesting to see how it plays out. I suspect it means we'll see more significant swings in the relative performance of cars between tracks.
Soldato
If the cars have so much torque that the drivers can barely contain it, surely the teams just opt for a tall ratios that'll see them maxing out revs with DRS open at Monza and the like.
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,456
Potentially but if rb can prove the sensors do not function correctly and indeed do not work as advertised, then no matter what the fia says rb can simple sue the sensor company for loss of earnings.
Should prove interesting.
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,456
Okay so gear ratios
One set for half season
One set for second half of season
And one joker for a track of your liking?
Seriously, this is what motor racing has become, or have i misinterpreted?
One set for half season
One set for second half of season
And one joker for a track of your liking?
Seriously, this is what motor racing has become, or have i misinterpreted?
You have misinterpreted.
Teams have to select a single set of ratios to use all year before the season begins. This will be the case until 2020. However, because this is the first year and it's likely someone will get it wrong the FIA are allowing a team the chance to change the ratios during 2014 once. Once the ratios are changes they stay for the rest of the season.
There is no "joker", and there is no "half and half". A team can change once, and that's it, at any point during 2014. If Williams are playing tactical and plan to change the ratios for Monza they will use those ratios for the rest of the year.
For 2015 onwards, one set of ratios all year.
No I dont believe they can, as its a part provided by the FIA (and the sensor is from one company and the meter for the sensor from another - if Ive understood the video correctly) - and anyway they (RBR) had a chance to gain some if not all of those points by complying with the FIA on Sat and Sun which they chose not to.
Last edited:
Sensor is Gill, calibration is someone else, and the whole "system" is a homologated part.
But while the sensor was supposedly incorrect, wasn't it still within the defined tollerances of the FIA and therefore still a requirement for RBR to follow its readings?
I.e. if the tollerance is +/- 1%, and RBR prove it was missresding by 0.9%, then its still tough doo doo for RBR.
But while the sensor was supposedly incorrect, wasn't it still within the defined tollerances of the FIA and therefore still a requirement for RBR to follow its readings?
I.e. if the tollerance is +/- 1%, and RBR prove it was missresding by 0.9%, then its still tough doo doo for RBR.
Deleted member 651465
D
Deleted member 651465
The FIA technical delegate told them to input a sensor reading offset, to counteract the misreading. They chose to ignore this, and use their own system.
If they wiggle out of this I'll eat my shoes.
It was also the same for every team and the other teams simply complied with what the sensor says as per the rules. Rather than their own figures.
Rbr are 99.9% screwed, they can't sue anyone. And I dint see how it could get interesting at all.
Its a standard part set by FIA to meet FIA rules.
Rbr are 99.9% screwed, they can't sue anyone. And I dint see how it could get interesting at all.
Its a standard part set by FIA to meet FIA rules.
Just did a quick google. Apparently the accuracy is:
52% of meters are within ± 0.1% accuracy of reading
92% of meters are within ± 0.25% accuracy of reading
Thats pretty good in my book. Just locate the sensors with the 0.1% rating, fit it, apply the FIA supplied offset and shut your complaining.
No, they can't sue the sensor company - sensors fail all the time, sometimes leading to DNFs, and surprise surpise, no one gets sued.
I can only think that RB must feel they can demonstrate that independently not using the data from the homologated sensor was allowable as per the letter of the technical regs. How much fuel they used seems to be beside the point (or rather, just a secondary point)
Last edited:
I dont think this issue is about suing and getting paid some money.
Its about points - RBR want points and want to continue to run their own fuel flow sensor.
If they succeed, they will probably continue using their own system.
If they fail, then they revert back to the FIA sanctioned part.
Lets not forget that they also want to deprive the people who finished behind Ricciardo, of points.
Their main man is Vettel. He is competing against the 2 McLaren drivers and Alonso.
So there is a lot to lose/gain by winning or losing the upcoming hearing on this matter.
And suing a company isnt going to help here.
Its about points - RBR want points and want to continue to run their own fuel flow sensor.
If they succeed, they will probably continue using their own system.
If they fail, then they revert back to the FIA sanctioned part.
Lets not forget that they also want to deprive the people who finished behind Ricciardo, of points.
Their main man is Vettel. He is competing against the 2 McLaren drivers and Alonso.
So there is a lot to lose/gain by winning or losing the upcoming hearing on this matter.
And suing a company isnt going to help here.
There is no choice about fitting the FIA part. Its homoligated, they have to run it. But the teams also run their own secondary sensors. What RBR did was chose to ignore the FIA readings in favour of using their own sensors readings, which they can't do.
I don't think it's even their own sensors, there sensors wouldn't be any more accurate even if they had one. Its a calculation based on the ECU and injector data.
They are stuffed, always were and have no chance at the appeal. They weren't the only team with issues, the others all followed FIA advice, rbr were just arrogant.
They are stuffed, always were and have no chance at the appeal. They weren't the only team with issues, the others all followed FIA advice, rbr were just arrogant.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,456
I actually think those are awful figures.
Half the sensors in use have up to 0.5% or more variance within them. Given that races are timed to 0.001 of a second, and laps can be 90-120 seconds, 0.5% seems a large amount of variance.
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,456
Wow, why would they limit they?
Its like purposely crippling a team for the sake of a single mistake at the start of a season.
Soldato
My man maths says .25% on a 600hp engine is about 1.5hp. The tolerances between different engines is likely more than that.