Australian Grand Prix 2014, Melbourne - Race 1/19

Hikari Kisugi said:
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.
Click to expand...

Cost. The gearbox mounting points are standardized so in theory any team could buy a gearbox off the shelf and bolt it to any engine.

It also made a bit of a mockery of the 5 races per gearbox rule if the teams were able to strip them down to replace the ratios every weekend.

And it encourages the teams to manipulate the ERS settings to manage the tourque for different tracks rather than just changing the gear ratios, which fits with how the technology would be used in road cars.
 
sunama said:
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.
Click to expand...

I highly doubt even Ron Dennis expects either McLaren driver to be within 3 points of Vettel come the end of the season (and thats the only way it would make a blind bit of difference)
 
FrankJH said:
I highly doubt even Ron Dennis expects either McLaren driver to be within 3 points of Vettel come the end of the season (and thats the only way it would make a blind bit of difference)
Click to expand...

A winner can never have this mentality (ie. of giving up the fight in race1).
A winner will fight hard for even 1 point, because you never know what may happen in 9 months time. Especially with double points available in the last race of the season.

Sorry buddy, but all teams will fight for every point they can.
If you dont have this fighting mentality, you won't last long in F1.
 
For those that missed it, the FIA judged that if Ricciardo had been made to follow their instructions for fuel flow he would have finished in 5th. So i guess red bull were a significant amount above the 100kg/hr fuel flow rate after all
 
Reaper 392 said:
For those that missed it, the FIA judged that if Ricciardo had been made to follow their instructions for fuel flow he would have finished in 5th. So i guess red bull were a significant amount above the 100kg/hr fuel flow rate after all
Click to expand...

Wow, so the fuel flow rate affects a drivers ability to defend and the speed of his rivals? :rolleyes:

But in pure time its only about 10 seconds, which is 0.175 seconds a lap.
 
New idea:

You've got 100kg of fuel to start. No fuel rate limit. But the one FIA refuelling rig (stationed at one end of the pitlane, no team staff allowed anywhere near) is set up like....well, anyone remember the first Herbie the Love Bug movie? The old guy refuelling Thorndyke's car at Chinese Camp in the first part of the final race, at about one gallon every six years. You run low, and have to make a stop, it's gonna cost you about 2 laps.

Much better than a fuel delivery rate limit that is basically acting as a target - and targets inevitably lead to teams trying to bend rules.
 
Skeeter said:
Wow, so the fuel flow rate affects a drivers ability to defend and the speed of his rivals? :rolleyes:

But in pure time its only about 10 seconds, which is 0.175 seconds a lap.
Click to expand...

It sort of does affect his ability to defend, because he has less power on the straights and less top speed, meaning that the drivers can get to the DRS zone more quickly, and effectively have a more powerful DRS (due to Ricciardo's lower top speed). I'm not denying that the 5th place has a lot to do with how well Ricciardo can defend, but it does show that he gained a significant amount of time by going over the regulated fuel flow (and please don't pretend that 0.175s per lap isnt significant, because in a sport as closely fought as F1 it certainly is significant)
 
It was a non-serious tongue in cheek comment about how the FIA can magically decide how many overtakes a fuel flow rate would cost a driver :).

They should talk about it in terms of time or power, things they can directly attribute to fuel flow rate. 0.175 seconds is a significant amount, but it doesn't mean RBR were bunging 150kg/h through or something :p
 
JRS said:
New idea:

You've got 100kg of fuel to start. No fuel rate limit. But the one FIA refuelling rig (stationed at one end of the pitlane, no team staff allowed anywhere near) is set up like....well, anyone remember the first Herbie the Love Bug movie? The old guy refuelling Thorndyke's car at Chinese Camp in the first part of the final race, at about one gallon every six years. You run low, and have to make a stop, it's gonna cost you about 2 laps.

Much better than a fuel delivery rate limit that is basically acting as a target - and targets inevitably lead to teams trying to bend rules.
Click to expand...

Crap idea, and fuel flow rate limit is very sensible.
Having maximum fuel load does nothing to limit BHP. All it does is limit average BHP.
Anyone could up the fuel flow and deliver 1000bhp for an over take. That would be utter rubbish racing as everyone would turn engines up for a second or two. Something you can't defend against as the person defending would have to manually change fuel flow rate on the steering wheel, meanwhile the person who's doubled there BHP has over taken you. Let alone the safety issues.


What are RBR going to do for the next two races?
I just don't see how RBR can think they can win. There injector data isn't calibrated, there's nothing to say it's right.
 
Last edited:
Glaucus said:
Having maximum fuel load does nothing to limit BHP. All it does is limit average BHP.
Click to expand...

Yes. And? :)

Glaucus said:
Anyone could up the fuel flow and deliver 1000bhp for an over take. That would be utter rubbish racing as everyone would turn engines up for a second or two. Something you can't defend against as the person defending would have to manually change fuel flow rate on the steering wheel, meanwhile the person who's doubled there BHP has over taken you.
Click to expand...

So.....pretty much exactly how KERS was when first introduced but in reverse. KERS became a push-to-not-be-passed button after all.

Push-to-pass was very much a feature of the old turbo cars once the technology matured past the stage of 'wait for the Renaults to blow themselves back to Narnia and watch the atmo runners carry on to victory'. Hell, push-to-pass stayed with us long after the first turbo era ended at the close of '88. The Williams FW15C had a mode where it used the active suspension to alter the rake of the car to shed downforce and drag. And many cars right into the '00s had a button to bump up the rev limiter before the FIA started mandating limits.

Glaucus said:
Let alone the safety issues.
Click to expand...

Ugh :(

I'm getting really fed up with that argument. Of course no-one wants to see carnage, but this is supposed to be a dangerous sport. Otherwise, what's the ******* point? The only way to make it 100% safe is to not run it at all. And I'd much rather see Grand Prix racing consigned to history than watch a neutered, God-awful version where no-one could possibly suffer anything more life-threatening than a mild surprise.
 
sunama said:
A winner can never have this mentality (ie. of giving up the fight in race1).
A winner will fight hard for even 1 point, because you never know what may happen in 9 months time. Especially with double points available in the last race of the season.

Sorry buddy, but all teams will fight for every point they can.
If you dont have this fighting mentality, you won't last long in F1.
Click to expand...

There is also the FACT that RD has to in all liklihood make McLaren "fighting weight" again which will take more than a month or two

He knows (and has admitted as such) he has to make changes within the team which is why he is taking an observational role this season to see how the team is operating.

In this sense RBR is a lot further down the line than McLaren

Glaucus said:
What are RBR going to do for the next two races?
I just don't see how RBR can think they can win. There injector data isn't calibrated, there's nothing to say it's right.
Click to expand...

It changes every race anyway doesnt it - so either they go directly for the FIA approved data straight away, or they push it up to quali again or even 1st part of the race and then when FIA complaints come in they decide again to ignore or accept what the FIA are saying.

Either way from the little Ive read about it (excluding Melbourne) I would expect every team to need a bit of calibration on every track / set of circumstances (weather , tyre type etc)
 
Last edited:
All RBR have to do is comply with what the FIA tell them to do. If the FIA say turn it down a bit then they turn it down.

There is no major technology overhaul required.
 
Skeeter said:
Wow, so the fuel flow rate affects a drivers ability to defend and the speed of his rivals? :rolleyes:

But in pure time its only about 10 seconds, which is 0.175 seconds a lap.
Click to expand...

Double that.

Every time Mag got close to him to use DRS he pulled away, thats all it takes.
KM waits 3/4 laps to attack and then DR just uses more fuel so he cant get within touching distance..
 
DiCe! said:
Double that.

Every time Mag got close to him to use DRS he pulled away, thats all it takes.
KM waits 3/4 laps to attack and then DR just uses more fuel so he cant get within touching distance..
Click to expand...

More importantly, Ricciardo was probably using increased fuel flow in qualifying as well and so shouldn't have qualified as high as he did.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom