EBD ban.

Mr Men · 28 Jun 2011 at 11:11

sunama said:
I'm certainly not accusing the FIA of being incompetent.

On the contrary, I think they are extremely cunning and well briefed (much better than any of us armchair enthusiasts).

Think about this:
In 2010, the title went to the last race of the season.
In 2009, the title went to the last race of the season.
In 2008, the title went to the last race of the season.
In 2007, the title went to the last race of the season.
In 2006, the title went to the last race of the season.

Are you beginning to see a pattern here?

pedantic - Jenson won the title in 2009 at Brazil, not the final race at Abu Dhabi - pedantic mode off, the rest well you could not really say the FIA interfered with most of them, maybe 2006 with the mass damper banning for Renault, 2007 maybe also as they let McLaren driver keep their points despite them being up to their necks in cheating, but had Lewis not went into the gravel in China or pressed the wrong button in Brazil....

2008 unless the FIA were part of crashgate then I don't see how they kept that title going to the last day, just a chain of events, same with 2010. The rules are why we are seeing close title's these days and the FOTA agreed budget limits (which Red Bull just ignore) as well as a lack of testing. Engine and gearbox limits do not help either, I guess this is what the FIA wanted a much closer grid.

DBT85 · 28 Jun 2011 at 11:18

Skeeter said:
If this is a design feature, then they are fairly stupid. Surely they remember the Ferrari front wing being modified as it was shown to flex by onboard cameras. They should have just moved the cameras.

I fully expect the FIA to say "oy, no!" on this and for the wing to fixed more securely for Silverstone. They cannot be penalised for Valencia as they would have passed all the tests to be legal for that race.

And McLaren will say that when RBs wing was quite definitely flexing it passed the tests and so was declared legal which Scarbs also talks about.

Scarbs said:
Following the prcedent of the Red Bull front wing, which also appears to move at speed, it seems that any movement of the wing is allowed as long as the wing passes the FIA deflection tests. Which is in turn contradicting the FIA demand for bodywork to be rigid and having no degree of freedom in relation to the body/chassis unit.

It'll be interesting to see what is said when they are undoubtedly asked about it though.

Mr Men said:
Newey on the BBC F1 forum seemed pretty downbeat about the ban and how their car was pretty much designed around the whole system, Horner is saying one thing while Newey the other, I probably believe Newey at this point but I am sure they will cope and still be up the front.

I'm just about to try and find this in the forum as i didn't watch it after the race. Seems to contradict what we've heard elsewhere though.

EDIT: Interesting that he is saying that the competition could be less affected than them.

Glaucus · 28 Jun 2011 at 11:26

Missed that finally someone else trying flexible wings, only taken them 2 years, still can't believe how teams haven't got on top of this yet. Surly more than one person in the world can work out or at least have a good idea what RBR are doing,

sunama · 28 Jun 2011 at 11:29

Mr Men said:
...

The point I was making is that the FIA have been "directing" the way in which F1 progresses.

They do this by defining rules and regulations.
If things are not going the way they would like, they change rules (mid-season).

Its similar to way a general manager of a company will come in and change the amount of sales the company makes. He won't personally go to the shop floor or make phone calls to clients, but he will make changes which have the final effect of making extra sales.

Similarly, it is in the best interest of the FIA to ensure that no single team runs away with the championship. And as such, will do what it takes to ensure that the title is close run.

DBT85 · 28 Jun 2011 at 11:30

AcidHell2 said:
Missed that finally someone else trying flexible wings, only taken them 2 years, still can't believe how teams haven't got on top of this yet. Surly more than one person in the world can work out or at least have a good idea what RBR are doing,

They are doing the opposite of the RB wing though. The RB wing tips down at the front to give more angle while the McLaren is tipping up to reduce angle.

RB trying to get more DF while McLaren trying to get less.

sunama · 28 Jun 2011 at 11:30

AcidHell2 said:
Missed that finally someone else trying flexible wings, only taken them 2 years, still can't believe how teams haven't got on top of this yet. Surly more than one person in the world can work out or at least have a good idea what RBR are doing,

This is exactly what I have been thinking.
If there is indeed only one person on the planet who can work out how to build a legal flexi wing, then that person should be commended.

DBT85 · 28 Jun 2011 at 11:32

sunama said:
Similarly, it is in the best interest of the FIA to ensure that no single team runs away with the championship. And as such, will do what it takes to ensure that the title is close run.

Can you give some recent examples of the FIA making a rule change mid season to influence the title as you are suggesting?

Skeeter · 28 Jun 2011 at 11:32

sunama said:
The point I was making is that the FIA have been "directing" the way in which F1 progresses.

They do this by defining rules and regulations.
If things are not going the way they would like, they change rules (mid-season).

Its similar to way a general manager of a company will come in and change the amount of sales the company makes. He won't personally go to the shop floor or make phone calls to clients, but he will make changes which have the final effect of making extra sales.

Similarly, it is in the best interest of the FIA to ensure that no single team runs away with the championship. And as such, will do what it takes to ensure that the title is close run.

Yes, but the FIA make the rules. You know that, the teams know that, everyone knows that. Its the FIA's rules to change, they can do what they like with them.

sunama · 28 Jun 2011 at 11:34

Skeeter said:
Yes, but the FIA make the rules. You know that, the teams know that, everyone knows that. Its the FIA's rules to change, they can do what they like with them.

Oh yes. Of course.
Effectively, they are the boss and can do what ever they wish to do.

Glaucus · 28 Jun 2011 at 11:36

Todge said:
They are doing the opposite of the RB wing though. The RB wing tips down at the front to give more angle while the McLaren is tipping up to reduce angle.

RB trying to get more DF while McLaren trying to get less.

They are indeed but at least it's along a similar line.

The gap opens up at high speed and closes when the car slows. Down. Presumably reducing drag on straights meaning higher top speed, combine that with kers and DRS.

It's passed scrutenering and video shows flexing on RBR. so I don't see why it should be banned but we'll have to wait and see. I see it as another rule where. One or two teams are doing it, they get away with it. Once half the grid starts doing the same it'll probably suddenly get banned.

Skeeter · 28 Jun 2011 at 11:54

sunama said:
Oh yes. Of course.
Effectively, they are the boss and can do what ever they wish to do.

Um, yes, that, exactly. Whats your point :confused:

AH2 - The RBR front wing was seen to visibly flex on TV, so the FIA responded by amending the weight load applied to the wings. Exactly the same as when the Ferrari wing was seen to separate from the nose on TV, and FIA clamped down on it. And again when which ever teams 'over the nose' wing in 2007/8 was seen to flex, they were all told to support them from the nose. I can see the FIA picking up on this and making sure all wings are fixed securely so that they don't seperate at speed.

Contrary to popular belief, the RBR flexing wing hasnt been simply ignored by the FIA. They spotted it, and changed the tests to clamp down on it straight away. The fact it still flexes is a combination of a clever design, and the limitation that applying weight has in relation to mimicing real world situations. The McLaren wing shouldn't be allowed "because the RBR wing was", as that is not what happened.

Glaucus · 28 Jun 2011 at 11:59

And the mclaren wing has passed the new heavier scruteenering tests, so unless they up the weight again, then it will still pass scruteenering. They also Only responded about 12 months after it was spotted.

However if it's not banned it looks quite easy to copy, imagine that on the RBR along with their extra downforce.

Skeeter · 28 Jun 2011 at 12:15

The McLaren wing looks to be seperating at a connection point, rather then flexing within the wing structure itself, so they could easily just state a minimum amount of separation at connections under load from now on.

And I think the initial increased weight on front wings was the first race after the RBR wing flexing was out in the open.

Glaucus · 28 Jun 2011 at 12:25

Just like a maximum flex under race load.

It certainly wasn't after the first race, it wasn't even the same season.
Although it was the next race after mclaren complained and asked for clarification.

Earliest I can see is silverstone 2009.

Mr Men · 28 Jun 2011 at 12:33

sunama said:
The point I was making is that the FIA have been "directing" the way in which F1 progresses.

They do this by defining rules and regulations.
If things are not going the way they would like, they change rules (mid-season).

Its similar to way a general manager of a company will come in and change the amount of sales the company makes. He won't personally go to the shop floor or make phone calls to clients, but he will make changes which have the final effect of making extra sales.

Similarly, it is in the best interest of the FIA to ensure that no single team runs away with the championship. And as such, will do what it takes to ensure that the title is close run.

They have not actually changed any rules mid-season for a while, this system is banned under the current regulations, I do not agree with the ban and I do agree it's just an attempt to interfere with the title.

Glaucus · 28 Jun 2011 at 12:37

Mr Men said:
They have not actually changed any rules mid-season for a while, this system is banned under the current regulations, I do not agree with the ban and I do agree it's just an attempt to interfere with the title.

It isn't at all, in fact the opposite is true. It's explicitly allowed under the current system.

Mr Men · 28 Jun 2011 at 12:43

AcidHell2 said:
It isn't at all, in fact the opposite is true. It's explicitly allowed under the current system.

Not really, the FIA are saying the engine should only be used to drive the car, when the driver is not on the throttle it is not driving the car and is now being used as aero device.

Kerming · 28 Jun 2011 at 12:47

Mr Men said:
Not really, the FIA are saying the engine should only be used to drive the car, when the driver is not on the throttle it is not driving the car and is now being used as aero device.

can't everybody see that this is a good thing?

the fia should had banned it from the start but they didn't since they are a FizzyDrinks International Assistance group.

Glaucus · 28 Jun 2011 at 12:48

What they say and what the rules say are often two very different things. The engine map is explicitly allowed to be reprogrammed between qauli and race, banned. Just like nothing in the rules against EBD, f-duct, DD yet two were allowed to stay for the season and the other is being banned.
If someone is blocking up a hole and moving air around the car, that is no less movable aeros than an engine. Infect I would say that's more movable than an engine. As exhausts have always been placed where they aid or at least damage the aero the least.

Slam62 · 28 Jun 2011 at 12:49

The only thing that matters is what the fia say and how they interpret the rules