Red Bull to quit F1?
- Thread starter CSMonkeh
- Start date
Someone figured out how they did it a couple of years ago. You'll have to google for the details, but basically the wing flexed a lot more when the car was on it's wheels because of a pivot where it is attached to the body. In the test, the car is lifted on it's belly with the wheels in the air, and with the wing on a pivot in the belly, this made the weight of the car stiffen the wing and stop it moving. In normal use, the car was on it's wheels and the wing allowed to flex a lot more as the pivot was free. Voila, pass the test but break the limits the test was designed to police.
RB have always pushed the line, waited to get caught, and several times they had to change things they'd been doing after they were caught in scrutineering, whilst managing to avoid getting into trouble for running it the previous races.
Now you could argue that passing the tests & scrutineering is all that matters that there is no "spirit of the law" but just the technical regulations, but that tends to go against the idea of an honest sporting ethos.
It leaves a poor impression when a big team like RB bad-mouths everyone else and threatens to leave the sport when they are not winning, instead of looking to themselves for the solutions to their own problems. This is especially the case when they spent so many years being successful whilst walking a very narrow line of honesty themselves.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
They were caught doing it last year, they've been doing it the whole time visibly. Wings were not allowed to be below 85mm from the ground I think it was(75 above the reference plain.. which is 10mm off the ground), theirs clearly was the entire time, the tests did not reflect realistic loads, simple as that.
People take illegal steroids in sports... but pass drug tests, thus have not cheated? Is that really the argument you're going with because no one else on earth believes so. Dozens of athletes passed their drugs tests yet were found guilty of cheating years later, either via other tests on saved blood samples or investigations, confessions from others caught doing it.
Regulations and the tests aren't the same thing, the regulations were pretty clear, it was pretty obvious RBR broke them, the tests were plainly not good enough. 100kg load when it was stated by people in the sport front wings had aero loads of 10-20 times that.... it was laughable.
There was a rule about the test is must pass and a rule about the actual functioning height of the wing. Passing the test didn't mean it was breaking the rule. RBR had a wing that would scrape along the ground yet rules which stated it had to be 85mm from the ground and immobile. We could all see it flex, the test was inadequate, they still knowingly and intentionally broke the rules. They continued to knowingly and intentional break the rules in 2014 and finally got caught doing it.
People take illegal steroids in sports... but pass drug tests, thus have not cheated? Is that really the argument you're going with because no one else on earth believes so. Dozens of athletes passed their drugs tests yet were found guilty of cheating years later, either via other tests on saved blood samples or investigations, confessions from others caught doing it.
Regulations and the tests aren't the same thing, the regulations were pretty clear, it was pretty obvious RBR broke them, the tests were plainly not good enough. 100kg load when it was stated by people in the sport front wings had aero loads of 10-20 times that.... it was laughable.
There was a rule about the test is must pass and a rule about the actual functioning height of the wing. Passing the test didn't mean it was breaking the rule. RBR had a wing that would scrape along the ground yet rules which stated it had to be 85mm from the ground and immobile. We could all see it flex, the test was inadequate, they still knowingly and intentionally broke the rules. They continued to knowingly and intentional break the rules in 2014 and finally got caught doing it.
Associate
Red Bull know where the issue is. But as they do not pay for the engine they're a little restricted to what they can complain about. Maybe next year they'll try the Honda engine in the Torro.
Sigh...
I knew it was a mistake to open this discussion up again. F1 is not regulated by the "spirit" of the rules, it's regulated by the "letter" of the rules.
If you comply with the letter of the rules your legal.
If you don't, your illegal.
If you are in a grey area in the middle, write better rules.
For this "I can see from my armchair that they pass the test but are clearly breaking the rules" guff to have any basis would require not only the FIA to be knowingly and willingly allowing competitors to cheat, but also that not a single other team has an issue with it.
How stupid do you think the whole F1 field are that they simply haven't spotted someone cheating so blatantly? Its not like there's 10s of millions of £s riding on the results either.
Think it through.
I knew it was a mistake to open this discussion up again. F1 is not regulated by the "spirit" of the rules, it's regulated by the "letter" of the rules.
If you comply with the letter of the rules your legal.
If you don't, your illegal.
If you are in a grey area in the middle, write better rules.
For this "I can see from my armchair that they pass the test but are clearly breaking the rules" guff to have any basis would require not only the FIA to be knowingly and willingly allowing competitors to cheat, but also that not a single other team has an issue with it.
How stupid do you think the whole F1 field are that they simply haven't spotted someone cheating so blatantly? Its not like there's 10s of millions of £s riding on the results either.
Think it through.
Don't you remember all those pictures of RB front wings going round corners far lower to the ground than regulations allowed, yet RB simply stating "we passed the tests" ? Or they did until the tests weights were changed (as allowed in the rules) and RB had to change their wings.
F1 development has never just been about the rules - it's also about what innovations you can find between the rules, or in the places where no one has thought to put any rules in at all. There wasn't a rule saying that a car had to have four wheels, until someone brought a six-wheel car to a race.
F1 development has never just been about the rules - it's also about what innovations you can find between the rules, or in the places where no one has thought to put any rules in at all. There wasn't a rule saying that a car had to have four wheels, until someone brought a six-wheel car to a race.
Soldato
I think he means it was flexing more than the regulations allowed.
Soldato
rule 14.3.4
"Height : From 400mm to 1000mm from the ground"
Oh look they do
There are others but I can't be arsed.(waits for the argument to start)
rule 14.3.4
"Height : From 400mm to 1000mm from the ground"
Oh look they do
There are others but I can't be arsed.(waits for the argument to start)
OK, I will clarify my original statement.
There isn't a single rule in the FIA technical regulations that measures a component of the car in relation to the ground.
Better?
Also, try quoting the whole regulation to provide context. I don't really think rules about the size of boards with numbers on them to test driver visibility really apply to flexing wings
14.3.4 The FIA technical delegate must be satisfied by a practical demonstration that the driver,
when seated normally, can clearly define following vehicles.
For this purpose, the driver shall be required to identify any letter or number, 150mm high
and 100mm wide, placed anywhere on boards behind the car, the positions of which are
detailed below :
Height : From 400mm to 1000mm from the ground.
Width : 4000mm either side of the car centre line.
Position : 10m behind the rear wheel centre line.
when seated normally, can clearly define following vehicles.
For this purpose, the driver shall be required to identify any letter or number, 150mm high
and 100mm wide, placed anywhere on boards behind the car, the positions of which are
detailed below :
Height : From 400mm to 1000mm from the ground.
Width : 4000mm either side of the car centre line.
Position : 10m behind the rear wheel centre line.
What a random rule, lol.
Oh and I saved you the effort, the only other rule that you might possibly be able to quote is 11.4, but that just referneces a plane paralell to the ground, the measurement part is from the wheel centre line.
11.4 Air ducts :
Air ducts around the front and rear brakes will be considered part of the braking system and
shall not protrude beyond :
a) A plane parallel to the ground situated at a distance of 160mm above the horizontal
centre line of the wheel.
b) A plane parallel to the ground situated at a distance of 160mm below the horizontal
centre line of the wheel.
c) A vertical plane parallel to the inner face of the wheel rim and displaced from it by
120mm toward the car centre line.
Air ducts around the front and rear brakes will be considered part of the braking system and
shall not protrude beyond :
a) A plane parallel to the ground situated at a distance of 160mm above the horizontal
centre line of the wheel.
b) A plane parallel to the ground situated at a distance of 160mm below the horizontal
centre line of the wheel.
c) A vertical plane parallel to the inner face of the wheel rim and displaced from it by
120mm toward the car centre line.
As far as F1 car design regulations go, "the ground" pretty much doesn't exist.
Last edited:
McLaren (Whitmatsh) admitted that one of the reasons they have had such a dry patch is because they played it too safe.
Hating RBR because they pushed the limit and won repeatedly because they did so is rather against what F1 is about (arent people always saying they want more development? Why then hate the team at the forefront?).
Hating RBR because Horner is an annoying whiney brat when things aren't going their way is fully justifiable however. But wouldn't F1 be a bit more boring without people like him to laugh at? With Flavio gone, Ferrari employing a rather down to earth and sensible boss, and the last of the outspoken drivers gone when Webber went, F1 risks becoming all to serious.
About time someone suggested sprinklers.
Hating RBR because they pushed the limit and won repeatedly because they did so is rather against what F1 is about (arent people always saying they want more development? Why then hate the team at the forefront?).
Hating RBR because Horner is an annoying whiney brat when things aren't going their way is fully justifiable however
. But wouldn't F1 be a bit more boring without people like him to laugh at? With Flavio gone, Ferrari employing a rather down to earth and sensible boss, and the last of the outspoken drivers gone when Webber went, F1 risks becoming all to serious.About time someone suggested sprinklers.
But likewise, I've got no sympathy for whining Horner when the rules change (which they all agreed to), and Mercedes innovates better than Red Bull and (unsurprisingly) ends up with a better car.
Instead of competing, Horner wants more rules to choke off the innovations that Mercedes have brought. Horner and Red Bull's owners just don't like it when they are not winning, and they bitch like little girls about it because the shoe is on the other foot for the time being.
Red Bull have been in a dominant winning position for several years, so it's hypocrisy when they don't like someone else doing the same thing to them. That's what can happen when you don't make your own engines.
Last edited:
Soldato
He did especially well to see that one coming seeing as Spygate happened a year after Newey had left.
He did especially well to see that one coming seeing as Spygate happened a year after Newey had left.
McLaren were still a stickler for the rules before Spygate and there were a lot of "will Newey leave?" rumours for a few seasons already. IIRC, he shook hands on a deal with BAR that was scuppered after it leaked out.
After Spygate and even more of a rules lockdown, I think Newey saw little chance to push the limits at McLaren, and lot of opportunity to do so at Red Bull.
Soldato
Jaguar, who he did eventually join in a roundabout kind of way.
Being told to change them by the FIA technical delegate for be in breach of the regulations?
If they were run in a Quali or race, then the other teams could have protested and got a disqualification, but they were told to change them during scruiteering or post free practice.