Spanish Grand Prix 2011, Circuit de Catalunya- Race 5/19

HRT considering lodging a protest against the EBD.

Weirdly, no one protested them on the McLaren had the exhausts exiting through the diffuser way back when Newey was there.

I can't see how it is against the rules. It's been done for years.
 
The interview with Whitmarsh said that they couldn't prove they were lifting off because it was a breaking zone but they weren't given a proper penalty because they were slower on that lap.

Then the interview with Mark Blundell said that they were reprimanded for having faster sector times.

I am confuse.
 
Flibster said:
HRT considering lodging a protest against the EBD.

Weirdly, no one protested them on the McLaren had the exhausts exiting through the diffuser way back when Newey was there.

I can't see how it is against the rules. It's been done for years.
Click to expand...

The discussion on the forum was that it has become extreme. As Martin explained the driver can have came completely off the pedal and yet the engine is doing something different entirely.
 
Flibster said:
HRT considering lodging a protest against the EBD.

Weirdly, no one protested them on the McLaren had the exhausts exiting through the diffuser way back when Newey was there.

I can't see how it is against the rules. It's been done for years.
Click to expand...

Surely it's more to do with the very intricate engine mapping they're all using now? I can't begin to imagine how much time and money it takes to develop.
 
Flibster said:
HRT considering lodging a protest against the EBD.

Weirdly, no one protested them on the McLaren had the exhausts exiting through the diffuser way back when Newey was there.

I can't see how it is against the rules. It's been done for years.
Click to expand...

They're not protesting the EBD. They're protesting the off-throttle ECU mapping :p

The only way that I can see the FIA being able to control this is if they introduce a rule that says there can never be more than certain % deviation between where the driver's throttle pedal is and where the throttle butterfly is.
 
Flibster said:
It's been done for years.
Click to expand...

Not like this I don't think.

traditionally the teams have used a cold blown diffuser. The exhaust gasses are just standard and they make the best use of it that they can.

At the end of last year and so far this year the top teams are running hot blown diffusers. Essentially they are retarding the ignition of the fuel while off throttle.

What that means is that when you lift the throttle the engine is still getting fed fuel but the spark is coming as the piston is on its way up instead of at near tdc. As the piston rises the exhaust valves are opening and the fuel mix is being ejected into the exhaust and THEN lit instead of in the chamber. That gives the hot gasses of ignition but not the power that you would obviously get if the explosion is occurring in a sealed pot.

Thats why there is a question mark over it being legal or not. They are running in quali at nearly 100% throttle even while not actually getting 100% power all in aid of better aero performance. Whitings argument is that it could easily be classed as moveable aero like the fan car and other such innovations.
 
NathanE said:
The only way that I can see the FIA being able to control this is if they introduce a rule that says there can never be more than certain % deviation between where the driver's throttle pedal is and where the throttle butterfly is.
Click to expand...

How about adding some revolutionary technology, maybe call it a throttle cable? ;)

Todge said:
Not like this I don't think.

*snip*

Thats why there is a question mark over it being legal or not. They are running in quali at nearly 100% throttle even while not actually getting 100% power all in aid of better aero performance. Whitings argument is that it could easily be classed as moveable aero like the fan car and other such innovations.
Click to expand...

I know what it means. It's also been done for several years. It's just that now they are using it to a much larger effect.

As for movable aero device - it is one about as much as the mass damer was. It isn't.

It's not illegal, never has been and isn't according to the current regulations. Unlike the mass damper *should have be classed as moveable ballast* and the double deck diffuser *holes in the floor* which were.
 
Last edited:
Flibster said:
How about adding some revolutionary technology, maybe call it a throttle cable? ;)



I know what it means. It's also been done for several years. It's just that now they are using it to a much larger effect.

As for movable aero device - it is one about as much as the mass damer was. It isn't.

It's not illegal, never has been and isn't according to the current regulations. Unlike the mass damper *should have be classed as moveable ballast* and the double deck diffuser *holes in the floor* which were.
Click to expand...

I believe the problem is that is a software controlled aero device. The original concept of a EBD was that the exhaust gases, that are controlled by the drivers application of the throttle, would increase DF as the driver increased the throttle but now the software is creating exhaust gas even when the driver is off throttle to aid the aero of the car.
 
Flibster said:
Best in the calender? Not by a long way.
It's one of the tracks I would drop from the calender without much hesitation.
Click to expand...

Yeah I find Monaco pretty boring tbh, just a procession. Though the glamour for some reason I always find nice to watch and also it can be great to watch a top driver just threading the car around the track, coming within inches of the walls and barriers etc. :)

Just a shame that there's next to no overtaking.
 
Flibster said:
It's not illegal, never has been and isn't according to the current regulations. Unlike the mass damper *should have be classed as moveable ballast* and the double deck diffuser *holes in the floor* which were.
Click to expand...

Sadly we don't interpret the rules though. Charlie Whiting probably didn't get to be where he is by getting things wrong too often.
 
I think HRT are more planning on protesting the FIAs decision not to do anything about the thottle thing.

The FIA have said they would ban it, but then decided they wouldn't yet. I think HRT are well in their right to go "hang on Mr FIA, you clearly want to ban these, meaning there is something you don't like in them, so why haven't you?"

They wont get anywhere, as the cars were all deemed legal to race, but I can see where HRT are coming from questioning what the FIA are doing about this 'advantage' the teams have that will, but isn't yet, be banned.
 
I think the Monaco grand prix will be great this year. We have already seen that the tyres mean there are far more overtakes ( when someones tyres are shot) and when you think about how narrow the circuit is....
 
If Kolles does protest the EBD overrun, RBR/McLaren should just reverse troll and go all out in Q1 running maximum engine on the softest tires for the rest of the season.

Que Kolles protesting the 107% rule for the rest of the season while sat on his fat arse watching everyone else race.
 
Jono8 said:
I think the Monaco grand prix will be great this year. We have already seen that the tyres mean there are far more overtakes ( when someones tyres are shot) and when you think about how narrow the circuit is....
Click to expand...

and the pits! more hanky panky of Alonso and Webber, I was like ..:eek::D:eek::D:eek::D :/
 
Panzerbjorn said:
The interview with Whitmarsh said that they couldn't prove they were lifting off because it was a breaking zone but they weren't given a proper penalty because they were slower on that lap.

Then the interview with Mark Blundell said that they were reprimanded for having faster sector times.

I am confuse.
Click to expand...

Im surprised they didn't get penalties,. Jb set his fastest lap time and even more importantly sector time on that lap.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom