2021 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix - Yas Marina, Dec 10 - 12

[DChemTech]

Changing the limits when there were already limits in place does not remove ambiguity; it just means that legal designs that were made based on the criteria provided suddenly become illegal, with all due resources wasted, based on information that was not available to the engineers when they made said designs.

All of which the FIA were entitled to do

And then we get back to my point. They are entitled, but should they, because it shoves the door wide open to partisanship, and ruins the competition by potentially and unexpectedly
penalizing teams for making design decisions that comply to the rules as they were provided. That should not be how a competition works. And, if they are entitled to change regs during a season, well, why not during a race? They are entitled to it, after all. And especially if a team thought of something brilliant thar nobody else though of, a reg change for the season can be much more damaging.

[Csmith1980]

Changing the limits when there were already limits in place does not remove ambiguity; it just means that legal designs that were made based on the criteria provided suddenly become illegal, with all due resources wasted, based on information that was not available to the engineers when they made said designs.

All of which the FIA were entitled to do

And then we get back to my point. They are entitled, but should they, because it shoves the door wide open to partisanship, and ruins the competition by potentially and unexpectedly
penalizing teams for making design decisions that comply to the rules as they were provided. That should not be how a competition works.

Yes I think they should. Teams know when they were pushing their luck so should and probably are prepared for the inevitable TD when it comes.
As a side note, the FIA were aware of Redbulls rear wing in 2020 so could and probably should have shut it down then.

[DChemTech]

So how should they know when they are pushing their luck, objectively and quantitatively, so that they can design accordingly? I asked you at least three times, you never answered it.

[Sieper]

They only changed the existing rule interpretation for the redbull wing (which was adhering to the limits) the Mercedes bendy main plane was raced all season long. I have seen it at least from France onwards. To me that was the deciding factor in the Mercedes domination of those last 5 races.

That bendy main plane never existed, that's why nothing was done about it. This was demonstrated many times during the season when it was brought up.

When redbull was accused I took one look at confirmed it, you can also see this from my earliest reply. I never went into the defence mode. When the ball is in the Merc park it is always deny deny deny. That doesn’t alter the reality. It was plain to see. Yes, hard, but clear to see. There was also the additional proof, when Mercedes was finally found out, the scratch pattern. But guess what, deny deny deny.

Imho this also needs a rule chance, there should be on car camera’s aimed at every aero surface. The fact the view was somewhat obscured is now handily abused to simply deny. That should not be an option imho. In fact, as I understood this is also a main reason for the new rear wings (having no separate end plates anymore). Less easy to bend. Plus the main plane is now also less hidden behind the drs flap I think. But these teams are there to try and find advantages. So why not mount a camera in a good place. It will immediately remove any denial attempts.

[Csmith1980]

So how should they know when they are pushing their luck, objectively and quantitatively, so that they can design accordingly? I asked you at least three times, you never answered it.

You do F1 designers a major disservice if you think they don’t know when they are bending/breaking rules.
FYI, I did answer your question, I’m sorry if you don’t like my answer.

[Csmith1980]

They only changed the existing rule interpretation for the redbull wing (which was adhering to the limits) the Mercedes bendy main plane was raced all season long. I have seen it at least from France onwards. To me that was the deciding factor in the Mercedes domination of those last 5 races.

That bendy main plane never existed, that's why nothing was done about it. This was demonstrated many times during the season when it was brought up.

It was plain to see. Yes, hard, but clear to see. There was also the additional proof, when Mercedes was finally found out, the scratch pattern.

The only people who could see it was Horner and Newey and even he had the decency to look sheepish when going into the stewards office and calling some low resolution photos of scratches on the RW is a stretch to say the least

[ringo]

Doesn't mean I am 'isolating' the issue; I am just saying that FIA has been influenced both ways, and the selective outrage at the last race is actually isolating a single event while omitting the rest of the season.

The difference is lobbying in the last race compared to other lobbying was a small thing called acutal adherence to rules and ineffect breaking the rules. Thats why eveyone are outraged, i dont think its going it end anytime soon, so i wouldnt waste time trying to supress it in a forum over the wast internet. Its happening everywhere in social media.

Its going to explode again when FIA is going to publish their report!

And you are wrong there. In the last race, Wheatley was suggesting that cars could unlap (all cars, he did not say -some cars-) and due to the short race distance left, did not have to go all the way around before we could resume racing. No different than Toto suggesting 'no safety car please'. That Masi came up with a creative interpretation is not due to RB lobbying. So, suggested and misplaced outrage.

And well, you anyway apparently have no issue with the FIA changing the rules during a season (yes Ringo, Toto -did- lobby for regulations to be changed, just the technical. As they did for the pitstop rule. Stop pretending Toto is a saint and Christian is Satan). You said yourself, they had the right to change the rules for the wings. So why not for the safety car too, then?

For the record, I oppose both. The regulations should be clear and actionable beforehand. No meddling in the season, unless for imminent safety concerns.

They made changes between competition. Not DURING a race. Technical changes happen in other sports between competition all the time. It does not affect the fairness of competition as all competitors compete fairly while the sporting event is taking place.
Change DURING the even is silly. What Masi did... lets say he did change SC rules at lap 25 to give Max an advantage.. and Lewis still found a way past and was up the road.. then another SC comes out and Max pits for fresh rubber then Masi decides to close the pitlane to precent Lewis from changing to fresh tyres because Wheatley suggested it to him.
That's the big picture that most people are not seeing. Lewis' goose was cooked in that race no matter what strategy Merc chose because the RD was manipulating the race at will and to redbull's delight.
Totto was trying to pull strings with current rules as they are..
Redbull were begging for a maricale outside of the rules. Horner said so himself.

[ringo]

And about the actual rules..
When cars unlap them selves, the safety cas has to go around for another lap with all cars on that lead lap.
Wheatley knew that and so was asking for what happened exactly. When Masi used the words "understood" that's said it all to me.
He himself was also pondering how to bring Max back into play. For the reasons of the show, after seeing how dead the stands were with the orange army, or tipped off by the event promoters or Liberty, we will never know, but Masi's intent was not just a greenflag finish.
In redbull's position you cannot blame them for taking anything to let them win the race.. but it was inherently dubious.
If you watch the replay of the sc.. even the manner in which the "SC in this lap" came out was erratic and completely against the regulations. That SC by the rule had to complete that lap then it should have came in after.

[Just_a_fan]

They only changed the existing rule interpretation for the redbull wing (which was adhering to the limits) the Mercedes bendy main plane was raced all season long. I have seen it at least from France onwards. To me that was the deciding factor in the Mercedes domination of those last 5 races.

That bendy main plane never existed, that's why nothing was done about it. This was demonstrated many times during the season when it was brought up.

When redbull was accused I took one look at confirmed it, you can also see this from my earliest reply. I never went into the defence mode. When the ball is in the Merc park it is always deny deny deny. That doesn’t alter the reality. It was plain to see. Yes, hard, but clear to see. There was also the additional proof, when Mercedes was finally found out, the scratch pattern. But guess what, deny deny deny.

Imho this also needs a rule chance, there should be on car camera’s aimed at every aero surface. The fact the view was somewhat obscured is now handily abused to simply deny. That should not be an option imho. In fact, as I understood this is also a main reason for the new rear wings (having no separate end plates anymore). Less easy to bend. Plus the main plane is now also less hidden behind the drs flap I think. But these teams are there to try and find advantages. So why not mount a camera in a good place. It will immediately remove any denial attempts.

Again, there was no evidence at all. No footage, nothing other than a "scratch pattern" that most agreed wasn't anything of the sort.

The rear wings haven't been changed to prevent the bending issue, they've been changed in order to change the shape of the wake behind the cars. That has been done to help improve following.

[DChemTech]

So how should they know when they are pushing their luck, objectively and quantitatively, so that they can design accordingly? I asked you at least three times, you never answered it.

You do F1 designers a major disservice if you think they don’t know when they are bending/breaking rules.
FYI, I did answer your question, I’m sorry if you don’t like my answer.

Still, no objective, quantitative answer, only subjective criteria. They just have to 'know' it. Both MB and RB had a wing that deflected to some degree, but MB just 'knew' their design complied and RB had to know theirs didn't. I never knew omniscience was a requirement for F1 engineers...

Lets say the FIA had a maximum deflection of 3 cm under any load in mind (but clearly didnt put it to paper). How did the engineers designing for 2.9 cm know they were correct, and the ones designing for 3.1 know they were secretly breaking the rules. How?

[DChemTech]

They made changes between competition. Not DURING a race. Technical changes happen in other sports between competition all the time. It does not affect the fairness of competition as all competitors compete fairly while the sporting event is taking place.
Change DURING the even is silly. What Masi did... lets say he did change SC rules at lap 25 to give Max an advantage.. and Lewis still found a way past and was up the road.. then another SC comes out and Max pits for fresh rubber then Masi decides to close the pitlane to precent Lewis from changing to fresh tyres because Wheatley suggested it to him.
That's the big picture that most people are not seeing. Lewis' goose was cooked in that race no matter what strategy Merc chose because the RD was manipulating the race at will and to redbull's delight.
Totto was trying to pull strings with current rules as they are..
Redbull were begging for a maricale outside of the rules. Horner said so himself.

Hey Brawn F1. Nifty front wing and double diffuser you got there. But eh, this is not what we intended when we wrote the rules. So here's a few TDs that make them illegal. No, we did not put any objective criteria to paper that banned this when we first wrote the rules, but surely, you should have just known, right. F1 engineers always know when they are bending or breaking the rules. Anyway
, nothing against you, the rules and TDs are the same for everyone after all. And hey, we're pretty lenient. You have four races to comply!

[Csmith1980]

So how should they know when they are pushing their luck, objectively and quantitatively, so that they can design accordingly? I asked you at least three times, you never answered it.

You do F1 designers a major disservice if you think they don’t know when they are bending/breaking rules.
FYI, I did answer your question, I’m sorry if you don’t like my answer.

Still, no objective, quantitative answer, only subjective criteria. They just have to 'know' it. Both MB and RB had a wing that deflected to some degree, but MB just 'knew' their design complied and RB had to know theirs didn't. I never knew omniscience was a requirement for F1 engineers...

Lets say the FIA had a maximum deflection of 3 cm under any load in mind (but clearly didnt put it to paper). How did the engineers designing for 2.9 cm know they were correct, and the ones designing for 3.1 know they were secretly breaking the rules. How?

This is getting boring now.

[PlatinumZealot]

As I've consistently said, I believe Masi would have done the same thing if the positions were reversed, but is ringo suggesting that RB was actually better than toto in that moment and so if the positions were reversed it would have ended differently because Toto prefers a more 'email based' approach with Masi?

I've certainly not heard that being suggested as causal before.

Call me tinfoil or whatever, but I have a suspicion that there was an unwritten mandate to lubricate the RedBull's path to winning the championship. And Masi in his position was the expected steward (no pun intended) of this objective. I am not saying it is full on match fixing, but I got the sense that there were times when RedBull were given slaps on the wrist for their indiscretions, while Mercedes were severely punished for theirs. As the season went on it became clear that a theme of entertainment was overriding sporting fairness.

[Ryar]

As I've consistently said, I believe Masi would have done the same thing if the positions were reversed, but is ringo suggesting that RB was actually better than toto in that moment and so if the positions were reversed it would have ended differently because Toto prefers a more 'email based' approach with Masi?

I've certainly not heard that being suggested as causal before.

Call me tinfoil or whatever, but I have a suspicion that there was an unwritten mandate to lubricate the RedBull's path to winning the championship. And Masi in his position was the expected steward (no pun intended) of this objective. I am not saying it is full on match fixing, but I got the sense that there were times when RedBull were given slaps on the wrist for their indiscretions, while Mercedes were severely punished for theirs. As the season went on it became clear that a theme of entertainment was overriding sporting fairness.

The right word that you are looking for, is Halluccination. You can thank me.

Hallucination: A profound distortion in a person's perception of reality, typically accompanied by a powerful sense of reality. A hallucination may be a sensory experience in which a person can see, hear, smell, taste, or feel something that is not there.

[mclaren111]

http://www.f1reader.com/#/news/mclaren- ... asi-302630


Go Masi...