- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
.Ryar wrote: ↑02 Jul 2022, 19:01.
I am a person of color and have faced discrimination, but I do think it was harsh. All that he grew up dreaming of, seems to have gone with a naive mistake. Racism and all kinds of discriminations should be absolutely unacceptable in the society. The problem is, a lot of kids like Yuri have grown up in a atmosphere where using "n" word casually was normal and it became part of vocabulary for them, which brought his downfall. I have seen my own people using "n" word casually! Not sure how many such talented kids are around who would go down that path unconsciously. The world should strive to improve on racism where it is NOT being monitored, more than where it is and parents/guardians/schools should provide an upbringing that also educates the evils of racism. That would bring true change.
Now we know why RBR and Ferrari were so irritated by the proposed porpoising test that looked more closely at the legality planks.“ Does the floor trick exist?
Many are wondering whether the initiative was really just the result of the new FIA President's activism to show that the association is in control. Or if there is more behind it. Does the FIA want to compress the field by tightening the underbody rule? The blatant superiority of Red Bull and Ferrari does not fit into the objectives that Formula 1 has set itself with the new cars.
During their examinations of the planks and underbody, the scrutineers have apparently discovered that some teams are deliberately playing with the rigidity of the huge base plate. When the FIA threatened at the last meeting of the technical directors that the central part of the floor should be uniformly stiff in the future, Red Bull and Ferrari went on the barricades.
The competition suspects that the floor of both cars deforms in certain places, thereby increasing the tunnel effect under the car. There should be enough air between the chassis and the base plate for the floor to move. That could generate significantly more downforce and would explain why the two cars, which are so different on the outside, are so much better than the rest.”
.zibby43 wrote: ↑02 Jul 2022, 21:30Huh. Wonder what the FIA will do.
From AMuS:
.“ Does the floor trick exist?
--------------------------------------
The competition suspects that the floor of both cars deforms in certain places, thereby increasing the tunnel effect under the car. There should be enough air between the chassis and the base plate for the floor to move. That could generate significantly more downforce and would explain why the two cars, which are so different on the outside, are so much better than the rest.”
Now we know why RBR and Ferrari were so irritated by the proposed porpoising test that looked more closely at the legality planks.
.
What party? It’s more about the planks than the floor. Article just came out today.
.
Yup I was puzzled by that aswell, I have posted about it before as to why Horner and Ferrari are against the new TD when their fans were celebrating herezibby43 wrote: ↑02 Jul 2022, 21:30Huh. Wonder what the FIA will do.
From AMuS:
Now we know why RBR and Ferrari were so irritated by the proposed porpoising test that looked more closely at the legality planks.“ Does the floor trick exist?
Many are wondering whether the initiative was really just the result of the new FIA President's activism to show that the association is in control. Or if there is more behind it. Does the FIA want to compress the field by tightening the underbody rule? The blatant superiority of Red Bull and Ferrari does not fit into the objectives that Formula 1 has set itself with the new cars.
During their examinations of the planks and underbody, the scrutineers have apparently discovered that some teams are deliberately playing with the rigidity of the huge base plate. When the FIA threatened at the last meeting of the technical directors that the central part of the floor should be uniformly stiff in the future, Red Bull and Ferrari went on the barricades.
The competition suspects that the floor of both cars deforms in certain places, thereby increasing the tunnel effect under the car. There should be enough air between the chassis and the base plate for the floor to move. That could generate significantly more downforce and would explain why the two cars, which are so different on the outside, are so much better than the rest.”
Has this rule been existing since the beginning of the season or it's just now the FIA is changing it in order to to have a more level playing field?siskue2005 wrote: ↑02 Jul 2022, 23:08Yup I was puzzled by that aswell, I have posted about it before as to why Horner and Ferrari are against the new TD when their fans were celebrating herezibby43 wrote: ↑02 Jul 2022, 21:30Huh. Wonder what the FIA will do.
From AMuS:
Now we know why RBR and Ferrari were so irritated by the proposed porpoising test that looked more closely at the legality planks.“ Does the floor trick exist?
Many are wondering whether the initiative was really just the result of the new FIA President's activism to show that the association is in control. Or if there is more behind it. Does the FIA want to compress the field by tightening the underbody rule? The blatant superiority of Red Bull and Ferrari does not fit into the objectives that Formula 1 has set itself with the new cars.
During their examinations of the planks and underbody, the scrutineers have apparently discovered that some teams are deliberately playing with the rigidity of the huge base plate. When the FIA threatened at the last meeting of the technical directors that the central part of the floor should be uniformly stiff in the future, Red Bull and Ferrari went on the barricades.
The competition suspects that the floor of both cars deforms in certain places, thereby increasing the tunnel effect under the car. There should be enough air between the chassis and the base plate for the floor to move. That could generate significantly more downforce and would explain why the two cars, which are so different on the outside, are so much better than the rest.”
the FIA has published the rules which comes into effect from France onwards about the plank....so there is no smoke without fire.
The FIA notes that any car configured around a plank which flexes by more than the 2mm regulation limit will be considered in contravention of regulations 3.5.9e and 3.15.8a. Those regs state:
“3.5.9e. The thickness of the plank assembly measured normal to the lower surface must be 10mm ± 0.2mm and must be uniform when new. A minimum thickness of 9mm will be accepted due to wear, and conformity to this provision will be checked at the peripheries of the designated holes.
“3.15.8a. Bodywork within RV-PLANK may deflect no more than 2mm at the two holes in the plank at XF=1080 and no more than 2mm at the rearmost hole, when the car, without driver, is supported at these positions. The car will be supported on 70mm diameter pads, centred on the holes, and only in contact with the underside of the plank assembly. The displacement will be measured at the supports, relative to the reference plane at the centre of each hole.”
https://the-race.com/formula-1/how-f1s- ... ed-detail/
LM10 wrote: ↑03 Jul 2022, 00:44Has this rule been existing since the beginning of the season or it's just now the FIA is changing it in order to to have a more level playing field?siskue2005 wrote: ↑02 Jul 2022, 23:08Yup I was puzzled by that aswell, I have posted about it before as to why Horner and Ferrari are against the new TD when their fans were celebrating here
the FIA has published the rules which comes into effect from France onwards about the plank....so there is no smoke without fire.
The FIA notes that any car configured around a plank which flexes by more than the 2mm regulation limit will be considered in contravention of regulations 3.5.9e and 3.15.8a. Those regs state:
“3.5.9e. The thickness of the plank assembly measured normal to the lower surface must be 10mm ± 0.2mm and must be uniform when new. A minimum thickness of 9mm will be accepted due to wear, and conformity to this provision will be checked at the peripheries of the designated holes.
“3.15.8a. Bodywork within RV-PLANK may deflect no more than 2mm at the two holes in the plank at XF=1080 and no more than 2mm at the rearmost hole, when the car, without driver, is supported at these positions. The car will be supported on 70mm diameter pads, centred on the holes, and only in contact with the underside of the plank assembly. The displacement will be measured at the supports, relative to the reference plane at the centre of each hole.”
https://the-race.com/formula-1/how-f1s- ... ed-detail/
Could have big ramifications for RBR and SF.But the regulations did not include the specific wording of that original guidance. As a result, some teams have conceived layouts around the regulation wording rather than the understanding outlined in the meetings.
What has this allowed them to do? The 2mm flexibility tolerance is defined at the leading edge of the plank. But at the rear – around where the driver sits – they have engineered the mounting of the plank and skid block in a way which gives a degree of cushioning. From France this interpretation will not be accepted.
Any cars with this solution in place will be required to make changes in order not to be considered in breach of those two regulations.
