2022 United States Grand Prix - COTA, Oct 21 - 23

[Sieper]

race directors are just the puppets. The real culprit is the FIA. there is a concerted effort between FIA and F1 / drivers not to interfere with racing at the front (the spectacle) and not to retroactively change results. For some reason, not to penalise RB.

their bias has been exposed by Haas big time.

It is a very hard question. Haas challenged so you have to look in to it. Rules required. So if this is the new normal all teams will be looking at any competitor and start asking for penalties (until 30 mins post race) and stewards will have to treat every case. I hope not but I fear the cat is now out of the bag. Effectively the teams have become the stewards now that a team decided to go down this route. I know, it is not the first time but this is a little the way of the world nowadays. Everyone always feels mistreated about everything. And to a point Haas also was, but imho KMAG with his hard racing is also prone to damage and perhaps stewards HAVE been using the meatball a bit more firmly with him. That perhaps is unfair, but I think that is how it went. In any case, Haas felt this was a needed step.

That is point 1, and then point 2 is consistency. You have to look at each case. Wing endplates have in the past been loose, yesterday alone f.e. also George Russell had one. This isn't always a meatball. I guess Checo got lucky it was first reasonably fixed and then (when he came out of the draft) it immediately broke off) so no meatball. It is marginal, but cases like that happened without punishment many times in the past (and even yesterday with George) so I guess for consistency sake you can say this required no penalty. But it is a hard call.

Then we have other infringements like a loose mirror. has that been punishable in the past. I recall Leclerc in Japan holding it with one hand (or was that Hamilton, dont remember). It feels very unfair to Alonso who was on the receiving end of a too late and dangerous defensive move (allthough his attack was also very late). But (un)fortunately that still needs individual decision, and now, after other teams protest then. Stewards hoped to let it slide.

Stewards still need to look at it on case by case basis. It will simply never be totally fair, also depends on of a protest is launched.

[Stu]

That doesn’t seem to be right, does it.
The only difference is that Alonso lost a mirror, as they all lost parts required by the regulations. There also seemed to be a bent/broken FWheel deflector on MV’s car, but this also got waived, that is another part that has very tight positional tolerances in the regs.

[Sieper]

I think you can win races and championships by lodging protest against any loose part. Stewards will then decide who wins. Any car that isn’t perfectly undamaged can still get punished after the race. Simply a fact.

The mirror must always be on the car for being able to see your competitor I just read. Losing it means a black flag. I guess teams need to make their mirror strakes very strong. It could well loose you the race.

That wheel deflector is apparently a standard part. That needs to be looked in to. Unless it is the mounting (if that is not part of the standard part) that failed.

[codetower]

So if I understand, Haas challenged not only Alonzo’s mirror, but because on MULTIPLE occasions this year alone, they’ve been flagged and called in for the very same wing issue Perez had. Yet the FIA simply brush aside Perez’ and harshly penalize Alonzo? Man, between this and the quick penalty to Gasly for the 10 car safety car length (when Perez gets a warning a few races back), the bias is becoming too obvious.

And we really think anything more than a slap on the wrist for the cost cap is coming?

[Big Tea]

At least Alonso did not get penalised for leaving the track in the wrong direction (Upwards)

[Bill_Kar]

So if I understand, Haas challenged not only Alonzo’s mirror, but because on MULTIPLE occasions this year alone, they’ve been flagged and called in for the very same wing issue Perez had. Yet the FIA simply brush aside Perez’ and harshly penalize Alonzo? Man, between this and the quick penalty to Gasly for the 10 car safety car length (when Perez gets a warning a few races back), the bias is becoming too obvious.

And we really think anything more than a slap on the wrist for the cost cap is coming?

Man, maybe it's because of recency bias, but F1 rarely gets something right anymore.

It's a magical combo, having bad rulings AND being inconsistent.

[TNTHead]

I think you can win races and championships by lodging protest against any loose part. Stewards will then decide who wins. Any car that isn’t perfectly undamaged can still get punished after the race. Simply a fact.

The mirror must always be on the car for being able to see your competitor I just read. Losing it means a black flag. I guess teams need to make their mirror strakes very strong. It could well loose you the race.

That wheel deflector is apparently a standard part. That needs to be looked in to. Unless it is the mounting (if that is not part of the standard part) that failed.

This could lead to a perverse incentive to damage the car of your opponent so he'll gets a penalty or need to go to the pits, even more than it was already.

Driving around with one mirror is a safety issue, quite strange they didn't act on that during the race. And than afterwards a 30 s penalty feels way too harsh. For what type of wrongdoing can you get a 30 s penalty? I cannot think of any (but also doesn't know the rule book).

[chrisc90]

So if I understand, Haas challenged not only Alonzo’s mirror, but because on MULTIPLE occasions this year alone, they’ve been flagged and called in for the very same wing issue Perez had. Yet the FIA simply brush aside Perez’ and harshly penalize Alonzo? Man, between this and the quick penalty to Gasly for the 10 car safety car length (when Perez gets a warning a few races back), the bias is becoming too obvious.

And we really think anything more than a slap on the wrist for the cost cap is coming?

There was more insecure bodywork than just Perez.

We need to go back and look at the instances of the front wing on the haas and see how much damage there was.

If it’s just insecure then Perez front wing was missing, so cannot be insecure.
I also believe it come off the lap after?

[organic]

So if I understand, Haas challenged not only Alonzo’s mirror, but because on MULTIPLE occasions this year alone, they’ve been flagged and called in for the very same wing issue Perez had. Yet the FIA simply brush aside Perez’ and harshly penalize Alonzo? Man, between this and the quick penalty to Gasly for the 10 car safety car length (when Perez gets a warning a few races back), the bias is becoming too obvious.

And we really think anything more than a slap on the wrist for the cost cap is coming?

There was more insecure bodywork than just Perez.

We need to go back and look at the instances of the front wing on the haas and see how much damage there was.

If it’s just insecure then Perez front wing was missing, so cannot be insecure.
I also believe it come off the lap after?

Perez damage comparable



Falls off lap 6



Leaving this, which RB showed the FIA wasn't a dangerous state



Seems that the critical thing was that the endplate wasn't flapping around that much, and fell off on its own. I don't know how quickly Haas were meatballed after receiving damage, but seems like Perez went 5 laps with the damaged endplate before it fell off.

Pics/timeline courtesy of Sam Collins

[chrisc90]

Do you know how long the haas took to get flagged? Or if it fell off?

That’s the critical question we need to analyse

[search]

Do you know how long the haas took to get flagged? Or if it fell off?

That’s the critical question we need to analyse

these are the laps he pitted in:

- Canada, Lap 7
- Hungary, Lap 6
- Singapore, Lap 7

so I guess he got shown the flag a lap or two before?!

[Sieper]

So if I understand, Haas challenged not only Alonzo’s mirror, but because on MULTIPLE occasions this year alone, they’ve been flagged and called in for the very same wing issue Perez had. Yet the FIA simply brush aside Perez’ and harshly penalize Alonzo? Man, between this and the quick penalty to Gasly for the 10 car safety car length (when Perez gets a warning a few races back), the bias is becoming too obvious.

And we really think anything more than a slap on the wrist for the cost cap is coming?

Is there ANY reason you did not mention George Russell’s wing, it had the same problem.

[organic]

Do you know how long the haas took to get flagged? Or if it fell off?

That’s the critical question we need to analyse

Singapore



Damage - Lap 1
Meatballed - Lap 6
Pitted to repair - Lap 7

Hungary



Damage - Lap 1
Meatballed - lap 5
Pitted to repair - lap 6

Montreal



Damage - Lap 1
Meatballed - Lap 6
Pitted to repair - lap 7

Remarkable consistency

[Big Tea]

Can one of our knowledgeable posters tell me please, how rigid do those endplates need to be?

Could they be moulded/printed from something like polypropylene which would flex if hit hard enough and return. Any 'tabs' or fiddly bits could be made of stiffer material if needed.

It could also prevent some punctures, possibly ruled to be flexible if it would be workable

Edit, the attachment point would obviously need to be stiffer material, just the upright part

[codetower]

So if I understand, Haas challenged not only Alonzo’s mirror, but because on MULTIPLE occasions this year alone, they’ve been flagged and called in for the very same wing issue Perez had. Yet the FIA simply brush aside Perez’ and harshly penalize Alonzo? Man, between this and the quick penalty to Gasly for the 10 car safety car length (when Perez gets a warning a few races back), the bias is becoming too obvious.

And we really think anything more than a slap on the wrist for the cost cap is coming?

Is there ANY reason you did not mention George Russell’s wing, it had the same problem.

I didn’t mention any others, including Verstappen‘s left front eyebrow. The reason was because I don’t believe Haas listed those in their protest. The FIA was only looking at those two.