2023 Azerbaijan Grand Prix - Baku, April 28 - 30

[Stu]

Nothing wrong with Max’s car. Perfectly legal.

It's interesting to note the specific details which were being inspected and noted by the FIA.

They read it here first!!!

[Stu]

…

…The Race even did a write up on it if anyone fancies reading it.
Key takeaways:

The draw for the car to be checked is random. As Tombazis put it “we will pull numbers out of a hat tomorrow after the race”.As stripping down the entire car is a lengthy process, the FIA has come up with 20 different areas that can be checked. According to Tombazis, “two or three” of these aspects will be focused on each time – although this could be increased in the future.

https://the-race.com/formula-1/how-f1s- ... will-work/

This is one of the problems with having an overly complex and prescribed rule book.
Engines & gearboxes have always had to be sealed and removed for full compliance checking (bore/stroke were possible to check at the track). In order for a full compliance check (pun intended) of the suspension system/members these now need to be removed for rig testing.

[Laserguru]

It's about time they increased it. Teams were already at the limits of reliabilty for years now. And with the engine freeze and no exotic materials allowed it was silly to keep it a three.

In theory there's no reason to need more than 3 because any PU can be detuned. What's going to happen now is teams will run them harder since they don't need to last as long. The cycle repeats itself. They'll be on the fringes of durability next year as well. If you aren't on the fringes, you aren't taking advantage of the regulations and are leaving laptime on the table. The calendar lends itself well to at least 1 or two in-season grid penalties so you would want to run the PUs in a way to maximize this.

Most teams chose to use four PU but they never openly said it. Nothing will change except for less penalties issued.

Nothing will happen? Really? I would expect Mercedes engines to be turned up. We learned in the past from them their concept allows for trading of power versus durability where as Honda cannot. This was the situation 1 year ago and yes nobody knows if that’s still valid today. Ferrari has so many reliability issues they are hard to judge. But I don’t agree nothing will happen. We will learn after the sprint race when data analysis starts.

To my opinion it is FIA interfering with competition already after 3 races providing Aston Martin better opportunity to fight RBR. We don’t know if this was the intention but it is business as usual in this sport to find rule changes to slow down the leading team. Would not be surprised if it is the outcome of a huge Mercedes lobby at FIA either. It all happened before. It is how this sport works.

[Capharol]

the moved the DRS on the Straight about 100m back, from 347m after T20 to 447 after T20

[ValeVida46]

This is one of the problems with having an overly complex and prescribed rule book.
Engines & gearboxes have always had to be sealed and removed for full compliance checking (bore/stroke were possible to check at the track). In order for a full compliance check (pun intended) of the suspension system/members these now need to be removed for rig testing.

I think they mitigate that for the officials by only checking "1 or 2" of a list of 20 items. It's not an exhaustive process of checking every item.
As Tombazis himself says, every team will be subjected to this, after 15 races if a team hasn't been chosen they will be without warning at a following venue. And it's also done with a view that teams need to get their freight on the road asap.

Does anyone have the previous 2 Grand Prix random check teams?

Edit: seems a host of teams were post-race checked in Jeddah and with George Russell's Mercedes getting the random check in Bahrain. Always good to have some perspective, I suppose folk can draw their own conclusions based on fundamentals here as opposed to the alternatives...:

https://twitter.com/fiadocsbot/status/1 ... 1342027824

[AR3-GP]

This is one of the problems with having an overly complex and prescribed rule book.
Engines & gearboxes have always had to be sealed and removed for full compliance checking (bore/stroke were possible to check at the track). In order for a full compliance check (pun intended) of the suspension system/members these now need to be removed for rig testing.

I think they mitigate that for the officials by only checking "1 or 2" of a list of 20 items. It's not an exhaustive process of checking every item.
As Tombazis himself says, every team will be subjected to this, after 15 races if a team hasn't been chosen they will be without warning at a following venue. And it's also done with a view that teams need to get their freight on the road asap.

Does anyone have the previous 2 Grand Prix random check teams?

Edit: seems a host of teams were post-race checked in Jeddah and with George Russell's Mercedes getting the random check in Bahrain. Always good to have some perspective, I suppose folk can draw their own conclusions based on fundamentals here as opposed to the alternatives...:

https://twitter.com/fiadocsbot/status/1 ... 1342027824

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FrnIXelXwAM ... =4096x4096
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FrnIXtWXgAE ... =4096x4096
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FrnIX8cWAAI ... =4096x4096
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FrnIYOqWwAI ... =4096x4096

https://twitter.com/fiadocsbot/status/1 ... 80/photo/1

You’re still missing the point and I’ve said At least twice now that the car which is selected for additional checks is random, that was never the question. So what are you still complaining about?

[ValeVida46]

You’re still missing the point and I’ve said At least twice now that the car which is selected for additional checks is random, that was never the question. So what are you still complaining about?

It's not a complaint at all, it's a correction for this:

It's interesting to note the specific details which were being inspected and noted by the FIA. You can see that some of the other teams have begun the fishing expedition

[AR3-GP]

You’re still missing the point and I’ve said At least twice now that the car which is selected for additional checks is random, that was never the question. So what are you still complaining about?

It's not a complaint at all, it's a correction for this:

It's interesting to note the specific details which were being inspected and noted by the FIA. You can see that some of the other teams have begun the fishing expedition

I still think you don't understand what I wrote so perhaps the third time is the charm. A random selection process is just that, random. This part is clear in the regulations. The car number is randomly selected out of a hat. Car 1 was selected at random after Australia for a deeper inspection.

Are you still with me? ok, great.

Now...

"But the cars are fairly specialised nowadays and you can't just start going there and dismantling."

The FIA staff will know in advance which elements of the car they intend to address.

"We are going to be splitting the car in approximately 20 macro areas," Tombazis explains. "And we're going to be selecting two or three to check thoroughly each time. As we build a bit more confidence and we make sure the logistically we can handle it, we may increase that, hopefully."

The latter part of this procedure is no longer random. The specific items of the technical inspection are not random.

Do you understand now? Of the 20 macro areas, they wanted to thoroughly inspect the suspension systems of the RB.

This comes with the backdrop of suspicions surrounding abnormally low ride heights (made by other teams), and other trick suspension which had been made by the other teams. If you want to believe in coincidences, that's on you. I don't. There are few coincidences in F1.

[AR3-GP]

On a different note, Ferrari and Mercedes do not have any upgrades here. RB do (reportedly). I wouldn't expect anything other than a RB victory unless they put it in the wall.

[langedweil]

Just stop raping the sport ..
Like a crowbar, some things are just close to perfection and simply need no improvement.

Rape?
Strong word. Last time i checked rape is taking by force and leaving the victim indignified and mentally and sometimes physically damaged. The sport is the healthiest it has ever been actually.

F1 nearly perfect?
Maybe when viewed through your rose tinted glasses. For me there is always room for change.

No, calling it a strong word is just no more than your perception. In fact it is a violation without consent, where the 'sexual' part of it is obviously metaphorical aimed at the intimacy of the proven formula over decades.
And you know exactly that it means just that.
But pls let's keep this thread to the Baku race?

[djones]

On a different note, Ferrari and Mercedes do not have any upgrades here. RB do (reportedly). I wouldn't expect anything other than a RB victory unless they put it in the wall.

I'm not sure how accurate that is. Hamilton has been in an interview saying they have upgrades for this race.

[AR3-GP]

On a different note, Ferrari and Mercedes do not have any upgrades here. RB do (reportedly). I wouldn't expect anything other than a RB victory unless they put it in the wall.

I'm not sure how accurate that is. Hamilton has been in an interview saying they have upgrades for this race.

I was just going off of what Toto said previously (no upgrades until Imola). I stand corrected if Hamilton said something different. Although I should have known better than to take Toto's word for anything

[ValeVida46]

I still think you don't understand what I wrote so perhaps the third time is the charm. A random selection process is just that, random. This part is clear in the regulations. The car number is randomly selected out of a hat. Car 1 was selected at random after Australia for a deeper inspection.

Are you still with me? ok, great.

Now...

"But the cars are fairly specialised nowadays and you can't just start going there and dismantling."

The FIA staff will know in advance which elements of the car they intend to address.

"We are going to be splitting the car in approximately 20 macro areas," Tombazis explains. "And we're going to be selecting two or three to check thoroughly each time. As we build a bit more confidence and we make sure the logistically we can handle it, we may increase that, hopefully."

The latter part of this procedure is no longer random. The specific items of the technical inspection are not random.

Do you understand now? Of the 20 macro areas, they wanted to thoroughly inspect the suspension systems of the RB.

This comes with the backdrop of suspicions surrounding abnormally low ride heights (made by other teams), and other trick suspension which had been made by the other teams. If you want to believe in coincidences, that's on you. I don't. There are few coincidences in F1.

It is a random process that when selected, the FIA... not the teams, will know what they want to look at.
So why would it be a "team fishing expedition"? There's literally no foundation to make that claim.

Especially since a technical protest is an avenue for any team. And...that if the FIA suspects any illegality it doesn't need the random selection process to inspect a car as per:

As the FIA is already able to perform extra checks on cars it has suspicions about, there is no reason for it to make the selection non-random

If it's teams informing the FIA of illegality, why would they leave it to a random process that may take up to 15 races to come to fruition?
If a protest is lodged or the FIA has a suspicion, they can inspect it immediately. No need for a random process.
Palming this off as some "fishing expedition" is therefore without any foundation as outlined by the process, and by the fact there's nothing to substantiate as a seditious plot by teams to catch Red Bull out.

From that very story Tombasiz says this too...

All teams are deeply suspicious of their competitors, that maybe team X or Y is doing something, I’m sure that on occasion, maybe some things may have happened below our radar. So we don’t have any suspicions, but it’s good practice to start checking the cars a bit more thoroughly.

[djones]

This sprint setup.....

If they are playing around so much they may as well have done something fun. Yeah, Friday qualifying sets the grid for Sunday. But the grid for the sprint should be in reverse championship order.

[AR3-GP]

It is a random process that when selected, the FIA... not the teams, will know what they want to look at.
So why would it be a "team fishing expedition"? There's literally no foundation to make that claim.

Especially since a technical protest is an avenue for any team. And...that if the FIA suspects any illegality it doesn't need the random selection process to inspect a car as per:

As the FIA is already able to perform extra checks on cars it has suspicions about, there is no reason for it to make the selection non-random

If it's teams informing the FIA of illegality, why would they leave it to a random process that may take up to 15 races to come to fruition?
If a protest is lodged or the FIA has a suspicion, they can inspect it immediately. No need for a random process.
Palming this off as some "fishing expedition" is therefore without any foundation as outlined by the process, and by the fact there's nothing to substantiate as a seditious plot by teams to catch Red Bull out.

From that very story Tombasiz says this too...

All teams are deeply suspicious of their competitors, that maybe team X or Y is doing something, I’m sure that on occasion, maybe some things may have happened below our radar. So we don’t have any suspicions, but it’s good practice to start checking the cars a bit more thoroughly.

I never said that the teams have the power to tell the FIA what to inspect in a random inspection. I only said it's possible for ongoing discussions and whispers to influence the direction of the FIA, even though their processes are supposed to be independent.

Also, you cannot submit a technical protest for a mechanism for which you do not understand or have proof of it's existence. The Ferrari was never protested in 2019. No car was protested over flexing floors in 2022. All that happened was a silent technical directive introduction.