denyall wrote:dialtone wrote: ↑13 Sep 2023, 00:51
The absence of a rule about how to measure wing torsion shouldn’t give teams the ability to find ways to bend wings when it’s been literal years of fighting wing deflection. If it were physically possible to mandate rigid wings they would have.
There is no difference whatsoever from fuel flow never breached to wings not measured in the way they deflect.
I agree that if they could they would mandate fixed wings, but since they cant they have to write a ruleset and testing procedure that is specific and measurable. Because it is nearly impossible to account for every movement they have relied on the TD process to clarify and ban specific types of movement for years.
Bypassing the test (fuel flow) is not they same thing as the test being inadequate for the job (wing deflection).
Literally the same. There is no way to measure continuous fuel flow, and there is no such thing as a 28khz pump. Whatever Ferrari was doing it wasn’t violating the fuel flow. The rule wasn’t specifying how much fuel per injection or other things of that nature, there were rules about engine construction to avoid reservoirs post sensor and they placed multiple sensors (requiring at least a 56khz pump to sidestep) including investigating the ERS deployment due to the split battery approach from Ferrari, and having Ferrari fuel system with blueprints on a test bench, all of this without even a TD going on. When was the last time that this level of “investigation” happened to any other team in F1.
As I said, imho this is part of the sport and not deserving a DQ. I love the sport for this. But let’s call a spade a spade. If Ferrari was cheating, this is cheating.
To write a TD (which is your criteria) someone needs to know what’s going on and nobody knew for Ferrari. The simple inability to believe they built a great engine was enough to start the hunt. I bet $1000 that if you applied that level of scrutiny to any team on the grid you would find something.