organic wrote: ↑15 Sep 2023, 09:43
Hold your horses...
Horner said at Monza it will not affect red bull, and max said this weekend as far as he knows it will not affect them. Waché has also talked about in the summer break with a french publication about how AMR and Mercedes are the ones playing with flexible elements at the moments.
I can dig the quotes but they're posted in the RB team thread at various points. Max's comments from yesterday.
Are you aware that TD039 was what pushed through the Flexi floor changes. The safety angle is how they managed to push through the TD without Ferrari's veto. It's almost exactly the same sort of situation here: flexible bodywork grey area that gets corrected with a technical directive that some cars will be more affected by than others depending on who was exploiting the opportunity more.
TD039 also introduced the AOM (aerodynamic oscillation metric) but they removed that for good after a few races (by Singapore).. so that whole safety angle was a non-issue really. TD039 also changed the diffuser minimum throat height and the minimum floor edge height of course for 2023.
I'm not saying it's definitive proof. It's just my belief.
Was the question asked to Mercedes by the press?
“It will be interesting,” said Wolff.
At Aston Martin you can already see that they have taken a step back now that their wing moves less, but I don’t know the details. Let’s wait and see. I don’t know who will benefit more than others, but who knows. Maybe Red Bull will suddenly be half a second slower. That would be nice, but I don’t think that will be the case.”
So Mercedes have also said something about it, if we are going to use press answers as "statements".
But they're not the same situation as being compared on this thread.
Silence was the reasoning behind the charge right?
TD039 Mercedes were vocal the TD018 there was no pre-emptive statement. There was no pre-emptive statements by Red Bull either which is my point, not after the fact press answers.
The theme is that Red Bull were suspected of doing it due to their higher top speed.
Formu1a.uno and AMuS used Wache's quotes as reasoning to cite Mercedes as suspect.
Teams like Aston Martin and Mercedes play with the deviation
That could very easily just be deflection on Wache's part.
So there's a half story, fleshed out into something of nothing, and then photos of a beam wing which was modified at Zandvoort because Merc were switching between single and double and required modularity to switch out the parts quickly. Well...they weren't the only ones.
Let's step back a moment then and assess technically, what you have based your belief on:
[*]You have a quote from Wache naming 2 rivals directly.
[*]A photo of a modularity switch on the beam wing, which other teams have done in the last couple of races too and prior.
That falls well below any standard of definition for proof, let alone "definitive proof". Even if we charitably term it speculation we could use this methodology for every single team and watch F1Technical turn into F1fantasy.
Not having a go mate, enjoy your content and appreciate the service you provide aggregating the news.
But here? It's like you're chasing ghosts in a thread that really doesn't need it, especially given past form by certain members with repeat attacks on the team and it's staff.
Edit:
The safety angle (TD039) was not a non issue, it was an issue and not just for Mercedes which literally got the FIA to act and issue a directive. But I digress as that's a glass half full/half empty doom loop which I won't comment on further or invoke the ire of mods.
