Joel709 wrote: ↑17 Oct 2024, 21:48
SmallSoldier wrote: ↑17 Oct 2024, 21:39
organic wrote: ↑17 Oct 2024, 21:04
If ride height was changed inside parc fermé using this device then it isn't similar to the McLaren rear wing. It would be completely illegal, not just a grey area.
Spot on… This isn’t about “the spirit of the rules”… “If” (and that’s a big “If”) this was actually used to change the ride height, there is not interpretation of the rules, there is no boundaries been pushed, this is plain and simply illegal.
I agree, however mclarens rear wing wasn’t a grey area, it was obvious to the fia after Azerbaijan that it wasn’t conforming to the regulations hence its immediate change.
The regulations clearly state that you cannot have the main plane of the rear wing flex to an extent that it allows a a certain gap, the wing didn’t conform
This is the Red Bull thread, so I don’t want to elaborate too much in regards to the McLaren rear wing, but you are mistaken… McLaren’s rear wing wasn’t deem “illegal’, it wasn’t “banned” in Azerbaijan, there was no test put in place to measure the deflection of the end corners of the flap… Very different situation… and not dissimilar to other “flex wing sagas” from the past… There is a big difference between those situations and simply having a device in the car, accessible from the cockpit that can change the ride height when the car is in Parc Femme, which if it was used would mean a DSQ.
Since there is no way to prove that Red Bull did indeed use the device while in Parc Femme, there are no grounds for a DSQ (only way would be for a Whisleblower to state that they did)… But given that device does indeed exist and can be used to alter the height, measures are been put in place to ensure it doesn’t happen.