Pirelli's motorsport director Paul Hembery has repeated at Korea that F1's sole tyre suppliers need to have more relevant tyre testing if it is to develop solid and reliable tyres for the 2014 season.
With the FIA press release above, well, so much for confidentialityPirelli wrote:"That [the details] remain confidential, but the FIA were informed as they were with the Mercedes test."
Agreed - but it looks like they could actually be in serious trouble. Remember, ignorance is no excuse:turbof1 wrote:With the FIA press release above, well, so much for confidentialityPirelli wrote:"That [the details] remain confidential, but the FIA were informed as they were with the Mercedes test."
I don't think Ferrari was expecting that one when they filed complaints. To be honest, I like this twist to the plot. Let's see which side Ferrari will choose now.
So let's review the changes from 2011:22) TRACK AND WIND TUNNEL TESTING
22.1 Track testing shall be considered any track running time not part of an Event undertaken by a competitor entered in the Championship, using cars which conform substantially with the current Formula One Technical Regulations in addition to those from the previous or subsequent year. The only exception is that each competitor is permitted up to eight promotional events, carried out using tyres provided specifically for this purpose by the appointed supplier, to a maximum distance of 100kms per event.
F2012
The main changes when compared to 2011 concern the height of the front section of the chassis, the position of the exhaust pipes and the mapping for the electronic engine management.
The 2013 car is very similar to 2012. The 2012 changes from the 2011 car are not a lot at all are they? One could have a very serious argument that the 2013 car 'conforms substantially' since 2011. I mean, it's not 'fundamentally different' is it?F138
This car constitutes the Scuderia’s interpretation of this year’s Technical and Sporting Regulations, which in fact are substantially the same as those from last season. Therefore the F138 can be seen as an evolution of the F2012, in terms of its basic design principals.
With the regulations essentially the same, the cars since 2011 all "conform substantially with the current Formula One Technical Regulations in addition to those from the previous or subsequent year". No team can test with any car.
That's positively brilliant, sir! =D> A pox on all their houses!No team can test with any car.
Is it though - did you read the Regs?Ganxxta wrote:Well I would say Ferrari has nothing worry...
Lets compare with the information we more or less can find online:
Ferrari:
- -used 2011 car => allowed by regs !
Regardless of tyres used, driver, distance, team operated by etc. Any test must abide by the Regulations, does it not? I would suggest Ferrari have at least "some" worries in this instance - with good cause.22.1 Track testing shall be considered any track running time not part of an Event undertaken by a competitor entered in the Championship, using cars which conform substantially with the current Formula One Technical Regulations in addition to those from the previous or subsequent year.
The 150 Italia doesn't comply with current regulations due to its exhaust-blown diffuser. (Incidentally, it also doesn't have a pull-rod front suspension, a feature of both the F2012 and the F138 and one that heavily effects tire use.)Cam wrote:[...]
The 2013 car is very similar to 2012. The 2012 changes from the 2011 car are not a lot at all are they? One could have a very serious argument that the 2013 car 'conforms substantially' since 2011. I mean, it's not 'fundamentally different' is it?
[...]
What a mess.
How on earth does a pull rod affect tyre use any more than a pull rod...bhallg2k wrote:Incidentally, it also doesn't have a pullrod front suspension, a feature of both the F2012 and the F138 and one that heavily effects tire use.
Yeah, I had considered the suspension and EBD. The EBD though, they've clawed a lot of that back, which I'm sure the data would reflect. I'll dig up some supporting facts on that aspect. The suspension might be their let off, although can we only look at parts? Surely the Regs consider the car as a whole? If you break the changes down, the suspension might only be a 2% change as a whole - which would be "conform substantially". You'd have to be in the 30-40% change area to overcome that argument I feel. I'll find a supporting argument.bhallg2k wrote:The 150 Italia doesn't comply to current regulations due to its exhaust-blown diffuser. (Incidentally, it also doesn't have a pullrod front suspension, a feature of both the F2012 and the F138 and one that heavily effects tire use.)Cam wrote:[...]
The 2013 car is very similar to 2012. The 2012 changes from the 2011 car are not a lot at all are they? One could have a very serious argument that the 2013 car 'conforms substantially' since 2011. I mean, it's not 'fundamentally different' is it?
[...]
What a mess.
That said, I still think it's absolutely proper that Ferrari be included in this investigation, regardless of the car they ran or whoever drove it under whatever conditions. This thing is a mess, and only a thorough review can (theoretically) resolve it.
Not that I expect any sort of meaningful resolution.
Agreed - this is what I was considering. It's not a fundamental change in suspension - like going to hydraulic, or leaf springs - that's a massive change.Tim.Wright wrote:How on earth does a pull rod affect tyre use any more than a pull rod...bhallg2k wrote:Incidentally, it also doesn't have a pullrod front suspension, a feature of both the F2012 and the F138 and one that heavily effects tire use.
I didCam wrote:Is it though - did you read the Regs?Ganxxta wrote:Well I would say Ferrari has nothing worry...
Lets compare with the information we more or less can find online:
Ferrari:
- -used 2011 car => allowed by regs !
Regardless of tyres used, driver, distance, team operated by etc. Any test must abide by the Regulations, does it not? I would suggest Ferrari have at least "some" worries in this instance - with good cause.22.1 Track testing shall be considered any track running time not part of an Event undertaken by a competitor entered in the Championship, using cars which conform substantially with the current Formula One Technical Regulations in addition to those from the previous or subsequent year.
Ok, here's my evidence that the EBD changes are not major.Cam wrote:Yeah, I had considered the suspension and EBD. The EBD though, they've clawed a lot of that back, which I'm sure the data would reflect. I'll dig up some supporting facts on that aspect. The suspension might be their let off, although can we only look at parts? Surely the Regs consider the car as a whole? If you break the changes down, the suspension might only be a 2% change as a whole - which would be "conform substantially". You'd have to be in the 30-40% change area to overcome that argument I feel. I'll find a supporting argument.bhallg2k wrote:The 150 Italia doesn't comply to current regulations due to its exhaust-blown diffuser. (Incidentally, it also doesn't have a pullrod front suspension, a feature of both the F2012 and the F138 and one that heavily effects tire use.)Cam wrote:[...]
The 2013 car is very similar to 2012. The 2012 changes from the 2011 car are not a lot at all are they? One could have a very serious argument that the 2013 car 'conforms substantially' since 2011. I mean, it's not 'fundamentally different' is it?
[...]
What a mess.
That said, I still think it's absolutely proper that Ferrari be included in this investigation, regardless of the car they ran or whoever drove it under whatever conditions. This thing is a mess, and only a thorough review can (theoretically) resolve it.
Not that I expect any sort of meaningful resolution.
[quote]For 2012 the exhaust position w ... ts/]Source[/quote]Red Bull's recent form is founded on a package of upgrades that started at the Singapore Grand Prix and has been refined ever since. There, chief technical officer Adrian Newey has found a way to recover more of the rear downforce that was lost through the banning of exhaust-blown diffusers at the end of last season than anyone else.
A revision of the rear bodywork has changed the direction of the exhaust gases and the way they interact with the rear aerodynamics. The gases are guided down channels inside the rear wheels, sealing the gap between the tyres and the diffuser sides.
