FRIC Could Be Banned As Soon As Germany

[basti313]

The clarification simply gave notice that a protest against the system won't fall upon deaf ears.

So every team can have a try and see what happens if they run it...

This is the same discussion like last weak: No one is running FRIC anymore, so the teams interpret the rules and the "one may protest"-letter from Charlie like I do: They are to strong and give not enough room to play games.
The theoretical discussion in this forums may lead to another result, but reality tells us that FRIC is banned.

I think the FIA's current clarification is a line arbitrarily drawn in the sand between one set of aerodynamic influences and another set of aerodynamic influences, and it doesn't make one lick of sense.

Yes, it is an arbitrary line. But I think it makes total sense as "do not connect front and rear axle" is a very good clarification, that leaves not much grey areas or is unfair.
This is completely the same like the engine mapping clarification two years ago (in Germany)...they are drawing an arbitrary line. 2012 everybody was ok with it...

[Cam]

But I think it makes total sense as "do not connect front and rear axle" is a very good clarification, that leaves not much grey areas or is unfair.

I disagree - it's not a good clarification, in fact, there's nothing good about any of this. "Do not connect front and rear axle" works until the time comes where the same effect occurs independent of any connection... what then? All that's occurred is they've put a band aid on a broken leg. The blood has been hidden but the major issue remains. Combine that now with apparently being allowed to change 'similar' parts in parc ferme and it's difficult not assume the FiA are simply incompetent, biased or both.

How can any fan understand the sport?

[turbof1]

To be clear, FRIC isn't banned, because the wording of the regulations can't be changed mid-season without the unanimous consent of the teams, and there's nothing written that specifically disallows an interconnected suspension. So, no team would be summarily prohibited from running the system as would be the case if a team submitted for scrutineering a car equipped with a blatantly illegal component, like this gem Ferrari tried to pass off as a "slot-gap separator" in 2011. The clarification simply gave notice that a protest against the system won't fall upon deaf ears.

It's this what I've been telling the whole time. There will be no regulatory banning until 2016 -unless unanimous agreement- for fric.

This is the same discussion like last weak: No one is running FRIC anymore, so the teams interpret the rules and the "one may protest"-letter from Charlie like I do: They are to strong and give not enough room to play games.
The theoretical discussion in this forums may lead to another result, but reality tells us that FRIC is banned.

No they interpret it as "we could run it, but I don't trust the other teams since they could rat me out". They could firmly disagree, but they don't want to take the risk since fric isn't a wonder system, bringing at most a couple of tenths and a reduced tyre wear. Ironically, the latter is the biggest advantage to fric, a purely mechanical matter which doesn't interfere with 3.15.

Yes, it is an arbitrary line. But I think it makes total sense as "do not connect front and rear axle" is a very good clarification, that leaves not much grey areas or is unfair.

It isn't.

-Red Bull is rumored to run other suspension system that could also be interpreted as trying to influence ride height.

-J-dampers, an even older suspension solution and the successor of the mass-dampers, has the very same intention as the mass-dampers, is run and has been run by the entire field since 2006.

-If a team could absolutely prove that connecting the front and rear is, lets say, purely a stifness solution which doesn't influence the ride height at all, is then disallowed? It doesn't fall foul to 3.15, so I'd say no.

The clarification is dodgy, hugely dodgy.

[tranquility2k4]

Just a thought. Everyone spoke of removing FRIC hurting Mercedes most - even though they probably do have the most advanced system, it could be that removing it from there car, which is already so good, has hurt them less than removing the system from slower cars with a lesser aerodynamic package.Ironically, in some ways at least, it may help Mercedes. I imagine they've had to bolt on a very basic suspension system for Germany, but they could refine this in coming races and actually end up with just as much margin.

I believe the interesting tracks will be ones with lots of undulation, as I think that's where FRIC would have worked best (on the Merc with corner-to corner levelling). I remember in 2013, no one could work out how MERC were so fast in sector 3 of Barcalona (especially the last turn), also in Hungary, they had a massive advantage in sector 1 and could drive round corners 2/3 much better than anyone else. Will be interesting to see if they get hurt in that section of Hungary this year or maybe their FRIC gave a bigger advantage in combination with the blown diffuser, and without that, it isn't so influential.

As Mark Hughes has said, RBR are meant to be able to keep a low ride without FRIC due to their flexi composite structures of their nose, etc, and from seeing how RIC bottomed out towards the end of the race (with sparks coming out) in Germany, I imagine they didn't have time to put their "flexi nose" back on. They wouldn't run that with FRIC at the same time - I wouldn't be surprised if the reason Horner keeps mentioning Hungary as being the true test is because they plan to bring back their flexi nose for there. So maybe at hungary, they'll keep the car lower for the whole lap, whilst Mercedes will be forced to raise their ride height for the long straight and it may cost them a lot. I remember when RBR raced at Hungary in 2010 with their flexi technology and their car was visibly so low and Vettel did a 1:18.7 on pole by a big margin.