2018 Canadian Grand Prix, Montreal June 8-10

[henry]

....

Whatever, we will see in Montreal if Ferrari will significantly be behind power wise or not. I'm curious about that.

I think you will be disappointed. The power/duration effect that is being hinted at is small. Only the teams will discern a difference, if it exists. To do so they will need full circuit simulators, meteorological data and a deep understanding of the performance of their own and their competitors’ power units from prior events.

Any differences we bystanders will note are much more likely to be down to tyres, chassis performance and setup. IMHO

[LM10]

I’m a software engineer, so let me give you an example:

You have a piece of software (energy management) that has an exploit that could be potentially used for abuse.

There’s no way to know, if that exploit is/was used or not, because there is no log of it.

You alter the software to close/fix that exploit from being used.

It doesnt answer if that exploit was used in the first place, but going forward, you can ensure it cant be used (and ensure full compliance).

I see. Thank you for the explanation.

I think you will be disappointed. The power/duration effect that is being hinted at is small. Only the teams will discern a difference, if it exists. To do so they will need full circuit simulators, meteorological data and a deep understanding of the performance of their own and their competitors’ power units from prior events.

Any differences we bystanders will note are much more likely to be down to tyres, chassis performance and setup. IMHO

I'm not even sure about how much the power effect that is being hinted at is. I'm just confused.
I've read about 20 hp over one lap, but also about sudden 20 hp increase for under 2 seconds.

So I personally don't know what to believe and don't have the technical know-how to evaluate it myself either.

[Bill_Kar]

Mercedes will do Q2 on the Ultra soft tyre and then fit SS until the end. They have the pace on the straights for that strategy and I think we'll see a Ferrari/Mercedes shoot out for the win. Hopefully we'll see a mix of strategies with Ferrari going for two stops quicker stints versus mercs 1 stop. Red Bull won't have the power to make up the time on the straights.

But Mercedes will work really sweetly on those SS, Ferrari will just loose 20s or something. Isn't this what happened in Canada 2016?I'm not sure, but IIRC Ferrari pitted and they were waiting for Mercedes to do so and they never caught up.
And there isn't so much graining as in the 2012 race to benefit from it.
I think it'll be a one-stopper easily, with no differentiation in strategy, at least for Vettel-Hamilton.

Agree but if it’s close I can see either team switching their resident Finn onto a contra strategy to put pressure on the other.

Oh, yeah that is totally correct. Albeit Ferrari's Finn won't be much of a factor, not so much as Merc's one.
As someone said, this is Kimi's worst track and probably one of the best for Bottas. Plus, Kimi won't get engine upgrade (I think?). And, well, no hate or something but Kimi seems to underperform lately (and you can relate this to his probable switch to WRC story).

[notsofast]

Has there ever been a case when the "updates" changed the pecking order? Teams keep saying they'll bring updates to such and such a race, but then nothing happens. Afterwards, their excuse is always that the other teams also brought updates, hence nothing changed.

[f1316]

Is it really that good for Bottas? He was nowhere near Hamilton last year.

[Restomaniac]

I found this article a bit strange anyway. How could they have implemented such "preventing" software without even being aware of how the system was working?

I’m a software engineer, so let me give you an example:

You have a piece of software (energy management) that has an exploit that could be potentially used for abuse.

There’s no way to know, if that exploit is/was used or not, because there is no log of it.

You alter the software to close/fix that exploit from being used.

It doesnt answer if that exploit was used in the first place, but going forward, you can ensure it cant be used (and ensure full compliance).

With regard to this my bigger concern was Whiting admitting that the FIA didn’t understand it because it is different to everyone else’s.
My immediate reposnce was ‘Wait, how can the regulation police not understand it. Who in the hell allowed a PU to have a device nobody in the FIA could fathom with Ferrari having to explain?’. By that logic Ferrari could give the FIA any old Speil and they would have no idea if it’s legit.

[TAG]

When Mercedes have seen tire issues it's been with getting the softest compound in the race weekend to work. Specifically overheating the rears. In Canada the tight part of the circuit is sector 1 which means that tires giving up their performance in Sector 3 like they did in Barcelona won't be an issue here. I think all teams will be able to extract the maximum performance for the hypersoft here.

The question then becomes whether you go for a one stop or a two stop.

[Just_a_fan]

My immediate reposnce was ‘Wait, how can the regulation police not understand it. Who in the hell allowed a PU to have a device nobody in the FIA could fathom with Ferrari having to explain?’. By that logic Ferrari could give the FIA any old Speil and they would have no idea if it’s legit.

It's rather reminiscent of Benetton and their "yes there is TC in the software but we don't use it, honest".

The cars are so complex that only the people who design and build them have a chance of understanding them.

[Big Tea]

I found this article a bit strange anyway. How could they have implemented such "preventing" software without even being aware of how the system was working?

I’m a software engineer, so let me give you an example:

You have a piece of software (energy management) that has an exploit that could be potentially used for abuse.

There’s no way to know, if that exploit is/was used or not, because there is no log of it.

You alter the software to close/fix that exploit from being used.

It doesnt answer if that exploit was used in the first place, but going forward, you can ensure it cant be used (and ensure full compliance).

With regard to this my bigger concern was Whiting admitting that the FIA didn’t understand it because it is different to everyone else’s.
My immediate reposnce was ‘Wait, how can the regulation police not understand it. Who in the hell allowed a PU to have a device nobody in the FIA could fathom with Ferrari having to explain?’. By that logic Ferrari could give the FIA any old Speil and they would have no idea if it’s legit.

To be fair to Ferrari, FIA did not regulate what they could have, only what they could not.

[Restomaniac]

I’m a software engineer, so let me give you an example:

You have a piece of software (energy management) that has an exploit that could be potentially used for abuse.

There’s no way to know, if that exploit is/was used or not, because there is no log of it.

You alter the software to close/fix that exploit from being used.

It doesnt answer if that exploit was used in the first place, but going forward, you can ensure it cant be used (and ensure full compliance).

With regard to this my bigger concern was Whiting admitting that the FIA didn’t understand it because it is different to everyone else’s.
My immediate reposnce was ‘Wait, how can the regulation police not understand it. Who in the hell allowed a PU to have a device nobody in the FIA could fathom with Ferrari having to explain?’. By that logic Ferrari could give the FIA any old Speil and they would have no idea if it’s legit.

To be fair to Ferrari, FIA did not regulate what they could have, only what they could not.

Ferrari pushed their luck as every team does. Other teams asked if the Ferrari set up is legit the FIA’s responce was to ask Ferrari ‘Explain it to us please’.
It is the FIA’s damn job to check stuff is legit. Like in many other cases it seems the FIA walk along with their heads in clouds whilst teams throw anything on their cars and nothing is said until other teams say ‘WTF FIA’.
Honestly I think Renault could sneak in 10 cylinders and the FIA wouldn’t notice until Ferrari, Mercedes and Honda kicked off.

[Phil]

My take on the whole battery story is that Ferrari found a way to use an exploit that wasnt policed by the regulators (happens all the time, see oil burning). Similar to the flexi-wing case - rules are in place to prevent such a thing, but the method of fully policing it are limited, until a competitor figures it out, requests clarification and the FIA go and check.

As in most cases, the FIA puts the onus on the team to prove they are compliant at all times.

As it’s effectively a software exploit, my hunch is that it is/was rather difficult to prove. Ferrari probably tried to explain first that there was no exploit, or that there might be one but they didnt (ab)use it. The FIA too cant know for sure either, as there are no logs, sensors, data that can be taken and the whole system is complex and complicated. Either way, eventually both agree that there is an exploit, a loophole, that isnt properly policed, can be exploited and if it were, there is no evidence, as there is no sensor or logs that monitors it.

Pressure mounts on all parties, opposing teams threaten to protest if there is no clarification and in the end, Ferrari gives in and comes up with alterations in the software that ensure that that kind of exploit can no longer be used.

As previous incompliance or abuse cant be proven either way, one assumes Ferrari’s innocence and moving forward, the exploit is closed with the changes made to the software (energy management).

Everyone is happy. The story slowly dies, there was no proof of any crime, everyone is happy to move on and most importantly, there is clarity that it can no longer be used, so no team will copy the solution, but neither can Ferrari still use it.

[TAG]

Speaking of Kimi's worst performances being in Montreal... A complaint has been made to police in Canada on behalf of Ferrari Formula 1 driver Kimi Raikkonen alleging he is the victim of extortion by a woman in Montreal.

[djos]

Rain or no rain, Verstappen will win this GP.

I'm curious to see if he can get through a GP weekend without damaging his car.....

[giantfan10]

Charlie is obviously in an awkward position. If he says too much, he is risking that media will cry foul play or make accusations/suggestions that the FIA are protecting Ferrari. Either way, it's a delicate matter and wrong conclusions can be drawn. In that sense, I'm more inclined to think that software changes have been made (Charlie confirmed or slipped that information in what I quoted). Then there is also the case that suddenly Ferrari have been very cooperative regarding the last minute 2019 aero changes which also suggests there's more to it than is publicly available. I also will add - again - that opposing teams did threaten with protests if no action was done. This definitely puts the FIA (and therefore Ferrari) under pressure to demonstrate that everything is in order (hence the alterations in software).

Under the presumption that altering software also alters the test-case, it's a different matter all together if there was a loophole that was effectively used, or not. That's an entirely different topic. If suddenly Ferrari's pace is off (like at Barcelona), it does raise a few interesting questions: Where did that pace go? Was Mercedes simply underperforming from Bahrain to Baku? Was it due to tires (for Mercedes at those 3 races or for Ferrari at Barcelona)? Or was Ferrari really riding on exploiting some advantage, at least in QF, from a loophole that is now closed?

Stop trying so hard.
You are on every thread trying to convince the masses that Ferrari has lost performance due to a change in software even though it was said point blank that any changes were made to aid the FIA in monitoring the system.
Are you that worried about Ferrari?
Cmon now being a Mercedes fan like yourself u should know that Mercedes can never be beaten : ) Ferrari is no threat.

[Vasconia]

This is one of my favourite tracks. Races here are usually pretty good and I love the layout.

Ferrari has been weak here but this year they should be much stronger. Power wise they are in a better position and the tyre allocation favours the team. I expect a close battle between Sebastian and Hamilton.