Racing Point RP20

[JordanMugen]

They legally had the CAD file for the ducts (last year)

But they knew they were supposed to design them themselves for 2020. So how did they think it was acceptable to use the Mercedes ducts as a starting point. The Mercedes ducts are not Racing Point's own design!

An example of following an idea but making an original design would be the Gibson Les Paul SG (later simply "SG" or solid guitar) as Gibson's answer to the cheap-to-manufacture Fender Stratocaster -- bolt-on neck, no veneers, no arched-top etc. The same idea, but Gibson's own original design.

[siskue2005]

I'm just curious as to what the limit is.

Can a Racing Point team member visit the Mercedes factory?
Can they see the car there? Take pictures, hold the parts, etc.

It is not that difficult to construct a 3D model of the car
I have seen near perfect replicas in games like rFactor and iracing for years since 2006...all 3d models done from just photos.
A near perfect 3d model in rfactor of the ferrari f1 2008 car.... u can find all cars' photos online
https://images-wixmp-ed30a86b8c4ca88777 ... _muBsB2jZU
And this made by someone at home with just one computer, imagine what an F1 team will achieve

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/OAtwjr7pYps/maxresdefault.jpg

I’m pretty sure codemasters actually laser scans the cars for the f1 game, so it it wouldn’t be hard to extract the 3D model off the game to put you in the ball park. Plus with all the other data you can gather with photos or 3D camera and cad files they have purchased

No they only laser scan some tracks, they dont do it to the actual car
And that too only this year they have done laser scans of some tracks

edit: just checked they dont even laser scan the tracks...it is asseto corssa, rfactor and iracing who laser scans all tracks

[siskue2005]

They legally had the CAD file for the ducts (last year)

But they knew they were supposed to design them themselves. So how did they think it was acceptable to use the Mercedes ducts as a starting point. The Mercedes ducts are not their own design!

That is where we hit a road block, the FIA has not specified anything about design transfer from previous seasons for listed and unlisted parts.
That is one of the things which is argued by RP. If you own an old design, u surely can improve upon it...the FIA also accepts this as their front brake ducts are cleared.
But when it comes to rears they didnt run them last year and that is why they were penalised (but again there is no rule stating they SHOULD run it last year) The FIA just made that rule just now (according the RP team principle on Sky TV in FP3 today).
So again it is poor rule implementation from FIA

[ispano6]

It's pretty two-faced of Ferrari and Renault to be asking for clarity and Abiteboul seeking all RP points to be taken away other than the first race. Ferrari and Renault should have all their points they obtained illegally last year taken away too. For Renault that should have at least been the points scored in Monza and even up to Suzuka. That would have dropped them below Toro Rosso at the end of the season. What hypocrites.

[holeindalip]

It is not that difficult to construct a 3D model of the car
I have seen near perfect replicas in games like rFactor and iracing for years since 2006...all 3d models done from just photos.
A near perfect 3d model in rfactor of the ferrari f1 2008 car.... u can find all cars' photos online
https://images-wixmp-ed30a86b8c4ca88777 ... _muBsB2jZU
And this made by someone at home with just one computer, imagine what an F1 team will achieve

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/OAtwjr7pYps/maxresdefault.jpg

I’m pretty sure codemasters actually laser scans the cars for the f1 game, so it it wouldn’t be hard to extract the 3D model off the game to put you in the ball park. Plus with all the other data you can gather with photos or 3D camera and cad files they have purchased

No they only laser scan some tracks, they dont do it to the actual car
And that too only this year they have done laser scans of some tracks

edit: just checked they dont even laser scan the tracks...it is asseto corssa, rfactor and iracing who laser scans all tracks

Even so it’s pretty easy to 3D scan an object even with a cellphone nowadays, I’m sure f1 teams are far ahead of the curve then the general public, I don’t see it being an issue. The don’t need any uprights or suspension info since that already comes from merc

[siskue2005]

I’m pretty sure codemasters actually laser scans the cars for the f1 game, so it it wouldn’t be hard to extract the 3D model off the game to put you in the ball park. Plus with all the other data you can gather with photos or 3D camera and cad files they have purchased

No they only laser scan some tracks, they dont do it to the actual car
And that too only this year they have done laser scans of some tracks

edit: just checked they dont even laser scan the tracks...it is asseto corssa, rfactor and iracing who laser scans all tracks

Even so it’s pretty easy to 3D scan an object even with a cellphone nowadays, I’m sure f1 teams are far ahead of the curve then the general public, I don’t see it being an issue. The don’t need any uprights or suspension info since that already comes from merc

Yup true, that is exactly what i was saying before

[siskue2005]

They legally had the CAD file for the ducts (last year)

But they knew they were supposed to design them themselves for 2020. So how did they think it was acceptable to use the Mercedes ducts as a starting point. The Mercedes ducts are not Racing Point's own design!

There were no rule clarification of that. The new rule just added brake ducts to listed parts, thats it
There were no clarification of already legally owned data from last year.... Why do you think their front brake duct was declared legal? (even when it is same as last year's and same as merc's?)

[SmallSoldier]

They legally had the CAD file for the ducts (last year)

But they knew they were supposed to design them themselves for 2020. So how did they think it was acceptable to use the Mercedes ducts as a starting point. The Mercedes ducts are not Racing Point's own design!

There were no rule clarification of that. The new rule just added brake ducts to listed parts, thats it
There were no clarification of already legally owned data from last year.... Why do you think their front brake duct was declared legal? (even when it is same as last year's and same as merc's?)

There wasn’t a need for a clarification and if the team thought there was a need for one, they should have asked.

Why the Front ducts were ruled as compliant? Because FIA determine that RP modified enough during the 2019 season for the current one to be considered “their design”... But on the RBD’s there is no design from RP.

It is the responsibility of the teams to comply with the rules, the fact that the rules didn’t mention anything in regards to when parts/designs were purchased should be irrelevant.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Big Tea]

But they knew they were supposed to design them themselves for 2020. So how did they think it was acceptable to use the Mercedes ducts as a starting point. The Mercedes ducts are not Racing Point's own design!

There were no rule clarification of that. The new rule just added brake ducts to listed parts, thats it
There were no clarification of already legally owned data from last year.... Why do you think their front brake duct was declared legal? (even when it is same as last year's and same as merc's?)

There wasn’t a need for a clarification and if the team thought there was a need for one, they should have asked.

Why the Front ducts were ruled as compliant? Because FIA determine that RP modified enough during the 2019 season for the current one to be considered “their design”... But on the RBD’s there is no design from RP.

It is the responsibility of the teams to comply with the rules, the fact that the rules didn’t mention anything in regards to when parts/designs were purchased should be irrelevant.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

When rules change there is usually an assumption of Status quo, or custom and practice where anything not mentioned or implied stays as it was.

[SmallSoldier]

There were no rule clarification of that. The new rule just added brake ducts to listed parts, thats it
There were no clarification of already legally owned data from last year.... Why do you think their front brake duct was declared legal? (even when it is same as last year's and same as merc's?)

There wasn’t a need for a clarification and if the team thought there was a need for one, they should have asked.

Why the Front ducts were ruled as compliant? Because FIA determine that RP modified enough during the 2019 season for the current one to be considered “their design”... But on the RBD’s there is no design from RP.

It is the responsibility of the teams to comply with the rules, the fact that the rules didn’t mention anything in regards to when parts/designs were purchased should be irrelevant.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

When rules change there is usually an assumption of Status quo, or custom and practice where anything not mentioned or implied stays as it was.

Still, if RP “assumed” that they could use them, that’s not a “get out of jail” free card for them... It is their responsibility to confirm that their assumption is indeed correct.

Also, “intent” has nothing to do with whether a team is breaking a rule or not.

I’ve always thought that copying the W10 was a great strategy from RP and don’t fault them for going in that direction, but the fact that they missed the fact that the rule (which was none for a long time before the start of the current season) was very clear in regards to what was and wasn’t allowed in terms of design of listed parts will make them pay dearly.

The ruling by FIA is clear in regards to the illegality of the RBD’s and that’s what Ferrari and Renault are claiming, there is part that doesn’t comply with the rules, the team is punished for their use and they are still allowed to use such a part for the rest of the season... The precedent is also a bad one for the sport and doesn’t follow previous rulings (like Renault’s brake controllers last year), with teams been forced to stop the usage of a part or system not in compliance with the rules... In theory it could allow teams to do something illegal, get a point penalty and under the assumption that they can’t “unlearn” what they now know, allowed to use that advantage for the rest of the season.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Big Tea]

There wasn’t a need for a clarification and if the team thought there was a need for one, they should have asked.

Why the Front ducts were ruled as compliant? Because FIA determine that RP modified enough during the 2019 season for the current one to be considered “their design”... But on the RBD’s there is no design from RP.

It is the responsibility of the teams to comply with the rules, the fact that the rules didn’t mention anything in regards to when parts/designs were purchased should be irrelevant.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

When rules change there is usually an assumption of Status quo, or custom and practice where anything not mentioned or implied stays as it was.

Still, if RP “assumed” that they could use them, that’s not a “get out of jail” free card for them... It is their responsibility to confirm that their assumption is indeed correct.

Also, “intent” has nothing to do with whether a team is breaking a rule or not.

I’ve always thought that copying the W10 was a great strategy from RP and don’t fault them for going in that direction, but the fact that they missed the fact that the rule (which was none for a long time before the start of the current season) was very clear in regards to what was and wasn’t allowed in terms of design of listed parts will make them pay dearly.

The ruling by FIA is clear in regards to the illegality of the RBD’s and that’s what Ferrari and Renault are claiming, there is part that doesn’t comply with the rules, the team is punished for their use and they are still allowed to use such a part for the rest of the season... The precedent is also a bad one for the sport and doesn’t follow previous rulings (like Renault’s brake controllers last year), with teams been forced to stop the usage of a part or system not in compliance with the rules... In theory it could allow teams to do something illegal, get a point penalty and under the assumption that they can’t “unlearn” what they now know, allowed to use that advantage for the rest of the season.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Just a small point, but an essential one. The ruling by FIA is clear in regards to the illegality of the RBD’

No, they are completely legal or would be foul of the tec regs and slam dunk, the car can not be raced.
They are legal, it is the design process that is in question. Nit picking yes, but that is what the whole dispute is about

[SmallSoldier]

When rules change there is usually an assumption of Status quo, or custom and practice where anything not mentioned or implied stays as it was.

Still, if RP “assumed” that they could use them, that’s not a “get out of jail” free card for them... It is their responsibility to confirm that their assumption is indeed correct.

Also, “intent” has nothing to do with whether a team is breaking a rule or not.

I’ve always thought that copying the W10 was a great strategy from RP and don’t fault them for going in that direction, but the fact that they missed the fact that the rule (which was none for a long time before the start of the current season) was very clear in regards to what was and wasn’t allowed in terms of design of listed parts will make them pay dearly.

The ruling by FIA is clear in regards to the illegality of the RBD’s and that’s what Ferrari and Renault are claiming, there is part that doesn’t comply with the rules, the team is punished for their use and they are still allowed to use such a part for the rest of the season... The precedent is also a bad one for the sport and doesn’t follow previous rulings (like Renault’s brake controllers last year), with teams been forced to stop the usage of a part or system not in compliance with the rules... In theory it could allow teams to do something illegal, get a point penalty and under the assumption that they can’t “unlearn” what they now know, allowed to use that advantage for the rest of the season.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Just a small point, but an essential one. The ruling by FIA is clear in regards to the illegality of the RBD’

No, they are completely legal or would be foul of the tec regs and slam dunk, the car can not be raced.
They are legal, it is the design process that is in question. Nit picking yes, but that is what the whole dispute is about

Agreed, the RBD’s comply with the “Technical Regulations”, but they were found non-compliant under the “Sport Regulations” (therefore the 15 point penalty).

It’s an interesting case for sure.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Big Tea]

Still, if RP “assumed” that they could use them, that’s not a “get out of jail” free card for them... It is their responsibility to confirm that their assumption is indeed correct.

Also, “intent” has nothing to do with whether a team is breaking a rule or not.

I’ve always thought that copying the W10 was a great strategy from RP and don’t fault them for going in that direction, but the fact that they missed the fact that the rule (which was none for a long time before the start of the current season) was very clear in regards to what was and wasn’t allowed in terms of design of listed parts will make them pay dearly.

The ruling by FIA is clear in regards to the illegality of the RBD’s and that’s what Ferrari and Renault are claiming, there is part that doesn’t comply with the rules, the team is punished for their use and they are still allowed to use such a part for the rest of the season... The precedent is also a bad one for the sport and doesn’t follow previous rulings (like Renault’s brake controllers last year), with teams been forced to stop the usage of a part or system not in compliance with the rules... In theory it could allow teams to do something illegal, get a point penalty and under the assumption that they can’t “unlearn” what they now know, allowed to use that advantage for the rest of the season.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Just a small point, but an essential one. The ruling by FIA is clear in regards to the illegality of the RBD’

No, they are completely legal or would be foul of the tec regs and slam dunk, the car can not be raced.
They are legal, it is the design process that is in question. Nit picking yes, but that is what the whole dispute is about

Agreed, the RBD’s comply with the “Technical Regulations”, but they were found non-compliant under the “Sport Regulations” (therefore the 15 point penalty).

It’s an interesting case for sure.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

It seams not all the teams are against what 'Tracing point' have done, it may just be 'the party line' for some


https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/tost ... =widget-22


included from Tost (who is currently hiding from Marco)

“I know all the F1 purists say, ‘Ah, we must be a constructor. Every team must design everything in-house.’ The question is, and you know the engineers are saying this, but how do you finance everything?

“Because we reached such a high level on the technical side, the top teams have such a fantastic infrastructure. If someone wants to come into F1 – even the teams which are in F1, if they want to catch up – this is very difficult, and nearly impossible.

“And you spend millions. And I’m just asking, what for? I’m asking, why does every team have to have its own wind tunnel, has to have its own CFD, has to have 500-600 employees?...
>>>>>>
Personally I still think back to the days when we came to F1 with Toro Rosso and we just got a one-year-old car from Red Bull Technology, and we could race with a third of the money.”

[holeindalip]

Just a small point, but an essential one. The ruling by FIA is clear in regards to the illegality of the RBD’

No, they are completely legal or would be foul of the tec regs and slam dunk, the car can not be raced.
They are legal, it is the design process that is in question. Nit picking yes, but that is what the whole dispute is about

Agreed, the RBD’s comply with the “Technical Regulations”, but they were found non-compliant under the “Sport Regulations” (therefore the 15 point penalty).

It’s an interesting case for sure.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

It seams not all the teams are against what 'Tracing point' have done, it may just be 'the party line' for some


https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/tost ... =widget-22


included from Tost (who is currently hiding from Marco)

“I know all the F1 purists say, ‘Ah, we must be a constructor. Every team must design everything in-house.’ The question is, and you know the engineers are saying this, but how do you finance everything?

“Because we reached such a high level on the technical side, the top teams have such a fantastic infrastructure. If someone wants to come into F1 – even the teams which are in F1, if they want to catch up – this is very difficult, and nearly impossible.

“And you spend millions. And I’m just asking, what for? I’m asking, why does every team have to have its own wind tunnel, has to have its own CFD, has to have 500-600 employees?...
>>>>>>
Personally I still think back to the days when we came to F1 with Toro Rosso and we just got a one-year-old car from Red Bull Technology, and we could race with a third of the money.”

And I 100% agree with Tost. Nothing wrong with running a 1 year old car for a 1/3 of the cost. Rp will be effectively stuck with a 2 year old car next year before new regulations kick in for 2022. And they are complaining about getting beat this year that’s the only reason they are protesting and upset with the outcome......

[the EDGE]

Agreed, the RBD’s comply with the “Technical Regulations”, but they were found non-compliant under the “Sport Regulations” (therefore the 15 point penalty).

It’s an interesting case for sure.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

It seams not all the teams are against what 'Tracing point' have done, it may just be 'the party line' for some


https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/tost ... =widget-22


included from Tost (who is currently hiding from Marco)

“I know all the F1 purists say, ‘Ah, we must be a constructor. Every team must design everything in-house.’ The question is, and you know the engineers are saying this, but how do you finance everything?

“Because we reached such a high level on the technical side, the top teams have such a fantastic infrastructure. If someone wants to come into F1 – even the teams which are in F1, if they want to catch up – this is very difficult, and nearly impossible.

“And you spend millions. And I’m just asking, what for? I’m asking, why does every team have to have its own wind tunnel, has to have its own CFD, has to have 500-600 employees?...
>>>>>>
Personally I still think back to the days when we came to F1 with Toro Rosso and we just got a one-year-old car from Red Bull Technology, and we could race with a third of the money.”

And I 100% agree with Tost. Nothing wrong with running a 1 year old car for a 1/3 of the cost. Rp will be effectively stuck with a 2 year old car next year before new regulations kick in for 2022. And they are complaining about getting beat this year that’s the only reason they are protesting and upset with the outcome......

Actually RP get a ‘golden ticket’ to upgrade their car next year to accommodate 2020 non-listed Merc parts in anyway they want, token free

So their car will be more developed than anyones