2021 Azerbaijan Grand Prix - Baku, June 04 - 06

[ispano6]

So there, we now have definitive judgement that Red Bull and Aston Martin in fact were not cheating and their tyre pressures did not rise as Pirelli presumed would.

All we have definitive judgment on is the fact that AM and RBR met starting pressure targets, which was the only way legality was measured prior to this weekend.

What we don’t know is how they’re somehow managing to get the pressures to run lower than others when normally in the universe, heat would cause tire pressures to rise above the starting values before plateauing.

Well what do you think Mercede's controversial wheels did? Make the air inside them hotter? Of course not, they are heat sinks that aim to reduce the rise of tyre temperature and pressure. So why were Mercedes wheels deemed legal? Why the double standard? Clearly this IS NOT an issue regarding legality since Red Bull and AM passed all checks. What Pirelli should have been doing was mandating definitively the operating pressures of the tyre at a given speed and temperature on the grounds of tire failure. Just because Red Bull and AM are able to keep the pressures from rising doesn't mean they are doing something illegal. Raising the minimum pressures still won't change the fact that whatever apparatus they use will prevent the tire pressures from rising as much as others. Now Pirelli is basically dictating how much the tire pressure must rise when in racing and operating conditions.

[dans79]

Well what do you think Mercede's controversial wheels did? Make the air inside them hotter? Of course not, they are heat sinks that aim to reduce the rise of tyre temperature and pressure. So why were Mercedes wheels deemed legal? Why the double standard?

As you said in your response, they are designed to reduce the rise in temperature. What no one knows is to what extent they limit the rise.

Perhaps Mercedes design prevents the tires from rising more than 2 psi above the minimum, while Red Bull and Aston Martin can hold the pressure at no more than 1 psi above the minimum. Just like with the flexy wings, the FIA always comes to a point in time when they decide something has gone on long enough, and they will change the rules to prevent it from continuing.

From a purely technical standpoint it might even be possible on some tracks for teams to drop the pressure below the indicated minimum. It all depends how much energy is being put into the tires from the track, and how much is being taken out by the brake ducts.

[zibby43]

So there, we now have definitive judgement that Red Bull and Aston Martin in fact were not cheating and their tyre pressures did not rise as Pirelli presumed would.

All we have definitive judgment on is the fact that AM and RBR met starting pressure targets, which was the only way legality was measured prior to this weekend.

What we don’t know is how they’re somehow managing to get the pressures to run lower than others when normally in the universe, heat would cause tire pressures to rise above the starting values before plateauing.

Well what do you think Mercede's controversial wheels did? Make the air inside them hotter? Of course not, they are heat sinks that aim to reduce the rise of tyre temperature and pressure. So why were Mercedes wheels deemed legal? Why the double standard? Clearly this IS NOT an issue regarding legality since Red Bull and AM passed all checks. What Pirelli should have been doing was mandating definitively the operating pressures of the tyre at a given speed and temperature on the grounds of tire failure. Just because Red Bull and AM are able to keep the pressures from rising doesn't mean they are doing something illegal. Raising the minimum pressures still won't change the fact that whatever apparatus they use will prevent the tire pressures from rising as much as others. Now Pirelli is basically dictating how much the tire pressure must rise when in racing and operating conditions.

I’ll give you an example to illustrate the difference:

Perhaps Mercedes’ wheels help to prevent runaway tire temperatures and pressures that would far exceed both Pirelli’s starting pressures and theoretical running pressures. So of course they impact heat and pressure, but never to the point where the running pressures dip below the **starting** pressures.

Whereas, whatever AM and RB are doing is so efficient that they are able to get the running pressures *lower* than the starting pressures while racing the tires in anger.

Do you see the distinction and how one flirts with the rules a little bit more?

[ispano6]

I’ll give you an example to illustrate the difference:

Perhaps Mercedes’ wheels help to prevent runaway tire temperatures and pressures that would far exceed both Pirelli’s starting pressures and theoretical running pressures. So of course they impact heat and pressure, but never to the point where the running pressures dip below the **starting** pressures.

Whereas, whatever AM and RB are doing is so efficient that they are able to get the running pressures *lower* than the starting pressures while racing the tires in anger.

Do you see the distinction and how one flirts with the rules a little bit more?

Pirelli hasn't stated that RB or AMs running pressures were *lower* than the starting pressures, all they have said is that their pressures didn't *RISE*, and they weren't flirting with any rules because there wasn't a definitive rule in place dictating what the operating temperatures were supposed to be. If Pirelli are doing the checks on the tires after they are used and return to ambient temperatures, the pressure should theoretically return to the pressure when filled at ambient unless there is some kind of leak. And if ambient temperatures aren't the same prior to and after the race, they would need to place the tire inside a climate controlled environment when doing the measuring prior to and after.
The "flirting with the rules" part hasn't anything to do with the tire failure - that is something that Hamilton is intentionally bringing up, which is very uncharacteristic of the dominant team and the reigning world champion, as that would indicate they aren't focusing on just themselves. The issue at Baku is whether or not Max's DNF is a result of a tire failure or the "fault" of the team for not having tires that rise in pressure. One could even argue it was negligent on Pirelli's part for not making the distinction regarding safe operating pressures. They themselves have admitted the prescribed pressures assumed a rise in temperature. The last thing Red Bull is expecting is a tire failure while adhering to the prescribed minimum pressures. If anything, Max was putting in fast laps right before his tire blew, so did his tires cool even more as he went faster? If he kept to Perez's pace would his tires have stayed hotter? Regardless, it was a tire failure.

[ispano6]

I have a problem with double standards.

lol, this forum would have half the posts it currently has if people didn't have double standards.

Guess what, the bendy wings were legal, they passed the tests. People here accused those teams they were cheating.
Then people here accused the teams were violating the "spirit of the rules", which can be argued whether Mercedes tactics were in accordance to the "spirit of the rules" or circum-"venting" rules. It seems that Mercedes are able to get away with their tactics more so than others. I wonder why.

Two points to consider.

1) As the moderators have said many many times, people are allowed to express their opinions freely as long as they keep their language and hostility in check. Thus, if a user can't tolerate other users opinions, because they shine a negative light on their team or driver of choice that is something they just have to live with.

2) Perhaps the FIA was ok with what Mercedes was doing 4 season ago, because they felt it was not pushing the limits of the grey area to far. To what extent a team or driver is bending the rules, has always played a big part in who gets a free pass, and who gets penalized!

Guess what, the double standard is with the FIA too. Again, it's like the umpire calling ball when it's obviously a strike, or vice versa. Only that Mercedes has been one to call out the double standard twice, in their favor. And when Hamilton was clearly abusing track limits and Red Bull told Max to do the same as Hamilton but was then denied, while Hamilton clearly gained a lasting advantage for every lap he abused the limits, his fans here clearly defended it. I don't expect people here to be objective and have a double standard because it's been repeatedly demonstrated. And of course, I am expressing my sensible opinion freely.

[dans79]

Guess what, the double standard is with the FIA too. Again, it's like the umpire calling ball when it's obviously a strike, or vice versa.

I think it's more like the speed limit.

For example, I've never heard of someone getting pulled over for going 5 mph over the limit on the highway. However, if you push your luck and go too fast you're going to see some flashing lights!

If you do 5 miles an hour over in a school zone chances are an officer is going to want to have a conversation with you.

In other words there is a tolerance that is not published, and also situational.

Imo, all the teams are constantly playing with the tolerances, some teams are just better at staying within them than others.

[zibby43]

Pirelli hasn't stated that RB or AMs running pressures were *lower* than the starting pressures, all they have said is that their pressures didn't *RISE*

Isola:

“The different scenario is that mainly the tyres were running at a lower pressure compared to the expectation, and it was not just the lower pressure, there were also other elements in the equation, that created the failure.”

The way I interpret that is the “expectation” is the minimum starting pressure(s).

[ispano6]

Pirelli hasn't stated that RB or AMs running pressures were *lower* than the starting pressures, all they have said is that their pressures didn't *RISE*

Isola:

“The different scenario is that mainly the tyres were running at a lower pressure compared to the expectation, and it was not just the lower pressure, there were also other elements in the equation, that created the failure.”

The way I interpret that is the “expectation” is the minimum starting pressure(s).

In the autosport article:

Pirelli normally sets a starting pressure based on an expectation that the Psi will then raise further once the tyres are running out on track.

However, it appears that the tyres on Aston Martin and Red Bull did not experience such a raise in pressure in Baku and were therefore running at a lower level than Pirelli anticipated.

Pirelli's expectation therefore was that the running pressure would be higher than the minimum starting pressure. Red Bull and AM have not been accused or acknowledged to be running at lower than minimum starting pressure.

[Slo Poke]

Suddenly, Pirelli have made clear that so-called standing waves during cornering are a very important but detrimental aspect to tyre integrity. Does that not indicate a design flaw?
Or does it, could it indicate Pirelli may have purposefully been kept in the dark since 2014, concerning the prodigious power output these power units are capable of?
I wouldn’t normally wonder but it might explain why the most wonderful car in f1 history is suddenly getting its backside kicked!
I mean think about it! Botass! I’ve read it more than a few times, is ‘too nice a guy’ for life at the sharp end.

[nzjrs]

Pirelli received the Baku live pressure data from RB and AM - did they get it from any other teams?

[Wouter]

I've never been able to catch Max on a lie and I've been following him for 15 years now.
It is time for Pirelli to come out with honest answers during the drivers meeting.
This is about driver safety.

[nzjrs]

Exactly yeah, using the RB provided pressure data (which Pirelli says they can't trust), Pirelli has determined that the pressures were too low.

But Max says they never went below the minimum using this same data.

So we have two parties saying opposite things from the same data. Who is lying?

[RZS10]

Theoretically one could roughly calculate the "too low" running pressures, or at least approximate them based on the number for Baku and France (?)

In France they start at 21 / 21.5 psi front/rear and the expected running pressures are ≥ 22 / ≥ 22.5 psi.

So Pirelli expects the pressures to rise by at least one psi, at least in France.

Isola said the starting pressure should have been 1.5 - 2 psi higher and that there was a safety margin.

All this could potentially mean that the pressures did not just not rise from the starting pressures but actually dropped lower ... in theory ... maybe... but it was probably marginal.

[TimW]

Exactly yeah, using the RB provided pressure data (which Pirelli says they can't trust), Pirelli has determined that the pressures were too low.

But Max says they never went below the minimum using this same data.

So we have two parties saying opposite things from the same data. Who is lying?

Nobody is lying.

Pirelli only specifies initial pressures, in the heat blanket. Based on that they will expect a certain range of pressures during the race. Apparently the in race pressures were lower than they expected. It could simply be that the tires ran colder core temperatures than expected, or Pirelli calculated with different expansion coefficients than the actual one, etc.

[Slo Poke]

Based loosely on personal experience NZJRS, I’ve found that people on possibly short life expectancy, don’t see any reason to lie!
However, should there be a cure, (honesty in this case), they want it!