Bib parc fermé ride height trick

[FittingMechanics]

Autosport Jonathan Noble is saying that they will be using a seal in Austin and that from what he understand, Red Bull will make a change to their car in Brazil so that even if they wanted to make a change in parc ferme, they will be unable to do it.

Quite a strange concession if you had a non cheating reason to put it in that position (like easier and quicker setup changes)

[thestig84]

Can we agree that being able to run two different setups in qualy and race is usually beneficial? We can speculate as much as we want and think how much it could help, but I think the basics of it are simple. If you are able to make a change in parc ferme, that is almost certainly an advantage (or at least opportunity for an advantage).

Maybe in some cases you don't need to make a change because it's perfect as is, but for things like ride height which are affected by the weight, I think it doesn't work that way.

It's a moot point. It's not an allowed procedure per rules and this is clear. Allegations of RB doing it come only from McLaren drivers, eager to force a non-issue as a discourse in my view. It's impossible to prove RB made these changes before and we'll see if there's a massive step-change in their performance, I highly doubt it. From german sources, it seems this change requires removal of some body panels from inside the cockpit and doing this would raise a lot of issues with anyone who sees it happening in Parc Ferme conditions. If there really was a device that is located inside the cockpit, we'd hear about it by now and it would have raised suspicion much sooner

One of the allowed changes under parc fermé is pedal position (article 40 sporting regulations), albeit with permission from a technical delegate. Placing an access point where adjustments can be made in the pedal box would not draw any attention whatsoever.

Removal of panels could point toward the removal of the panel on top of the cockpit nose, which is typically the access panel for the pedal box. Therefore, I believe it is strategically placed and not a coincidence.

Ultimately, the effectiveness of it is beside the point when you are breaking the law to make changes. Obviously absolutely no evidence of that whatsoever, but if it were to have a noticeable effect I think that would show with a bigger discrepancy between their qualifying and race pace.

Quite right. I'm shocked at how many people seem to think the cars aren't touched at all. RedBull normally have an extensive list of parts they have been given permission to change in parc fermé.
Also how has the tool become a 'specialist tool' for me that is any tool in a mechanics tool box. Put a rare fastener on the panel like a triwing...now a specialist bit is required for a driver.
I don't think it's a huge deal but the details and how things get spun by teams/individuals trying to hype or downplay is quite interesting

[Mezger]

I think we can all agree, even as a Red Bull fan that it is possible that adjustments have been made under Parc Ferme rules which are illegal.
I started reading this thread after it was announced that the culprits were Red Bull and the first few pages were fun to read.
I can't imagine how many pages there would be now if it was for instance, McLaren who did the dirty.

[Paa]

So I try to summarize the info I got from the last pages.

Current theory is Red Bull tried to cheat by
1. Using an open source device
2. In the presence of a FIA controller and recording cameras
3. Pretending they need to change the pedals after qualy every single race.

Do I understand correctly? I mean it's no wonder the team seems relaxed.

[Wouter]

So I try to summarize the info I got from the last pages.

Current theory is Red Bull tried to cheat by
1. Using an open source device
2. In the presence of a FIA controller and recording cameras
3. Pretending they need to change the pedals after qualy every single race.

Do I understand correctly? I mean it's no wonder the team seems relaxed.

.

[Wouter]

I think we can all agree, even as a Red Bull fan that it is possible that adjustments have been made under Parc Ferme rules which are illegal.

.
Speak for yourself. No, we can't all agree. See what @Paa posted!

[taperoo2k]

Feels like a massive nothing burger to me. As the existence of a device isn't in contravention of any rule - the use of one would be - and we would* surely all want to believe that this kind of cheating isn't actively part of a team strategy?

If this is in place to allow better packaging - i/e the standard route to adjust would be blocked, or made more difficult/time consuming - then so what? That is clever engineering

Adding a seal to it to ensure that it cannot be used is a neat, sensible and issue killing solution.

Of course - were it proven that they had been actively using this in breach of parc ferme - then gather the rocks up and let's stone them!


*We are a non partisan and sensible crowd...right?

It'll be glaringly obvious if Redbull have been using this trick in parc ferme to alter the ride height for the race. Either they'll be slower than they were at the previous races, or the car won't be as smooth as before i.e. it's not as stable in race trim and might even bounce on track. Or it'll be more subtle than that.

If parc ferme rules have been broken at every race, then I think the only punishment that would suffice would be excluding Redbull from both championships. This isn't the usual pushing the boundaries of the rules as per usual in F1, this would be blatant cheating. I can hear the Redbull fans howling now, but if it is the case Redbull have cheated in this manner? A harsh response is the only sensible option for the FIA to take, in order to protect the intergrity of the sport. I'd say the same thing if Mercedes, McLaren, Ferrari etc were doing it. I abhor cheating.

Should be an interesting weekend on track and off track.

[organic]

Feels like a massive nothing burger to me. As the existence of a device isn't in contravention of any rule - the use of one would be - and we would* surely all want to believe that this kind of cheating isn't actively part of a team strategy?

If this is in place to allow better packaging - i/e the standard route to adjust would be blocked, or made more difficult/time consuming - then so what? That is clever engineering

Adding a seal to it to ensure that it cannot be used is a neat, sensible and issue killing solution.

Of course - were it proven that they had been actively using this in breach of parc ferme - then gather the rocks up and let's stone them!


*We are a non partisan and sensible crowd...right?

It'll be glaringly obvious if Redbull have been using this trick in parc ferme to alter the ride height for the race. Either they'll be slower than they were at the previous races, or the car won't be as smooth as before i.e. it's not as stable in race trim and might even bounce on track. Or it'll be more subtle than that.

If parc ferme rules have been broken at every race, then I think the only punishment that would suffice would be excluding Redbull from both championships. This isn't the usual pushing the boundaries of the rules as per usual in F1, this would be blatant cheating. I can hear the Redbull fans howling now, but if it is the case Redbull have cheated in this manner? A harsh response is the only sensible option for the FIA to take, in order to protect the intergrity of the sport. I'd say the same thing if Mercedes, McLaren, Ferrari etc were doing it. I abhor cheating.

Should be an interesting weekend on track and off track.

Nothing at this point will be sufficient burden of proof to retroactively exclude red bull from championships. Even if RB car behaviour suddenly changes, it can't be concretely proven that it is due to the bib change. FIA have said as much, there will be no retroactive action

[Delasoup]

Only RB knows if they have used the said device in parc ferme conditions. There are a few points I'd like to mention:
- Car fully assembled does not mean much. Take the panel off and the car is not fully assembled anymore.
- 3 macro elements can be 3 elements larger than a few microns, for examples 3 fasteners.
- It seems like the pedal area is of particular interest. Is there a way to compile all parc ferme modifications all teams have declared since 2023 and compare how often RB made a request to work on the pedal area compared to the rest of the field?

[organic]

[Quantum]

Feels like a massive nothing burger to me.

Nothingburger?

Brakeboosted has replied to users on twitter, some of which frequent this forum, and absolutely nails it.

So you're telling that having a device situated at the drivers feet that would require the driver to get out every time an adjustment needs to be made, is more accessible than removing the bib with a car already on jackstands in the garage.
By their own admission, it only get's adjusted when the car is disassembled, so why go through the effort of designing something that is now technically more work than simply removing the BIB and making adjustments?
So they have admitted to making their lives more difficult, do you think some of the smartest people in the world are capable of making things backwards

And for the absence of doubt, the FIA have told Red Bull for it to be removed which it will by Brazil. It will be sealed for the this race weekend. That is not conducive to "nothing burger".
My post is just reflexive of the nothing to see here stuff being posted. There is simply no reasonable explanation why a team in a budget cap formula would add complexity, cost, weight and operational time constraints on something unless they got a net benefit out of it. Also note Red Bull and both their drivers have denied any net benefit.
Why go this far then?

[jumpingfish]

Is there a way to compile all parc ferme modifications all teams have declared since 2023 and compare how often RB made a request to work on the pedal area compared to the rest of the field?

Not an easy way but for example here we can find pdf files named "Parts and Parameters have been replaced / changed during the Parc Fermé" for each GP in 2024

https://www.fia.com/documents/champions ... -2024-2043

[ME4ME]

Put a sticker seal on it and move on. We have a title fight to enjoy.

Nothing will be proven either way, but people will have their opinions I guess.

[Quantum]

Was the controversy over drivers doing it or the mechanics in Parc Ferme?

[Vanja #66]

One of the allowed changes under parc fermé is pedal position (article 40 sporting regulations), albeit with permission from a technical delegate. Placing an access point where adjustments can be made in the pedal box would not draw any attention whatsoever.

Removal of panels could point toward the removal of the panel on top of the cockpit nose, which is typically the access panel for the pedal box. Therefore, I believe it is strategically placed and not a coincidence.

Ultimately, the effectiveness of it is beside the point when you are breaking the law to make changes. Obviously absolutely no evidence of that whatsoever, but if it were to have a noticeable effect I think that would show with a bigger discrepancy between their qualifying and race pace.

Placing an adjustment device around pedal box is also a lot handier for setup during FPs than having to get the car up on jacks every time. It's put there for a reason, if it really is there, which does not make it illegal. If they indeed used it, there'd a lot - and I mean A LOT - less trouble with balance and lack of downforce in race trim on their end.

This setup change between Q and R would allow the car to be setup and run lower than others at all times during Q and R. As the race goes on, cars go faster and faster, getting closer to the ground. Floor downforce coefficient increment gets bigger as the car gets closer to the ground. This would mean the lowest car would have a noticeable step in the final stint vs other cars and this is not a feature of RB20 and it never was. There is a car that often finds something extra in the final 3rd of the race though and that car comes from Woking.