Lotus's braking attitude compensator is now illegal

[ESPImperium]

System is now banned!!!

[Ferraripilot]

Say what?

[ESPImperium]

Its banned, just literally within the last half hour they banned it.

The exact reasons are still to emerge, but they have banned it. Dr Mark Gillian said so on TheFlyingLap on SimbsTV. http://smibs.tv/live

[Ferraripilot]

wow that was fast. why would it be officially declared legal by Charlie and then all-of-the-sudden illegal...... make up your mind!

[ced381]

Make up your mind FIA...

[ESPImperium]

They are saying it could be under Moveable Aero rules.

Whitch in code it could be "Ferrari dont have or dont like, so dont want"

Il incur allot of heat for saying that.

[Ferraripilot]

Well, Ferrari was working on a system and were essentially waiting for the Fia to give the thumbs up or down so they knew whether to implement or not. Too bad this happened as I think it was a very interesting way around the rules. Apparently not

[Crucial_Xtreme]

They are saying it could be under Moveable Aero rules.

Whitch in code it could be "Ferrari dont have or dont like, so dont want"

Il incur allot of heat for saying that.

Ferrari tested the system last year after Korea, and have been developing it since then. It helps the balance of the F2012 in the simulator so they do not want it banned.

[Goran2812]

I hate FIA...

[scarbs]

It was reported theflyinglap.com by Mark Gillan of Williams that TD was issued tonight banning the design.

[bhall]

[...] Whitch in code it could be "Ferrari dont have or dont like, so dont want"

Il incur allot of heat for saying that.

Or it could mean that Red Bull weren't pleased.

[Morteza]

[...] Whitch in code it could be "Ferrari dont have or dont like, so dont want"

Il incur allot of heat for saying that.

Or it could mean that Red Bull weren't pleased.

The controversy begins
BTW, that's a bummer for Lotus. Last year with their unsuccessful exhaust system and this year with ride height system!

[Ferraripilot]

[...] Whitch in code it could be "Ferrari dont have or dont like, so dont want"

Il incur allot of heat for saying that.

Or it could mean that Red Bull weren't pleased.

I was wondering if it was a case of someone crying very loudly about it. RB can have an extremely felxible front wing but someone else cannot have a passive ride height system? hmm

[myurr]

[...] Whitch in code it could be "Ferrari dont have or dont like, so dont want"

Il incur allot of heat for saying that.

Or it could mean that Red Bull weren't pleased.

I was wondering if it was a case of someone crying very loudly about it. RB can have an extremely felxible front wing but someone else cannot have a passive ride height system? hmm

That does seem ridiculous. How can a suspension system be deemed a moveable aero device but a clearly flexing front wing is deemed to be legal. Why is it that time and again the FIA declare a device to be legal only to subsequently carry out a complete U turn, usually in the face of pressure from one or other team.

The FIA continue to be a complete and utter farce, almost a parody of themselves, where political pressure is more important than the fair and equitable running of the sport for all.

[bhall]

Before this goes too far, I'd like to point out that my suggestion that Red Bull had something to do with the FIA's about-face on this matter was made with tongue planted firmly in-cheek. At this point, there's no way to know exactly why the FIA reversed course.