Formula 1 2009

[Darth_Pugwash]

Well, that's hardly fair. It would actually be much fairer if the appeal is granted and the 3 teams with the substantial advantage are all disqualified. Either way, it should never have happened. There should be no broad interpretation like this in the rules. It simply isn't fair to all the other teams.

It's perfectly fair, it's just the nature of F1... the teams that are protesting are only doing so because they didn't come up with a trick diffuser of their own. It's the FIA that are at fault ultimately for allowing this go on without clarifying their position before the racing began.

Anyway the race was good, very commanding win by Button (I think he had pace to spare) and a great drive by Hamilton.

 

[Formaldehyde]

It's perfectly fair, it's just the nature of F1.:

How is it 'fair' that 7 out of 10 teams interpreted the rules one way while 3 didn't? This has never happened in the history of F1 before.

the teams that are protesting are only doing so because they didn't come up with a trick diffuser of their own. .:

No, I htink they likely interpreted the rules as they were intended since the majority interpreted it that way. And the stewards had to make their determination based on the rules as they currently exist, not as they likely should have been. I wonder if the court of appeal has more lattitude...

It's the FIA that are at fault ultimately for allowing this go on without clarifying their position before the racing began.

At least we agree there, which is why I think they should review designs. If they had, they would have found and corrected this obvious difference long ago.

Anyway the race was good

It certainly could have been much better if all 10 teams fielded the same type of car with the same basic capabilities.

 

[azzaman333]

Maybe the other teams should get better at abusing loopholes?

 

[Joe Harker]

How is it 'fair' that 7 out of 10 teams interpreted the rules one way while 3 didn't? This has never happened in the history of F1 before.

This is common place, for example the engine freeze that came about a few years ago, only Renault followed the spirit of the rule, while all the other teams improved all the bits of the engine that weren't covered by the rules. As a result, it was only till towards the end of last season that the Renault caught up to the top teams.

No, I htink they likely interpreted the rules as they were intended since the majority interpreted it that way. And the stewards had to make their determination based on the rules as they currently exist, not as they likely should have been. I wonder if the court of appeal has more lattitude...

I'm not convinced that they all thought of the solution but discarded them for being illegal, I think many are susprised that this could be within the rules and how clever a solution it is, rather than coming from the view that they think it is illegal, I think they want clarification, so they can exploit it.

Also the appeal court cannot ban a teams desgin as long as it's within the rules, whether it's in the spirit of the rule is a different matter. The rules would have to be changed to illegalise them if they arn't already, and they won't be until 2010.

It certainly could have been much better if all 10 teams fielded the same type of car with the same basic capabilities.

The whole point of F1 is that all the teams cars are different, what they build is controlled by the rules, some teams are going to find a advantage over others, the only difference this year is that three of the teams have been able to find extra downforce using a component that is deemed outside the rules by some. It's not the first time this has happened, and won't be the last time either....

If you want racing between teams of a similar capablity, watch A1, or touring cars.

 

[dutchfire]

Disputes about rules and races and championships being decided more by the quality of the car than by the quality of the driver are just essential parts of Formula 1. That's part of the beauty of it.

Any opinions on KERS?

 

[raketooy]

Disputes about rules and races and championships being decided more by the quality of the car than by the quality of the driver are just essential parts of Formula 1. That's part of the beauty of it.

Any opinions on KERS?

I like KERS. It seemed to speed the cars quite noticeably on straights and it will probably give more overtaking chances.

 

[phoenix_night]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7972046.stm

Besides, one very experienced F1 aerodynamicist told me the following: "In aerodynamic terms, seven tenths of a second implies about 70kg of extra downforce for a given drag.

"The size of the diffuser as defined in the regulations means it creates only about 10% of the car's total downforce - about 120kg.

"If their diffuser is worth seven tenths of a second it implies that they are getting 60% more downforce from their diffuser than anyone else. That is ludicrous.

"I'd say if you could get a diffuser to be giving you an extra 20kg over everyone else - about 0.2 seconds-worth - you would be doing incredibly well."

So, whichever way the court of appeal goes, do not expect the Brawn to be anything other than a front-runner this year.

 

[Formaldehyde]

This is common place, for example the engine freeze that came about a few years ago, only Renault followed the spirit of the rule, while all the other teams improved all the bits of the engine that weren't covered by the rules. As a result, it was only till towards the end of last season that the Renault caught up to the top teams..

Those situations aren't simlilar at all. A few teams supposedly cheated in that particular case.

I'm not convinced that they all thought of the solution but discarded them for being illegal,.

I don't know how you got that from what I posted.

I'm think many are susprised that this could be within the rules and how clever a solution it is, rather than coming from the view that they think it is illegal, I think they want clarification, so they can exploit it.

You are missing one obvious fact. 3 teams have already been "exploiting" it for months now so they are far ahead of anybody else. If they rule the new spoilers legal these 3 teams have essentially eliminated everybody else from competition unless either the other teams far outpace their development in the upcoming months, which is highly unlikely.

I'm Also the appeal court cannot ban a teams desgin as long as it's within the rules, whether it's in the spirit of the rule is a different matter. The rules would have to be changed to illegalise them if they arn't already, and they won't be until 2010.

I certainly hope that's not the case. Otherwise, they are just going to rubber stamp the stewards decision.

The whole point of F1 is that all the teams cars are different, what they build is controlled by the rules, some teams are going to find a advantage over others,.

Not by exploiting a particular interpretation of the rules. That is patently unfair.

It's not the first time this has happened, and won't be the last time either.....

Is that right? Try to find another example in all of F1 history where a handful of teams interpreted the rules differently than the rest to give them a commanding advantage.

If you want racing between teams of a similar capablity, watch A1, or touring cars.

Nice straw man. Now try discussing what I actually stated for a change.

Disputes about rules and races and championships being decided more by the quality of the car than by the quality of the driver are just essential parts of Formula 1. That's part of the beauty of it.

That's great when they are all on a level playing field, which is obviously not the case here.

Any opinions on KERS?

I have mixed feelings about it. It should make for more passes, but it's a bit gimmicky and I certainly don't like the idea of corner workers possibly getting shocked and possibly electrocuted, especially if it rains.

 

[phoenix_night]

Not by exploiting a particular interpretation of the rules. That is patently unfair.

You didn't read my post? The diffuser doesn't account for Brawn's pace. They've just as much an advantage over the other diffuser teams as over the 7 non-diffuser teams, and as stated above, expecting a diffuser to account for as much as a second is ludicrous.

Exploiting that loophole alone doesn't give you Brawn's pace, it's a very fast car and that's because it's Honda developed with a massive budget over a period of time much larger than any other team. It's only a surprise to see them at the front because they're called Brawn now. If they were still called Honda and with people knowing their budget, facilities and amount of preparation time, it would be less of a surprise. Honda may have left f1 but the car was already designed by the time they pulled out, and that car is what you're seeing now.

Here's the link again http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7972046.stm

 

[Formaldehyde]

You didn't read my post? The diffuser doesn't account for Brawn's pace.]

Yeah. I read it. I simply decided not to respond because I thought it was redundant based on my other posts. But since you insist, here are 3 articles that completely disagree with your columnist's premises, including 2 from exactly the same source, the BBC:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7965056.stm

Rivals believe the controversial diffusers create more downforce and give a
lap-time benefit of as much as 0.5 seconds.

They say the diffusers in question contravene a rule that demands that the
diffuser has an upper edge that runs in a horizontal straight line.

They also believe that the parts go against the aim of a huge raft of new
rules that were introduced this year in an attempt to make it easier to
overtake.

One of the main aims was to reduce the amount of air turbulence generated by
the cars so drivers find it easier to follow closely behind.

http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news/detail/090330095321.shtml

"What is happening with the diffusers is stupid, forcing teams to spend
money in a time of crisis," Briatore fumed.

"It is also about safety: we have already put similar pieces in our wind
tunnel and it gives 14 per cent more downforce. That is not in the spirit of
the regulations. And once they are developed we could be talking 30 or 40
per cent additional," Briatore added.

Red Bull boss Christian Horner said the team's design department began
investigating the 'double diffuser' weeks ago during winter testing.

"There is lap time to be gained," he told the BBC.

"The diffuser issues opens up a development path that was not previously
open. That is potentially big performance gain because the floor is the most
powerful aerodynamic tool on the car," Horner added.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/motorsport/formulaone/5060261/F1-diffuser-row-QandA.html

Q: What is all the fuss about in Australia?

A: Three teams, Toyota, Williams and Brawn, have diffusers that work markedly better than those of the other teams. So their cars are markedly faster.

That's the thing about sports opinions. Everybody has one or more whether they are based on facts or not, especially sports commentators. To claim one must be right while the others aren't is disingenuous at best.

In particular, this remark from your article is rather absurd:

Firstly, Jenson Button's margin over the chasing Red Bull of Sebastian Vettel was 3.9 seconds after only one lap of the Albert Park street circuit. Yet it hovered between only four and five seconds for most of the following 57 laps.

I guess he missed the fact that Barrichello almost stalled on the grid from P2, which obviously created the huge first lap gap.

And so is this one unless Briatore and the rest are outright lying or completely uninformed:

"The size of the diffuser as defined in the regulations means it creates only about 10% of the car's total downforce - about 120kg.

As far as I'm concerned, the situation is readily apparent by the fact that 3 F1 teams who have the different diffusers are at the front of the field in every outing so far. If Ferrari had the same diffuser and car design optimized to deal with it, I think they would be dominant as usual. It's really too bad too because Brawn in particular has a very good car this year, which is pretty remakable for a team under those conditions. Too bad it will alway be tainted by a rules interpretation which should never have happened.

 

[phoenix_night]

You posted the opinions of bosses of two non-diffuser teams! Of course they say that, they want to play up the diffuser aspect ahead of the appeal as they want it made illegal. It's just PR to start claiming back some ground. There's no way Briatore thinks he can match Brawn if they ban the diffuser. Interestingly regarding Briatore, when Brawn began testing he dismissed their pace as being media laps and suggested they were running light, not believing their times - this despite the fact that he'd already seen the test times of two other cars with the same diffuser. Evidently he doesn't believe a diffuser will produce that kind of advantage!

And no, the three diffuser teams are not out front at all. That's BS. Red Bull were consistently fast in testing and have proved to be so during the first race weekend, being faster than both other diffuser teams in both qualifying and the race. The diffuser teams rarely came in fastest during winter testing, with the likes of Ferrari, BMW and Red Bull easily matching, and beating, both Williams and Toyota. BMW also put a car on the grid ahead of both Williams and Toyota. Nakajima failed to make Q3! Explain that!

Williams and Toyota were NEVER DOMINANT in winter testing and they haven't demonstrated any dominance during the first weekend. The Brawn kicked the diffuser protests into overdrive, and it was the only car to suggest a gap between itself and the rest of the field - the Williams and Toyota never did.

I guess he missed the fact that Barrichello almost stalled on the grid from P2, which obviously created the huge first lap gap.

I guess you missed the fact that after the safety car, despite messing up the restart, Button very quickly pulled out a similar lead, and then held it. Or that Button was, fuel-corrected, a second faster than Vettel in qualifying...

It's really too bad too because Brawn in particular has a very good car this year, which is pretty remakable for a team under those conditions.

IT ISN'T A NEW BRAWN CAR! IT'S A HONDA WITH A MERCEDES ENGINE.

It was built over a long period of time with excellent facilities, a large staff and a HUGE BUDGET. The only thing that happened when the team was bought, was they took the Honda, put a far better Mercedes engine in it, and changed the name.

 

[Joe Harker]

Those situations aren't simlilar at all. A few teams supposedly cheated in that particular case.

How is it not, the rules were seen in a different light by different teams, and they weren't never convicted of cheating with it.

You are missing one obvious fact. 3 teams have already been "exploiting" it for months now so they are far ahead of anybody else. If they rule the new spoilers legal these 3 teams have essentially eliminated everybody else from competition unless either the other teams far outpace their development in the upcoming months, which is highly unlikely.

A) Then the other teams have had team to come up with a similar design.
B) It's suggests the FIA don't see them as illegal and as a result, my bet is that it won't be deemed illegal on the appeal court.
C) Only Brawn is out in front. Williams were probably going all out in the practice, rather than sandbagging like Ferrari, Mclaren and other top teams do.
D) It's fairly common to have three top teams in a seaon gunning it out for the championship, like last year, just this year it might be a different three to what might of been expected.

I certainly hope that's not the case. Otherwise, they are just going to rubber stamp the stewards decision.

A courts judgement can not be whether the diffuser is within the spirit of the laws, rather whether it is allowed or not within the rules. The spirit of the rule will have to be enforced by the FIA at the end of the season

Not by exploiting a particular interpretation of the rules. That is patently unfair.

No it's not, as long as it is legal, it's perfectly fair, the team found a second use of their rear crash structure, fair play to them, shame on the other teams for taking advantage of it. If you need to blame anyone, blame the rule makers, by expoilting the rules, the engineers have done their jobs.

Is that right? Try to find another example in all of F1 history where a handful of teams interpreted the rules differently than the rest to give them a commanding advantage.

There isn't a single part, in recent years that have given rise to this sort of situation, due to the limitations placed by rules, however, there have been times like this before, one company made the first mid engined F1 car, which dominanted the season, Lotus switched to aluminium as the main construction material, they began to dominate, however in all cases, the other teams rapidly caught up.

Nice straw man. Now try discussing what I actually stated for a change.

The technology race is as much the part of F1, and unique part of it compared to the rest of motorsport, as the racing between the drivers, you want cars of a similar nature and similar performance.

IT ISN'T A NEW BRAWN CAR! IT'S A HONDA WITH A MERCEDES ENGINE.

It was built over a long period of time with excellent facilities, a large staff and a HUGE BUDGET. The only thing that happened when the team was bought, was they took the Honda, put a far better Mercedes engine in it, and changed the name.

It hasn't had much winter testing though, so it is amazing they are this quick so suddenly.

I do think that if Brawn weren't so quick, and the order of the teams not so screwed, this wouldn't be an issue. Afterall, in qualifying, Willams were 5th and 13th, Toyota, 6th and 8th, with the super flexible wing.

Now apart from Brawn, those are fairly regular positions for those teams, the performance gained by the diffuser is not that much, only cause Brawn had a super fast car has this come up, if Ferrari were top, we'd all be going, Oh, it's going to be another Ferrari possession to the constructors championship.

 

[phoenix_night]

It hasn't had much winter testing though, so it is amazing they are this quick so suddenly.

I do think that if Brawn weren't so quick, and the order of the teams not so screwed, this wouldn't be an issue. Afterall, in qualifying, Willams were 5th and 13th, Toyota, 6th and 8th, with the super flexible wing.

Now apart from Brawn, those are fairly regular positions for those teams, the performance gained by the diffuser is not that much, only cause Brawn had a super fast car has this come up, if Ferrari were top, we'd all be going, Oh, it's going to be another Ferrari possession to the constructors championship.

Completely agree.

My point about it being a Honda car was to say that it's actually been backed by a major manufacturer, to illustrate that it isn't just a small team that got lucky with a loophole. It looks like a very good car.

 

[Darth_Pugwash]

In any case, it shouldn't be surprising to see the established order shaken up a bit by the new regulations, at least initially.

 

[Rossiya]

Lol@Hamilton.

 

[Formaldehyde]

failed to make Q3! Explain that!

I'll let him explain it:

http://www.paddocktalk.com/news/html/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=105337

Kazuki Nakajima: The car was good enough to make it into Q3 today, but I made a small mistake and it cost me quite a few places. There is however plenty to consider tomorrow and I think I still have a good opportunity, so it will be important to concentrate and get absolutely everything right. As it the first race I think there will be plenty going on, which will make it exciting, but challenging.

Williams and Toyota were NEVER DOMINANT in winter testing and they haven't demonstrated any dominance during the first weekend.

They certainly aren't at the back where they should be expected to be given their history.

The Brawn kicked the diffuser protests into overdrive, and it was the only car to suggest a gap between itself and the rest of the field - the Williams and Toyota never did.

There is obviously a lot more to F1 cars than merely having a superior diffuser. It is only good for .5-.7 seconds a lap, which is more than enough to completely ruin the season even before the second race.

IT ISN'T A NEW BRAWN CAR! IT'S A HONDA WITH A MERCEDES ENGINE.

So what's your point? That bold text is obnoxious? I think we got it.

 

[azzaman333]

You obviously want the same teams to win year in year out.

That's boring.

 

[Darth_Pugwash]

The diffusers probably aren't going to ruin the season. If they do, it won't be due to the diffusers themselves or any performance advantage they give, but all the silly politicking and controversy stirring that's going on. Again, the teams that are protesting are only doing so because they fear that they will not be able to fully develope double decker diffusers of their own before the middle of the year, or later.

If anyone is at fault, it's the FIA, not the teams who are utilizing a clever engineering solution that is within the rules. If the FIA was at all competent, then this issue would have been cleared up weeks or months ago, and we could all just enjoy the racing.

 

[Rossiya]

Button !

 

[Formaldehyde]

You obviously want the same teams to win year in year out.

No, I "obviously want" rules that are not subject to interpretation, and are subsequently fair to everybody instead of providing a huge advantage to 3 out of 10 of the teams. But nice straw man.