closing tag is in template navbar
timefactors watches



TZ-UK Fundraiser
Page 29 of 29 FirstFirst ... 19272829
Results 1,401 to 1,449 of 1449

Thread: Formula 1 2019

  1. #1401
    Grand Master Chris_in_the_UK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Norf Yorks
    Posts
    35,959
    Good finish position for Sainz.
    When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........

  2. #1402
    Master thieuster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    GMT+1
    Posts
    6,732
    Blog Entries
    1
    This race would have been more interesting without DRS during the full race.

  3. #1403
    Grand Master PickleB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    M25 J6 UK
    Posts
    13,971
    Still 10 minutes to go before the stewards start on Ferrari's fuel problem. "A team representative is required to report to the Stewards at 19:45"...that's 15h45 GMT.

  4. #1404
    Grand Master PickleB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    M25 J6 UK
    Posts
    13,971
    Quote Originally Posted by PickleB View Post
    Still 10 minutes to go before the stewards start on Ferrari's fuel problem. "A team representative is required to report to the Stewards at 19:45"...that's 15h45 GMT.
    Stewards issued a fine of €50,000, but Leclerc keeps his third place...link:


    The FIA's findings read: "TD/014-19 required teams to declare the amount of fuel that they intended to put in the car for the laps to the grid, the formation lap, the race, the in-lap and any fire-ups that would be needed. The Technical Delegate was able to confirm the fuel mass put in the tank by checking in accordance with the procedure specified in TD/014-19.

    "There was a difference of 4.88kgs between the team’s declaration for car 16 and the Technical Delegate’s measured fuel mass.

    "The team’s declaration was therefore inaccurate and constituted a breach of the Technical Directive. This in turn constitutes an infringement of Article 12.1.1.i of the International Sporting Code."

  5. #1405
    Waits for Adrian to post something about favouritism......
    Although no trees were harmed during the creation of this post, a large number of electrons were greatly inconvenienced.

  6. #1406
    The FIA strikes again, if it had been McLaren they would have got a £120 million fine

    There you go

  7. #1407
    Grand Master PickleB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    M25 J6 UK
    Posts
    13,971
    If it's of any interest, here's a link to the decision document...Offence Doc41 - Ferrari (Fuel Declaration)...and another to the Official Classification.

  8. #1408
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Southern Spain
    Posts
    23,176
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by adrianw View Post
    Depends on what you mean by home, one of them is about to be disqualified
    Home it was...
    When the going gets tough, the DAF gets going.

  9. #1409
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Warrington, centre of the Universe and home of the Mighty Wire
    Posts
    558

    Formula 1 2019

    I may be missing something here, but surely more fuel would weigh the car down and slow it down, probably by a negligible amount, what is the issue here??. Or was it less fuel they put in? Genuine question.

    Stuart


    Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app

  10. #1410
    I'd guess that the car was filled correctly as per race requirements however the weight declared was incorrect, it was this discrepancy that earned them the fine.

  11. #1411
    Master thieuster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    GMT+1
    Posts
    6,732
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by cinnabull View Post
    I may be missing something here, but surely more fuel would weigh the car down and slow it down, probably by a negligible amount, what is the issue here??. Or was it less fuel they put in? Genuine question.

    Stuart


    Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
    They put in more. Technically, more fuel allows more (longer) high speed pace. In the beginning of the race, the Ferraris had superior speed over the RB, where they failed to keep up with the RB later in the race. A heavier car would not have been able to produce more speed. Therefore, the surplus of fuel must be used to produce more speed. As I said earlier this day, in the future there will always be a hint of scam and deceit when one refers to Ferrari's 2019 season.

  12. #1412
    Quote Originally Posted by thieuster View Post
    They put in more. Technically, more fuel allows more (longer) high speed pace. In the beginning of the race, the Ferraris had superior speed over the RB, where they failed to keep up with the RB later in the race. A heavier car would not have been able to produce more speed. Therefore, the surplus of fuel must be used to produce more speed. As I said earlier this day, in the future there will always be a hint of scam and deceit when one refers to Ferrari's 2019 season.
    There's no evidence that Leclerc's car had more fuel in it than declared, only that there was a discrepancy between what was stated and what was found, at least that's what the statement in PickleB's post says.

    It could well be that there was less fuel in the car than was declared, not more. The fine was for the incorrect declaration, not for a specific under or over filling.

    I'm only going by that statement, if there's any evidence that his car was under-declared I haven't seen it.

  13. #1413
    Grand Master Chris_in_the_UK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Norf Yorks
    Posts
    35,959
    Quote Originally Posted by CardShark View Post
    There's no evidence that Leclerc's car had more fuel in it than declared, only that there was a discrepancy between what was stated and what was found, at least that's what the statement in PickleB's post says.

    It could well be that there was less fuel in the car than was declared, not more. The fine was for the incorrect declaration, not for a specific under or over filling.

    I'm only going by that statement, if there's any evidence that his car was under-declared I haven't seen it.
    What?

    The evidence is clear and obvious.
    When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........

  14. #1414
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris_in_the_UK View Post
    What?

    The evidence is clear and obvious.
    Unfortunately I missed the post-race chatter on Sky's coverage, maybe there was something mentioned there about the car being over-filled.

    Going by the official statement released, it could have been under or over. There's an article on the racefans website saying that the car was over the declaration by 5kg, within that article they quote the statement as per PickleB's post that only mentions a discrepancy.

  15. #1415
    Grand Master PickleB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    M25 J6 UK
    Posts
    13,971
    More or less? Try this link.

  16. #1416
    Quote Originally Posted by PickleB View Post
    More or less? Try this link.
    That states that Binotto himself said the car had more, but rather interestingly they don't quote it unlike "measurement discrepancy"

    Maybe I'm reading too much, or too little, into the situation 😄

  17. #1417
    Grand Master Andyg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wiltshire
    Posts
    22,682
    A 50,000 Euro fine for Ferrari's fuel infringement. What naughty boys they have been.

    Interesting it's the first time they have been checked this season, so it begs the question how many times have they done it previously (and got away with it)? Also Was it just CLC car or was it both of them that were checked? And perhaps more importantly who is feeding the FIA all this intel on what Ferrari are getting up to - perhaps a spy in the camp?

    As for Lewis's performance yesterday, sublime and then to set the fastest lap on old knackered tires simply rubbed his and Mercedes dominance in.

    Its been a very enjoyable and entertaining season and hopefully we will see more of the same in 2020.

    Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
    Friedrich Nietzsche


  18. #1418
    Master tiny73's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Back in Blighty
    Posts
    2,983
    I've read that they had 4.88kg extra fuel present. There is a suspicion that the recent Technical Directives were aimed at Ferrari who were believed to have found a way to cheat the FIA sensor (which samples at 2 khz) and "add" extra fuel somehow between the measurement frequency. Hence having extra fuel to burn gives them extra fuel whilst still having enough fuel to satisfy the end of race fuel measurement requirements (1 kg IIRC). Add to this Seb being told to move to engine mode 4 (most powerful being 1) and when asking why was told "because we need to".

    In my view it's blatant cheating all round but it's unlikely we'll see any punitive action beyond a derisory 50k euro fine.

  19. #1419
    In 2005 BAR got a two race ban for using fuel as ballast, it will run and run but if Ferrari do it, its not cheating it is an error.
    Last edited by adrianw; 2nd December 2019 at 10:13.

  20. #1420
    Grand Master PickleB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    M25 J6 UK
    Posts
    13,971
    Quote Originally Posted by PickleB View Post
    More or less? Try this link.
    Contains quote:

    Binotto said his team’s cars have had their fuel weights checked on many previous occasions with no problems. “I think this year we have been checked at least 10 times,” he said. “It’s not the first time, we’ve always been OK and today we got a discrepancy.”

    And then we get...

    Quote Originally Posted by Andyg View Post
    ...Interesting it's the first time they have been checked this season, so it begs the question how many times have they done it previously (and got away with it)? Also Was it just CLC car or was it both of them that were checked?...

  21. #1421
    Quote Originally Posted by Andyg View Post
    A 50,000 Euro fine for Ferrari's fuel infringement. What naughty boys they have been.

    Interesting it's the first time they have been checked this season, so it begs the question how many times have they done it previously (and got away with it)? Also Was it just CLC car or was it both of them that were checked? And perhaps more importantly who is feeding the FIA all this intel on what Ferrari are getting up to - perhaps a spy in the camp?

    As for Lewis's performance yesterday, sublime and then to set the fastest lap on old knackered tires simply rubbed his and Mercedes dominance in.

    Its been a very enjoyable and entertaining season and hopefully we will see more of the same in 2020.
    Ferrari were fined for the discrepancy between the delclared volume and actual volume, nothing more and nothing less.

    Who knows? However there's no evidence to suggest that there were other discrepancies so there cannot be any accusation or insinuation of guilt. The discrepancy was spotted as part of a random check, not because there's a mole or snitch. You've also got to ask yourself the question as to why would Ferrari even bother trying to cheat. Both the CC and DC were already won and they'd also already secured 2nd place in the DC, why risk the negative exposure of being caught when you've nothing to gain.

    I agree with Lewis' and Mercedes' performance, a fantastic way for them to sign off an enjoyable season.

    Quote Originally Posted by tiny73 View Post
    I've read that they had 4.88kg extra fuel present. There is a suspicion that the recent Technical Directives were aimed at Ferrari who were believed to have found a way to cheat the FIA sensor (which samples at 2 khz) and "add" extra fuel somehow between the measurement frequency. Hence having extra fuel to burn gives them extra fuel whilst still having enough fuel to satisfy the end of race fuel measurement requirements (1 kg IIRC). Add to this Seb being told to move to engine mode 4 (most powerful being 1) and when asking why was told "because we need to".

    In my view it's blatant cheating all round but it's unlikely we'll see any punitive action beyond a derisory 50k euro fine.
    I've read through autosport, motorsport, F1 and planetf1 websites and haven't read a single report from any of them that confirms Leclerc had more fuel than declared, only conjecture on forums presuming it to be so. If there is a report I'd be happy to read it, I'm not going to include the racefans report as I simply don't trust it.

    I could well be wrong however I still see it all as people trying to fit so called evidence to a so called crime implying Ferrari tried to cheat yet all we have is the FIA/stewards statement. The only thing that Ferrari have been found guilty of is stating a different fuel load, as to why or how that happened we may never know.

  22. #1422
    Master tiny73's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Back in Blighty
    Posts
    2,983
    Quote Originally Posted by CardShark View Post
    Ferrari were fined for the discrepancy between the delclared volume and actual volume, nothing more and nothing less.

    Who knows? However there's no evidence to suggest that there were other discrepancies so there cannot be any accusation or insinuation of guilt. The discrepancy was spotted as part of a random check, not because there's a mole or snitch. You've also got to ask yourself the question as to why would Ferrari even bother trying to cheat. Both the CC and DC were already won and they'd also already secured 2nd place in the DC, why risk the negative exposure of being caught when you've nothing to gain.

    I agree with Lewis' and Mercedes' performance, a fantastic way for them to sign off an enjoyable season.



    I've read through autosport, motorsport, F1 and planetf1 websites and haven't read a single report from any of them that confirms Leclerc had more fuel than declared, only conjecture on forums presuming it to be so. If there is a report I'd be happy to read it, I'm not going to include the racefans report as I simply don't trust it.

    I could well be wrong however I still see it all as people trying to fit so called evidence to a so called crime implying Ferrari tried to cheat yet all we have is the FIA/stewards statement. The only thing that Ferrari have been found guilty of is stating a different fuel load, as to why or how that happened we may never know.
    I think Sky may have mentioned it yesterday but I wouldn’t swear to it to be honest.

  23. #1423
    Grand Master PickleB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    M25 J6 UK
    Posts
    13,971
    Quote Originally Posted by CardShark View Post
    Ferrari were fined for the discrepancy between the delclared volume and actual volume, nothing more and nothing less.

    ...

    I've read through autosport, motorsport, F1 and planetf1 websites and haven't read a single report from any of them that confirms Leclerc had more fuel than declared, only conjecture on forums presuming it to be so. If there is a report I'd be happy to read it, I'm not going to include the racefans report as I simply don't trust it...
    As...

    Quote Originally Posted by PickleB View Post
    More or less? Try this link.

    ...didn't convince you, how about this link?

  24. #1424
    Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Warwickshire
    Posts
    1,928
    I’m still finding it difficult to understand where Ferrari’s immense improvement after the summer break came from and even more confused how that speed disappeared after the Technical Directives issued by the FIA.

    After all, it’s not as if Ferrari don’t have form re rule interpretation.

  25. #1425
    Master tiny73's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Back in Blighty
    Posts
    2,983
    Quote Originally Posted by tiny73 View Post
    I think Sky may have mentioned it yesterday but I wouldn’t swear to it to be honest.
    Mark Hughes mentions it here:

    https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opinion/f1/hamilton-crowns-f1-title-crushing-win-2019-abu-dhabi-grand-prix-report


    "Leclerc’s podium was as much as could’ve been asked of a Ferrari around here and the team was doubtless relieved just to be fined $50,000 for the fuel load offence. An extra 4.88kg (5% of the maximum) was found to have been in the car which, in a fuel-limited formula, is worth lap time."
    Last edited by tiny73; 2nd December 2019 at 12:25.

  26. #1426
    Quote Originally Posted by PickleB View Post
    As...




    ...didn't convince you, how about this link?
    That's not a website I've ever used before hence not referring to it when checking, thanks for that. Still a bit odd that the 4 major sites haven't reported it but there you go.

    Even if there was 5kg more than stated it doesn't prove there was 5kg too much, as in it was Ferrari's intended race volume plus an additional volume that could be used to somehow cheat with. It could still have been the correct race volume with a clerical error understating it.

    Bottom line for me is that I don't see any reason why Ferrari would cheat in the final race of the season when a) championship positions were already decided b) they were already under scrutiny for fuel flow management and c) it sounds like there was a 50/50 chance of them being caught out based upon the number of occasions car/fuel weights had been checked in prior races.

  27. #1427
    Quote Originally Posted by CardShark View Post

    Bottom line for me is that I don't see any reason why Ferrari would cheat in the final race of the season when a) championship positions were already decided b) they were already under scrutiny for fuel flow management and c) it sounds like there was a 50/50 chance of them being caught out based upon the number of occasions car/fuel weights had been checked in prior races.
    I completely agree, I could be wrong (again) but I cant think of another team that have made an error and not been penalised with the FIA saying "rules are rules"

    I just remembered an example of rules is rules, I think it was 2008, Hamilton cut a chicane to avoid kimi, LH then slowed down and KR didn't go past (he later crashed) and Hamilton got a massive penalty for it.


    Found it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rzy7...ature=youtu.be
    Last edited by adrianw; 2nd December 2019 at 13:12.

  28. #1428
    Master thieuster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    GMT+1
    Posts
    6,732
    Blog Entries
    1
    5% is a lot when you step back and realise that everthing in Formula 1 is measured thousands of a second, where engine tolerances are to be measured with a devices only readable under a microscope. You can't dismiss this with '...measuring mistake, it's 5% difference!' Everything is checked and rechecked. You can't convince me that someone wrote down the wrong number in relation to the amount of fuel in the car without someones else checking that. Perhaps someone can clarify the correct procedure?

    Or is this also a part of Ferrari's problems to run a team without mistakes?

    FWIW: One liter fuel weighs about 0.70 kilo which makes 5 kilo about 7.1 liters. That's a lot. And still, the overspeed of both Ferraris at the beginning of the race isn't explained, compared with their lack of pace later on. Combine that with 'Engine -mode 4' and there are even more puzzles.



    Menno
    Last edited by thieuster; 2nd December 2019 at 13:41.

  29. #1429
    Grand Master hogthrob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Essex, UK
    Posts
    12,076
    Here's the official statement on the FI website: https://www.fia.com/file/111722/download/30082

    Decision
    The Competitor (Scuderia Ferrari Mission Winnow) is fined €50,000.

    Reason
    The Stewards heard from the team representative, FIA Technical Delegate and the
    FIA Head of Single Seater Technical Matters.

    TD/014-19 required teams to declare the amount of fuel that they intended to put in the
    car for the laps to the grid, the formation lap, the race, the in-lap and any fire-ups that
    would be needed.

    The Technical Delegate was able to confirm the fuel mass put in the
    tank by checking in accordance with the procedure specified in TD/014-19.

    There was a difference of 4.88kgs between the team’s declaration for car 16 and the
    Technical Delegate’s measured fuel mass.

    The team’s declaration was therefore inaccurate and constituted a breach of the
    Technical Directive. This in turn constitutes an infringement of Article 12.1.1.i of the
    International Sporting Code.

    Accordingly, the stewards determined that the team should be fined €50,000 for its
    inaccurate declaration.

    Competitors are reminded that they have the right to appeal certain decisions of the
    Stewards, in accordance with Article 15 of the FIA International Sporting Code and
    Article 9.1.1 of the FIA Judicial and Disciplinary Rules, within the applicable time limits.
    The statement doesn't specify whether the there was more or less fuel than they had declared, but I think there's enough reports to safely assume it was more.
    Last edited by hogthrob; 2nd December 2019 at 14:54.

  30. #1430
    Grand Master PickleB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    M25 J6 UK
    Posts
    13,971
    Quote Originally Posted by hogthrob View Post
    Here's the official statement on the FI website: https://www.fia.com/file/111722/download/30082



    The statement doesn't specify whether the there was more or less fuel than they had declared, but I think there's enough reports to safely assume it was more.

    So...€50,000 worth of disorderly conduct, since 12.1.1.i reads "Failure to follow the instructions of the relevant officials for the safe and orderly conduct of the Event."

    Or was it a safety issue?

  31. #1431
    Quote Originally Posted by PickleB View Post
    So...€50,000 worth of disorderly conduct, since 12.1.1.i reads "Failure to follow the instructions of the relevant officials for the safe and orderly conduct of the Event."

    Or was it a safety issue?
    I think they should have the same stewards at every race, then there might be a chance of consistency, a permanent team with an agreed interpretation of the rules and the punishments for breaking them.

  32. #1432
    Grand Master PickleB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    M25 J6 UK
    Posts
    13,971
    Quote Originally Posted by adrianw View Post
    I think they should have the same stewards at every race, then there might be a chance of consistency, a permanent team with an agreed interpretation of the rules and the punishments for breaking them.
    Looking at the list (link) leads me to think that the FIA is trying to avoid criticism of nationalistic bias by having representatives from many countries (all those holding a GP?). I take that they are nominated by their national organisations.

    Having any more than four, as at present, for any one event would probably be unwieldy, if not unmanageable.

    While the idea of having a smaller, permanent team is appealing I doubt that it would be without its own problems. Who would choose them...the FIA's decisions are frequently criticised and an election by drivers or teams would similarly be open to accusations of bias. However, it shouldn't be an insoluble problem, but...?

  33. #1433
    Grand Master Andyg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wiltshire
    Posts
    22,682
    Quote Originally Posted by CardShark View Post

    Bottom line for me is that I don't see any reason why Ferrari would cheat in the final race of the season when a) championship positions were already decided b) they were already under scrutiny for fuel flow management and c) it sounds like there was a 50/50 chance of them being caught out based upon the number of occasions car/fuel weights had been checked in prior races.
    The bottom line, is a win is a win. Especially when it's the last race of the season and a team is looking to take any positives it can in to the closed season.

    But in a sport, which is so technical and which is subject to all sort of governance and scrutiny, how is it possible that Ferrari could make such a mistake. Incompetence or something else? Which ever way you look at it, it not good for Ferrari, or the FIA for that matter.

    Whats even sadder is it begs the question how Ferrari and their drivers would had reacted had they not been tested and won the race?

    Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
    Friedrich Nietzsche


  34. #1434

    Smile

    That's it, then. All over bar the gloating, and not much to look forward to between now and pre-season testing, unless Lewis Hamilton would care to make another of his seasonal social media gaffes (nephew in a dress, fought his way up from the slums of Stevenage etc,) for our amusement.

    Overall, 2019 was a better season than any of the preceding during the turbo-hybrid era, because there were some genuine challengers to Mercedes' dominance, and some exciting new young drivers making a name for themselves. High point of the year has undoubtedly been the resurgence of Honda, who have improved their power units beyond all recognition, and credit must go to Toro Rosso and Red Bull for the way that they have integrated the Honda units into their respective chassis, and produced winning cars. And, in Max Verstappen, they have a potential World Champion, who must have inherited much of his ability from his mother.

    Ferrari? So near, and yet so far. Their ability to snatch catastrophe from the jaws of victory seems unsurpassed, and I hope that for the sake of the sport they can provide Sebastian Vettel and Charles Leclerc with the tools and infrastructure to regularly beat Mercedes.

    2020 will see a season of stability before the yet to be agreed major changes of 2021, and teams will be divided between two programmes, with a lot of effort going into the 2021-onwards cars, so next year might prove to be a repeat of the season just finished, which will no doubt delight the Hamilton supporters. Underlying rumours of Penske making a bid for the Mercedes operation keep circulating, and there's no smoke without fire, although it wouldn't be the first time that the Captain has dabbled in Formula 1. Liberty would love to have an American team at the forefront of the sport, and Haas doesn't seem to be threatening the Big Three, so who knows? The threat of a second US Grand Prix hasn't gone away, either, although I've always been left feeling a bit underwhelmed by the attempts of our close allies to come up with a decent venue - they've always been a bit half-hearted, and although they made a real effort with Austin, getting Herr Tilke to use all of the best corners from his previous circuits from around the world, it's a bit rubbish, and has become very bumpy.

    Until 2020 then, ...
    Last edited by Backward point; 4th December 2019 at 19:19. Reason: Went a bit Yorkshire - t turbo! Corrected!
    Although no trees were harmed during the creation of this post, a large number of electrons were greatly inconvenienced.

  35. #1435
    Master thieuster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    GMT+1
    Posts
    6,732
    Blog Entries
    1
    Well said! Thanks.

  36. #1436
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Bedfordshire
    Posts
    405
    Sounds about right.

    Although 2021 may be very different as Honda and Renault pull the plug and Mercedes head towards Formula E.

  37. #1437
    Quote Originally Posted by Pretzel View Post
    Sounds about right.

    Although 2021 may be very different as Honda and Renault pull the plug and Mercedes head towards Formula E.
    That must be the Doomsday Scenario for Liberty! Haven't Honda committed to 2021 (but not 2022) recently?
    Although no trees were harmed during the creation of this post, a large number of electrons were greatly inconvenienced.

  38. #1438
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Southern Spain
    Posts
    23,176
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Backward point View Post
    Haven't Honda committed to 2021 (but not 2022) recently?
    Yes.

    Not unthinkable though that we will see Honda achieve the last worthwhile F1 title; a Ferrari single mark series will interest few. By´22 the fourth gen e-cars can very well be up to the level of proper circuits.
    I hópe not though as full e-power is a trap and hybrid makes way more sense.
    When the going gets tough, the DAF gets going.

  39. #1439
    Master thieuster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    GMT+1
    Posts
    6,732
    Blog Entries
    1
    To balance all that E nonsense, here's some old school sound. I'm not a fan of the Suderia, but this is breathtaking! For a more intense experience, go to the Ferrari Museum in Maranello where you can nearly 'feel' the V12 sound in a special booth. (Nice museum, but I encountered some 'flak' when I entered the museum, wearing a t-shirt with the Porsche dog-leg shift pattern...)


  40. #1440
    Grand Master Chris_in_the_UK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Norf Yorks
    Posts
    35,959
    Very good analysis of the Ferrari fuel issue:-

    https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/o...nd-controversy
    When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........

  41. #1441
    Grand Master Andyg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wiltshire
    Posts
    22,682
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris_in_the_UK View Post
    Very good analysis of the Ferrari fuel issue:-

    https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/o...nd-controversy

    Interesting. The key however is "An extra 5kg might be worth in the order of 10-15sec of race time. It would be of that magnitude".

    Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
    Friedrich Nietzsche


  42. #1442
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Southern Spain
    Posts
    23,176
    Blog Entries
    1
    Anyway, all water under the bridge now, which, if the puppet masters don´t act more dramatically, may happen to the whole of F1.
    The reasons given by Honda for only an extension for ´21 is like bright dayglow graffiti on the crumbling wall.
    When the going gets tough, the DAF gets going.

  43. #1443
    Quote Originally Posted by Andyg View Post
    Interesting. The key however is "An extra 5kg might be worth in the order of 10-15sec of race time. It would be of that magnitude".
    And they got away with it.

  44. #1444
    Master thieuster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    GMT+1
    Posts
    6,732
    Blog Entries
    1
    ... but what makes me happy is, that pure driver's skills like Hamilton's and Verstappen's are able to counter cheating. Before Sunday's race I mentioned that there will always be an air or fraude over this season. Not knowing what would happen a few hours later when the fuel weight difference was discovered. That suggestion of fraude is now even stronger.

    Another thing: I think that there were less engine and other mechanical failures than in previous years. But I might be wrong.

    Menno

  45. #1445
    Grand Master Andyg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wiltshire
    Posts
    22,682
    Quote Originally Posted by adrianw View Post
    And they got away with it.

    Again.

    In other news did you see that Stroll (Snr) might buy into Aston Martin and the Racing Point team being re-branded Aston Martin. Not sure how Red Bull would view this - not happy I imagine.

    Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
    Friedrich Nietzsche


  46. #1446
    Grand Master Andyg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wiltshire
    Posts
    22,682
    Quote Originally Posted by thieuster View Post
    ... but what makes me happy is, that pure driver's skills like Hamilton's and Verstappen's are able to counter cheating. Before Sunday's race I mentioned that there will always be an air or fraude over this season. Not knowing what would happen a few hours later when the fuel weight difference was discovered. That suggestion of fraude is now even stronger.

    Another thing: I think that there were less engine and other mechanical failures than in previous years. But I might be wrong.

    Menno

    In fairness cheating (or pushing the limits of the regs - as some would claim) has being going on forever. So no real change there, but yes driver/racer ability usually comes to the fore in most cases. It's just a shame when it often prevents other drivers from fulfilling their potential by getting poles and podiums - a bit like team orders.

    Regarding mech reliability I would agree with you. Most of the DNF were the result of crash damage rather than failures, plus we seemed to have less grid place penalties. This may be because technology has improved, however personally I think it's a lot of it is because team's turn the wick down and "manage" the mechanicals during the race as well as having to manage the tires, I.e cars operate at 97% rather than 100%. Not sure it's a good or bad thing to be honest.

    Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
    Friedrich Nietzsche


  47. #1447
    Quote Originally Posted by Andyg View Post
    Again.

    In other news did you see that Stroll (Snr) might buy into Aston Martin and the Racing Point team being re-branded Aston Martin. Not sure how Red Bull would view this - not happy I imagine.
    Aston Martin are loosing money, they need the cash

  48. #1448
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Southern Spain
    Posts
    23,176
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Andyg View Post

    In other news did you see that Stroll (Snr) might buy into Aston Martin and the Racing Point team being re-branded Aston Martin. Not sure how Red Bull would view this - not happy I imagine.
    Any change like this is an extra effort but I think RB would be one of the teams least bothered by a forced spronsor change. Especially for the coming two seasons with two top notch young guns propelled by a Honda which has overtaken Ferrari.
    When the going gets tough, the DAF gets going.

  49. #1449
    Quote Originally Posted by Andyg View Post
    ... might ...
    Ah, the power of selective quoting

    It's funny how some people zero in on one aspect of an article and others note another, Mark Hughes' last paragraph sums it up for me.

    "Ferrari’s Mattia Binotto points out that the team has been pre-race weight-checked ‘about 10 times this year’ and always found to be in full compliance with its declaration. What happened in Abu Dhabi was a simple error, he insists. Without proof, anything else is speculation. But it’s easy to understand the suspicions of Ferrari’s rivals."

    I'm aware that I've been banging this particular drum for a number of posts now however I still can't see why Ferrari would attempt to sneak an easily discovered cheat, for the want of a better word, past scrutineers when they had a 50/50 chance of being sussed. Why add to to the already existing fuel flow rumours for zero gains? Is it easy to understand the suspicions of Ferrari's rivals? Yes. Is there nothing but a degree of circumstantial evidence that Ferrari have been fiddling with zero proof? Another yes.

    Maybe we've heard the last of this, maybe we haven't.

    As for summing the season up there are a number of highlights for me.

    Lewis and Mercedes, Russel, Norris, Albon, McLaren and Honda all had a successful 2019 campaign. There has to be nothing other than respect for a team achieving their 6th successive championship wins, the three rookies above all shone brightly, McLaren were the most improved team from 2018 and Honda appear to have taken another step forward, and a notable one at that by achieving their first race wins for many a year.

    The biggest disappointments? Williams spluttered into the season after missing the first two test sessions, they soon admitted that the car was a complete dud and wrote the season off there and then, Paddy Lowe cleared his desk sharpish as well. Did the new front wings improve the racing? We did have some cracking weekends over the course of the year however I don't remember any chatter about the altered aero being even a part of it. Haas screwed 2019 right up and were, for me the greatest disappointment of all, the last half of the season may have seen them occasionally qualify OK however they appeared to have lost the ability to use top gear come race day. Oh, and they chose to keep Grosjean instead of hiring Hulkenberg for 2020.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •