Grand Prix Rejects

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/74475

Let battle recommence!

I say great. Now we can get on with the racing. I mean, if they were twice scrutineered and found to be entirely legal, why would they not be?

Great for F1, though Toro Rosso being top would almost have been worth the diffusers being declared illegal and F1 plunged into chaos. But its the correct decision, now we can enjoy the racing.

PayasYouDNPQ wrote:I say great. Now we can get on with the racing. I mean, if they were twice scrutineered and found to be entirely legal, why would they not be?

The scrutineers' decisions aren't always upheld by the FIA. Off the top of my head I can think of the McLaren 'third pedal' (1997/8), the Michelin tyres (2003) and the Renault 'mass damper' (2006). All were declared race-legal by the scrutineers, yet when other teams appealled (Ferrari in all cases, if I remember correctly), the FIA declared the devices illegal.

This is just the way the system works. As far as I understand it, the ONLY way to get a final ruling on the legality of a component is to appeal to the ICA; anything the FIA says is advisory only until the scrutineers and, if neccessary, the ICA make their ruling.

The great thing is that we now have a ruling, and we can get on with the season. From what I've been reading, it sounds like McLaren and Renault will have a new diffuser for China, BMW and Force India for Barcelona, and Ferrari and Red Bull for Turkey (maybe Barcelona for Ferrari, depending on how much they rush it). Torro Rosso will get the diffuser at some point after Red Bull.

somebody totally needs to put a fan on the back of their car.

"But there's nothing in the regs that says you can't do that..."

I think the correct decision was made by the scrutineers at the races and that decision has been upheld.
The idea that every car that is missing the 'double-decker' diffuser is underperforming is a joke. Red Bull seem to manage just fine.
It's a sad day for this sport when one team protests another one for basically being cleverer than they were.

Wheeee!

(doing a happy dance)

I always had faith in Brawn and I'm not disappointed

Not a surprise at all...

I was expecting to hear this. Great to hear that all controversies are finally over..................

Faustus wrote:I think the correct decision was made by the scrutineers at the races and that decision has been upheld.
The idea that every car that is missing the 'double-decker' diffuser is underperforming is a joke. Red Bull seem to manage just fine.
It's a sad day for this sport when one team protests another one for basically being cleverer than they were.

That's entirely correct. Red Bull seem to be able to challenge without them.

Faustus wrote:I think the correct decision was made by the scrutineers at the races and that decision has been upheld.
The idea that every car that is missing the 'double-decker' diffuser is underperforming is a joke. Red Bull seem to manage just fine.
It's a sad day for this sport when one team protests another one for basically being cleverer than they were.

Ditto

tastyhouse wrote:somebody totally needs to put a fan on the back of their car.

"But there's nothing in the regs that says you can't do that..."

I'd like to see someone try that actually. Especially since one B. Ecclestone was in charge of Brabham at the time ...

It's a good thing that the court made a decision that is not bringing the sport into disrepute. Your Honor, may I apologize for the use of my words here? Thanks.
Still, the FIA will have to modify their regulations regarding diffusers for next year, to slow down the cars for 2010 and basically abolish the multiple-level diffusers again that are now allowed. It was kind of similar, too, back when active suspensions were banned.

Unsurprising, and I'm kind of glad, but I think that the FIA should ban them for next season, because frankly they go against the spirit of the rules and possibly detriment racing and close following. All credit to Brawn, Toyota and Williams however, because if there is a loophole, and it can be feasibly argued that the exploiting the loophole is legal, exploit it.

ImissJORDAN wrote:Unsurprising, and I'm kind of glad, but I think that the FIA should ban them for next season, because frankly they go against the spirit of the rules and possibly detriment racing and close following. All credit to Brawn, Toyota and Williams however, because if there is a loophole, and it can be feasibly argued that the exploiting the loophole is legal, exploit it.

I don't think there is any point in banning them for next season. Within the next month or two (if you're Force India ), every team on the grid will have one of their own, so there will be no inherent advantage to be had. For next year it won't cost any more than normal to incorporate into the design and it doesn't affect the racing at all.

There may be an argument for banning them on the basis of increased performance and cornering speeds, but the reason why lap times this year are so close to last year's is more to do with tyres than anything else.

Faustus wrote:I don't think there is any point in banning them for next season. Within the next month or two (if you're Force India ), every team on the grid will have one of their own, so there will no inherent advantage to be had. For next year it won't cost any more than normal to design and it doesn't affect the racing at all.

There may be an argument for banning them on the basis of increased performance and cornering speeds, but the reason why lap times this year are so close to last year's is more to do with tyres than anything else.

I'm sure it can be proven that they provide far more turbulent air to the car behind than a regular diffuser. Maybe we're talking tiny fractions here, but anything to help with overtaking, especially if it means banning an unecessary component. It's less about "advantage", than about the recently oft-mentioned "spirit of the regulations". Maybe they mean the ghost of them, after the diffuser wars..

ImissJORDAN wrote:

Faustus wrote:I don't think there is any point in banning them for next season. Within the next month or two (if you're Force India ), every team on the grid will have one of their own, so there will no inherent advantage to be had. For next year it won't cost any more than normal to design and it doesn't affect the racing at all.

There may be an argument for banning them on the basis of increased performance and cornering speeds, but the reason why lap times this year are so close to last year's is more to do with tyres than anything else.

I'm sure it can be proven that they provide far more turbulent air to the car behind than a regular diffuser. Maybe we're talking tiny fractions here, but anything to help with overtaking, especially if it means banning an unecessary component. It's less about "advantage", than about the recently oft-mentioned "spirit of the regulations". Maybe they mean the ghost of them, after the diffuser wars..

Hmmmm... I think you're right that they produce more turbulent air, but then again, the rear wing endplates and the rear tyres produce most of the turbulent air or 'wake' effect. On a car with ajustable front wing, it's just a question of adjusting the wing earlier than you normally would. Of course, you haven't got an adjustable front wing, it'll be like going back in time 12 months!
I know for a fact that the difference in turbulent air generated by a car can be quantified, it's just a case of using the two different solutions in a wind-tunnel. Whether a team is willing to cooperate with the FIA and / or make their wind-tunnel figures available is a different matter.

I just wonder what did Renault and Red Bull had in mind and what did they ask to make FIA rule their diffusers illegal at the start of the year.

Faustus wrote:Hmmmm... I think you're right that they produce more turbulent air, but then again, the rear wing endplates and the rear tyres produce most of the turbulent air or 'wake' effect. On a car with ajustable front wing, it's just a question of adjusting the wing earlier than you normally would. Of course, you haven't got an adjustable front wing, it'll be like going back in time 12 months!
I know for a fact that the difference in turbulent generated by a car can be quantified, it's just a case of using the two different solutions in a wind-tunnel. Whether a team is willing to cooperate with the FIA and / or make their wind-tunnel figures available is a different matter.

Theissen: Diffusers will hurt overtaking - Autosport.com
"..it does not achieve the reduction in downforce and cornering speeds intended by the Overtaking Working Group when the new regulations were drawn up. At the same time, this decision means that seven teams will have to invest heavily in carrying out the necessary modifications to their cars."

Newey starts work on new diffuser - Autosport.com
"I wonder what impact this will have on cornering speeds. I assume there will be problems soon when cars are going too fast, and the airflow the double diffuser creates for sure will make overtaking more difficult again. Thus it is against the spirit of the rules agreed in the working groups."

__________________________________________

I know this hasn't got a great deal to do with your most recent post, but it seems that the complainants back me up. Of course they would, wouldn't they (every F1 technical expert needs something to complain about), but it's still obvious that it will detriment the airflow at least somewhat, and although this issue could also be improved in other areas, this particular aspect is the most contraversial, and one that can be seen as toeing the line of the regulations. Therefore, this aspect is the most relavent aspect of "turbulent air" and "cornering speeds" at the moment.

Thank heavens, the last thing the sport needs right now is another travesty of a result altered after the race has ended. Now lets hope for a great race in China with no political interference to put this entire business out of our mids.

ImissJORDAN, I think you have to understand the political context of those statements. It is in their interest to appear as the injured party and to protest as vehemently as possible about the ruling. Of course they're going to say whatever they can to justify their appeal of the steward's decision!
The detriment to the airflow and it's effect on following cars is not the issue that upsets them, it's the fact that they've been outsmarted and they don't like it. It's going to cost them money and time to catch up and they've already lost points. Points equal money, in this case a bigger share of the FOA money. They don't care one iota about the effect on the racing, they care about the money they're losing.
Don't believe everything that you read, especially in the comics.

By the way, I understand that the Honda diffuser was devised by a former Arrows bloke who was at Super Aguri last year and then joined Honda. He took the idea with him. Apparently Toyota and Williams came up with it on their own.

Well, I hope we can get on with racing now. I think a lot of the criticisms that have been levelled at the decision - I've seen them over at the GTP forums and F1 Fanatic, which is ironic as both websites had a lot of support or the diffusers - are because the FIA have made some calls that have been perceived as specious, biased and downright wrong in the past, and people are assessing this decision based on those outcomes as opposed to the facts of this particular case. I'm not really sure what Ferrari, Red Bull, BMW and Renault expected out of this, but they're just going to have to take it on the chin and come up with something on their own. If at all; I think there are bigger aerodynamic issues with some of them, in particular the Renault R29. As for Red Bull and Renault approaching the stewards before the season began, I think we'll find that what they proposed was something radically different to Brawn, Williams and Toyota or, at the very least, different enough to have the FIA say no.

Request to Jamie and Enoch. Can you please continue your "official future" chapionship please ? I am enjoying the scrap at the "top" of the championship between Bourdais and Buemi and if Force India will claw back against STR in the constructors battle.

As far as the court battle went, I think Ferrari's lawyer has now left RossB's Xmas card list. Also, I wonder what RossB said about the other designers that caused sparks to fly ?

runningboots wrote:Request to Jamie and Enoch. Can you please continue your "official future" chapionship please ? I am enjoying the scrap at the "top" of the championship between Bourdais and Buemi and if Force India will claw back against STR in the constructors battle.

Maybe we should start a thread to monitor the 12-car, non-diffuser-triopoly, non-McLaren 2009 World Championship ... <---------- DONE! See the HWNSNBM Memorial Forum!

eytl wrote:

runningboots wrote:Request to Jamie and Enoch. Can you please continue your "official future" chapionship please ? I am enjoying the scrap at the "top" of the championship between Bourdais and Buemi and if Force India will claw back against STR in the constructors battle.

Maybe we should start a thread to monitor the 12-car, non-diffuser-triopoly, non-McLaren 2009 World Championship ... <---------- DONE! See the HWNSNBM Memorial Forum!

Great success!

i would like to have seen them banned.... even if it was just to see buttons face when told he was stripped of all his points
i think the FIA have done the right thing for the sport..... if they were banned it would have looked sooooo bad..... concidering the cars have passed every inspection....

Faustus wrote:ImissJORDAN, I think you have to understand the political context of those statements. It is in their interest to appear as the injured party and to protest as vehemently as possible about the ruling. Of course they're going to say whatever they can to justify their appeal of the steward's decision!
The detriment to the airflow and it's effect on following cars is not the issue that upsets them, it's the fact that they've been outsmarted and they don't like it.

All true, but that doesn't stop the fact that the diffuser creates more downforce and more turbulent air, hence the many "spirit of the rules" arguments from impartial observers. Flawed examples my quotes may have been, but many others, some more impartial than others, think like I do. The diffusers clearly create more turbulent air to be produced. It may only be by degrees, but it's still a step in the wrong regulatory direction to me.

Innovative, yes, Legal, yes. Better for racing, no.