Jump to content


Photo

Ferrari asked FIA question about Red Bullâ??s car


  • Please log in to reply
55 replies to this topic

#1 camberley

camberley
  • Member

  • 438 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 03 November 2012 - 08:19

Ferrari ask FIA about RB8 legality

Nov.3 (GMM/Inautonews.com) Ferrari this week asked a question to the FIA about championship contender Red Bull’s car, according to the Spanish sports daily AS.

The report said Ferrari, whose Fernando Alonso is pushing to catch runaway title leader Sebastian Vettel, asked the governing body if Red Bull is allowed to use a system whereby it changes the fluid levels of two tanks between qualifying and the race.

“It seems that this is one of the tricks (Adrian) Newey has used to improve the car,” read the media report.

More from BBC

BBC F1 technical analyst Gary Anderson

"There is speculation that an auxiliary oil tank forward in the Red Bull car is being used to move the weight distribution forward by pumping oil from the back to the front. If they did that, it would contravene the regulations but I don't believe they will be. The rules say that the teams have to ensure their cars comply at all times, and if they had that system the FIA would know about it. They will know whether there is a pump that moves oil from the back to the front, or the front to the back."

Edited by camberley, 03 November 2012 - 11:46.


Advertisement

#2 BernieEc

BernieEc
  • Member

  • 2,131 posts
  • Joined: August 11

Posted 03 November 2012 - 08:22

Ferrari Questions Legality of Red Bull

#3 jimjimjeroo

jimjimjeroo
  • Member

  • 1,475 posts
  • Joined: December 08

Posted 03 November 2012 - 09:17

Just a clever way of altering the weight distribution of the car, something that can have a massive affect on tyre wear! Simple but effective!

#4 Peter Perfect

Peter Perfect
  • Member

  • 4,902 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 03 November 2012 - 09:52

Just a clever way of altering the weight distribution of the car, something that can have a massive affect on tyre wear! Simple but effective!

That sounds suspiciously like using fluid as ballast... => 2 race ban (if it's all true of course  ;) )

#5 Kelateboy

Kelateboy
  • Member

  • 5,797 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 03 November 2012 - 10:07

That sounds suspiciously like using fluid as ballast... => 2 race ban (if it's all true of course ;) )

Honda San Marino GP 2005.

How could the FIA prove that Red Bull is guilty of this indiscretion if they did not catch the team in action?

#6 Peter Perfect

Peter Perfect
  • Member

  • 4,902 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 03 November 2012 - 10:14

Honda San Marino GP 2005.

How could the FIA prove that Red Bull is guilty of this indiscretion if they did not catch the team in action?

Indeed. Not a good day for BAR.

If I recall correctly from 2005 the burden of proof is on the team to prove that the car if adhering to the rules at all times.

#7 jrg19

jrg19
  • Member

  • 6,118 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 03 November 2012 - 10:16

Wasn't it 2006 when BAR got banned?

*No it wasn't.

Edited by jrg19, 03 November 2012 - 10:20.


#8 Peter Perfect

Peter Perfect
  • Member

  • 4,902 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 03 November 2012 - 10:20

Wasn't it 2006 when BAR got banned?

Nope, 2005.

http://en.wikipedia....and_controversy

#9 dau

dau
  • Member

  • 4,578 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 03 November 2012 - 10:30

Honda San Marino GP 2005.

How could the FIA prove that Red Bull is guilty of this indiscretion if they did not catch the team in action?

BAR was running underweight and that's why they were disqualified. RBR are alleged to use fluid ballast to shift the weight balance between quali and race. I can't find anything in the Technical Regulations that would explicitly forbid a system like that - wouldn't expect this to be allowed though, because with the weight distribution being fixed for qualifying, it would be pretty much a no-brainer to use it.

But all i could find in the regs is that ballast needs to be "secured in such a way that tools are required for removal", which should be easy to do, and that "no substance may be added to the car during the race".

Edited by dau, 03 November 2012 - 10:31.


#10 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,870 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:05

Yeah it's the weight distribution thing which impacts here, because I can't see the ballast rules impacting;

ARTICLE 4: WEIGHT
4.1 Minimum weight:
The weight of the car must not be less than 640kg at all times during the Event.
If, when required for checking, a car is not already fitted with dry-weather tyres, it will be weighed on a set of dry-weather tyres selected by the FIA technical delegate.
4.2 Weight distribution :
For 2012 and 2013 only, the weight applied on the front and rear wheels must not be less than 291kg and 342kg respectively at all times during the qualifying practice session.
If, when required for checking, a car is not already fitted with dry-weather tyres, it will be weighed on a set
of dry-weather tyres selected by the FIA technical delegate.
4.3 Weight of tyres :
The weight limits specified in Articles 4.1 and 4.2 will be adjusted according to any differences (rounded up to the nearest 1kg) between the total set and individual axle set weights respectively of the 2010 and 2011 dry-weather tyres.
4.4 Ballast:
Ballast can be used provided it is secured in such a way that tools are required for its removal. It must be possible to fix seals if deemed necessary by the FIA technical delegate.
4.5 Adding during the race:
With the exception of compressed gases, no substance may be added to the car during the race. If it becomes necessary to replace any part of the car during the race, the new part must not weigh any more than the original part.



#11 study

study
  • Member

  • 2,452 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:08

Why can't they for one season compete cleanly rather then win through dubious methods, its the same every year, Redbull wins should all come with asterixs against them.

#12 Gecko

Gecko
  • Member

  • 800 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:14

Why can't they for one season compete cleanly rather then win through dubious methods, its the same every year, Redbull wins should all come with asterixs against them.


I read that as: "Why are Red Bull always smarter than others?"

#13 study

study
  • Member

  • 2,452 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:16

I read that as: "Why are Red Bull always smarter than others?"


So having illegal balast is smarter then the rest? If Ferrari fix a turbo to their car is that being smarter then the rest?

They are not smarter, they are just cheating **************

#14 showtime

showtime
  • Member

  • 2,587 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:17

Don't worry, they will play the same card they did with last years engine mapping so it won't be banned: reliability.

#15 camberley

camberley
  • Member

  • 438 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:19

I wouldn't be surprised to see Ferrari file an official protest right after the race tomorrow as RB has no choice but to continue with the car and questionable ballast mechanism

#16 rhukkas

rhukkas
  • Member

  • 2,439 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:19

So having illegal balast is smarter then the rest? If Ferrari fix a turbo to their car is that being smarter then the rest?


t's smart if it's undetectable. and sticking an undetectable turbo would be nothing short of genius :)

#17 study

study
  • Member

  • 2,452 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:20

I wouldn't be surprised to see Ferrari file an official protest right after the race tomorrow as RB has no choice but to continue with the car and questionable ballast mechanism


They have to finally do so, making a mockery of the sport again

#18 dau

dau
  • Member

  • 4,578 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:20

So having illegal balast is smarter then the rest? If Ferrari fix a turbo to their car is that being smarter then the rest?

They are not smarter, they are just cheating **************

You seem to be convinced it is illegal, so could you please point me to the relevant article in the Technical Regulations?

Edited by dau, 03 November 2012 - 11:20.


#19 study

study
  • Member

  • 2,452 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:21

t's smart if it's undetectable. and sticking an undetectable turbo would be nothing short of genius :)


Its really sad that somepeople thing this.

You in favour of the drug cheats if they can use a drug thats undetectable .


Advertisement

#20 jrg19

jrg19
  • Member

  • 6,118 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:21

Do we actually know they have been running such a system?

#21 camberley

camberley
  • Member

  • 438 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:23

Do we actually know they have been running such a system?



Its quite obvious they are since Ferrari has specifically questioned it on the RB8

Edited by camberley, 03 November 2012 - 11:26.


#22 jrg19

jrg19
  • Member

  • 6,118 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:24

Why aren't Sky who love to stir reporting it then?

#23 fabr68

fabr68
  • Member

  • 3,963 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:26

I read that as: "Why are Red Bull always smarter than others?"


Any village idiot can add an illegal system to make a F1 car have an unfair advantage

#24 swerved

swerved
  • Member

  • 3,689 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:27

Incidentally, Kravitz on Sky reckoned that it was Ferrari and McLaren who had been playing about with bi-metal strips or such in the braking systems.





Why can't they for one season compete cleanly rather then win through dubious methods, its the same every year, Ferrari & McLaren wins should all come with asterixs against them.

#25 ultimategold

ultimategold
  • New Member

  • 15 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:29

If they have been caught infringing the rules then the precedent is a two race suspension. I also think that Red Bull would be excluded from the championships. The FIA could not let a team caught cheating win thr WDC and WCC. It's all IF at the moment though.

#26 krapmeister

krapmeister
  • Member

  • 5,607 posts
  • Joined: August 08

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:30

How the hell would Ferrari know about the alleged Red Bull ballast 'tanks'?

#27 study

study
  • Member

  • 2,452 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:30

If they have been caught infringing the rules then the precedent is a two race suspension. I also think that Red Bull would be excluded from the championships. The FIA could not let a team caught cheating win thr WDC and WCC. It's all IF at the moment though.


Why they've let them win for the last 2 years?

#28 camberley

camberley
  • Member

  • 438 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:31

Would be fair to expect a few protests after the race. RB8 has been caught with the water ballast issue hence Ferrari has asked for clarification. RB is countering by threatening on the brake issue.

Lets see what happens

#29 Longtimefan

Longtimefan
  • Member

  • 3,170 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:32

RBR Would never get banned no matter what they did. They have infringed the rules several times in the past seasons and when found it simply gets banned and they get zero punishment.



#30 fabr68

fabr68
  • Member

  • 3,963 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:34

How the hell would Ferrari know about the alleged Red Bull ballast 'tanks'?


It seems Red Bull got caught red handed during a failure of this system under practice

#31 krapmeister

krapmeister
  • Member

  • 5,607 posts
  • Joined: August 08

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:38

It seems Red Bull got caught red handed during a failure of this system under practice


Was this the leak from Webber's car? I thought that was related to the cooling of the KERS system...

#32 Realyn

Realyn
  • Member

  • 557 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:38

You seem to be convinced it is illegal, so could you please point me to the relevant article in the Technical Regulations?

Look, he ignored your post. What a suprise. Oh wait ... no not really.

#33 tomjol

tomjol
  • Member

  • 132 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:38

Was this the leak from Webber's car? I thought that was related to the cooling of the KERS system...


As far as I know it was completely unexplained. According to the media (Kravitz) nobody looked particularly worried, which is odd.

#34 superdelphinus

superdelphinus
  • Member

  • 1,470 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:39

I think some of you guys are watching the wrong sport if you don't like this sort of thing. Clever things that are sailing close to the legality winds are part of what make f1 so interesting

#35 study

study
  • Member

  • 2,452 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:41

Look, he ignored your post. What a suprise. Oh wait ... no not really.


Altering the weight distribution is not legal, do you think Ferrari would make a complaint if it was.

#36 superdelphinus

superdelphinus
  • Member

  • 1,470 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:44

Altering the weight distribution is not legal, do you think Ferrari would make a complaint if it was.


Can't find anything that suggests it's illegal, it just looks like one of those things that hasn't been thought about yet by anyone else

#37 krapmeister

krapmeister
  • Member

  • 5,607 posts
  • Joined: August 08

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:44

Altering the weight distribution is not legal, do you think Ferrari would make a complaint if it was.


According to the regs, the weight distribution is only set for the 'qualifying practice session':

4.2 Weight distribution :
For 2012 and 2013 only, the weight applied on the front and rear wheels must not be less than 291kg and 342kg respectively at all times during the qualifying practice session.


So does that mean just for FP or FP and Qualifying - note it doesn't mention anything about the Race itself...

#38 camberley

camberley
  • Member

  • 438 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:45

BBC

BBC F1 technical analyst Gary Anderson

"There is speculation that an auxiliary oil tank forward in the Red Bull car is being used to move the weight distribution forward by pumping oil from the back to the front. If they did that, it would contravene the regulations but I don't believe they will be. The rules say that the teams have to ensure their cars comply at all times, and if they had that system the FIA would know about it. They will know whether there is a pump that moves oil from the back to the front, or the front to the back."


#39 Jon83

Jon83
  • Member

  • 1,941 posts
  • Joined: November 11

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:46

Why can't they for one season compete cleanly rather then win through dubious methods, its the same every year, Redbull wins should all come with asterixs against them.


I'm a Ferrari fan but this is nonsense.

Advertisement

#40 artista

artista
  • RC Forum Host

  • 5,299 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:47

Sorry for the silly question, but has it been confirmed that Ferrari has asked the FIA for clarification?

I'm asking because in the original article in Diario As, they say Ferrari doesn't confirm nor denies the information and the author of the article is the loony that came out with the story of Grosjean squeezing Hamilton with a wall in Spa in order to take Alonso out on purpose and Räikkönen somehow making Alonso squeeze him out of track also in order to take him out on purpose. Of course the Lotus were doing it all to help Red Bull. Manuel Franco sometimes has good informations but his obsession with Red Bull and Vettel is so out of control that I've ended up questioning everything he writes, even when it's true (which may be the case now, I really don't know).

Edited by artista, 03 November 2012 - 11:48.


#41 smoothcrim

smoothcrim
  • Member

  • 426 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:52

Out come the knives,its high stakes folks and neither Ferrari or RBR want to lose.

#42 Zava

Zava
  • Member

  • 5,069 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:53

wouldn't that mean additional weight to the car? afaik they measure the minimum weights with every fluid sucked out of the car.

#43 tomjol

tomjol
  • Member

  • 132 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:55

According to the regs, the weight distribution is only set for the 'qualifying practice session':



So does that mean just for FP or FP and Qualifying - note it doesn't mention anything about the Race itself...


Er, surely there is no ambiguity in "the qualifying practice session"? Every session before the race is a practice session, "the qualifying practice session" is "qualifying".

Edited by tomjol, 03 November 2012 - 11:56.


#44 showtime

showtime
  • Member

  • 2,587 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:58

Sorry for the silly question, but has it been confirmed that Ferrari has asked the FIA for clarification?

I'm asking because in the original article in Diario As, they say Ferrari doesn't confirm nor denies the information and the author of the article is the loony that came out with the story of Grosjean squeezing Hamilton with a wall in Spa in order to take Alonso out on purpose and Räikkönen somehow making Alonso squeeze him out of track also in order to take him out on purpose. Of course the Lotus were doing it all to help Red Bull. Manuel Franco sometimes has good informations but his obsession with Red Bull and Vettel is so out of control that I've ended up questioning everything he writes, even when it's true (which may be the case now, I really don't know).


Yeah, it was Ferrari but it was not aimed at RB or any other team, just a clarification:

http://www.caranddri...tecnicas?page=1 (Spanish)

#45 krapmeister

krapmeister
  • Member

  • 5,607 posts
  • Joined: August 08

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:58

Er, surely there is no ambiguity in "the qualifying practice session"? Every session before the race is a practice session, "the qualifying practice session" is "qualifying".


Ok - see your point. But still no mention about the 'Race' - so in theory they can shift the weight distribution in the race then, car could be complying to the weight distribution for qualy and then free to adjust once the race gets underway...

Edited by krapmeister, 03 November 2012 - 12:03.


#46 artista

artista
  • RC Forum Host

  • 5,299 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 03 November 2012 - 12:07

Yeah, it was Ferrari but it was not aimed at RB or any other team, just a clarification:

http://www.caranddri...tecnicas?page=1 (Spanish)

Thanks! :)

#47 KOMORI

KOMORI
  • Member

  • 460 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 03 November 2012 - 12:11

Ok - see your point. But still no mention about the 'Race' - so in theory they can shift the weight distribution in the race then, car could be complying to the weight distribution for qualy and then free to adjust once the race gets underway...


Parc ferme?

#48 D A

D A
  • Member

  • 888 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 03 November 2012 - 12:11

Ok - see your point. But still no mention about the 'Race' - so in theory they can shift the weight distribution in the race then, car could be complying to the weight distribution for qualy and then free to adjust once the race gets underway...


The regulations call qualifying "qualifying practice session".

#49 krapmeister

krapmeister
  • Member

  • 5,607 posts
  • Joined: August 08

Posted 03 November 2012 - 12:12

Parc ferme?


Parc ferme finishes once the race gets underway yes?

#50 krapmeister

krapmeister
  • Member

  • 5,607 posts
  • Joined: August 08

Posted 03 November 2012 - 12:12

The regulations call qualifying "qualifying practice session".


Yes I see that now - thanks...