Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Red Bull, Mercedes and Lotus with not fully legal floor in Malaysia


  • Please log in to reply
94 replies to this topic

#1 jstrains

jstrains
  • Member

  • 3,219 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 30 March 2013 - 06:34

Italian OmniCorse.it informes that FIA technical inspection of Red Bull, Mercedes and Lotus in Malaysia discovered inconsistencies in the front part of the cars' floor. Theses teams were asked to redesign the floor prior to China to avoid possible disqualification.

http://www.omnicorse...irino-della-fia

I am stunned how FIA protects Red Bull with their illegal parts over and over again...

Advertisement

#2 SpaMaster

SpaMaster
  • Member

  • 5,856 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 30 March 2013 - 06:54

Not very different to how FIA protected Ferrari over and over again in the past, isn't it?

Surprise, surprise, all teams except Ferrari were allegedly told to modify their floors! I wonder who tipped this Italian source. Might it be Ferrari? All the teams bxxxh about other teams on possible borderline stuff. I am sure Ferrari would have been at the receiving other times. Just PR stuff from Ferrari.

Edited by SpaMaster, 30 March 2013 - 06:58.


#3 ViMaMo

ViMaMo
  • Member

  • 6,513 posts
  • Joined: September 03

Posted 30 March 2013 - 06:59

Not very different to how FIA protected Ferrari over and over again in the past, isn't it?

Surprise, surprise, all teams except Ferrari were allegedly told to modify their floors! I wonder who tipped this Italian source. Might it be Ferrari? All the teams bxxxh about other teams on possible borderline stuff. I am sure Ferrari would have been at the receiving other times. Just PR stuff from Ferrari.



Byt there was an army of haters :lol:

#4 Wingnut

Wingnut
  • Member

  • 717 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 30 March 2013 - 07:06

It seems that teams are given the opportunity to run illegal parts until they are discovered, at which point they need to be modified with no punishment. Why design a legal car, may as well run something illegal and hope for the best, as Red Bull have mastered over time.


Each team should have one reprimand when illegal parts are discovered, and disqualified the next time illegal parts are found. Won't happen though, the FIA are scared to death of Red Bull leaving.

#5 moorsey

moorsey
  • Member

  • 653 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 30 March 2013 - 07:13

It seems that teams are given the opportunity to run illegal parts until they are discovered, at which point they need to be modified with no punishment. Why design a legal car, may as well run something illegal and hope for the best, as Red Bull have mastered over time.


Each team should have one reprimand when illegal parts are discovered, and disqualified the next time illegal parts are found. Won't happen though, the FIA are scared to death of Red Bull leaving.


FIA are scared of ANY team leaving. They won't have enough cars to make a race weekend.

#6 Szoelloe

Szoelloe
  • Member

  • 7,054 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 30 March 2013 - 07:20

Italian OmniCorse.it informes that FIA technical inspection of Red Bull, Mercedes and Lotus in Malaysia discovered inconsistencies in the front part of the cars' floor. Theses teams were asked to redesign the floor prior to China to avoid possible disqualification.

http://www.omnicorse...irino-della-fia

I am stunned how FIA protects Red Bull with their illegal parts over and over again...


When was the last time Ferrari had to re-design something on its car because it actually worked too well, and not because it was not working well enough?


#7 reggie

reggie
  • Member

  • 103 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 30 March 2013 - 07:24

Typical. Shows once again the conservative nature of the Ferrari designers.

#8 aray

aray
  • Member

  • 5,796 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 30 March 2013 - 07:50

shame that they were not disqualified from Malaysia GP result.... :mad:

then again cheating is the only way they can beat Ferrari-Alonso combo..;)

#9 Timstr11

Timstr11
  • Member

  • 11,162 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 30 March 2013 - 07:54

In the merc thread someone pointed to the fact that it's a speculative article.
The title of the article has a question mark so it is not presented as fact.

#10 cekalas

cekalas
  • New Member

  • 4 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 30 March 2013 - 07:59

Anyone else noticed how the Lotus had loads of sparks even with light fuel in Malaysia? For a minute there i actually thought that the car had problems or something.

#11 BernieEc

BernieEc
  • Member

  • 2,131 posts
  • Joined: August 11

Posted 30 March 2013 - 08:12

Does the site actually say its these 3 teams for sure that breached regulations or its just a suspicion they are yet to confirm?

#12 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 16,473 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 30 March 2013 - 08:38

When was the last time Ferrari had to re-design something on its car because it actually worked too well, and not because it was not working well enough?

Don't know if it was the last time, but many of us will remember that Ferrari had to change their floor after the 2007 Australian GP.

#13 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 30 March 2013 - 08:45

It starts off confidently saying 'si tratta di' which means 'this involves' Red Bull, Lotus and Mercedes.

At the end it says "RED BULL, LOTUS E MERCEDES NEL MIRINO? Ovviamente è partita la caccia alle streghe per scoprire quali sono i team coinvolti: nella lista pare ci siano la Red Bull che proprio a Sepang ha firmato una doppietta con la RB9, insieme a Lotus e Mercedes."

The key is 'pare ci' which apparently means 'appears to us',

So they say "RED BULL, LOTUS AND MERCEDES IN the crosshairs? Obviously there is a witch hunt to find out what are the teams involved: the list appears to us to be Red Bull in Sepang who just scored twice with RB9, along with Lotus and Mercedes."

So it's not 100%. Some insider info, some guesswork it looks like . But I'm not really an Italian speaker, someone else might get the nuances better.

#14 Timstr11

Timstr11
  • Member

  • 11,162 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 30 March 2013 - 09:19

Could it be an April fools prank by omnicorse?

#15 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 30 March 2013 - 09:53

Could it be an April fools prank by omnicorse?


I'd have thought to be an April 1 joke it'd have to be a bit more ridiculous. I mean, with a joke we're supposed to go 'DoH' when we realise aren't we, with it being a bit obviously not realistic.

This is realistic, except I suppose in that it was a simple mechanical test they failed, which teams would have been doing for themselves.

#16 Shiroo

Shiroo
  • Member

  • 4,012 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 30 March 2013 - 11:16

if it wasnt clearly banned then that's the reason why they could run it AND DIDN'T get DSQ cuz of illegal part. any changes that needs to be done is due to some clarification of rules.

Though I can't recall when Ferrari was involved in such thing. Why they never try something that is on edge of rules for some time already.



@cekelas we all know about Lotus and they odd sparking. Ted last time said smt about active suspension or w/e it was. That's why they instead of going higher after using fuel, they are at same position height-wise, or even go lower.

Edited by Shiroo, 30 March 2013 - 11:17.


#17 jstrains

jstrains
  • Member

  • 3,219 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 30 March 2013 - 11:31

I think it should be like it used to be before. Your car is illegal, then you should get DSQ because of unfair advantage and not like please do not use it next time

http://www.ferrariow...ber/171099.html

http://news.bbc.co.u...la_1/477316.stm

#18 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 16,473 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 30 March 2013 - 11:38

Though I can't recall when Ferrari was involved in such thing. Why they never try something that is on edge of rules for some time already.

Read just a few posts above.

#19 Zava

Zava
  • Member

  • 7,116 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 30 March 2013 - 11:46

I think it should be like it used to be before. Your car is illegal, then you should get DSQ because of unfair advantage and not like please do not use it next time

http://www.ferrariow...ber/171099.html

http://news.bbc.co.u...la_1/477316.stm

and as an example, you bring us a story where ferrari got un-disqualified after being disqualified for cheating. :stoned:

Advertisement

#20 SpaMaster

SpaMaster
  • Member

  • 5,856 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 30 March 2013 - 11:51

It is like before. Just because some fans cry foul because they can't stand Red Bull beating their team/drivers, it does not mean they were doing something to be disqualified. Like someone said earlier, the design is just in the clarification realm, not clear infringement of regulation. They have been pushing the limits very finely to the grey area, where it is neither illegal nor to the satisfaction of the officials to let it continue the same way. Some teams like Red Bull have perfected that art of pushing limits. Just because some fans don't like a team does not mean they were doing something illegal when given a clarification.

#21 RedF1

RedF1
  • Member

  • 135 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 30 March 2013 - 12:03

It is like before. Just because some fans cry foul because they can't stand Red Bull beating their team/drivers, it does not mean they were doing something to be disqualified. Like someone said earlier, the design is just in the clarification realm, not clear infringement of regulation. They have been pushing the limits very finely to the grey area, where it is neither illegal nor to the satisfaction of the officials to let it continue the same way. Some teams like Red Bull have perfected that art of pushing limits. Just because some fans don't like a team does not mean they were doing something illegal when given a clarification.


It certainly helps that Mr Charly Whiting is somehow more than willing to close his eyes and look away when it comes to RedBull.... as seen over the last few years again and again!

#22 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 61,758 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 30 March 2013 - 12:12

Wasn't it Omnicorse that reported Alonso defied team instructions to stay out on the broken wing in Malaysia?

#23 CrucialXtreme

CrucialXtreme
  • Member

  • 4,414 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 30 March 2013 - 12:29

Wasn't it Omnicorse that reported Alonso defied team instructions to stay out on the broken wing in Malaysia?


Indeed. Therefore take this story with a grain of salt..

#24 artista

artista
  • RC Forum Host

  • 5,677 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 30 March 2013 - 12:30

Am I the only one noticing the '?' in the headline of the article and also noticing all the article is written in conditional tense?

#25 SpaMaster

SpaMaster
  • Member

  • 5,856 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 30 March 2013 - 12:35

It certainly helps that Mr Charly Whiting is somehow more than willing to close his eyes and look away when it comes to RedBull.... as seen over the last few years again and again!

What is it that you know that Red Bull was definitively breaking rules that Whiting turned his blind eye on?

Am I the only one noticing the '?' in the headline of the article and also noticing all the article is written in conditional tense?

There is nothing concrete in the article, no source, no evidence. Just silly speculation like a f1 fan posts on forum. Yet some group of fans are so convinced that this must be true and it definitely was illegal and hence they should be disqualified. If you ask them based on what, they wouldn't have a clue.

Edited by SpaMaster, 30 March 2013 - 12:40.


#26 Timstr11

Timstr11
  • Member

  • 11,162 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 30 March 2013 - 12:58

Only omnicorse has picked up on this which makes it unlikely in my opinion.
Surely other members of the F1 press corps would have picked up on this.

#27 Jimisgod

Jimisgod
  • Member

  • 4,954 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 31 March 2013 - 12:39

It wouldn't be F1 without our weekly 'your car is illegal' thread.

#28 Collective

Collective
  • Member

  • 1,522 posts
  • Joined: June 05

Posted 31 March 2013 - 12:48

Had it been Sauber...

#29 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 31 March 2013 - 12:54

Well we fans are mere mushrooms aren't we? It could be nothing, or it could all be going off behind closed doors. We can only wait and see if someone else says something, or if some cars look slower in China.


#30 GhostR

GhostR
  • Member

  • 3,783 posts
  • Joined: September 03

Posted 31 March 2013 - 22:58

Don't know if it was the last time, but many of us will remember that Ferrari had to change their floor after the 2007 Australian GP.

Which year was it the bridge front wings were all the rage but Ferrari's version linked to the nose with a pin that was obviously allowing flex? They were told it would get them a dq if they kept it, from memory?

#31 stonebutter

stonebutter
  • Member

  • 697 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 01 April 2013 - 19:10

shame that they were not disqualified from Malaysia GP result.... :mad:

then again cheating is the only way they can beat Ferrari-Alonso combo..;)


I could have beaten alonso in malaysia with my bicycle.

#32 fabr68

fabr68
  • Member

  • 3,963 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 01 April 2013 - 19:31

Any cheating any team does starts with the excuse "Ferrari....

Who gives a#%& who did what 100 years ago, this years rules apply to this years championship. I hope all teams are hold to respect the rules with same rigor. It seems however that the FIA prefers to be asked for forgiveness insteas of for permission as many teams are allowed to race and keep the points after using illegal design features.

#33 Afterburner

Afterburner
  • RC Forum Host

  • 9,173 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 01 April 2013 - 21:07

It wouldn't be F1 without our weekly 'your car is illegal' thread.

Agreed. :lol: :up:

#34 MikeV1987

MikeV1987
  • Member

  • 6,371 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 01 April 2013 - 21:29

Italian OmniCorse.it informes that FIA technical inspection of Red Bull, Mercedes and Lotus in Malaysia discovered inconsistencies in the front part of the cars' floor. Theses teams were asked to redesign the floor prior to China to avoid possible disqualification.

http://www.omnicorse...irino-della-fia

I am stunned how FIA protects Red Bull with their illegal parts over and over again...


I lol'd when I seen this comment, especially after reading this
http://en.espnf1.com...ory/104589.html

#35 JimiKart

JimiKart
  • Member

  • 457 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 02 April 2013 - 01:10

I lol'd when I seen this comment, especially after reading this
http://en.espnf1.com...ory/104589.html


What is the correlation between Ferrari having a veto on rule changes and Red Bull constantly getting caught breaking the rules and then being told to fix it instead of being punished?

#36 fabr68

fabr68
  • Member

  • 3,963 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 02 April 2013 - 01:26

What is the correlation between Ferrari having a veto on rule changes and Red Bull constantly getting caught breaking the rules and then being told to fix it instead of being punished?


There is absolutely no correlation.

There is some weird twisted logic that anyone or everyone is perfectly allowed to break the rules and do as they please just because Ferrari may have done something (even if irrelevant) that may be perceived by some as wrong.

#37 Owen

Owen
  • Member

  • 13,178 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 02 April 2013 - 08:54

@JennieGow: FIA tells top teams to change 'splitters' - reports #f1 http://t.co/wqvCg0twwd

#38 Owen

Owen
  • Member

  • 13,178 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 02 April 2013 - 08:58

Article in full:
Apr.2 (GMM) F1's governing body has warned three top teams to make changes to their cars ahead of the next race in China, it has emerged.
Italian reports, including in the pages of Italiaracing and Omnicorse, claim the FIA has reacted after scrutineers flagged controversial solutions in the area of the underbody presented in Malaysia by Red Bull, Lotus and Mercedes.
The reports say the cars' 'splitters' are too flexible, with the teams told to make changes for Shanghai to avoid sanction.

Motorsport.com

#39 jrg19

jrg19
  • Member

  • 6,118 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 02 April 2013 - 09:12

Probably why RedBull and Lotus have a support in the middle of the t-tray.

Advertisement

#40 Timstr11

Timstr11
  • Member

  • 11,162 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 02 April 2013 - 09:22

Article in full:
Apr.2 (GMM) F1's governing body has warned three top teams to make changes to their cars ahead of the next race in China, it has emerged.
Italian reports, including in the pages of Italiaracing and Omnicorse, claim the FIA has reacted after scrutineers flagged controversial solutions in the area of the underbody presented in Malaysia by Red Bull, Lotus and Mercedes.
The reports say the cars' 'splitters' are too flexible, with the teams told to make changes for Shanghai to avoid sanction.

Motorsport.com

Ah GMM. The news thieves.
As usual it's the same story, rehashed, from ominicorse.

Waiting for an F1 journo to ask FIA or one of the teams for confirmation.

#41 SealTheDiffuser

SealTheDiffuser
  • Member

  • 2,416 posts
  • Joined: June 12

Posted 02 April 2013 - 09:35

coincidentally it is the the two cars with the biggest rake and the lowest riding one, so in my opionon true story.

#42 Mc_Silver

Mc_Silver
  • Member

  • 5,339 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 02 April 2013 - 09:40

So this is good news for Ferrari and McLaren guys.

#43 Zava

Zava
  • Member

  • 7,116 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 02 April 2013 - 09:40

Probably why RedBull and Lotus have a support in the middle of the t-tray.

I hope you know that the tray supports were there on most of the cars since 2009?

#44 jrg19

jrg19
  • Member

  • 6,118 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 02 April 2013 - 09:50

But the support I'm talking about wasn't on either the RB8 or E20.

The RB9 support is similar to the one used on the RB6.

#45 One

One
  • Member

  • 6,527 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 02 April 2013 - 11:26

it all sounds too vague to say something, which is a bit troublesome for everybody, isn't it? never the less this vagueness of the claim could harm these three teams in both directions... could face ban or performance reduction at china from the side of FIA or clarification imposed by their competitors.

#46 Panktej

Panktej
  • Member

  • 359 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 02 April 2013 - 12:30

Jennie Gow ‏@JennieGow 2m

Have spoken to Lotus and Merc who say FIA splitter story is just that - a story! Both teams passed tests and no changes to make

#47 Szoelloe

Szoelloe
  • Member

  • 7,054 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 02 April 2013 - 12:39

LOL Omnicorse.it

#48 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 02 April 2013 - 12:41

Jennie Gow ‏@JennieGow 2m

Have spoken to Lotus and Merc who say FIA splitter story is just that - a story! Both teams passed tests and no changes to make


:up:

I suppose it's too much to hope Red Bull 'declined to comment'...

#49 Timstr11

Timstr11
  • Member

  • 11,162 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 02 April 2013 - 13:15

There you go.
I knew it was suspicious that only omnicorse was running the story.


#50 BillBald

BillBald
  • Member

  • 5,818 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 02 April 2013 - 13:35

Jennie Gow ‏@JennieGow 2m

Have spoken to Lotus and Merc who say FIA splitter story is just that - a story! Both teams passed tests and no changes to make


If the issue is real, and the FIA chose to have a quiet word with the teams involved (as is increasingly their style), then we will never have anything other than rumours, which will never be confirmed by any of the parties.

If the FIA has spared teams the embarassment of publicly accusing them of cheating, you would hardly expect the teams to accuse themselves.

There were a number of similar issues last year which only emerged as rumours, but were finally generally accepted to be true.