Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 1 votes

Racing Point protest against Renault, Japan 2019


  • Please log in to reply
428 replies to this topic

#251 New Britain

New Britain
  • Member

  • 2,329 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 21 October 2019 - 20:51

WHAT?????

As a constructor.



Advertisement

#252 New Britain

New Britain
  • Member

  • 2,329 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 21 October 2019 - 20:58

You are forgetting that the teams placed below Renault right now have a powerful financial incentive to want to see them disqualified from the WCC - as Renault’s accumulated prize money would go back into the common pot. And those teams may not see to the longer term FOM/FIA interest.

I have not forgotten that but believe, perhaps naively, that it would be less of an incentive to the lower-ranked teams than the incentive to keep Renault in the sport. In the lower half of the WCC, each upward step is worth roughly $2.5m more in prize money. It's not nothing, but it's not going to make or break any of the teams either. Obviously the ideal situation for the lower teams would be for Renault to lose its points but decide to stay in F1, but that is not the only possible scenario.



#253 KWSN - DSM

KWSN - DSM
  • Member

  • 20,843 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 21 October 2019 - 23:27

I found guilty and multiple races, disqualify from season. 

 

:cool:



#254 GT351

GT351
  • New Member

  • 7 posts
  • Joined: August 16

Posted 22 October 2019 - 03:13

I still struggle to believe that they will be found to have done anything blatantly illegal. I mean, they hired Budkowski who knows the technical regs and their interpretations better than anyone, and would have been across the precedents of how other teams exploited grey areas in the past. It would be quite bizarre for them to develop a system that is obviously against the rules under his watch - let alone one where an opposition team can (apparently) detect it just by looking at on-boards!

 

If Renault do get any sort of penalty then it will either have been quite the stuff up on Budkowski's part or some typical FIA inconsistency.



#255 Talisman

Talisman
  • Member

  • 6,042 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 22 October 2019 - 08:33

I still struggle to believe that they will be found to have done anything blatantly illegal. I mean, they hired Budkowski who knows the technical regs and their interpretations better than anyone, and would have been across the precedents of how other teams exploited grey areas in the past. It would be quite bizarre for them to develop a system that is obviously against the rules under his watch - let alone one where an opposition team can (apparently) detect it just by looking at on-boards!

 

If Renault do get any sort of penalty then it will either have been quite the stuff up on Budkowski's part or some typical FIA inconsistency.

 

Alternatively knowledge of the FIA's systems would allow someone to develop a technology that would be illegal but also undetectable by current means.  Rather like the front wings from a few seasons back where flex was prohibited but some teams developed ones where they only flexed at load levels higher than the FIA test.



#256 Talisman

Talisman
  • Member

  • 6,042 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 22 October 2019 - 09:10

This quote from Ricciardo is interesting, if only that it shows that brakes have been an issue for Renault this season - 

 

 

https://racer.com/20...osophy-in-2020/

 

That isn't proof that Renault were running the system they are accused of running.  Its proof that the Renault isn't as good as the Red Bull under braking, probably due to differences in downforce and mechanical grip.  That isn't news.

 

On a different note I agree with those who claim that the FIA's decision will be affected by Renault's future in F1.  Of all the manufacturers involved their future is by far the shakiest especially since McLaren has now moved on for 2021 to Mercedes and with the infighting at the top of the corporate structure and with the future of the Nissan alliance still not fully secure.  None of us know the seriousness of the allegations and whether it would ordinarily be punished by having more than the points scored at Suzuka stripped away but the likelihood of Renault pulling out rises the harsher the penalty.  Losing a manufacturer would affect the value of the sport massively so all stakeholders including the low ranking teams would eventually pay the price for a Renault withdrawal.

 

While we are no longer in Max's world of politically targeted penalties I suspect the FIA will be under a lot of pressure to look away from or simply ignore some of the worst transgressions if any took place.


Edited by Talisman, 22 October 2019 - 09:11.


#257 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 36,052 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 22 October 2019 - 09:19

That isn't proof that Renault were running the system they are accused of running. Its proof that the Renault isn't as good as the Red Bull under braking, probably due to differences in downforce and mechanical grip. That isn't news.

On a different note I agree with those who claim that the FIA's decision will be affected by Renault's future in F1. Of all the manufacturers involved their future is by far the shakiest especially since McLaren has now moved on for 2021 to Mercedes and with the infighting at the top of the corporate structure and with the future of the Nissan alliance still not fully secure. None of us know the seriousness of the allegations and whether it would ordinarily be punished by having more than the points scored at Suzuka stripped away but the likelihood of Renault pulling out rises the harsher the penalty. Losing a manufacturer would affect the value of the sport massively so all stakeholders including the low ranking teams would eventually pay the price for a Renault withdrawal.

While we are no longer in Max's world of politically targeted penalties I suspect the FIA will be under a lot of pressure to look away from or simply ignore some of the worst transgressions if any took place.

Dangerous precedent to set though. If they look away from something serious now, what excuse would they have to punish another team in the future?

#258 Talisman

Talisman
  • Member

  • 6,042 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 22 October 2019 - 09:26

Dangerous precedent to set though. If they look away from something serious now, what excuse would they have to punish another team in the future?

 

Reasons can always be found.

 

After all three different teams were found to have had intellectual property from another team back in 2007, only two were investigated by the FIA and only one found guilty of using that material and punished.  IIRC the two engineers at the heart of the Toyota incident were found guilty in a civil court but that wasn't proof enough for the FIA to even take a look.  Renault were found to have had McLaren files which were opened but the FIA claimed that the engineers involved must have averted their eyes at that point.  McLaren on the other hand...



#259 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 36,052 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 22 October 2019 - 09:46

Reasons can always be found.

 

After all three different teams were found to have had intellectual property from another team back in 2007, only two were investigated by the FIA and only one found guilty of using that material and punished.  IIRC the two engineers at the heart of the Toyota incident were found guilty in a civil court but that wasn't proof enough for the FIA to even take a look.  Renault were found to have had McLaren files which were opened but the FIA claimed that the engineers involved must have averted their eyes at that point.  McLaren on the other hand...

 


True, but as you said previously Mosley's crooked dealings are no longer in the mix.

Advertisement

#260 Viryfan

Viryfan
  • Member

  • 2,090 posts
  • Joined: June 12

Posted 22 October 2019 - 10:38

Renault used the system since 2016.

FIA said nothing about it according to autohebdo.

#261 Talisman

Talisman
  • Member

  • 6,042 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 22 October 2019 - 10:45

True, but as you said previously Mosley's crooked dealings are no longer in the mix.

 

Only because Todt is a very different personality.  The mechanisms to alter the judgement are still there.



#262 New Britain

New Britain
  • Member

  • 2,329 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 22 October 2019 - 10:50

Reasons can always be found.

 

After all three different teams were found to have had intellectual property from another team back in 2007, only two were investigated by the FIA and only one found guilty of using that material and punished.  IIRC the two engineers at the heart of the Toyota incident were found guilty in a civil court but that wasn't proof enough for the FIA to even take a look.  Renault were found to have had McLaren files which were opened but the FIA claimed that the engineers involved must have averted their eyes at that point.  McLaren on the other hand...

As you say, reasons can always be found. When was the last time that anything with political implications in Formula One was decided on principle?

The two Toyota engineers who stole the Ferrari data were found guilty in criminal court and given suspended custodial sentences. Mosley claimed that the reason the FIA did not lift a finger against Toyota was that Ferrari had not filed a formal complaint with the FIA. :lol:

I'll say this for old Mosley - he had a heck of a sense of humour. Instead of polluting motor sport for 50 years, he should have made his career as a stand-up comic.



#263 Mohican

Mohican
  • Member

  • 1,606 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 22 October 2019 - 11:01

I have not forgotten that but believe, perhaps naively, that it would be less of an incentive to the lower-ranked teams than the incentive to keep Renault in the sport. In the lower half of the WCC, each upward step is worth roughly $2.5m more in prize money. It's not nothing, but it's not going to make or break any of the teams either. Obviously the ideal situation for the lower teams would be for Renault to lose its points but decide to stay in F1, but that is not the only possible scenario.

 

Agree with you re above, but do not see why you should expect teams to care, or why it is necessarily in the other teams' interest that Renault should stay in F1.

Even if you made the argument re value, the team principals (who are all hired guns, remember) may not see it that way.



#264 Mohican

Mohican
  • Member

  • 1,606 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 22 October 2019 - 11:07

And the FIA need to be careful - in case a rule infringement is proven - not being too lenient on Renault. The owners of the smaller teams may take exception, perceiving that there are different rulebooks for different teams.

 

Gene Haas is already on record as being highly critical over the Force India/Racing Point transformation. Why should he, or the owners of Toro Rosso, Alfa Romeo Racing, Racing Point (who are the ones protesting) or Williams be overly receptive to FIA mollycoddling ? And why should they feel secure in committing to a business environment that does not commit to them ?

 

Whose present is really important for F1 ? A corporate-owned team or the independents ? Just asking...



#265 New Britain

New Britain
  • Member

  • 2,329 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 23 October 2019 - 01:13

And the FIA need to be careful - in case a rule infringement is proven - not being too lenient on Renault. The owners of the smaller teams may take exception, perceiving that there are different rulebooks for different teams.

 

Gene Haas is already on record as being highly critical over the Force India/Racing Point transformation. Why should he, or the owners of Toro Rosso, Alfa Romeo Racing, Racing Point (who are the ones protesting) or Williams be overly receptive to FIA mollycoddling ? And why should they feel secure in committing to a business environment that does not commit to them ?

 

Whose present is really important for F1 ? A corporate-owned team or the independents ? Just asking...

My observation through the years has been that individual teams will moan, groan and sometimes protest about policies, rulings and procedures up to a certain level of importance, but above that level they hang together because there is a tacit if not explicit understanding that nobody's hands are entirely clean, the permanent loss of any competitor detracts from the show, and they're all in it together.

My experience in motor sport is that although occasionally there are intense rivalries, those are more between individuals than between teams. There is so much inter-team movement of staff over time, and even when people are on different teams they often help each other out. Yes, they're all playing to win and will fight to do that, but they're not there to put somebody else out of business and cause 500 of their peers to be made redundant. It's like boxing - you want to beat up your opponent, but at the same time you would do almost anything to avoid killing him.

 

Who is more important to F1: the independents or the corporates? I'd say the independents. I couldn't care less if the four huge corporate-backed constructors left F1 all together.

The thing is - and I don't know if this is a good or bad thing - all the truly global racing series of which I can think (F1, WRC, MotoGP, WEC) feature teams owned by huge corporations. Perhaps they are a necessary, or at least an inescapable, evil.



#266 RA2

RA2
  • Member

  • 1,254 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 23 October 2019 - 06:22

My observation through the years has been that individual teams will moan, groan and sometimes protest about policies, rulings and procedures up to a certain level of importance, but above that level they hang together because there is a tacit if not explicit understanding that nobody's hands are entirely clean, the permanent loss of any competitor detracts from the show, and they're all in it together.

My experience in motor sport is that although occasionally there are intense rivalries, those are more between individuals than between teams. There is so much inter-team movement of staff over time, and even when people are on different teams they often help each other out. Yes, they're all playing to win and will fight to do that, but they're not there to put somebody else out of business and cause 500 of their peers to be made redundant. It's like boxing - you want to beat up your opponent, but at the same time you would do almost anything to avoid killing him.

 

 

 

But I do hope that this episode is serious enough for the top management at Renault Sport be changed.

 

Cyril Abiteboul is too good a manager to be wasted in F1 by Renault. They should have him attend to some more serious issues like liaison with Nissan. 



#267 Quickshifter

Quickshifter
  • Member

  • 4,361 posts
  • Joined: April 15

Posted 23 October 2019 - 12:32

Not much time left for decision i guess as cars will be undergoing scrutineering on Thursday.

#268 New Britain

New Britain
  • Member

  • 2,329 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 23 October 2019 - 13:04

But I do hope that this episode is serious enough for the top management at Renault Sport be changed.

 

Cyril Abiteboul is too good a manager to be wasted in F1 by Renault. They should have him attend to some more serious issues like liaison with Nissan. 

I am confused by the two parts of your post.

 

You hope that the episode is serious enough - by which one presumes you mean that you hope the alleged violation was egregious enough - that in reaction to it Renault S.A. will change the top management of Renault Sport.

You then suggest that, if such a change were made, the person who was responsible for the alleged violation and, if it had existed, would certainly have been aware of and approved it, should be promoted by Renault S.A. and given much broader responsibilities than only running their racing team.

 

I understand the first wish and I understand the second wish, but I am afraid I do not understand the logic of why the second would follow the first. Could you please explain? :)



#269 restless

restless
  • Member

  • 565 posts
  • Joined: August 15

Posted 23 October 2019 - 13:53

Oh, but I understand his wish very well :rotfl:


Edited by restless, 23 October 2019 - 13:53.


#270 BRG

BRG
  • Member

  • 17,076 posts
  • Joined: September 99

Posted 23 October 2019 - 17:53

I'll say this for old Mosley - he had a heck of a sense of humour. Instead of polluting motor sport for 50 years, he should have made his career as a stand-up comic.

Well, he did stand as a candidate for Parliament, which would have been a career as a stand-up, if the current mob of MPs is anything to go by.

 

I understand the first wish and I understand the second wish, but I am afraid I do not understand the logic of why the second would follow the first. Could you please explain? :)

Have you not heard of the principle of 'kicking him upstairs'?  Very common way to move an unpopular or unsuccessful manager.  Instead of sacking him, which is difficult and potentially expensive, they promote him to somewhere that doesn't matter.  Mind you, maybe that was how he ended up at Enstone in the first place.



#271 FNG

FNG
  • Member

  • 4,738 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 23 October 2019 - 18:26

Renault are cheating and they still suck?



#272 Laster

Laster
  • Member

  • 2,025 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 23 October 2019 - 19:25

https://mobile.twitt...085724799115264
- AMuS saying hearing has been held and will hear from them soon.

Edited by Laster, 23 October 2019 - 19:26.


#273 Brawn BGP 001

Brawn BGP 001
  • Member

  • 4,113 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 23 October 2019 - 19:32

Riccardo & Hulkenberg DSQ

https://www.fia.com/...nese-grand-prix


Edited by Brawn BGP 001, 23 October 2019 - 19:32.


#274 Viryfan

Viryfan
  • Member

  • 2,090 posts
  • Joined: June 12

Posted 23 October 2019 - 19:46

The car is legal but the use made out of it is not....

 

Legendary call.

 

:rotfl:  :rotfl:  :rotfl:

 

I guess we will hear a lot of complaints about cars from now on.

 

The pandora box is open.



#275 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 36,052 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 23 October 2019 - 19:47

Riccardo & Hulkenberg DSQ

https://www.fia.com/...nese-grand-prix

 


So they don't care how many other races were affected by this driver aid.

#276 Laster

Laster
  • Member

  • 2,025 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 23 October 2019 - 19:47

Well that is a bad look for Renault. I like to give the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise, and reading through that I get the sense someone was trying to be clever and trying to dance along the boundaries of the walls - only to trip and go flying over the edge. Someone at Renault is in for a bollocking.

#277 Viryfan

Viryfan
  • Member

  • 2,090 posts
  • Joined: June 12

Posted 23 October 2019 - 19:50

So they don't care how many other races were affected by this driver aid.

 

The call in itself is a joke.

 

If we go by this thinking, Brawn GP,Williams and Toyota should've been disqualified in 2009.

 

I'm pretty sure that under Whiting ruling it would've been allowed.



#278 TomNokoe

TomNokoe
  • Member

  • 21,219 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 23 October 2019 - 19:52

Wow. Puts Toro Rosso within touching distance of P5. That would be a phenomenal achievement.

#279 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 20,467 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 23 October 2019 - 19:52

From the team that brought you Option 13, which they had on the car but didn’t use, promise.

 

It’s a confusing decision. The system is apparently legal, but because it’s a driver aid it isn’t.



Advertisement

#280 richardprice

richardprice
  • Member

  • 70 posts
  • Joined: June 19

Posted 23 October 2019 - 19:53

Typical “was legal but we need to look tough and punish you anyways” outcome using one of F1s many many catch all “you won’t know if you’ve broken it until we punish you for it” rules...

#281 Viryfan

Viryfan
  • Member

  • 2,090 posts
  • Joined: June 12

Posted 23 October 2019 - 19:56

Results from now on will look very provisional....



#282 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 20,467 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 23 October 2019 - 20:02

Results from now on will look very provisional....

 

Not any more than with similar strange disqualifications.



#283 ali.unal

ali.unal
  • Member

  • 4,736 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 23 October 2019 - 20:02

"Breaking system was legal and could be implemented. All the driver had to do was use; and as soon as he did, the system would no longer be legal and would have to be illegal as a driver aid. The driver would be crazy to use an illegal driver aid and sane if he didn't, but if he were sane he had to use them. If he used them it was illegal and didn't have to use, but if he didn't want to the system was legal and he had to use it. Hulkenberg was moved very deeply by the absolute simplicity of this clause of Catch-22 and let out a respectful whistle."

Edited by ali.unal, 23 October 2019 - 20:04.


#284 Fastcake

Fastcake
  • Member

  • 9,520 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 23 October 2019 - 20:03

From the team that brought you Option 13, which they had on the car but didn’t use, promise.

 

It’s a confusing decision. The system is apparently legal, but because it’s a driver aid it isn’t.

 

The idea that a system is allowed by the technical regulations but is banned by a sporting reg makes sense to me. It's essentially just saying it doesn't break one rule but does break another one.



#285 Viryfan

Viryfan
  • Member

  • 2,090 posts
  • Joined: June 12

Posted 23 October 2019 - 20:04

Not any more than with similar strange disqualifications.

 

Now you can say that torque maps are acting as traction control so all cars are illegal.



#286 Amz964

Amz964
  • Member

  • 370 posts
  • Joined: August 13

Posted 23 October 2019 - 20:05

Riccardo & Hulkenberg DSQ
https://www.fia.com/...nese-grand-prix


What a joke the FIA says in he article in the technical perspective it's a legal device but the use of it is not! How can they disqualify them for that! I would understand if they told them to reprogram it but to disqualify them makes no sense.

#287 Marklar

Marklar
  • Member

  • 34,204 posts
  • Joined: May 15

Posted 23 October 2019 - 20:06

Schrödingers brake bias adjustment system



#288 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 20,467 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 23 October 2019 - 20:06

The idea that a system is allowed by the technical regulations but is banned by a sporting reg makes sense to me. It's essentially just saying it doesn't break one rule but does break another one.

 

Well it makes a bit more sense from that perspective.



#289 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 20,467 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 23 October 2019 - 20:08

Now you can say that torque maps are acting as traction control so all cars are illegal.

 

No, for two reasons. One is that the torque maps are heavily policed, and two that traction control requires a feedback loop which is impossible with the current ECUs.



#290 Marklar

Marklar
  • Member

  • 34,204 posts
  • Joined: May 15

Posted 23 October 2019 - 20:08

Not any more than with similar strange disqualifications.

Every single engine mode, mapping, etc. can be seen as a driver aid though.

I would have understood this call more if they had deemed to have a system like this illegal in the first place, but the wording opens a can of worms.



#291 Viryfan

Viryfan
  • Member

  • 2,090 posts
  • Joined: June 12

Posted 23 October 2019 - 20:12

No, for two reasons. One is that the torque maps are heavily policed, and two that traction control requires a feedback loop which is impossible with the current ECUs.

 

Torque maps controls power deliver in function of corners, it effectively acts as traction control.



#292 Requiem84

Requiem84
  • Member

  • 6,039 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 23 October 2019 - 20:16

So.. who would be the Renault employee blowing the whistle... ;)

#293 pitlanepalpatine

pitlanepalpatine
  • Member

  • 1,420 posts
  • Joined: March 15

Posted 23 October 2019 - 20:23

Every single engine mode, mapping, etc. can be seen as a driver aid though.

I would have understood this call more if they had deemed to have a system like this illegal in the first place, but the wording opens a can of worms.

 

So which team will be the first one to reintroduce a stick shift and protest the gear paddles I wonder?  :rotfl:

 

Oh wait, the beeps for shifts will have to go too. 


Edited by pitlanepalpatine, 23 October 2019 - 20:28.


#294 JimmyTheFox

JimmyTheFox
  • Member

  • 423 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 23 October 2019 - 20:25

An early post in here says they've ran this system since 2016, so did the sporting regs change since then or have the FIA let them off the hook for running this driver aid for four seasons?

#295 Viryfan

Viryfan
  • Member

  • 2,090 posts
  • Joined: June 12

Posted 23 October 2019 - 20:27

An early post in here says they've ran this system since 2016, so did the sporting regs change since then or have the FIA let them off the hook for running this driver aid for four seasons?

 

Interpretation of the rule changed.


Edited by Viryfan, 23 October 2019 - 20:31.


#296 eREr

eREr
  • Member

  • 1,686 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 23 October 2019 - 20:32

How can be a system legal if it is a driver aid?

#297 Viryfan

Viryfan
  • Member

  • 2,090 posts
  • Joined: June 12

Posted 23 October 2019 - 20:33

How can be a system legal if it is a driver aid?

 

Power steering is a driver aid, paddle shift is a driver aid, torque map is a driver aid....



#298 pitlanepalpatine

pitlanepalpatine
  • Member

  • 1,420 posts
  • Joined: March 15

Posted 23 October 2019 - 20:35

Interpretation of the rule changed.

 

Yup, think it was originally brought in to sort out the whole trackside engineer telling drivers what to do in what corner nonsense but unfortunately the sporting regs on the FIA side only go back as far as 2017.



#299 beachdrifter

beachdrifter
  • Member

  • 5,242 posts
  • Joined: November 17

Posted 23 October 2019 - 20:35

So this is all this amounts to? A loss of a few points? 



Advertisement

#300 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 20,467 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 23 October 2019 - 20:36

Power steering is a driver aid, paddle shift is a driver aid, torque map is a driver aid....

 

The steering wheel and pedals are driver aids at this rate.

 

Edit: That is, the rate of your exaggeration.