The FIA Stewards have ruled on the question of Red Bull’s ECU data after meeting with the team and its engine supplier Renault.
“While the stewards do not accept all the arguments of the team, they however conclude that as the regulation is written, the map presented does not breach the text of Artcile 5.5.3 of the Formula One Technical Regulations, and therefore decide to take no further action.”
Thus it would seem, reading between the lines, that the rules need tightening to allow for breaches in spirit as well as in text.
No doubt that will happen, but one has to say that this must be seen as a victory for Red Bull. The problem is that unless a rule change comes quickly, everyone will soon be doing the same thing.
Hes is a crafty man that Newey!
Its interesting following Charlie Whiting on twitter, getting his take on it.
The FIA need to recruit a top professor of engineering.
Weakness in enforcing regulations hurts everyone in F1. The FIA need to increase the “brain power” element to stay on top of shoddy tactics, and it’s sad when a fine engineer like Newey decides to take on the ethics of the shifty cockney stall-holder and the cockney cabby to make progress [sorry to cockney friends, but you will know exactly what I mean]
Now that, I agree with!
In my opinion the FIA should make the rules less complex. The tighter the rules are, the higher the possibility of loopholes. It’s impossible for the FIA to close every loophole right out of the box (even with more brain power, I assume they have plenty already), and I think it’s quite sad that (seemingly) every bit of creative engineering is stomped down every time. It kind of ridicules the sport.
What’s the reason engine mapping is no longer allowed anyway? It’s not a safety issue, is it?
They need someone who has been a race car engineer to write the rules. Such as Newey. Although I suspect they must have such a person in place already.
As for Newey taking on poor ethics. If he didn’t sit on the knife edge of legality and look for every nuance of the rules to find loopholes and advantages he would be out of a job. It’s what he (and all other F1 chief designers) are employed for, and always have been. Look at the history of his cars, and people like Gordon Murray.
You think they don’t have that?
ROFL re Charlie.
Charlie and twitter together – seems apt somehow.
I suspect the other teams are going to throw a fit over this.
However, perhaps just shows the determination of RBR to push every possible boundary and loophole?
Maybe the other teams are playing too safe.
No, they will just do the same. Or the FIA will close the loophole
Joe, the Jo Bauer letter mention the regulation 5.5.3 and also a TD. The Stewards only mention the regulation yet they seem to possibly relate to two issues – one relates to TC and the other to EBD.
Whats your take on that aspect? Seems the stewards have ignored the TD – why would that be?
Like most contracts (or regulations) its the text not the spirit that will be enforced.
But the question of the day centres around whether BE made it in the end or is cowering in some dark corner somewhere?
German media say he wasn’t there….
Yeah… I’d like to know why more comment is not being made of the non-show of Bernie Ecclestone to Hockenheim GP this weekend? Did he have second thoughts about fronting for further investigation interview in Germany? Or perhaps less inclined in making it easy for possible ‘German Remand into Custody’ scenarios, however unlikely, just to be safe? JF
Why the outrage (by some) over this? I call it creative engineering, pushing the limits of the regulations to maximum benefit. If it’s not legal, declare it so.
I think this torque/traction control was somewhat in evidence in Sebs “illegal” pass on Button. The overhead replay we saw showed Seb’s RB literally rocket away from Button, and he was on the painted concrete part of the track.
I’m a simple soul, and can’t understand why the rules for exhausts do not just demand a pair of round pipes, running horizontal for the last couple of feet of their length, positioned one on each side of the rear light, with no part of the car behind them. Job done.
I agree with you, but this discussion relates to the torque in the engine mapping, not the positioning of the exhaust pipes.
Bauer’s report includes the sentence “Furthermore this new torque map will artificially alter the aerodynamic characteristics of both cars which is also in contravention on TD 036-11.”
This clearly refers to off throttle blowing, and my point is that this whole technology could be avoided by making it impossible for the exhaust outlets to point at any part of the car.
In my simple opinion.
…but the reason for the strange engine mapping appears to be so that more gas can flow through those exhaust pipes to help blow the diffuser. So it’s applicable.
Well the nearest we have got to that is the last 4 inches of pipe must be circular and pointing a bit upwards and a bit outwards. Unfortunately the intent of the regs was not achieved. The intent was to stop diffuser blowing.
There is a clear mistake in the wording of one part regarding the visibility of the pipe.
The intent was to stop exhaust blowing, off throttle, but instead of tackling the means of achieving this, it is maybe time to reverse the rules by saying “It is forbidden to utilise any means which may be construed as that intended to increase exhaust flow,” or “it is forbidden to use exhaust gasses for any aerodynamic purpose”. In other word forbid the effect, not the means.
Yes, but the exhaust IS going to have some effect, no matter what is done with it. There are a lot of hot gases exiting the engine and to say they can’t have any aerodynamic effect is silly. They have to go somewhere and interact with something.
I think it’s worth noting that any advantage gained by the mapping is arguably marginal at the moment. If Red Bull showed the same domination as 2011 with Vettel, then it might have been a different outcome. But Red Bull is leading the constructors championship largely based on consistent points scoring by Webber and Vettel rather than locking up 1-2 finishes everywhere due to a substantial boost from their mapping.
No matter who you are a fan of, this, AGAIN, makes a joke of the FIA. It doesn’t matter who is ‘right’ or ‘wrong’, it matters that the FIA cannot clarify anything. As in “duh we cannot rule on this because duh there isn’t a rule on it duh”.
The sounds of the engine were noticed by mere spectators MONTHS ago. Now they look at it – in order to (as they knew they would say months ago) there isn’t a rule on it. So maybe they will make one. Sometime. When they get round to it.
Perhaps a certain someone is delaying a resolution to this, to ensure that Vettel can battle Alonso to the end of the WDC in order to ensure viewing figures etc.?
Crikey! Conspiracy alert!!
Did Red Bull ever say whether they used the controversial maps in the race?
Given that the FIA left the issue of legality somewhat undecided, one doubts Red Bull would have risked a post-race protest. Still, I haven’t seen any team quotes clarifying their actions.
This map was found recently. Apparently they used it in Germany (there’s been no question that it was used, just the legality of the map itself).
There is nothing in 5.5.3 that states that a linear relationship is required from 0-100% throttle. This one will be interesting. Teams don’t use linear maps and they are all different (or can be anyway). So odds are someone is going to be compromised by this. I see another hot/cold blowing saga like last year (changing their minds three times in a week).
Teams can have various maps that they use, right (i.e. Dry/wet? I believe they removed the quali/race mapping last year)?
After a bit of searching, I found a post-race interview with Christian Horner where he strongly suggests Red Bull *did* in fact run the controversial maps during the race
This cannot bode well for Red Bull, as even with the maps they were only on par with Ferrari and McLaren. Now that the FIA has decided to disallow those maps going forward, Red Bull should definitely be down a step to their German GP performance, especially for this weekend’s Hungarian round. There is simply too little time for them to adapt in any meaningful way.