Sauber has announced its intention to appeal against the exclusion of its two cars from the Australian GP.
- Comment
-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
Joe Saward writes about F1 and the world
Sauber has announced its intention to appeal against the exclusion of its two cars from the Australian GP.
joeblogsf1 
FiA back to the good old days… Why so late after the race ?
sombrero,
These things take time. There was the technical inspection, then a report, then a hearing and then a decision. It is better that it is done properly than rushed so I would argue that your criticism is unnecessary.
Why was an external measurement infraction like Sauber’s not caught in scruteneering (pre-race technical inspection), or is that process a thing of the past?
There is also the question as to why it wasn’t caught in scrutineering on Thursday. Perhaps a team behind saw the chance to pick up some points by protesting anything it could think of? Now lessee, who finished 11th and 12th…
Looking at all reports that has come out about this issue, I can guess at the following:
1. The wing that went through scrutineering at the start of the event, was not the one raced. Sauber say that they have tested all other configurations brought to the GP and they all pass. They do admit that the wings used, do not conform to the test.
2. I believe that you have to lodge a notice of appeal within a certain time frame, so Sauber have done that and will investigate the cause & effect in the interim, as a hearing won’t be for at least 3 weeks, on past timings from the FIA. That gives them plenty of time to withdraw their appeal, if they can’t see a likely successful outcome
3. I don’t think that conspiracies of other teams are very likely, as this would be covered in post race check on every car. If my first point is close to correct, that would explain it.
As Joe said, rules are rules. The FIA didn’t really had any other option.
I wonder how this will reflect on Sauber’s Technical Director James Key, as he’s ultimately responsible for this disaster.
He was hailed like a Superstar when he arrived last season, but this surely put a black mark on his CV?
F430-FOX
Not at all. These things happen. It was a mistake. We all make mistakes.
The scruteneering carried out before the race only covers the basics. If a car then finishes in the top 10 (i.e. in the points) then they are automatically put through further scruteneering to check the car for all rules, which is time consuming. This means the FIA only have to do the detailed inspection on the cars that matter in terms of championship points.
I’m gutted that Sauber was DSQ’d but rules are rules. I know for a fact that a simple modification to amend a small oversight will make the rear flap legal and the cars will be back with the same performance in Kuala Lumpur, which has to be said was impressive this weekend!
A small thing on scrutineering, as funnily enough I was following the local scrutineers on the weekend for an hour or so.
Firstly, there are two levels of scrutineers. There are the FIA ones, who check the technical details (wing shape and other things along those lines) and locally supplied ones, in this case CAMS (Confederation of Australian Motor Sport). The CAMS scrutineers initially check the safety details (race suits, wheel tethers, fire extinguishers, cockpit size, etc) before the cars turn a wheel (by 4pm on the Thursday – there is a 6 hour window). The FIA scrutineers are able to do random checks but generally don’t do a lot until after Practice 2.
The teams are able to go to the FIA scrutineering area (one of the garages on pit lane) and get the car checked to make sure it’s legal, mostly weight (and weight distribution for this year).
There are usually some checks after qualifying (top 3 plus some randoms) as well. After the race there are even more checks. All cars are weighed and numerous areas are checked for legality. It’s not every single rule that’s checked each time but the teams don’t know what will be checked.
The rule that Sauber are said to have broken is using a new test with a template for the wing.
The local scrutineers have another job. For each garage, there are 2 assigned. They both watch the teams and make sure that there isn’t anything fishy. Basically if a gearbox is pulled apart that everything goes back in again. If a bolt is removed, the same bolt goes back. Everything is noted down for FIA review. They also check to make sure the correct tyres are put on and taken off each car.
I believe the FIA can check any part of the car at any time, but they do not have to check every millimetre of all cars in scrutineering. There must have been a reason for them to have checked the radii on the rear wings, quite often it may be because it just does not look right. This may be hard to understand for non-engineers but it is quite normal for us lot to be able to look at things and just tell that they look slightly different. This is emphasised when you have already looked at 19 other cars roughly the same. The other part is luck, it is quite possible that no one ,may have noticed that the wing Sauber actually used was a tiny bit different to the others they had brought along. and Sauber would have got away with it.
My college once designed a part that was used for many years by two customers in SA but then one day a new potential customer in Europe pointed out that it failed UK external protrusion regs..
Joe
I understand adrian newey and another tech director raised objections about the sauber wing after a grid walk. Did you hear anything on that?
Andy c,
I did not hear that.
Hi Joe,
What are your thoughts on the decision to disqualify the Sauber’s over a seemingly minor infringement?
Matt,
Rules are rules.
Rules are rules. It’s a joke : think about “Felippe, Fernando is faster than you”.
Rules are not rules for everyone… Especially the big teams.
Sombrero,
You are living in the past. The rules have changed.