Hamilton deserves more respect

The FIA has in the past disqualified teams from the WCC: Tyrrell and McLaren.
They were not classified and had to forfeit their share of the money that season. So it can be done.

"It's the way it has always been" I hate that expression. That's the refuge of those who refuse progress.
F1 has been the object of so many changes, already, that everything should be on the table regarding finding an efficient way of enforcing the rules. Nothing is sacred, and it's better to try something else, than to hold on to traditions.

 

alright cool.

So the janitor is made CTO, the car will run 1200hp and win the race. janitor (sorry, CTO), will be told to go away and the win stands.

This plan is totally flawless.

 

I honestly don't see this as clear cut cheating. Every team runs as low as they can. If the minimum post race is 9.0mm minimum, then they will all be aiming for 9.1mm (or something similar to allow for miscalculation). But then throw in the extra unknown of a track that gets bumpier every year. Track limits painted lines changing in respect to location of curbs, which cause wear. Then add in the sprint race, ambient pressure changing downforce thus spring compression, time spent chasing vs following, rate of fuel burn etc. etc. At some point one or more teams are going to get it wrong. It probably happens every race, but when you are only checking 20% of the cars, people are probably getting lucky every week. And if they are just taking the 'random' four from the points playing places, then what chances are the second half of the grid taking? This track / weekend /sprint format probably pushed their calculations to the extreme, and at least Ferrari and Mercedes got it wrong. And if anyone thinks measuring ride height is easy, they need to brush up on 40 year old F1 history. The FIA tried that in the 80's after skirts were banned, and all the teams (*) found ways to drive F1 car sized holes right through the intent of the rule.

(*) Go check Mario Andretti's comments about his Alfa. The Alfa factory wanted a 100% by the rules and intent car, so they had more ride height all year, despite everyone else running super soft helper springs, wooden wedges (yes really) to hold the springs up in the pits, etc. At the end of the season Mario persuaded them to test at the lower ride height every one was using, and they suddenly found all the time they were lacking.

 

I agree, for whatever reason Mercedes and Ferrari were a fault for not running cars compliant with the rules.
So, they are disqualified from one race ... and that's it ? They get away very lightly, IMO.
The penalty should be more severe, and affecting them where it hurts, like 2 spots down in the WCC ranking for example ?
Technical infringements are taken seriously, or ... forget about them.
From what transpires, among different items, like ride heights are not regularly checked ? WTF ?

 

You are bonkers @Bas, I have to tell you. Everybody knows who the CTOs are.

 

I said "in the matter of not letting them race". In other words, a BAN.

McLaren or its drivers never received any bans from any races for their 2007 scandal.

Post race inspection is mandatory to prevent cheating. This works. They just need to do it with all the cars. If it takes 1 hour or 5 hours, it doesn't matter. If the car fails post race inspection it means the car was not legal for that race, and it's get DQ'd from that race. I'm not sure how that isn't a fair punishment.

 

I don't know who makes the technical rules in F1; I thought they came as a compromise between teams and the FIA technical advisers.
Legislators should have 2 rules: write laws that are enforcable, and then make sure these laws are enforced by establishing a control.
The FIA is good at the former, but found lacking in the later.
It looks like enforcing rules is not taken seriously among the FIA officials, and only acted haphazardly.
No wonder the teams (and the drivers) keep taking a chance.

 

McLaren was disqualified from the championship (WCC), but not forbiden to race. It only affected their share of the monies.
The FIA considered that the drivers were not the guilty party and didn't want to penalise them.
Banning a team from competion is signing its death warrant in some cases, although Max Mosley FIA President considered it.

Same as Michael Schumacher was disqualified from the WDC one season, thus not ranked, but kept his wins that year.

 

yeah. They never change their job.

 

And when they take their competence to another team, they are registered there. Period.

Are you lacking basic common sense, or trying to be contrarian ?

 

I think technical infractions like these merit the driver being forbidden from qualifying and having to start the next race from the pits on a first offense. Second offense, the team is suspended for the next race.

That's more than fair, imho.

 

I am for making a distinction between penalising driving offenses and technical infringements.
In the former case the driver should be punished, for the later it's the team that should bear the consequences.
If a car is set too low, or below weight, the driver isn't responsible, why should he be penalised for that ?
His role is to race in accordance with the racing rules, respect track limits, etc ...

 

no, I'm just poking holes in your idea.

He doesn't even need to go to a new team. He could literally become head of aero and let someone else be the fall guy. That's the point.

 

William, I tend to agree with you the vast majority of the time, but I differ here. I think the penalty was totally appropriate in this case. I don't believe this was a case of setting out to circumvent the rules, I think it's compromise component that's probably very very difficult to model and simulate, especially with a non defined use case (no one knows how much time any one car will spend grinding, especially if damage is done by the curbing). If this was something egregis such as Ferrari or Mercedes having an overcapacity engine, then sure, discuss a year long ban or something, but a wear component that's subject various different conditions and circumstances, then it would be ridiculous.

 

Let's put it another way: each team would have a recognised qualified engineer on its payroll, travelling with the team, nominated as Compliance Technician.
He would be registered with the FIA and charged with checking that the cars fully abide the technical rules before being sent on the track.
Fluent with all the rules, his job would be to watch the preparation, observe the mechanics interventions on the cars, verify the components used and check that all the criteria and measures are met. At the end of his pre-race inspection, he would officially sign off both cars as conform to the technical rules, taking total responsability for any discrepencies found later.

 

If it's only about the wear and tear of a consumable component on the cars, liable to affect some but not others on different tracks, what is the point of having its measurement included in the "random" post-race checks? In that case it's totally ridiculous.
Replace the wooden plank by a more durable material that will not wear out during a GP. Or, stop checking the ride height of cars, and let them scrape the track all they want. It's the inconsistency that irritate me.

 

They are called "designers".

 

boffin I do not claim the paternity of that expression; I only replied to it.

See @Bas who introduced it in his post #8120.

 

Uh, I'll take Contrarian for $1,000... Alex

 

I'll ask again.

Was there, in fact, a "triggered sensor" that led to the investigation or was this just a random inspection?
I can find no article that suggests the FIA singled out Mercedes and Ferrari due to "plank sensors" data as SS454 has suggested.

 

but it's not wear and tear of a consumable.

It's wear and tear of a part specifically mandated to check the legality of the car during the race...I don't understand why this is so hard for you.

You're acting like cars get DSQ'ed for plank illegalities all the time. When was the last time this actually happened? The last I can truly recall is Schumacher in 94. There may have been one or two since then but less than 5 cases in 29 years, does that really require a revamp to the rules? Of course not.

The plank is not wood btw. It's Permaglass. I really don't think you grasp the concept of why that plank is there.

There is no inconsistency regarding the plank wear. You exceed wear, it's a slam dunk penalty.

 

Where can I cash it? Just because I disagree with his insane notion that a team should have a season DSQ for plank wear?

 

Alreay posted on this very thread but here you go for a second time:

How the disqualifications of Hamilton and Leclerc sting a hornet's nest (motorsport-total.com)

I'll even highlight the important bit for you:

Following the sensational reappearance of porpoising in the wake of the introduction of ground-effect cars in 2022, the FIA is now also measuring vertical vibrations in the car to ensure drivers are not put at risk by vibration. If a car attracts attention due to excessive movements, the Technical Delegate will carry out further investigations.

 

Disqualifying a team for a whole season for an irregular plank wear on a bumpy track is absolute nonsense.
William is joking I’m sure.

 

Why should either team be disqualified for the whole season when Ferrari wasn't even disqualified for their engine a few years back?