News

Renault cheating?

Discussion in 'F1' started by TheMayor, Oct 17, 2019.

  1. daytona355

    daytona355 F1 World Champ
    BANNED

    Mar 25, 2009
    12,120
    London
    Full Name:
    Sid Korshak
    Renault excluded from the results in Japan.... any more fallout expected?
     
  2. william

    william F1 World Champ

    Jun 3, 2006
    14,335
    England
    Full Name:
    William Denoyelles
    Both Renault cars are disqualified from Japanese Grand Prix result

    http://www.gptoday.com/full_story/view/698928/BREAKING_Both_Renault_cars_are_disqualified_from_Japanese_Grand_Prix_result/

    Renault have been disqualified from the Japanese Grand Prix after an FIA investigation into their braking system. Both Daniel Ricciardo and Nico Hulkenberg's result from the race has been removed. This process was initiated by a Racing Point protest.

    Renault's result from the Japanese Grand Prix will not stand after the FIA have disqualified the team as a result of an illegal braking system. The FIA determined Renault's braking system “constitutes a driving aid and is, therefore, not in compliance with Article 27.1 [of the] FIA Formula 1 Sporting Regulations”.

    “The brake balance adjustment system in questions acts as a driver aid, by saving the driver from having to make a number of adjustments during a lap. The stewards note that there is a clear distinction between this system and one which provides actual feedback control, which would be a substitute for driver skills or reflexes. Nevertheless, it is still an aid and, therefore, contravenes [the regulations].”

    Renault recorded a double-points finish in Japan. This result has now been void. Ricciardo finished sixth as Hulkenberg finished in 10th place, therefore, the French team will lose nine points in the F1 world championship opening the gap between themselves and McLaren to 43 points.

    Renault have the opportunity to appeal the decision. They will get until 10am Central Daylight Time, the local time in Mexico City, on October 24th 2019. The decision was made after an FIA hearing which was held in Geneva on Wednesday.
     
    DF1 likes this.
  3. william

    william F1 World Champ

    Jun 3, 2006
    14,335
    England
    Full Name:
    William Denoyelles
    It has been mentioned that, according to FIA documents, it was a Renault staff who blew the whistle by telling Racing Point.
     
  4. daytona355

    daytona355 F1 World Champ
    BANNED

    Mar 25, 2009
    12,120
    London
    Full Name:
    Sid Korshak
    it says that in the above fia technical memo
     
    stavura likes this.
  5. Nortonious

    Nortonious Formula Junior

    Sep 20, 2018
    733
    TX
    Yep. I just read through it a couple of times. Former Renault employee tips off Racing Point who then files the protest.

    The system was legal from a technical standpoint, but a violation due to being a driver's aid (as others had postulated earlier in this thread).
     
    daytona355 likes this.
  6. Igor Ound

    Igor Ound F1 Veteran

    Sep 30, 2012
    7,076
    The Horn
    Full Name:
    Igor Ound
    Racing point chose the right race to protest. Gained 4 racing points
     
    pilotoCS, stavura, 375+ and 2 others like this.
  7. DF1

    DF1 F1 World Champ
    Rossa Subscribed

    Apr 10, 2007
    16,421
    BaWü
    https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/146769/renault-considering-its-f1-future-amid-major-review

    Renault has admitted that its future in Formula 1 will be considered as part of a major strategic review it is about to embark on.

    As the French car manufacturer bids to turn around a fall in revenue and move on from the disruption caused by the arrest of former Renault-Nissan alliance boss Carlos Ghosn last year, it will examine all aspects of its business.

    During a conference call with investors on Friday, interim CEO Clotilde Delbos made clear that although she was not specifically targeting Renault's F1 programme, the firm's grand prix activities would fall under the spotlight of a review that was about to begin.

    Key to its long term ambitions will be to analyse the 'Drive the Future' strategy that had been implemented by Ghosn back in 2017, and that could now be changed if Renault feels it no longer suits its needs.

    Asked whether Renault would consider stopping non-essential activities such as F1 and its Alpine brand, Delbos said: "I am not specifically targeting those two activities that you mentioned but clearly the review of the 'Drive the Future' plans means that we put on the table [everything].
     
  8. Igor Ound

    Igor Ound F1 Veteran

    Sep 30, 2012
    7,076
    The Horn
    Full Name:
    Igor Ound
    They can still stay on as engine suppliers. Lol
     
  9. Nembo1777

    Nembo1777 F1 Veteran

    Nov 4, 2006
    5,382
    opposite lock
    Full Name:
    Marc Sonnery
    Yep consider them gone, the social(ist) pressure is too strong in France and Renault has too many problems right now.

    This is deja vu all over gain cf when in the 80's Renault team boss Gerard Larrousse wanted Lauda for the team, Niki was all for it but there was a leak about the pending contract and suddenly the factory unions were howling this Austrian will get the equivalent of HOW MANY worker salaries?!...exit Lauda before he was in. Poor Daniel and little Ocon soon to be unemployed...
     
    daytona355 and LVP488 like this.
  10. william

    william F1 World Champ

    Jun 3, 2006
    14,335
    England
    Full Name:
    William Denoyelles
    Renault says braking system was used before this season

    https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/renault-convinced-breaking-system-legal/4586477/

    The Renault Formula 1 team acknowledges its now-illegal braking system was a driver aid but was "absolutely convinced" of its legitimacy because it was introduced before this season.

    Renault was disqualified from the Japanese Grand Prix after a detailed investigation by the FIA led to a decision this week that the team was utilising a braking system that adhered to technical regulations but combined to facilitate a sporting regulations breach.

    The French manufacturer opted not to appeal the decision but stands by the system, and team boss Cyril Abiteboul explained Renault had not sought clearance from the FIA for the design itself because "it's a technology that's been used for a while".

    "Another party [Racing Point] has decided to ask for an opinion," he said.
    "The normal course would have been to ask the FIA to issue a technical directive, or to engage a discussion with us directly, not in the context of a race, not through the stewards. In that case we could have the opportunity to change.

    "Before that event of Suzuka, there was never such discussion or speculation regarding the legality of our system.
    "[Approaching the FIA] is not something we've done because we were absolutely convinced, as further demonstrated, that we were legal. And we were legal from a technical perspective."

    Abiteboul accepted that "it is a driver aid, but a number of things are a driver aid", highlighting automatic energy recovery system deployment as an example.
    "At some point you need to accept there is an element of subjectivity [in the rules]," he added.
    "It's been used since so many years that we never thought it could be put into question until what happened presently."
    Asked specifically how long Renault has used the system, he replied: "I don't want to go into details but it's not from this season. It's from before."

    Abiteboul admitted that Renault needs to have stronger processes when establishing the legality of its ideas.
    "Let's not forget it's the second time we're having a situation like this season, which is two times too many," he said.

    When announcing their verdict, the stewards wrote that Renault had exploited grey areas in the technical rules but not committed a breach, and it was the combined effect of the system that amounted to a driver aid they deemed unacceptable.
    However, Abiteboul said it was important for Renault to be cleared of any wrongdoing per the technical regulations, and suggested the team had fallen foul of a contradiction of rules that are "getting more and more complex".
    "We do not deny it is a form of driver aid," he said. "Not to make the car faster, but to reduce the workload of the drivers.

    "It was always going to be a bit of a subjective assessment as to how far it is aiding the driver and whether it's acceptable or not.
    "The stewards have judged it's not acceptable. So be it. For me it's harsh on the team. It's also even harsher on the drivers because I think it's a very poor recognition of what they are doing.
    "It's shedding a negative light on what they are doing, the way they are performing in the car.
    "We will see this weekend, we will have the competitiveness we have – it's independent of whatever braking system we have or not."

    [​IMG]


    By his own admission, Abiteboul accepts that Renault has used the "illegal" brake balance system for some time, without being detected.
    His rather cavalier attitude is that if you don't ask, you are not told about the illegality of a new technical solution, therefore it's permitted !
    Renault is lucky to escape a complete disqualification for this year, IMO.
     
  11. BartonWorkman

    BartonWorkman F1 Veteran
    Sponsor Silver Subscribed

    Nov 3, 2003
    5,700
    En El 305
    Full Name:
    Barton Workman
    william likes this.
  12. Igor Ound

    Igor Ound F1 Veteran

    Sep 30, 2012
    7,076
    The Horn
    Full Name:
    Igor Ound
    They got off very lightly. If it was based on GPS could have been very easily and accurately influenced by speed too. Nowhere near as rudimental as manual adjustments.
     
  13. Simon^2

    Simon^2 F1 World Champ

    Oct 17, 2005
    11,598
    At Sea Level
    Yup. Typical FIA. Not even close to evenhanded. How they didn't have all their points for the year stripped is beyond me. Any other team would likely have incurred a HUGE fine as well.

    The FIA knows Renault has one foot out the door,... and didn't want to give them a push. I wonder how much input Liberty got in the matter...
     
    stavura, william, daytona355 and 2 others like this.
  14. Kiwi Nick

    Kiwi Nick Formula 3

    Jun 13, 2014
    1,236
    Durango, CO
    Full Name:
    Jeff
    This affords Renault the opportunity to turn its attention to the future and focus on electric cars.
     
    william likes this.
  15. GrigioGuy

    GrigioGuy Splenda Daddy
    Global Moderator Owner

    Nov 26, 2001
    23,254
    E ' ' '/ F
    Full Name:
    Yes, I have one
    IMHO, if the system is technically legal, then it's fair game. Everything -could- be considered a driver aid. Should we eliminate flappy paddles and rear view mirrors as well? They "aid" the driver.

    70 zillion dollars to run a F1 team, and you get treated like this. No wonder they're on the way out. Why stay in a biased series?
     
    Nembo1777 and daytona355 like this.
  16. william

    william F1 World Champ

    Jun 3, 2006
    14,335
    England
    Full Name:
    William Denoyelles

    I think it's just an interpretation of the rules about driver's aid, that the FIA don't want the other teams to emulate.
    So they killed the idea before other teams start to adopt it.
     
  17. LVP488

    LVP488 F1 Rookie

    Jan 21, 2017
    2,766
    France
    But in that case they could have put it as clarifying for the future without penalising the team, it's been done before.
     
    daytona355 and william like this.
  18. william

    william F1 World Champ

    Jun 3, 2006
    14,335
    England
    Full Name:
    William Denoyelles

    Yes, they could have, but the FIA works in mysterious ways ...
     
  19. daytona355

    daytona355 F1 World Champ
    BANNED

    Mar 25, 2009
    12,120
    London
    Full Name:
    Sid Korshak
    If Mercedes had done it, of course it would have been deemed legal for copying later, and no penalties applied, but it’s one of the nine other teams, so they are there to be ****ed by the FIA. Typical
     
    Nembo1777, fil and stavura like this.

Share This Page