More FIA Dice Rolling-FRIC Suspension to be Banned
Discussion
Mercedes have basically played Charlie and the complainants at their own game, good for them. I hope that they do protest any car running FRIC and still beat the rest of them.
I'm quite surprised they are able to remove the system from the car and still be confident of good performance, maybe they've had a backup non FRIC system ready to go for some time ?
I'm quite surprised they are able to remove the system from the car and still be confident of good performance, maybe they've had a backup non FRIC system ready to go for some time ?
Its really easy to figure out who is behind this. Ferrari and Red Bull and Lotus have good FRIC systems. The customer teams will never protest against the factory teams. Lotus could have done but they are trying to get a Mercedes deal so they would be so stupid to protest against them. Marussia also has a FRIC system so they wouldn't protest against it. That leaves the odd one out that is McLaren. They are out of contract with Mercedes so they have no alliances in the paddock. Also we all know that has been the worse car under braking and over bumps and kerbs for the past 3 seasons.
This is Ron Denis's parting "gift" to Mercedes for stealing Hamilton, Lowe and Hugo Boss. It's sad the FIA is trying to push for a in season ban. This a big part of development off a lot teams, if you wan't to get rid of something such substantial why not include it in the regulation changes for 2015... We are going from F1 to FIA1 if the FIA is starting to play a crucial role each season.....
This is Ron Denis's parting "gift" to Mercedes for stealing Hamilton, Lowe and Hugo Boss. It's sad the FIA is trying to push for a in season ban. This a big part of development off a lot teams, if you wan't to get rid of something such substantial why not include it in the regulation changes for 2015... We are going from F1 to FIA1 if the FIA is starting to play a crucial role each season.....
QROPS said:
Its really easy to figure out who is behind this. Ferrari and Red Bull and Lotus have good FRIC systems. The customer teams will never protest against the factory teams. Lotus could have done but they are trying to get a Mercedes deal so they would be so stupid to protest against them. Marussia also has a FRIC system so they wouldn't protest against it. That leaves the odd one out that is McLaren. They are out of contract with Mercedes so they have no alliances in the paddock. Also we all know that has been the worse car under braking and over bumps and kerbs for the past 3 seasons.
This is Ron Denis's parting "gift" to Mercedes for stealing Hamilton, Lowe and Hugo Boss. It's sad the FIA is trying to push for a in season ban. This a big part of development off a lot teams, if you wan't to get rid of something such substantial why not include it in the regulation changes for 2015... We are going from F1 to FIA1 if the FIA is starting to play a crucial role each season.....
I like your logic but do you really think Ron and McLaren have that much clout any more? Are the FIA that happy to have Honda back?This is Ron Denis's parting "gift" to Mercedes for stealing Hamilton, Lowe and Hugo Boss. It's sad the FIA is trying to push for a in season ban. This a big part of development off a lot teams, if you wan't to get rid of something such substantial why not include it in the regulation changes for 2015... We are going from F1 to FIA1 if the FIA is starting to play a crucial role each season.....
Gaz. said:
As I mentioned in an earlier post, I don't think Mclaren's beef is with Mercedes, I think they need to leapfrog Force India & Williams. They should be giving them both a pasting when until now they have had a hell of a job to keep up on merit. It'd be even worse had Perez & Massa not have had their collision in Canada.
I understand the motives for Mclaren, I just don't understand the FIA ruling FRIC illegal nor them giving Mclaren the time of day as they don't usually.
Ferrari- I hear mixed reports/opinions about them. The car is clearly an animal yet many commentators have said that their FRIC system is as advanced as anyones.
IMO Caterham have slit their own throats if they vote for the ban, they have a lot of Red Bull Technology on that car and this ban is going to hit RBR harder than anyone and may stop selling Caterham their fancier toys.
I concur, I also don't believe that they have issues with Mercedes, just issues with their current standings.I understand the motives for Mclaren, I just don't understand the FIA ruling FRIC illegal nor them giving Mclaren the time of day as they don't usually.
Ferrari- I hear mixed reports/opinions about them. The car is clearly an animal yet many commentators have said that their FRIC system is as advanced as anyones.
IMO Caterham have slit their own throats if they vote for the ban, they have a lot of Red Bull Technology on that car and this ban is going to hit RBR harder than anyone and may stop selling Caterham their fancier toys.
Does anyone know when we can expect an outcome?
Surely it has to be time also for CW to step down, the technology is overtaking his knowledge?
Perhaps what has happened is this...
McLaren, knowing that their FRIC is not great and will tie up a lot of budget do develop further, asked Charlie for clarification on developments for their system.
McLaren; "Charlie, can you give you opinion of this sytem we are developing, it's purpose is to aid the aero platform by tightly controling pitch, rake and roll".
Charlie; (has the metaporical light bulb moment), "But if the sole aim is to move the aero platform, that may constitute a moveable aero device and therefore can't be allowed"
McLaren; "I suppose so, but everyone else is doing it!"
Charlie; (Knowing that is the case anyway, but now having admitted so to a competitor has to take action) "We may have issue a clarification.
McLaren; Oh well (hehehe)
McLaren, knowing that their FRIC is not great and will tie up a lot of budget do develop further, asked Charlie for clarification on developments for their system.
McLaren; "Charlie, can you give you opinion of this sytem we are developing, it's purpose is to aid the aero platform by tightly controling pitch, rake and roll".
Charlie; (has the metaporical light bulb moment), "But if the sole aim is to move the aero platform, that may constitute a moveable aero device and therefore can't be allowed"
McLaren; "I suppose so, but everyone else is doing it!"
Charlie; (Knowing that is the case anyway, but now having admitted so to a competitor has to take action) "We may have issue a clarification.
McLaren; Oh well (hehehe)
lord summerisle said:
Scuffers said:
I suspect if dragged into court, the FIA would not have a leg to stand on,
Unfortunatly the only court it would go in front of would be the FIA kangaroo courtjust a case of who wants to push it the hardest, FIA cannot ignore real courts if somebody wanted to drag the case into one.
way I see it, Merc as a company have sufficient clout to basically tell the FIA where to go, the problem is they are into F1 to the tune of a s
t load of cash.question is, who has the bigger gonads?
I suspect this would not be happing if berni was not already somewhat distracted.
Gaz. said:
I think Merc will let this battle slide, although RBR may not. What will really piss Mercedes & Honda off is if the FIA start messing about with the ERS rules which is the backbone of their F1 projects. They aren't going to spend a rumoured one billion euros between them just for 9 races only for the FIA to change the rules significantly and take it laying down.
agreed...it's a joke they go on about cost cutting, yet mandate the most expensive power plants in history, and have almost zero rule stability, these must be the best ways to ram up the costs of a team I can think of.
REALIST123 said:
QROPS said:
Its really easy to figure out who is behind this. Ferrari and Red Bull and Lotus have good FRIC systems. The customer teams will never protest against the factory teams. Lotus could have done but they are trying to get a Mercedes deal so they would be so stupid to protest against them. Marussia also has a FRIC system so they wouldn't protest against it. That leaves the odd one out that is McLaren. They are out of contract with Mercedes so they have no alliances in the paddock. Also we all know that has been the worse car under braking and over bumps and kerbs for the past 3 seasons.
This is Ron Denis's parting "gift" to Mercedes for stealing Hamilton, Lowe and Hugo Boss. It's sad the FIA is trying to push for a in season ban. This a big part of development off a lot teams, if you wan't to get rid of something such substantial why not include it in the regulation changes for 2015... We are going from F1 to FIA1 if the FIA is starting to play a crucial role each season.....
I like your logic but do you really think Ron and McLaren have that much clout any more? Are the FIA that happy to have Honda back?This is Ron Denis's parting "gift" to Mercedes for stealing Hamilton, Lowe and Hugo Boss. It's sad the FIA is trying to push for a in season ban. This a big part of development off a lot teams, if you wan't to get rid of something such substantial why not include it in the regulation changes for 2015... We are going from F1 to FIA1 if the FIA is starting to play a crucial role each season.....
FIA: Not a question of them being happy to have Honda back.
Remember, we all generally concur that Charlie is a total f
ing idiot so why not? 
REALIST123 said:
They really are a bunch of wkers. Stumbling from one poor decision to another.
It's time they all went; Bernie, his cronies, the whole fking lot. They couldn't run the proverbial piss up.
I just hope Mercedes still win and then protest every other team, in case they still have FRICS and give the FI fking A a whole load of work to do before Hungary.
I think a little bit more elaboration is needed here to highlight their true level of incompetence:kers. Stumbling from one poor decision to another.It's time they all went; Bernie, his cronies, the whole f
king lot. They couldn't run the proverbial piss up.I just hope Mercedes still win and then protest every other team, in case they still have FRICS and give the FI f
king A a whole load of work to do before Hungary.They couldn't run the proverbial piss up in a brewery.
wow, I really don't understand all of the FIA/Charlie Whiting hate all of a sudden. He's upholding the regulations, how can we harangue him for that?
F1 technology has always been a massively transient thing, the cars, the rules, engineering philosophies are constantly changing race by race. The teams are so secretive and that extends to hiding from the FIA. CW and his team have to reverse engineer the implementation and intent of the teams technology, it must be massively difficult for them.
In this case he's investigated the FRIC on every single team that's using it, far far more information than we fans have access to. It's not a rash or ignorant decision to ban it, it's calculated from all of the information he's gathered.
There are loads of precedents for the primary effect of technology that controls the aero platform being banned. Enthusiasts like us should be well prepared for technical rule changes like this. The teams certainly sound like they are prepared or knew they were pushing their luck with FRIC as they haven't uttered a single complaint at all and immediately got on with testing without it.
If the teams can't agree amongst themselves to delay the ban until 2015 then that is not CW's fault either, that's their own.
F1 technology has always been a massively transient thing, the cars, the rules, engineering philosophies are constantly changing race by race. The teams are so secretive and that extends to hiding from the FIA. CW and his team have to reverse engineer the implementation and intent of the teams technology, it must be massively difficult for them.
In this case he's investigated the FRIC on every single team that's using it, far far more information than we fans have access to. It's not a rash or ignorant decision to ban it, it's calculated from all of the information he's gathered.
There are loads of precedents for the primary effect of technology that controls the aero platform being banned. Enthusiasts like us should be well prepared for technical rule changes like this. The teams certainly sound like they are prepared or knew they were pushing their luck with FRIC as they haven't uttered a single complaint at all and immediately got on with testing without it.
If the teams can't agree amongst themselves to delay the ban until 2015 then that is not CW's fault either, that's their own.
zac510 said:
wow, I really don't understand all of the FIA/Charlie Whiting hate all of a sudden. He's upholding the regulations, how can we harangue him for that?
err... come again?how can applying a totally un-related regulation be justified as upholding the regulations?
this is the same s
t they hit Renault with on Mass dampers, and being blunt, it's shameful abuse of position.I used to have a lot of respect for Charlie, but the last few years etc have killed this.
I can only assume he's doing what he is told?
Your interpretation is that the regulation is unrelated.
He has access to lots of information and data from teams, and data not only from present but likely to have data from the past too so he can see how the evolution and use of FRIC has evolved as the teams gain knowledge. How can you be so sure that you are correct and he is not?
Anyway most of what bothers me is the clear abuse in the thread, if I said to you some of the things said about CW in this thread I'd surely be hit with the ban stick.
He has access to lots of information and data from teams, and data not only from present but likely to have data from the past too so he can see how the evolution and use of FRIC has evolved as the teams gain knowledge. How can you be so sure that you are correct and he is not?
Anyway most of what bothers me is the clear abuse in the thread, if I said to you some of the things said about CW in this thread I'd surely be hit with the ban stick.
zac510 said:
Your interpretation is that the regulation is unrelated.
He has access to lots of information and data from teams, and data not only from present but likely to have data from the past too so he can see how the evolution and use of FRIC has evolved as the teams gain knowledge. How can you be so sure that you are correct and he is not?
no, not at all.He has access to lots of information and data from teams, and data not only from present but likely to have data from the past too so he can see how the evolution and use of FRIC has evolved as the teams gain knowledge. How can you be so sure that you are correct and he is not?
he could have all the data in the world, whichever way you cut it, suspension components are NOT movable aero devices.
yes, you can try and cook up some bulls
t to justify that this or that contravene this rule (much as they did with mass dampers) but anybody with half a brain can see it's just wrong.here's the reg:
FIA regs said:
3.15 Aerodynamic influence :
With the exception of the driver adjustable bodywork described in Article 3.18 (in addition to minimal parts solely associated with its actuation) and the ducts described in Article 11.4, any specific part of the car influencing its aerodynamic performance :
a) Must comply with the rules relating to bodywork.
b) Must be rigidly secured to the entirely sprung part of the car (rigidly secured means not having any degree of freedom).
c) Must remain immobile in relation to the sprung part of the car.
Any device or construction that is designed to bridge the gap between the sprung part of the car and the ground is prohibited under all circumstances.
No part having an aerodynamic influence and no part of the bodywork, with the exception of the skid block in 3.13 above, may under any circumstances be located below the reference plane.
With the exception of the parts necessary for the adjustment described in Article 3.18, any car system, device or procedure which uses driver movement as a means of altering the aerodynamic characteristics of the car is prohibited.
explain how *any* suspension component breaches this reg?With the exception of the driver adjustable bodywork described in Article 3.18 (in addition to minimal parts solely associated with its actuation) and the ducts described in Article 11.4, any specific part of the car influencing its aerodynamic performance :
a) Must comply with the rules relating to bodywork.
b) Must be rigidly secured to the entirely sprung part of the car (rigidly secured means not having any degree of freedom).
c) Must remain immobile in relation to the sprung part of the car.
Any device or construction that is designed to bridge the gap between the sprung part of the car and the ground is prohibited under all circumstances.
No part having an aerodynamic influence and no part of the bodywork, with the exception of the skid block in 3.13 above, may under any circumstances be located below the reference plane.
With the exception of the parts necessary for the adjustment described in Article 3.18, any car system, device or procedure which uses driver movement as a means of altering the aerodynamic characteristics of the car is prohibited.
You are reading the words of the regulation too literally. The most important part is not in the words; the precedent set by previous regulatory decisions and this FRIC decision follows those precedents.
It may be different from the way you wish the regulations to be interpreted but at least the FIA are consistent here. We've seen this interpretation before and should have seen it coming again this time.
It may be different from the way you wish the regulations to be interpreted but at least the FIA are consistent here. We've seen this interpretation before and should have seen it coming again this time.
I'm not talking about "spirit of regs" , I'm talking about "execution of the regs" which is very different. One is fantasy and one is cars and technology getting banned.
Have you given any thought that perhaps FRIC started its time as a sort of advanced anti-roll bar to enhance mechanical grip, to which FIA and CW thought "that's fine and legal." After development and evolution, probably particularly after the fuel tank rules or blown diffuser rules changed the teams might have thought "this FRIC stuff is working well for grip, I wonder if we can use it for stabilising the aero platform?" Maybe then they introduced different axis into the system. At that point it's still FRIC by name, but it's used in a different way with a very different purpose, which then is outside the rule precedents set in recent years.
Saying that "FRIC was around for 6 years and then it was banned" is a far too simple and naive statement to describe F1 and FRIC, 6 years is a huge amount of time and represents many changes in F1 engineering theory, rule changes and so forth for many teams. Nothing is black and white and especially not F1 technology!
Have you given any thought that perhaps FRIC started its time as a sort of advanced anti-roll bar to enhance mechanical grip, to which FIA and CW thought "that's fine and legal." After development and evolution, probably particularly after the fuel tank rules or blown diffuser rules changed the teams might have thought "this FRIC stuff is working well for grip, I wonder if we can use it for stabilising the aero platform?" Maybe then they introduced different axis into the system. At that point it's still FRIC by name, but it's used in a different way with a very different purpose, which then is outside the rule precedents set in recent years.
Saying that "FRIC was around for 6 years and then it was banned" is a far too simple and naive statement to describe F1 and FRIC, 6 years is a huge amount of time and represents many changes in F1 engineering theory, rule changes and so forth for many teams. Nothing is black and white and especially not F1 technology!
Gaz. said:
As discussed on F1Technical, it's really about cost cutting:
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/114922
AFTER the money was spent...
It says it started as a discussion about cost cutting, but that discussion exposed more information about it to the FIA.http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/114922
AFTER the money was spent...
Gaz. said:
a) it's been banned because it's expensive and b) Active suspension in 2017 will do exactly the same job as FRIC does now.
Whether you say it's too expensive or the teams are developing it too much (for aero) they are the exact same thing because development == money spent.Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff