has Charlie Whiting finally lost the plot?
Discussion
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/92980
Basically, let's forget this blown diffuser ban and go back to how it was!
in the last few years he has started making a number of stupid decisions/stands, this one's a classic..... is it time he stood down?
Think he was put in an awkward positon by Hispani http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/formula_one/134936...
Wonder if Hispania will agree seing as they started the ball rolling but are now cozy with Red bull?
Wonder if Hispania will agree seing as they started the ball rolling but are now cozy with Red bull?
Scuffers said:
I just don't see what the issue was, to try and make out it's a moveable aero device is just pathetic (same as mass dampers).
I think it's quite clear it's a moveable aero device - the same as the "fan cars" being banned really, they're using motive power to lower the pressure under the car.Eric Mc said:
It's also a computer controlled device. In other words, the automated system on board the car is determining the aerodynamic grip levels. The driver has no say in the matter.
It should be banned - but they have gone about banning it in a cack-handed way.
sorry, but that's a crock!It should be banned - but they have gone about banning it in a cack-handed way.
using that definition, you could argue the engine is a movable aero device, as well as the brakes, springs, dampers, steering wheel, etc.
Scuffers said:
Eric Mc said:
It's also a computer controlled device. In other words, the automated system on board the car is determining the aerodynamic grip levels. The driver has no say in the matter.
It should be banned - but they have gone about banning it in a cack-handed way.
sorry, but that's a crock!It should be banned - but they have gone about banning it in a cack-handed way.
using that definition, you could argue the engine is a movable aero device, as well as the brakes, springs, dampers, steering wheel, etc.
I actually don't object to moveable aerodynamic devices at all. Indeed, they first appeared on cars in the 1950s so they aren't exactly modern or ground breaking. What I DO object to is an element of the control of the car (whether it be throttle control, grip or steering) being OUTSIDE the control of the driver.
Edited by Eric Mc on Sunday 10th July 08:16
It's certainly been a bit of a mess. But hopefully it will be solved soon enough (though I rather suspect that the teams who have the advantage aren't going to be too keen to lose out given they are not, it seems at least, in direct breach of the rules - if they were then it would be simpler!) and F1 can get back to being about hard racing.
Eric Mc said:
Scuffers said:
Eric Mc said:
It's also a computer controlled device. In other words, the automated system on board the car is determining the aerodynamic grip levels. The driver has no say in the matter.
It should be banned - but they have gone about banning it in a cack-handed way.
sorry, but that's a crock!It should be banned - but they have gone about banning it in a cack-handed way.
using that definition, you could argue the engine is a movable aero device, as well as the brakes, springs, dampers, steering wheel, etc.
I actually don't object to moveable aerodynamic devices at all. Indeed, they first appeared on cars in the 1950s so they aren't exactly modern or ground breaking. What I DO object to is an element of the control of the car (whether it be throttle control, grip or steering) being OUTSIDE the control of the driver.
Edited by Eric Mc on Sunday 10th July 08:16
k up and that in the unlikely event that all teams agree, put the rules back for 2011.Eric Mc said:
Scuffers said:
Eric Mc said:
It's also a computer controlled device. In other words, the automated system on board the car is determining the aerodynamic grip levels. The driver has no say in the matter.
It should be banned - but they have gone about banning it in a cack-handed way.
sorry, but that's a crock!It should be banned - but they have gone about banning it in a cack-handed way.
using that definition, you could argue the engine is a movable aero device, as well as the brakes, springs, dampers, steering wheel, etc.
I actually don't object to moveable aerodynamic devices at all. Indeed, they first appeared on cars in the 1950s so they aren't exactly modern or ground breaking. What I DO object to is an element of the control of the car (whether it be throttle control, grip or steering) being OUTSIDE the control of the driver.
that's the wording of the rule that's being used to justify the ban, (same one used to ban Mass dampers).
as has been said before, if was legal all of last year and so far this year, how can is suddenly not be legal now? if he had a problem with it, then the regs should have been changed at the end of last year.
IMHO no regs should be changed mid season, without either unanimous support from all the teams, or it being a clear and urgent genuine safety issue.
the FIA should not ever put it self in this position of making the rules up as it goes along, look what a complete shambles it all looks now?
for the record, I don't like blown diffusers either, but the time to ban them was at year end.
this is the same as the double diffuser argument the year Brawn won, ground effect in Chapmans day, active suspension, etc etc.
It's called "interpretation". All laws can be reinterpreted.
Maybe last year they didn't understand the significance of the technology and now they do.
Get rid of it - it's a computer controlled driver aid and should be banned as it breaches both the spirit and the meaning of the rules.
Note that I said i wan't concerned about blown diffusers, What I am against is computers determining how the car drives.
This is not a blown diffuser issue - it's a computer control issue.
Maybe last year they didn't understand the significance of the technology and now they do.
Get rid of it - it's a computer controlled driver aid and should be banned as it breaches both the spirit and the meaning of the rules.
Note that I said i wan't concerned about blown diffusers, What I am against is computers determining how the car drives.
This is not a blown diffuser issue - it's a computer control issue.
Eric Mc said:
It's called "interpretation". All laws can be reinterpreted.
Maybe last year they didn't understand the significance of the technology and now they do.
Get rid of it - it's a computer controlled driver aid and should be banned as it breaches both the spirit and the meaning of the rules.
Note that I said i wan't concerned about blown diffusers, What I am against is computers determining how the car drives.
This is not a blown diffuser issue - it's a computer control issue.
think you need to read back up on what's being done....Maybe last year they didn't understand the significance of the technology and now they do.
Get rid of it - it's a computer controlled driver aid and should be banned as it breaches both the spirit and the meaning of the rules.
Note that I said i wan't concerned about blown diffusers, What I am against is computers determining how the car drives.
This is not a blown diffuser issue - it's a computer control issue.
the 'computer' as you put it is doing no more than providing exhaust gas flow at all times (as opposed to just when on throttle).
how do you interpret this as 'computer control' I am not quite sure, it's no more computer control an drive-by-wire throttle maps etc?
back to the essence of the argument, re-interpretation is for weasels, if you can't accept something that's been deemed legal for over a year, you have to question your place in the sport.
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff