Ferrari: Enginegate

[mcdk2]

Not the most reliable source, but does anyone think there is truth in the legal action threat from Ferrari to red bull?
https://www.grandprix.com/news/binotto-threatened-...

[TheDeuce]

RemarkLima said:

I read there were three suggestions from Red Bull, all resulting in the same clarification... Which is why I'm curious as to the other options, unless they all involve storing fuel past the flow sensor, or increasing flow between measurements?

I imagine if the RB engineers could imagine there mildly different ways of achieving the same result, they would ask three distinct questions in order to ensure the FIA response firmly shuts the door on any team doing such things.

I don't believe the questions are published.

[anonymous-user]

mcdk2 said:

Not the most reliable source, but does anyone think there is truth in the legal action threat from Ferrari to red bull?
https://www.grandprix.com/news/binotto-threatened-...

No, but they doth protest far too much.

[Deesee]

KIV this is the same Red Bull that was DQ in 2014, for fuel flow sensor usage, and then it actually transpired they have tampered with it.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/26790864

&

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2014/apr/15...

[Megaflow]

janesmith1950 said:

mcdk2 said:

Not the most reliable source, but does anyone think there is truth in the legal action threat from Ferrari to red bull?
https://www.grandprix.com/news/binotto-threatened-...

No, but they doth protest far too much.

Indeed. It is funny how they were quite happy when people were questioning their ‘engine’. When somebody has questioned the fuel flow to that engine, they are quite so impressed...

[RemarkLima]

Megaflow said:

janesmith1950 said:

mcdk2 said:

Not the most reliable source, but does anyone think there is truth in the legal action threat from Ferrari to red bull?
https://www.grandprix.com/news/binotto-threatened-...

No, but they doth protest far too much.

Indeed. It is funny how they were quite happy when people were questioning their ‘engine’. When somebody has questioned the fuel flow to that engine, they are quite so impressed...

However, on the flip side, having a prominent person saying you are "cheating" outright is slanderous - hence a case of legal action to clarify the legality. Basically being told outright that you're cheating would (actually should) make any boss right p**sed off!

[Graveworm]

RemarkLima said:

However, on the flip side, having a prominent person saying you are "cheating" outright is slanderous - hence a case of legal action to clarify the legality. Basically being told outright that you're cheating would (actually should) make any boss right p**sed off!

It was in the US. Ferrari would need to prove they were not cheating and would probably open up a lot of IP to the public domain.

Edited by Graveworm on Thursday 7th November 12:03

[Angpozzuto]

I genuinely hope last weekend was just a one off bad weekend and Ferrari can wipe that smug look off verstappen's face next week in Brazil

[mcdk2]

Angpozzuto said:

I genuinely hope last weekend was just a one off bad weekend and Ferrari can wipe that smug look off verstappen's face next week in Brazil

Me too, but probably for different reasons. Whilst Ferrari have a veto and such power over the future of the sport, I don't think F1 will benefit if Ferrari are embarrassed or pushed into a corner.
I think F1 will be just fine if Ferrari leave, but I rather suspect that members of the FIA world try to keep them by bending over as asking for some Italian stallion.

[TheDeuce]

mcdk2 said:

Me too, but probably for different reasons. Whilst Ferrari have a veto and such power over the future of the sport, I don't think F1 will benefit if Ferrari are embarrassed or pushed into a corner.
I think F1 will be just fine if Ferrari leave, but I rather suspect that members of the FIA world try to keep them by bending over as asking for some Italian stallion.

That's an awful mental image!

[mcdk2]

TheDeuce said:

That's an awful mental image!

Well accepting a few feet of red seems to be the FIA's thing. Horses for courses.

[Deesee]

Mark Hughes on Ferrari not cheating

https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opinion/f1/mph-...

Oh and looks like CLC will get an updated spec 4 engine for Brasil, with next years updates..

[Derek Smith]

Deesee said:

Mark Hughes on Ferrari not cheating

https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opinion/f1/mph-...

Oh and looks like CLC will get an updated spec 4 engine for Brasil, with next years updates..

My reading of that is that Hughes is not saying that Ferrari did not try to circumvent the fuel flow regulations, ie cheat, but that any changes to make the engine legal were not the cause of the rather dramatic loss of performance.

[TheDeuce]

Deesee said:

Mark Hughes on Ferrari not cheating

https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opinion/f1/mph-...

Oh and looks like CLC will get an updated spec 4 engine for Brasil, with next years updates..

All makes complete sense. The sane theory is always the most dull of course, but usually accurate

[C2Red]

TheDeuce said:

Deesee said:

Mark Hughes on Ferrari not cheating

https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opinion/f1/mph-...

Oh and looks like CLC will get an updated spec 4 engine for Brasil, with next years updates..

All makes complete sense. The sane theory is always the most dull of course, but usually accurate

Occams Razor

[TheDeuce]

C2Red said:

Occams Razor

The problem with that principle is that a lie can be constructed in such a way as to appear true, if Occams Razor principle is applied.

In this case however, the whole idea of cheating started and stopped for me as soon as I considered the technical challenges to making it effective, the relatively small advantage it would give and the high risk of negative PR (it would be plain dirty, noncompetitive cheating) if they were found out. These simple realities are why I have been dubious throughout.

Also, there are plenty of other known factors that have made the Ferrari both surprisingly fast, and surprisingly slow at some circuits.

[C2Red]

TheDeuce said:

C2Red said:

Occams Razor

The problem with that principle is that a lie can be constructed in such a way as to appear true, if Occams Razor principle is applied.

In this case however, the whole idea of cheating started and stopped for me as soon as I considered the technical challenges to making it effective, the relatively small advantage it would give and the high risk of negative PR (it would be plain dirty, noncompetitive cheating) if they were found out. These simple realities are why I have been dubious throughout.

Also, there are plenty of other known factors that have made the Ferrari both surprisingly fast, and surprisingly slow at some circuits.

For you, that may we’ll resonate; however to extrapolate that to: Formula 1 teams don’t cheat is naive to say the least.
Let’s look at Benetton, traction controls, fuel rigs, Red Bull fuel flow metering, Renault crash gate as just a few well l know examples.
It happens; even to the teams we support.
Brazil will give us some more data to work with, then we’ll have a better if not definitive picture

[TheDeuce]

C2Red said:

For you, that may we’ll resonate; however to extrapolate that to: Formula 1 teams don’t cheat is naive to say the least.
Let’s look at Benetton, traction controls, fuel rigs, Red Bull fuel flow metering, Renault crash gate as just a few well l know examples.
It happens; even to the teams we support.
Brazil will give us some more data to work with, then we’ll have a better if not definitive picture

You shouldn't extrapolate it that way though, as not every scenario is the same. If the advantage they stood to gain was greater and easier to realise on track, I could see the risk being potentially worth it. If I didn't expect the car to be slower in Austin for aero reasons, I would also be more open to the possibility of something funny going on - or in this case, stopping going on.

I don't really like wisdom packaged in to neat principles or quippy expressions a'la 'no smoke without fire' etc. I think to stand the best chance of judging a situation correctly, it's best to view that situation in isolation with fresh eyes and mind.

Given that in default configuration the Ferrari would have got mullered at in Austin (too few places to press home their speed advantage, more than enough corners for Red Bull and Mercedes to make up their own greater advantage) I would always have expected them to have to sacrifice a lot of speed for the sake of downforce, which they did. In the end their car isn't designed for that sort of track, so even with the adjustments made, it was never going to perform as well as the other two. I would have thought that with/without any ideas of cheating ever being mentioned. Everything we have seen from Ferrari's cars this season is explained by what is known about their car design philosophy, without needing to ponder what might be secretly happening.

[SturdyHSV]

Deesee said:

Mark Hughes on how not to use imply / infer

https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opinion/f1/mph-...

[Deesee]

SturdyHSV said:

Deesee said:

Mark Hughes on how not to use imply / infer

https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opinion/f1/mph-...

Let’s be fair he’s on FOM & Sky payroll... so nothing controversial, so let’s look forward to Brundle relaying the “Ferrari looking mighty up and through sector 3” on Friday, Saturday & Sunday.