Mclaren 2008

[megy]

So, the FIA have said they will be carrying out a deep search of the 2008 Mclaren, looking for not only Ferrari bits on the car, but for ideas that MAY have incorporated ideas from Ferrari IP. My question is, how the hell are they going to prove if something is from an idea that Ferrari had, as oppose to natural evolution of design from year to year.

Will they have the dossier to hand, study it and only look at the areas covered in the dossier, this would be the logical way to go, but it is the FIA, and we all know how it appears they have always favoured Ferrari and (especially) this year, held a grudge against Ron. I would like to think that the SPEICIALISTS that they will use to inspect the car will be impartial, but will they really, it would be so easy for all their findings to end up in the wrong hands.

Also, Nigel Stepney has said on record that in return for the information he passed to Mclaren, he was given the corresponding information back to him, yet the FIA have not even spoken about this, yet alone held any investigation to clarify or disprove this claim. Should then the same inspection be carried out on the Ferrari 2008 car design?

I DO NOT want this thread to be another pro/anti Mclaren versus anti/pro Ferrari, but instead other peoples thoughts on the inspections carried out to date, and the ones that will be carried out and wat others think to the possibility that Mclaren would start on negative points IF anything dubious was found.

[coetzeeh]

Even if Mclaren did have any Ferrari data, they would ensure that none of it is incorporated in their 2008 design - perhaps this is exactly what the FIA wanted...

[TonyHetherington]

What puzzles me is that teams walk down the pit lane with cameras all the time. They see a little fin on another car, and go back to the wind tunnel and do a similar fin. It happens all the time!!

So what's the difference between seeing a fin or new spoiler on another car and IP...?! That will be impossible to prove.

[jamieboy]

megy said:

Also, Nigel Stepney has said on record that in return for the information he passed to Mclaren, he was given the corresponding information back to him

To be fair, he also said that he didn't have a scrap of evidence to substantiate his claim. And IIRC he made this shock announcement around the time he was trying to find a publisher for his autobiography, which has got to raise a question about his credbility / motive.

Edited by jamieboy on Thursday 1st November 09:59

[simonfa]

TonyHetherington said:

What puzzles me is that teams walk down the pit lane with cameras all the time. They see a little fin on another car, and go back to the wind tunnel and do a similar fin. It happens all the time!!

So what's the difference between seeing a fin or new spoiler on another car and IP...?! That will be impossible to prove.

Well the major reason would be that if a team see a wing on another teams car then they have to go away reserch it test it in the wind tunnel and develop it themselves, yet when they recieve information be it from a dosier, emails, phone calls that something is a proven time gain then thats different.

[PJS917]

simonfa said:

TonyHetherington said:

What puzzles me is that teams walk down the pit lane with cameras all the time. They see a little fin on another car, and go back to the wind tunnel and do a similar fin. It happens all the time!!

So what's the difference between seeing a fin or new spoiler on another car and IP...?! That will be impossible to prove.

Well the major reason would be that if a team see a wing on another teams car then they have to go away reserch it test it in the wind tunnel and develop it themselves, yet when they recieve information be it from a dosier, emails, phone calls that something is a proven time gain then thats different.

Well not really, F1 cars are designed as a whole and just because someone else does it does not mean it will work on another car. In many cases it may well be detrimental to the design. I do think McLaren will be disqualified next year because they are using 4 wheels, a design copied from Ferrarsi.

[jesusbuiltmycar]

Remember this is te FIA which means there decisions could completely defy rational logic.

They might deem that having round wheels is a breach of Ferrari IPR....

[philis]

iirc Mclaren were off the hook until the emails between Alonso and De la Rosa were bought into light, and they were only regarding tire pressures as used by Ferrari.
So if the FIA found the 2007 car free of Ferarri parts then 2008 should be the same.
We will just have to wait and see what Max Mosely thinks is best.

[flemke]

philis said:

iirc Mclaren were off the hook until the emails between Alonso and De la Rosa were bought into light, and they were only regarding tire pressures as used by Ferrari.
So if the FIA found the 2007 car free of Ferarri parts then 2008 should be the same.
We will just have to wait and see what Max Mosely thinks is best.

I do not believe that that is exactly what happened this season.
One of McLaren's many frustrations was that the FIA refused their invitation to send an FIA technical team into the factory and make an unfettered, exhaustive forensic examination of the '07 car and its design history. We know that, as a general principle, one cannot prove the negative, but this would have come as close as humanly possible to exposing any Ferrari influence on the car - if there had been any at all.
The FIA thus did not find the '07 car free of Ferrari parts. Rather, they asserted that, because it had not been proved that there were no Ferrari parts (or influence), they would assume that there had been something somewhere.

With these sorts of rules of engagement, perhaps it will be impossible again for McLaren to prove its innocence. As the WMSC seems to require proof of innocence, rather than requiring itself to prove guilt, how they treat the '08 McLaren probably will have less to do with the engineering reality and more to do with what strikes their fancy.

[PJS917]

flemke said:

With these sorts of rules of engagement, perhaps it will be impossible again for McLaren to prove its innocence. As the WMSC seems to require proof of innocence, rather than requiring itself to prove guilt, how they treat the '08 McLaren probably will have less to do with the engineering reality and more to do with what strikes their fancy.

This is what make the FIA even more stupid. There is suspicion that Ferrari gained from information via Nigel Stepney so by the FIA's own illogical kangeroo court system Ferrari have cheated and should be thrown out of the championship. As they have not done this the only conclusion that can be drawn is that the FIA are biased in Ferraris favour.

[Graham]

I think it will be almost impossible for them not to fine mac guilty.. as they are casting the net so wide, the fact that the car has four wheels ( as does the donkey) will screw them...

The FIA seem to be assuming that mac dont have any of their own ideas, surely as they are all working to the same aim and the same rule book, there are bound to both come up with similar ideas in some areas? what happens then...

G

[toomuchbeer]

Graham said:

I think it will be almost impossible for them not to fine mac guilty.. as they are casting the net so wide, the fact that the car has four wheels ( as does the donkey) will screw them...

The FIA seem to be assuming that mac dont have any of their own ideas, surely as they are all working to the same aim and the same rule book, there are bound to both come up with similar ideas in some areas? what happens then...

G

Exactly what I was thinking. Afterall there are only so many things you can do to a car, and all the teams must be trying the same things, albeit seperately.

I really do not know how this will all work out, but it will hurt F1, that I am sure.

[jamieboy]

Graham said:

The FIA seem to be assuming that mac dont have any of their own ideas, surely as they are all working to the same aim and the same rule book, there are bound to both come up with similar ideas in some areas? what happens then...

McLaren made a big thing about being able to trace the DNA of every part of the car - I guess if something is found that doesn't have that trace, some sort of eureka moment, then they better hope that no-one at Ferrari had the same moment a year ago.

[flemke]

jamieboy said:

Graham said:

The FIA seem to be assuming that mac dont have any of their own ideas, surely as they are all working to the same aim and the same rule book, there are bound to both come up with similar ideas in some areas? what happens then...

McLaren made a big thing about being able to trace the DNA of every part of the car - I guess if something is found that doesn't have that trace, some sort of eureka moment, then they better hope that no-one at Ferrari had the same moment a year ago.

But problem is that, when they were offered the opportunity this year to inspect the McLaren, the FIA declined. Instead, they came to their ruling based on whatever and then dished out their penalty.
Now that the FIA will be doing for '08 what they should have done for '07, inspecting the actual car, they can contrive a new set of justifications for a new set of penalties against McLaren: "Oh goodness, if we had only known in the summer how much of this car was like the Ferrari, we'd have laid down a harsher penalty. As it is, we now have no choice but to ban them for '08 and fine them another $100M."

[jules_s]

Flemke,

Do you think there would have been time to test the McL mid season and come to any palpable conclusions?

That and I dont doubt the lawyers had there say... in my opinion an investigation mid season would invariably have resulted in the McL cars being pulled from the series while it was undertaken......thus ruining the Bernie/Max/£££ bandwagon.

Just my 2p's worth.

[flemke]

jules_s said:

Flemke,

Do you think there would have been time to test the McL mid season and come to any palpable conclusions?

That and I dont doubt the lawyers had there say... in my opinion an investigation mid season would invariably have resulted in the McL cars being pulled from the series while it was undertaken......thus ruining the Bernie/Max/£££ bandwagon.

Just my 2p's worth.

I am not sure that they would have needed a physical car at all. What would have mattered were all the McLaren design data, software, timelines, protocols, etc.
If the FIA had needed a physical car, however, the big teams make a number of chassis each year.
If the FIA truly had needed a considerable length of time to inspect the car in excruciating detail, they could always have impounded one at the time and done the examination at their leisure - as they will be doing during November with the '08 car. If the inspection had revealed anything genuinely damning, the FIA could have levied a penalty (such as retroactive disqualification from '07 WCC) on that basis - of substantive evidence.

Instead they rushed to judgment without much of the truth having come to light.
In addition to not bothering to inspect the car, or the design data and software that underlay it, they did not bother to interview three of the four protagonists (Stepney, Coughlan and Alonso).
How can you look at only a fraction of the evidence and come up with the most severe punishment in sports history?

Edited by flemke on Thursday 1st November 22:49

[andyps]

Surely, any decision should allow for sufficient time to be spent to ensure the correct decision is reached? When it is the FIA making the decision that doesn't seem to apply unfortunately. McLaren offered the chance for the FIA to inspect the car fully, indicating that they would put up with any inconvenience that would cause. Without any specific knowledge I am sure they would have had the ability to provide a spare car specifically for the FIA to check, and as long as the drivers didn't have a large number of serious accidents destroying other chassis would have been able to manage this way.

Edited by andyps on Thursday 1st November 22:47

[andyps]

I am still puzzled over how this check can be done with any degree of accuracy without someone from Ferrari being involved in the inspection and therefore the passing of in depth information about the 2008 McLaren being to Ferrari. I don't know who the FIA will use to do this, but they will have to have full access to details of Ferrari components and IP to be able to make a judgement, and will have to make a decision along the lines of "is this component similar in concept to that one" which may involve discussion with Ferrari engineers.

How can all this be done without compromising the basic issue of IP which started the whole saga? Will the 2009 Ferrari be subjected to the same level of inspection to ensure they have not included anything gained from the inspection of the 08 McLaren?

I have only just read this article and MM's comments don't help allay my suspicions. Have I missed something somewhere?

[Finchy172]

The FIA will take all mclarens plans, designs, drawings for the 2008 car at the start of the year.

And hand them straight to Feraari

[woof]

andyps said:

I have only just read this article and MM's comments don't help allay my suspicions. Have I missed something somewhere?

Interesting reading - even if it is on the FIA's on site

"Q: Critics argue that the whole affair was a private vendetta between you and Ron Dennis. How is your relationship with him?
MM: Civilized. We phone once in a while. Personally I have no problems with Ron but otherwise there are differing positions. Just to give an example: Ron would like to finish every race with a one-two victory whereas it is my take that every entrant should have equal opportunities. So those two opinions don’t jar. But what goes for Ron also goes for Jean Todt, Frank Williams or Flavio Briatore.

Q: For Luca di Montezemolo as well?
MM: With di Montezemolo it is different. He is chairman of Fiat and President of Italian business lobby Confindustria. My relationship with him is very personal.

Q: So you are intellectually, socially and personally closer to him than to Ron Dennis?
MM: That is probably correct as I know Luca longer and therefore better than Ron. Indeed I’ve known Ron since 1970, but I became really acquainted with him at the end of the eighties, whereas I have known Luca very well since the beginning of the seventies."