To cheat, or not to cheat?
#1

Every few weeks there has been something or other brought up (mostly) about Ferrari and the legalities of the SF71H, as we are only half way through the season I thought there should be a thread for any ongoing or further discussions and debates regarding any of the teams and drivers possible "indiscretions"

Formula 1 race director Charlie Whiting insists that the FIA is still happy with the operation of Ferrari’s hybrid system, despite ongoing discussions with rival teams.
The FIA announced in Monaco that its investigations have suggested that the Italian team was doing nothing wrong.
However, rivals have continued to question the recent strong performance of both the works cars and customer teams Haas and Sauber.
"Something is going on there, it's not normal," said Renault's Nico Hulkenberg.
"Since a couple of weekends, since France I think, all Ferrari-powered cars have a lot of power all at once.
"It's difficult for us against Haas, because in the corners we are at eye level or better but on the straights we lose a lot."
Whiting and other key FIA players had a meeting with Mercedes representatives at the team's motorhome in Hockenheim.

"We are entirely satisfied with everything on that front, as we said in Monaco," said Whiting.

"Some teams have been asking further question and we were just there to try and help them have some peace, if you like."

Asked if Mercedes had questions about legality, or just wanted to know where the limits were for its own development, Whiting said: "Again, those discussions are private.

"I don't think I should be telling you. If you want to talk to Mercedes, they'll tell you but I think what goes on behind closed doors should remain behind closed doors."

Mercedes boss Toto Wolff would not be drawn on the discussions, implying that it was a routine gathering.

"The exchange you're having with the FIA and some of the other teams, or engine manufacturers, is on a regular basis," he said.

"It's more visible if you do it on a weekend, on track, in the motorhome, but it's completely regular business to discuss various technical topics."
Renault Sport F1 boss Cyril Abiteboul admitted that the data suggests that Ferrari is doing something "strange" - but he stressed that doesn't necessarily mean that it is illegal.
"First we know we have a power deficit, which up until now was against Mercedes," he told Motorsport.com.

"They are still here but we see indeed that Ferrari has taken the upper hand, so congratulations to Ferrariin that battle, which is more a technical battle, but less visible. The step that they have done is amazing.

"It's a step that they have done to a certain degree that does not go with a hardware introduction, it's also a step that we see across all three teams, not just Ferrari

[/url] [url=http://twitter.com/ScuderiaFerrari]

"It's a step that they have done to a certain degree that does not go with a hardware introduction, it's also a step that we see across all three teams, not just Ferrari which is not necessarily a battle for us, but also Haas and Sauber, which are more of a battle for us.



"Clearly we are scratching our heads, because we look in particular at the GPS profile, and we we see indeed that it's really strange what they are doing.
"But doing something strange doesn't mean that it's illegal. I think we must give credit to what they have done, and that should be an extra commitment to work harder, and try and do the same step on our side."

"You live more for 5 minutes going fast on a bike than other people do in all of their life"....Marco Simoncelli
[+] 2 users Like forzaferrari's post
Reply
#2

Well as long as it’s all above board leave them scratching their heads
[+] 3 users Like LotusLover's post
Reply
#3

Hi Forza, over the years I have lost count how many times teams have "found something" whether it was clever, innovative, lateral thinking or downright skulduggery! honestly if the FIA say it passes it passes, end off argument, Ferrari have obviously found an edge, some say the Battery & others the engine, some fans say they are #Cheatingbastards (the loons) my view they are being clever & whilst might be sailing close to the wind they have been proved not to be breaking the rules, who was it that said, "read the rules once to understand them, read them again to work out how to get around them" Mercedes are just miffed because Ferrari thought of it before them I recon.....


Message to Toto, FFS work out what it is & replicate it fast! Tongue

"When a man holds you round the throat, I don't think he has come to apologise" 
Ayrton Senna on Nigel Mansell, SPA 1987.   Angel
[+] 2 users Like PapaofGags's post
Reply
#4

I think we all know what is happening now given the points of clarification the FIA have given over the batteries and kinetic recovery regulations. There is a line ito the stores and a line out. Now, the only reason you'd have such a set up, if you ask and electronic engineer (which I have) is to allow you to charge the batteries at the same time you are using them. The rules clearly state that all energy drawn from the batteries MUST come from one point and MUST not exceed certain levels. Fine. We are told Ferrari's batteries do indeed only draw from one point, confirming the other is either there for decoration or charging. The other teams use a single point for both, why? Because you can only charge from breaking on the rear axle right? Well... no the rules for Kinetic recovery state you can only draw energy from kinetic source on the rear axle. It does say anything about only from breaking, although it does mention breaking as the primary source of kinetic recovery. So... what if you were able to charge the batteries from the rear axle while accelerating, giving you even more energy to deploy via the electric motor? Well, you'd see a pretty big boost to bhp that's for certain.

The issue with this theory? in 2014 before they rejoined the sport we know Honda were told it was illegal, and Abitobul suggested that Renault were given similar advice in 2012 while developing their engine. Toto has also hinted that Mercedes may have explored this avenue as well and been told their solution might not comply with the regulations. Soooo... yeah. The way I see there are a few possibilities:

1) The FIA have changed their minds and decided it's not illegal afterall. We know this happened in the past with double diffusers (Brawn, Lotus had asked the season before and were told no) and blown diffusers, McLaren and Williams had previously asked before it was deemed legal on the Red Bull.
2) Ferrari have come up with differing solutions for this from other teams that the FIA have deemed legal.
3) Ferrari are doing something different, despite this being the only logical reason they've suddenly been able to increase the electrical component of their engines by over 100%, which is monstrous.

That's the theory I'm going with, and it's one I've spoken to a number of my F1 nerd friends about, and it's the one we all think is most likely. Which might explain Renaults initial annoyance as they seemingly had a march on the idea in 2012, who knows, if it's been allowed the history of the sport might look very different.
[+] 2 users Like Jody Barton's post
Reply
#5

... is this not the very essence of Formula One, pushing the technological boundaries.

Good for Ferrari they have found something, they have also obviously involved the FIA in what they have come up with and as long as they are doing what they are telling the FIA they are doing there is nothing wrong with that.

This is why some teams spend millions. This is why technology and a level playing field is a stupid idea. No advantages means no technological advancement (its pointless).

That is why I say to all who want F1 to change to that level playing field if you do not like it go follow another motor sport there are plenty to choose from. Leave the DNA of F1 alone it is and has worked very well for a very long time.
[+] 2 users Like NeilP's post
Reply
#6

NeilP absolutely, there's another possibility, I read in an interview with Andrian Newey how the Renault Kinetic generator thingymebob generated way more energy than could be stored... and that's got me to thinking. The rules also clearly only state a single point for drawing energy, nothing about using multiple points to store energy. So if you use 2, 3 or 4 cables to store energy, but only one for deployment you might store way more energy and therefore be able to deploy for a lot longer as well. I honestly think this is what they're doing in some way. If it's within the law and the FIA are OK with it then fair play, I've never really been one for the 'spirit' of the law within F1. The rules are there to be exploited.
[+] 1 user Likes Jody Barton's post
Reply
#7

Well, yes. If you read Newey's book he's pretty up front that the thing all teams are looking for is an advantage that is difficult for the other teams to implement quickly. If Ferrari have found this kind of advantage then all kudos to them. If, on the other hand, competitors have wanted to take this approach but told it was illegal (and subsequently dropped that avenue of development) then that is simply unfair. No other way of dressing it up.

I don't feel qualified to comment until I see some facts rather than speculation.
[+] 3 users Like morini's post
Reply
#8

(25-07-2018, 06:05 PM)Jody Barton Wrote:  NeilP absolutely, there's another possibility, I read in an interview with Andrian Newey how the Renault Kinetic generator thingymebob generated way more energy than could be stored... and that's got me to thinking. The rules also clearly only state a single point for drawing energy, nothing about using multiple points to store energy. So if you use 2, 3 or 4 cables to store energy, but only one for deployment you might store way more energy and therefore be able to deploy for a lot longer as well. I honestly think this is what they're doing in some way. If it's within the law and the FIA are OK with it then fair play, I've never really been one for the 'spirit' of the law within F1. The rules are there to be exploited.

To be honest Jody I havent read up on the specifics of what is and what isnt within the tech rules, as for the storage end of things you could generate as much as you like, hell you could stick an additional windmill on the rear wing but the storage/battery will limit what can be stored....imagine the battery like a 500ml can...no matter how smart an engineer may be they will not get that can to hold 600ml`s....it is the same for electrical draw, if the teams are only allowed to draw X from these power stores that would be very easy to confirm should someone try to flout the rules. As Ive said I am not clued up on what the regs state.

"You live more for 5 minutes going fast on a bike than other people do in all of their life"....Marco Simoncelli
[+] 1 user Likes forzaferrari's post
Reply
#9

Nico @ Silverstone

https://streamable.com/vh89e

"You live more for 5 minutes going fast on a bike than other people do in all of their life"....Marco Simoncelli
Reply
#10

Forza, I thought the Nico explanation had already been trashed by technical experts because it isn't free energy before the MGU-H. That part of the regulations is seriously strict. Plus I doubt it's that, why? Because it's Sassi's idea that Ferrari pursued and eventually rejected because it was too complex, and that's the reason he eventually left Ferrari and joined Mercedes. So methinks Nico's info is actually Sassi's thinking Ferrari have actually continued with his ideas... I'm not so sure:

1) If they have completed Sassi's plan / design then Mercedes won't have too much issue catching up.

2) If they've done something different the Sassi's might be leading Ferrari up the garden path.

It'll be interesting to see how it plays out.
[+] 2 users Like Jody Barton's post
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)