2014 Formula One Discussion

Zabbey21 wrote:

"We are not able to race," the Japanese is quoted by Spain's El Confidencial. "But if we were, I think we should use a GP2 car, as we would be faster."

 

Haha, Well said. Should also mention that they sound a whole lot better as well   

Martini returns to F1 with Williams   

WOW, the sound of these new spec F1 cars is very different to last years with each team having a different sound to there engines. The turbo whistle is sweet.

Hamilton stopped on track during his first lap. When he wants to enter the paddock, this guy wants to stop him as he said 'you are not allowed to enter the paddock'

Lewis: "But I'm a driver......."

Hahaha imagine that being Kimi, he would have simply shoved the guard on his ar5e and kept walking!!

In all fairness, he was only doing his job!. It could have been anyone with arace suit and helmet. Even those guys from chasers, haha

RU

Yeah!

YEAH!

Awww!

Actually the best bit for me was when Vettel finished Q13 and didn even make it into to Q3, so he went on to say we will see how Ricardo goes in Q3 with that smug look he gives that implies something else, umm Vettel your team mate had pole in the dying seconds of Q3 and ended up Qualifying 2nd, suck them up and would of loved to seen his face as the Redbull camp erupted in applause wth the Aussie crowd and that smugness sure would of been moved of the reigning champs face!!

Ricciardo has been disqualified for exceeding the fuel flow limit. Red Bull are appealing for the decision. Interesting Times ahead....

Envy The Best wrote:

Yeah!

YEAH!

Awww!

Was actually amazing to hear and see, crowd showed heaps of love for homeboy Ricciardo.

Not bad for a number 2 driver! Hope he gets to keep the position, maybe Seb told them to mess with it so it looks like they're both on equal points again

The race went really quick for me today, it was lap 47 in what seemed like half an hour of racing. That means I really enjoyed it  Wish Malaysia was next weekend !

>Fuel sensor is faulty
>Gets new one
>New one is also faulty
>Told to replace new one with old one and race
>Gets DQ'd

GG FIA.

Envy The Best wrote:>Fuel sensor is faulty
>Gets new one
>New one is also faulty
>Told to replace new one with old one and race
>Gets DQ'd

GG FIA.

What are you talking about? The FIA is always full of great and innovative ideas. The step-noses, the new exhaust layouts on the new cars which means that the noise is halved from last year.

For a sport which has a main priority of spectators they are sure doing a lot to try and stop people from watching/going. That is honestly just bollocks. Dan Ricciardo puts in a great drive to stop Magnussen but due to something beyond his control he's now been stripped of his points. Fantastic job, FIA.

http://www1.skysports.com/formula-1/news/12433/9218561/australian-gp-organisers-say-the-quieter-engine-noise-could-breach-fom-contract

Claire Williams quoted as saying something along the lines of "people will get used to the noise (or lack thereof)".

IMHO the engine note itself sounds pretty great. Nice throaty growl with a little whine from the turbos spooling is pretty awesome. But unfortunately, whether it be the long-exit exhaust or simply the engine itself, the volume of the engine note is severely underwhelming. In the Ultimate Speed Comparison an RB7 went around the track I'm pretty sure, and the amount of noise from the V8 shook your insides and roared into your eyes. It really does give you a kick up the arse, the new cars sort of just tap you on the shoulder politely and ask if you're still awake.

Red Bull might actually have a case, and the FIA's posturing will probably come back to bite them. The FIA disqualified RIC for going over the fuel flow limit, not because Red Bull didn't comply with their shitty sensor. Sure, the sensor played a part later in the clarification, but the grounds for the DSQ was his fuel flow, not Red Bull taking the matters into their own hands.

If Red Bull can prove that they never exceeded 100kg/h, then they should not be DSQed on the basis that a clearly fault sensor (which FIA told them to replace previously... acknowledging it as faulty) is reading way too high.

And let's get serious, if people are crediting RIC's success with the extra margin given to him by having an accurate fuel flow sensor... what does that mean for all of the other teams? What if MERC's constantly read high while Force India's read low.. meaning that Force India could be using 104kg/h with merc only using 96kg/h... but both would read 100kg/h. That's a near 8% disparity in fuel usage... that's Frig MASSIVE... it doesn't surprise me that Red Bull is taking a stand here. At the very least to sort out this shit part early in the season.

You can't follow the rules when the tools used to enforce the rules are broken in the first place. This is grounds for a regulation change and could win Red Bull the case.


(NOTE: copy pasting opinions more eloquently written that i happen to agree with)

This is what I read, but as usual quotes can be takers out of context, personally I hope ricciardo get the point back. And this whole this is fixed, can live with a quiter F1 car, but rules and there interpretation and/or inconsistant equipment is a big worry, i guess we wait and see...

"The FIA said Ricciardo's car "exceeded constantly" the rules limiting fuel flow to 100kg per hour.

Allowing the fuel to flow faster than allowed in the regulations would give a team that did so a power advantage over others.
.
The FIA said on Sunday that Red Bull had been told during the race that telemetry readings showed the fuel flow on Ricciardo's car was too high but the team had failed to correct the situation.

Red Bull principal Christian Horner argued that inconsistencies with the meters had "been prevalent all weekend up and down the pit lane".

The stewards ruled that "regardless of the team's assertion that the sensor was at fault, it is not within their discretion to run a different fuel flow measurement method without the permission of the FIA."

RU

RBR and the FIA apparently agreed upon a correction factor of x% when measuring the fuel flow rate with the faulty or incorrectly calibrated or whatever fuel flow sensor.

I think that unless RBR can show the FIA's sensor was spitting out figures differing to their own figures by varying percantages (inconsistent figures, as Horner puts it) throughout the race, then they might not have had any reason to break their agreement with the FIA.

I hope Ricciardo gets his points back and I don't think RBR wouldn't follow the FIA's instructions without a bloody good reason.

At the end of the day RU's last quote has looked to be the FIA's ace up its sleeve since Sunday.

But hey, I'm just going by things iv read around the internets and stuffs.

RU four 86 wrote:
Allowing the fuel to flow faster than allowed in the regulations would give a team that did so a power advantage over others.

Thats assuming that the FIA's 101kg/hr is RB's 99kg/hr. What if RB's measured rate was 92kg/hr for the FIA's 100kg/hr?

The problem is we don't have all the numbers, and that will only come out in the appeal process.

Envy The Best wrote:

RU four 86 wrote:
Allowing the fuel to flow faster than allowed in the regulations would give a team that did so a power advantage over others.

Thats assuming that the FIA's 101kg/hr is RB's 99kg/hr. What if RB's measured rate was 92kg/hr for the FIA's 100kg/hr?

The problem is we don't have all the numbers, and that will only come out in the appeal process.

Wouldn't it also be possible that if Ricciardo was exceeding the fuel flow volume per hour, that he would not have enough fuel to complete the race? The cars are only limited to carry 100kg of fuel, so if he was "constantly" exceeding that margin of 100kg/hr wouldn't it have been impossible for him to complete the race?

Sorry if those are stupid questions, I'm just trying to get my head around it.

Zabbey21 wrote:

Envy The Best wrote:

RU four 86 wrote:
Allowing the fuel to flow faster than allowed in the regulations would give a team that did so a power advantage over others.

Thats assuming that the FIA's 101kg/hr is RB's 99kg/hr. What if RB's measured rate was 92kg/hr for the FIA's 100kg/hr?

The problem is we don't have all the numbers, and that will only come out in the appeal process.

Wouldn't it also be possible that if Ricciardo was exceeding the fuel flow volume per hour, that he would not have enough fuel to complete the race? The cars are only limited to carry 100kg of fuel, so if he was "constantly" exceeding that margin of 100kg/hr wouldn't it have been impossible for him to complete the race?

Sorry if those are stupid questions, I'm just trying to get my head around it.

Fuel rate is the flow of fuel into the engine at any one time, not the total amount of fuel used. Combust more fuel, get more power. Pedal to the metal the cars are only allowed to have a flow of 100kg per hour running into the engine, but obviously they're not running full throttle for the entirety of the race not to mention the tuning down of the engines during the safety car period.

Apparently its to stop teams from simply driving away from a threat instead of racing, which is totally what Nico just did in Melbourne.

Envy The Best wrote:

Zabbey21 wrote:

Envy The Best wrote:

RU four 86 wrote:
Allowing the fuel to flow faster than allowed in the regulations would give a team that did so a power advantage over others.

Thats assuming that the FIA's 101kg/hr is RB's 99kg/hr. What if RB's measured rate was 92kg/hr for the FIA's 100kg/hr?

The problem is we don't have all the numbers, and that will only come out in the appeal process.

Wouldn't it also be possible that if Ricciardo was exceeding the fuel flow volume per hour, that he would not have enough fuel to complete the race? The cars are only limited to carry 100kg of fuel, so if he was "constantly" exceeding that margin of 100kg/hr wouldn't it have been impossible for him to complete the race?

Sorry if those are stupid questions, I'm just trying to get my head around it.

Fuel rate is the flow of fuel into the engine at any one time, not the total amount of fuel used. Combust more fuel, get more power. Pedal to the metal the cars are only allowed to have a flow of 100kg per hour running into the engine, but obviously they're not running full throttle for the entirety of the race not to mention the tuning down of the engines during the safety car period.

Apparently its to stop teams from simply driving away from a threat instead of racing, which is totally what Nico just did in Melbourne.

Ah, okay, that makes sense. Cheers for the explanation mate.

I'm guessing that it's partly due to Mercedes having the best car on the grid (or so it seems) and the technical development of the Mercedes powertrain being far superior to even the closest rivals at Ferrari due to all the development they did last year on them. Also, not discounting Nico as a driver as he is bloody quick and proved it time and time again. If Ricciardo doesn't win it, I'd love to see Rosberg take it away from Shambles. He's a top driver and deserves some reward for all of his consistency.

Mercedes definately have the goods this year, thats for sure. Read somewhere too that they have the advantage of being a manufacturer team to not just bolt the engine on like other teams (including RB), but building it uniquely into the chassis itself. Even when compared to the Merc inside, say, the Mclaren or Williams.

Haha funny guy. Slightly overreacting perhaps? Meh

Fast forward to 16.02 for the best bit.

http://www1.skysports.com/f1/news/24239/9231815/christian-horner-reveals-why-red-bull-are-extremely-confident-of-winning-appeal

The World Champions argument centres on the wording of the FIA's Technical Regulations with Article 5.1.4 stating "Fuel mass flow must not exceed 100kg/h". However, as it does not say that this reading has to come from the FIA's sensor Red Bull feel they can use their own measurements to prove they did not breach the regulations.

"Our whole case is on the fact of which reading is correct," the Team Principal added.

"We have a sensor that is drifting and isn't reading correctly versus a fuel rail that we know is calibrated and we know that hasn't varied throughout the weekend and has subsequently been checked and found to be not faulty and hasn't moved or varied at all since it was installed on the car prior to the weekend.

"Our argument is very simple - that we haven't broken the Technical Regulations. That we haven't exceeded the fuel flow limit and that the sensor, which hopefully we will be able to demonstrate in the appeal, is erroneous.

Well then.