Link suspension banned???

[MacFeegle]

Problem is , as I see it , if the linked suspension is to maintain aero stability , then so is the entire suspension system , as these things are always sprung very hard to begin with , to deal with the downforce they produce .
That keeps them within very close tolerances to begin with , and all the rest of the set-up is down to keeping the rubber on the road at the right ride height , which , for all is as close to the ground without scraping that plank off , because that's where the most ground effect is .

If I've got this right , isn't all suspension on these cars illegal if this really applies to the FRIC system ?
I get the reasoning , I suppose , but I'm quite puzzled as to how it doesn't apply , for the same reasoning , to the rest of the suspension .

I understand confusion Mr Bagwan.

Suspension is design to maintain ride in all cases. Plank is ground zero whicvh you must wear in race but not exceed max wear or show over with Stewards.

Main goal to ensure even wear plank but tricky cause car dive under brake and sit under gas so see saw.

Goal to make dive become sit and sit become dive = even and stable. Problem. How do this with convention = impossible so link like anti roll bar (which is also aero device in current rules).

See basic plan?

Car turn left so physics load right and roll bar move load left. FRIC same back and front.

Me think should be allowed as help car perform but technology go USA because FIA lady boy about spend. Disgrace. Make F1 Cartoon mouse.

So, you 100% right. If FRIC illegal then roll bar illegal. Also argue centrufugal wheel channeling and aero over suspension arm etc. All moveable and design to influense aero.

just FIA bang drum and be cock.

[Nem14]

The FIA's job seems to be making sure F1 teams spend as much money as possible. Lol!

[Bagwan]

I understand confusion Mr Bagwan.

Suspension is design to maintain ride in all cases. Plank is ground zero whicvh you must wear in race but not exceed max wear or show over with Stewards.

Main goal to ensure even wear plank but tricky cause car dive under brake and sit under gas so see saw.

Goal to make dive become sit and sit become dive = even and stable. Problem. How do this with convention = impossible so link like anti roll bar (which is also aero device in current rules).

See basic plan?

Car turn left so physics load right and roll bar move load left. FRIC same back and front.

Me think should be allowed as help car perform but technology go USA because FIA lady boy about spend. Disgrace. Make F1 Cartoon mouse.

So, you 100% right. If FRIC illegal then roll bar illegal. Also argue centrufugal wheel channeling and aero over suspension arm etc. All moveable and design to influense aero.

just FIA bang drum and be cock.

I get it Mr. Mac .

But , consider this .
If the goal of this system is to add pressure frontward when braking to counter that dive , isn't that the exact goal of making that suspension stiff in the first place ?

Certainly , it is an improvement on just stiffening , but clearly , I think , they have the same effect .
In fact , it's really an improvement on the same concept in that way .

I think , sadly , that banning it is not such a good thing to begin with , as it might be something that could be better developed , and then sent to the road car sector , where it might be really useful , coupled with ABS .

Instead of the current potentially disastrous situation we have the FIA setting up for the German GP , back footing the home team , the leading team , mid-season , whilst forcing buckets of spending , risking mid-season mutiny , amid protests and bans and appeals , they could easily have said nothing but that they would not be allowed next year , as an effort to slow the cars down for the reason of safety .
Perhaps even to have said that they would ban it three races from now , instead of next race , to allow a little time , and maybe a little less cash to be spent in such an urgent situation .

Given that the idea that this improvement could be argued to be safer , as it helps to stabilize the attitude of the car , makes the banning on safety grounds a bit spurious , but easily argued that it would slow the cars down to at least some degree .

That seems to me to make more sense than banning , mid-season or not , on the grounds of movable aerodynamic device .