Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Probably not assuming, but maybe hoping.
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Probably not assuming, but maybe hoping.
Surely all it would take then is for the FIA to issue a press release stating that the rules for 2008 will be tightened up. That way McLaren get what they want (a definitive rule) and we get what we want (Kimi to stay champion as McLaren can then drop this stupid appeal)
What disturbs me deeply with this thread is that there are only a couple of posts that actually ponder reasons why the cars were not punished. And there was and are very good reasons as why they should not be punished.
And that establishes a very good reason for McLaren to file a complaint, because at best the rule in question is too vague to be followed and as it is, it should be clarified.
The rule states that fuel on board has to be no more than 10 degrees cooler than the ambient temperature.
However, the temperature of the fuel on board is not measured, but the temperature entering the car. I am going to assume that there is still some fuel left in the tank and the tank itself must be quite hot. Therefore the fuel immediately heats up at least a little bit when it finds an equilibrium with the tank and the fuel left in the tank. Therefore, the fuel temperature will most likely to be within regulations on board even though it may be a couple of degrees too cold in the fuel rig.
Secondly, it is not estasblished what is the official and correct ambient temperature. The teams are using data given by a weather forecast company while there is a temperature meter somewhere laying in the sun and giving very different readings. And either of them could be used as a reference temperature, because the official temperature is not established.
Therefore, we have no way of telling the fuel temperature on board and we do not know what is the temperature it should be compared to.
Thus, the marshalls made the only possible decision and punished no-one.
So case closed, the verdict will not change, but hopefully FIA will elaborate, what they mean by that rule.
Move on, there is nothing to see here and Kimi will keep his title. Good night.
Very good points, with the exception that if McLaren wanted a clarification, they could have asked for a clarification, which by the way is far cheaper than al appeal ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Juppe
Funny that you have brought this up, because I was thinking about the temperature measurements all morning.Quote:
Originally Posted by Juppe
First of all, I'd like to know whether the thermometers were calibrated by a recognised scientific standards laboratory that morning before the measurements were taken.
Then there is the very good point that Juppe brought up about where the temperature of the fuel is taken. So I would ask how many readings were taken from the fuel from within the fuel tanks and whether these readings were consistant!
I used to run Soils Testing Laboratories for many years, here in Australia and abroad, and I can verify that even temperatures taken from within an enclosed oven ( used for moisture content determinations) can vary significantly. We had our ovens checked by the standards people (can't remember their name now) and we had to discard some of the ovens that showed variations in excess of around 1.5 degrees C.
Now taking the temperature of the fuel in motion before entry into the fuel tanks would show significant differences from the fuel within the tank. As Juppe mentions, there is some residual fuel in the tank which when mixed with the ingoing fuel could significantly affect the temperature of the total fuel load once the tank is filled. Then, of course, depending from where inside the tank the temperatures are taken, you would get significant variation in the fuel temperatures. I don't remembre seeing anyone from FIA or the stewards sticking a thermometer inside the fuel tanks and taking temperatures at various points within the fuel tanks. This procedure, to provide accurate readings wouldn't take much longer than around ten minutes, so the time factor wouldn't affect the car in the pits that much would it? :rolleyes: I mean he would only lose a couple of places but in a long race over 200 km, this would hardly matter.
And this is even before we go into the subject of ambient temperatures specified by the FOM, which I am willing to bet, nobody bothered to get running temperature checks each quarter of a minute with standard calibrated thermometers for these FOM readings displayed.
A good lawyer with the help of a good physicist or chemist or engineer would shoot down the charges against BMW and Williams in a flash.
it won't matter, even if the FIA punishes Williams and BMW, they can't take away driver points.
Mclaren stole Ferrari documents but the drivers weren't given any punishment, but the constructor was banished for 2 years and a 100 million dollar fine.
Kimi won the WDC fair and square, it was Hamiltons own fault, when Alonso got by, he didn't have to push to get back in front cause he was still champion even if the Ferraris and Alonso were ahead of him.
Absolutely right, Hamilton misses the title because of his own mistakes both in China and in Brazil – it’s the only reason. I think the pressure from English media was too much for him. TV and all the newspapers were giving a picture of their new racing star like he all ready was a world champion. They was pushing him too much and that was creating the atmosphere around him of a "wonder kid" or "golden boy" which made it very difficult for him (after all he was a rookie with his first season in F1 and didn’t have the experience necessary to a champion). :)Quote:
Originally Posted by harvick#1
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63664Quote:
The FIA's International Court of Appeal will hear McLaren's case against the decision of the Brazilian Grand Prix stewards on Thursday, November 15.
According to Max:
Quote:
"For us the world championship is over, the result is what it is. A team presented an appeal; at the moment, this doesn't change anything - it's up to them to prove they are right."
You could argue whether McLaren had a right to appeal. They could have protested the result, but they didn't. Apparently they didn't measure the temperature of the fuel. But even if the cars classified ahead of Hamilton would be excluded, would this change his position? The Court of Appeal will have to rule on that."
But they don't want a clarification they want the others to be punished.Quote:
Originally Posted by tinchote
And they have to reasons:
1. Trying to win the WDC for Hamilton, but it's very unlikely
2. Trying to get more WCC points to offset some more millions from their $ 100.000.000 fine. As it stands they virtually got less points than Ferrari this season and they have to pay in excess of $ 50.000.000 fine. If however they manage to get Williams and BMW disqualified than they will get more points than earlier and they will also have most constructor points in which case there is more TV revenue virtually allocated to them and thus they will have to pay a smaller fine in the end.
So they are not appealing because they want a rule clarification, that's just a smoke screen as they have two way better reasons for an appeal than a mere rule clarification.
Not to mention that they did often seek for clarifications in the past without appealing (Renault's MDS, Ferrari floor beeing a few examples from the last 2 seasons).
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinchote
That is very true as well. :)
As I understand it, McLaren's objection is that these points had been looked at and decided in a minuted meeting, using the correct formal process. So in theory the FOM temperature was the official temperature and the refuelling tank fuel temperature was the one that had to be 10 degrees below ambient. Either the stewards didn't know, or like too many stewards before them they looked at the short-term fallout instead of running the sport by the rules. They spent 3 hours deliberating so that does make it look like a "judgement call" - taking the easy way out.
So I think McLaren are right to challenge a poor bit of officiating, to improve things next time, but I don't think they or anyone else want to change the result.
Quote:
Originally Posted by passmeatissue
Further to my reply to Juppe's post, I would like to ask, just for my own satisfaction if I may, the exact ruling which states the FOM temperature is the official temperature, and how this is measured and certified correct. I would also ask, if I may, the reference to the refuelling tank fuel temperature as the one which has to be correct, and how this is measured and the measuring instruments certified accurate and correct.
I would stress, at this stage, that this is only for my own knowledge. However, others may infer that the exact scientific procedures for temperature measurements and references may have been, at best, dubious, and quite possibly inaccurate.
This was on pitpass (http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpa...s_art_id=33298)
quoting McLaren... "The team believes that the FIA has, in written clarification of the Technical Regulations and in its minutes of two Formula 1 Team Manager meetings, made clear how it would interpret and manage the Regulations and Procedures associated with the control of fuel temperatures. This process was followed in the normal manner by the FIA Technical Delegate following the Brazilian Grand Prix and the irregularities were reported by him to the Stewards of the meeting."
However Ted Kravitz on ITV (http://www.itv-f1.com/Feature.aspx?T...tz&PO_ID=41190) says that the FOM temperature data was in disarray, perhaps too much so to use even if they wanted to.
How can a organization with the resources that the FIA has, always have such a problem enforcing their rules. You would think that a company this big could hire competent people and provide them with the proper tools for the job. This problem of selectively enforcing the rules has been going on for years.
It's bad for the competitors and for the reputation of the sport.
I agree! there's a good item on this on planet-f1 today - http://www.planetf1.com/story/0,1895...828705,00.html
Even if I think McLaren are acting like a-holes in this situation and should take defeat graviously and not try what they're trying.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
be honest... if Ferrari would be involved in this situation you and the other Ferrari fans would be giving us 9 pages long threads with hundreds of posts about how BMW and Williams should stick to the rules and that Ferrari deserves the title cause the other cars weren't legal anyway... and bla bla
I mean this is getting boring to read in every single thread "RD and McLaren are the most pathetic losers ever" when you'd be supporting Ferrari if they wre doing the same!
Link Please!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by jso1985
this whole thread...
Just for my knowledge, is it the temperature of the fuel in the fuel rigs or the temperature in the car or both that is covered by the FIA rules? It would be really simple to require a calibrated temperature sensor in the car's fuel tank which could easily be monitored if you want to get that precise. The same goes for the fuel rig.
(Perhaps they should take drivers' and team principals' temperatures, too?) ;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jso1985
but you didn't provide a link ;) :D
http://www.motorsportforums.com/foru...d.php?t=122352
happy now? or do I face a penalty for breaching the forum rules? :p :
Like Valve here I myself have been involved in a lot of industrial measurements and it is always very difficult to tell, what are the correct readings from any measurement.
Therefore, a protocol should be established how the ambient temperature is measured, what meter is used, how it is calibrated and how the information will be transferred to the teams.
With critical measurements it is quite normal to use multiple meters and use the average value or the middle value as the reference reading.
If it is true that the FOM meter was directly in the sun, it was an amateurish mistake and the results should be ignored. Not only the reading is wrong, but the reading can also change very quickly so it would be very difficult to follow the rule.
I don't understand why the rule couldn't establish a definite minimum temperature. For example, the lowest temperature pumped into the cars can not be lower than 10 or 15 °C.
That should be clear enough and easy to follow.
It is strange, isn't it? Temperatures get measured all the time in F1 and they are obviously extremely good at it.
It does seem clear though that the FIA had clarified that the fuel measurement was to be taken on a sample from the refuelling rig and not from the car, so I don't know why the stewards were agonising about that. Well, we have to suspect they were looking for an excuse not to change the result.
Also we don't know (I don't, anyway) if Meteo France were employed by the FIA or just those two teams, or any other teams. Nor do we know what the samples from the other teams measured, whether they were similar or very different, and whether the other teams had strictly used the FOM data as, apparently, they had been told to.
Funny how the FIA 'transparency' comes and goes... maybe we'll find out more on the 15th.
Indeed. I wonder if any teams have 'got away' with something similar at other times — unless every car really is checked at every race.Quote:
Originally Posted by passmeatissue
Of course you do! Now you are advertising an internet forum on your post!!! :mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by jso1985
:rotflmao:
Quote:
Originally Posted by passmeatissue
This is indeed strange. If accurate temperature gauges are installed in the refuelling rigs, these can be monitored instantaneously at any time and compared with the temperature provided by the FOM, and provided these are accurately measured according to a specified standard procedure, then cars can be black flagged as soon as the temperature variation between the fuel rig and the FOM exceeds the specified tolerances.
My laboratory technicians used to measure the temperature of the asphaltic concrete (bituminous concrete or hot mix to others) on the trucks and if these are outside tolerances, the truck load is dumped.
Here we have a billion dollar industry and there is confusion by those measuring the temperatures? This is not rocket science, is it!! I just don't understand how things can appear so lax which can then cause disputes later on in F1 races.
Just like the timing system in Brazil in 2003...Quote:
Originally Posted by Valve Bounce
Strange as it may seem, I have not checked the positions of the various cars up to and including Lewis Hamilton's and the time difference in their finish positions.
So I would suggest one outcome of the appeal hearing for members hre to comment on.
If the temperature difference of the BMW and Williams cars did give these cars an advantage, would the gap to Lewis Hamilton have been such that he would have caught the 6th and maybe even the 5th car had they operated on the same fuel temperatures of his car? Did they have such an unfair advantage over Lewis Hamilton as to deprive him of finishing ahead of one or more of these cars and thus a chance of winning the Championship?
If yes, then Lewis Hamilton should be declared joint winner of the championship. If not, then there is only the issue of temperature determinations to be cast in stone to avoid future doubts.
Definitely not. F1 results should never depend on a probability of something happening — basically, a 'what if'. Say Hamilton may have been able to have caught those ahead of him if their fuel temperatures had been correct. He may have collided with one of them while doing so. You cannot decide a race result with that as the basis to the reasoning.Quote:
Originally Posted by Valve Bounce
I think that most people agree that there is no way the temperature difference could have affected the result of the race.Quote:
Originally Posted by Valve Bounce
Which most are you talking about. Any racing i've been involved in trick gas makes a pretty good difference (until you get caught)
Not sure what trick gas exactly is, but if you are talking about a gasoline with different specifications that is completely different thing than to have a legal fuel 3-4 °C too cool for about three laps.Quote:
Originally Posted by spiritone
I would argue that the difference in performace would be impossible to detect.
Well they say this gave an advantage of 1sec on the whole distance for BMW and Williams...Quote:
Originally Posted by Juppe
By trick gas i mean, not the stuff that comes out your corner gas station pump. Most racing gas is specially blended gas for racing. Their are numerous products that you can blend with race gas to give you an advantage. Some legal, some not.
I'm sure that the gas that is used in F1 is highly developed fuel with ingrediants that i'm sure we"ll never hear about. I'm sure when we hear the evidence from the appeal ( if we get to hear any) we might get a clearer picture of what the advantage was in terms of performance gain.
Not sure about that.Quote:
Originally Posted by spiritone
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonJippo
Well, if this is correct, then I would suggest that the Williams and BMW cars be penalised 1 second each. End of story.
The gas they use in F1 is very strictly regulated, and it is basically "street gasoline". There were crazy times regarding fuel in the past, but those days are long gone.Quote:
Originally Posted by spiritone
Mike Gascoigne was quoted as saying about the cool fuel issue "it could be 5 or 10 hp easily". Because of the effect on charge temperature.
I thought it was supposed to be "pump fuel", but then Ferrari are thanking Shell for their contribution, so there must be some scope for messing with it. Before they regulated it used to be really toxic, apparently, dangerous to handle for the crews.
Yes, it was significantly more volatile.Quote:
Originally Posted by passmeatissue
IF lewis hasnt made that mistake where he lost a chunk of time and IF mclaren did a two stopper than that stupid 3 stopper this would be irreleventQuote:
Originally Posted by DonJippo
Would McLaren bother if Hammy won the WDC? Somehow I dont think so.......
For it to have any advantage would the fuel have to stay as cool through the whole race? Without the gas tank being insulated that wouldnt happen I dont think.
They said during the telecast that it was about 60C temp on the race track