Renault investigated by FIA !

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

11th November 2007, 17:09
Azumanga Davo

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fiero 5.7

Dateline Paris Feb. 25, 2008..........................................

In a statement released today, FIA President Max Mosley sought to reassure the fans of Formula 1 that the FIA does indeed listen to, and respond to public opinion..... "

And we have told him how he is a nong and asked him to leave the post for how many years now? :D
11th November 2007, 20:34
passmeatissue

Quote:

Originally Posted by tinchote

That's not the case, because for obvious reasons the enforcement of the rules is made in terms of measurements. Otherwise, a marshal would be able to say for example "this part flexes too much" and ban a car. Rules like 3.15 express what is usually called "the spirit of the rules", which is the guide used to determine the measurement test. And that's precisely what happened after Australia: it was noted that these movable floors complied with the letter of the rules but not the spirit, and the measurements were changed accordingly.

This is being discussed (I hope) in detail on the FIA slams Hill thread, please join in there :)
11th November 2007, 20:42
Malbec

Well well well, the FIA are in a bit of a tight spot. They set a precedent by hitting McLaren very hard but the problem with that is that they then have to hit any other team doing something similar equally hard to be seen as being fair.

In this case McLaren info was actually on a Renault computer and 15 engineers are supposed to have seen the data which is 14 more than in the McLaren case. On the face of it the evidence against Renault is stronger than the evidence against Mclaren was, so what is the FIA going to do?

Interestingly I also can't see Alonso being all too keen to sign up for a team that might suddenly not be scoring any points in 2008 and may have a whopping fine put against them so where is he going to go?
12th November 2007, 05:29
markabilly

Quote:

Originally Posted by passmeatissue

Well I personally am hoping to get a bit more information about this. Max saying that McLaren were running the same floor as Ferrari doesn't square with Jonathan Neale trying to introduce the issue into the WMSC hearing.

But even if McLaren were, that wouldn't make it comply. The problem is that the FIA said the design complied with the letter of the rules, but it did not. Read clause 3.15. It's no answer to say "the FIA said it was OK". That is the problem, not the solution.

Max does not really say this ---what he says is the test was changed or revised, and as a result, the three teams had a floor problem. The Mac design could have been totally different, may not have lowered as much, may not have relied on springs, may have used some special composite material that flexed/deflected at speed....

there has never really been much of an explanation for how the ferrari floor actually operated, and its design details. Same for the Mac and RB floors.

So one can not really say much except to speculate.
12th November 2007, 07:52
wmcot

Quote:

Originally Posted by passmeatissue

Well I personally am hoping to get a bit more information about this. Max saying that McLaren were running the same floor as Ferrari doesn't square with Jonathan Neale trying to introduce the issue into the WMSC hearing.

But even if McLaren were, that wouldn't make it comply. The problem is that the FIA said the design complied with the letter of the rules, but it did not. Read clause 3.15. It's no answer to say "the FIA said it was OK". That is the problem, not the solution.

Actually Max said a "similar device" but we don't have the details to know if it was the same design. I assume he means that the device had the same effect (flexing floors) whether it was the same design or not.

So you are agreeing that if the Ferrari floor was "illegal" there is the possibility that the McLaren and RedBull floors were also "illegal" at Melbourne according to 3.15?
12th November 2007, 11:57
passmeatissue

Quote:

Originally Posted by wmcot

Actually Max said a "similar device" but we don't have the details to know if it was the same design. I assume he means that the device had the same effect (flexing floors) whether it was the same design or not.

So you are agreeing that if the Ferrari floor was "illegal" there is the possibility that the McLaren and RedBull floors were also "illegal" at Melbourne according to 3.15?

Yes I think I have to :mad: . I posted on the Max slams Hill thread that the Macca floor seems to have hinged down too.
12th November 2007, 12:03
passmeatissue

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dylan H

Well well well, the FIA are in a bit of a tight spot. They set a precedent by hitting McLaren very hard but the problem with that is that they then have to hit any other team doing something similar equally hard to be seen as being fair.

In this case McLaren info was actually on a Renault computer and 15 engineers are supposed to have seen the data which is 14 more than in the McLaren case. On the face of it the evidence against Renault is stronger than the evidence against Mclaren was, so what is the FIA going to do?

Interestingly I also can't see Alonso being all too keen to sign up for a team that might suddenly not be scoring any points in 2008 and may have a whopping fine put against them so where is he going to go?

Ron could have stitched Fernando up, couldn't he, if he'd waited till he'd signed and the other teams had confirmed their drivers, then made the complaint. Bet he was tempted.
12th November 2007, 13:11
ioan

Quote:

Originally Posted by passmeatissue

Ron could have stitched Fernando up, couldn't he, if he'd waited till he'd signed and the other teams had confirmed their drivers, then made the complaint. Bet he was tempted.

No he couldn't, he complained about Renault already back in August. ;)
12th November 2007, 13:42
passmeatissue

Quote:

Originally Posted by ioan

No he couldn't, he complained about Renault already back in August. ;)

"But while conducting an interview with team boss Briatore, a journalist for The Times says the Italian "seemed puzzled as to why McLaren had waited so long to make a formal complaint to the FIA, which they did this week."

In the days leading up to Renault's FIA summons, McLaren refugee Fernando Alonso was reportedly imminently close to agreeing a deal to return to the French team in 2008."
http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headline...11165618.shtml
12th November 2007, 13:43
ArrowsFA1

It's ironic that when Pat Symonds was asked by Nigel Roebuck if he thought McLaren were guilty he said "yes, I suppose so", but when asked what exactly they were guilty of he said "not very much".

In the light of what's happening to Renault I wonder if he has the same opinion now.

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page