http://www.motorsportforums.com/foru...d.php?t=122352
happy now? or do I face a penalty for breaching the forum rules? :p :
Printable View
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