Ferrari/McLaren Espionage Story [merged]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

A couple of things about this...if true then Coughlan was given info about the floor on the Ferrari. It wasn't stolen, or discovered by illegal means. It was given to him. The only thing anyone is possibly guilty of is a Ferrari employee who passed on 'trade secrets'.

Secondly, if there was a question about the legallity of the floor then what is wrong with anyone raising the issue with the FIA? Should we condone a potential breaking of the rules simply because of where the information comes from, or is an illegal floor an illegal floor regardless?

---

it strikes me as strange that IF TRUE, people arent picking up on this point.

someone at Ferrari blows the whistle that they are using an illegal floor to McLaren, Mclaren do the right think and ask the FIA to clarify which they do, the floor is outlawed and the situation resolved.

now, the people that want Mclaren hung, drawn and quartered because Mikle was their employee and they are responsible for his actions should also be calling for Ferrari to be penalised for the ALLEDGED illegal conduct of their employee and that they were attempting to field a componant contrary to the rules.

now, I personally think this is all a load of horse sh*t but before you all jump up and down throwing stones, look at the glass house youre hiding behind first ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

A couple of things about this...if true then Coughlan was given info about the floor on the Ferrari. It wasn't stolen, or discovered by illegal means. It was given to him. The only thing anyone is possibly guilty of is a Ferrari employee who passed on 'trade secrets'.

Secondly, if there was a question about the legallity of the floor then what is wrong with anyone raising the issue with the FIA? Should we condone a potential breaking of the rules simply because of where the information comes from, or is an illegal floor an illegal floor regardless?

---

Brilliant logic.............just a shame it's not from this planet.

The Ferrari floor, like Renault's Mass-Damper that you defended last year, was legal until the FIA changed the regulations.

However, stealing 'trade secrets' is a crime....as is receiving stolen 'trade secrets'.

Honestly Arrows, even as a Ferrari fan I'm hoping that Mclaren's lawyers/advisors are better than you at trying to get them off!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tamburello

Brilliant logic.............just a shame it's not from this planet.

The Ferrari floor, like Renault's Mass-Damper that you defended last year, was legal until the FIA changed the regulations.

---

No, thats not the case.

The Ferrari floor was able to pass the FIA tests, proving that it ought not be able to flex. However, it was designed in a way to flex under a load greater that in the FIA tests. That is against the spirit of the rules, is it not? And, moreover, if it can flex in excess of the tolerances laid down in the rulebook, it is thus illegal.

I have yet to see a safe testing facility that allows an FIA delegate to measure the floor while the car is travelling at 190mph...... :D

The MD in the Renault was only deemed Illegal because someone in the FIA labelled it a 'moveable aerodynamic device'.

I mean, just how can a device, tucked out of the airflow inside the vehicle be aerodynamic?

Just to give you an idea of the oik that is Charlie Whiting, the Chauffeur here in the office used to fit sunroofs for the garage one BE used to work at with Charlie. Charlie was so chuffing inept, they did not even trust him to do the MOT's.

And look what he is doing now.......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

No, thats not the case.

The Ferrari floor was able to pass the FIA tests, proving that it ought not be able to flex. However, it was designed in a way to flex under a load greater that in the FIA tests. That is against the spirit of the rules, is it not? And, moreover, if it can flex in excess of the tolerances laid down in the rulebook, it is thus illegal.

I have yet to see a safe testing facility that allows an FIA delegate to measure the floor while the car is travelling at 190mph...... :D

---

It passed the tests, making it legal. What it did on the track could not be classified as illegal because, as you say, it couldn't be tested.

As for the 'spirit of the rules'....nobody has yet to be able to measure that either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tamburello

Brilliant logic.............just a shame it's not from this planet.

---

No, the shame is the need to dismiss anyone's view in this way :rolleyes: although it is easier to explain away a complex situation with oneliners than to discuss and debate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tamburello

Honestly Arrows, even as a Ferrari fan I'm hoping that Mclaren's lawyers/advisors are better than you at trying to get them off!

---

I have no wish to try to get anyone "off", as you put it. What I would like to see is a discussion about what is, after all, a major news story in F1.

At present the only "charge" McLaren have been summoned to answer (by the FIA) is that they "had unauthorised possession of documents and confidential information belonging to Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro, including information that could be used to design, engineer, build, check, test, develop and/or run a 2007 Ferrari Formula One car."

The "charge" itself raises more questions, none of which any of us have the answers to, and yet it appears that many have decided that McLaren are guilty of something/anything/everything and should be kicked out of F1.

Assuming someone is guilty, and then looking for "evidence" to support that "guilt" is hardly the right way to go about things. Or do you not agree?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tamburello

Brilliant logic.............just a shame it's not from this planet.

The Ferrari floor, like Renault's Mass-Damper that you defended last year, was legal until the FIA changed the regulations.

However, stealing 'trade secrets' is a crime....as is receiving stolen 'trade secrets'.

Honestly Arrows, even as a Ferrari fan I'm hoping that Mclaren's lawyers/advisors are better than you at trying to get them off!

---

IIRC, information about the infamous Honda fuel tank was provided by ex Honda employees who had moved to another team. Was that not also a trade secret by your definition?.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

No, the shame is the need to dismiss anyone's view in this way :rolleyes: although it is easier to explain away a complex situation with oneliners than to discuss and debate.

I have no wish to try to get anyone "off", as you put it. What I would like to see is a discussion about what is, after all, a major news story in F1.

At present the only "charge" McLaren have been summoned to answer (by the FIA) is that they "had unauthorised possession of documents and confidential information belonging to Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro, including information that could be used to design, engineer, build, check, test, develop and/or run a 2007 Ferrari Formula One car."

The "charge" itself raises more questions, none of which any of us have the answers to, and yet it appears that many have decided that McLaren are guilty of something/anything/everything and should be kicked out of F1.

Assuming someone is guilty, and then looking for "evidence" to support that "guilt" is hardly the right way to go about things. Or do you not agree?

---

I notice you haven't attempted to defend your logic, which is hardly discussing and debating either so get off the high horse.

Not once have I said that Mclaren are guilty, just that the charges against them are not easily dismissed with half-baked and incorrect statements as to what crime has potentially taken place.

Nor have I said you are wanting to get Mclaren 'off'....just that your argument is piss-poor.

I therefore stand by the statement that your logic is not of this planet and it's to be hoped Mclaren have a better line of defence.

If you want to take offence, then that is your perogative. Of course, if you could debate and discuss with a better line of argument, then you wouldn't be putting yourself in a position whereby someone could fire off a one-liner, but again, that is your choice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tamburello

Brilliant logic.............just a shame it's not from this planet.

The Ferrari floor, like Renault's Mass-Damper that you defended last year, was legal until the FIA changed the regulations.

However, stealing 'trade secrets' is a crime....as is receiving stolen 'trade secrets'.

Honestly Arrows, even as a Ferrari fan I'm hoping that Mclaren's lawyers/advisors are better than you at trying to get them off!

---

sorry, Im struggleing a bit with your interplanetary logic here ;)

You seem to be mistaking legality with finding ways to get around testing. The moving floor was illegal but Ferrari constructed it in such a way as to fudge it through testing forcing the FIA to revise their regulation on testing. i can think of 2 very similar situations in recent history other than the ones quoted. Michelin had a tyre that was legal when measured (at the beginning of the GP) but afterwards exceeded the original tyre specifications and was subsequently outlawed towards the end of the season. At the time, Ferrari were struggleing but after Michelin had to redesign the tyre, Ferrari won the championship.

Honda had a fuel tank that conformed to the regulations although the FIA president publicly called them cheats before the case. this was apparently squealed on by some ex employees and the FIA sprung a bit of a trap. I have no doubts that Honda were trying to fudge the rules a bit but half the other teams were doing the same but Honda got the rap. Banned for 2 races.

Ferrari should consider themselves lucky that they got away with it :D

now, for your "receiving trade secrets" bit. Can you provide a link of exactly what secrets they received?

I understood that it was an email but did it have specific plans or was it a tip off for them to look at something dodgy? I dont know and neither do you so its a bit silly to claim someone is or isn't guilty without holding a scap of evidence. as it stands, it looks like Mike received some information pertaining to a team trying to enter a car that contravened the regulations, which it did, and they informed the FIA to ask for clarification. The FIA investigated and deemed that it did not conform to the regulations but did to the testing procedures so they modified them to take into account Ferraris inginuity the same as they did with Honda and Michelin.

The Honda case was rather different. I remember seeing a sketch of the system with it's special return valve to the hidden tank. This system allowed a car to qualify at lower than regulation weight, and run every stint except the last one on a lower fuel load than other cars, and run lighter towards the end of stints except the last one. If I remember correctly, during the weighing after the race, Honda was asked if the tank was empty and they said yes. The stewards then tipped the car up and more fuel was drained from the car. However, this did not prove, at any stage, that the car was in fact running light at any stage during quals or the race.
The FIA then got Honda for using fuel as a ballast. Not sure if any other teams had such a system.
I think this is correct, unless my Alzeimer has already kicked in tonight. :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flat.tyres

sorry, Im struggleing a bit with your interplanetary logic here ;)

You seem to be mistaking legality with finding ways to get around testing. The moving floor was illegal but Ferrari constructed it in such a way as to fudge it through testing forcing the FIA to revise their regulation on testing. i can think of 2 very similar situations in recent history other than the ones quoted. Michelin had a tyre that was legal when measured (at the beginning of the GP) but afterwards exceeded the original tyre specifications and was subsequently outlawed towards the end of the season. At the time, Ferrari were struggleing but after Michelin had to redesign the tyre, Ferrari won the championship.

Honda had a fuel tank that conformed to the regulations although the FIA president publicly called them cheats before the case. this was apparently squealed on by some ex employees and the FIA sprung a bit of a trap. I have no doubts that Honda were trying to fudge the rules a bit but half the other teams were doing the same but Honda got the rap. Banned for 2 races.

Ferrari should consider themselves lucky that they got away with it :D

now, for your "receiving trade secrets" bit. Can you provide a link of exactly what secrets they received?

I understood that it was an email but did it have specific plans or was it a tip off for them to look at something dodgy? I dont know and neither do you so its a bit silly to claim someone is or isn't guilty without holding a scap of evidence. as it stands, it looks like Mike received some information pertaining to a team trying to enter a car that contravened the regulations, which it did, and they informed the FIA to ask for clarification. The FIA investigated and deemed that it did not conform to the regulations but did to the testing procedures so they modified them to take into account Ferraris inginuity the same as they did with Honda and Michelin.

---

On Planet Earth, contacting a rival with information about your employees designs is breaking the terms and conditions of your contract, which is a legally binding document.

Recieving information from a member of another team who has broken his contract to give you that information is in breach of FIA sporting regulations and is, in itself, breaching the terms of employment with your team because of that, not to mention that you are complicit in industrial espionage which carries both sporting and judicial penalties

With regard to "You seem to be mistaking legality with finding ways to get around testing", something that passes the test, like the Michelin tyres you're trying to be smart with, is legal.

What it does away from the test is not illegal because there is no way of verifying it's illegality. All that can be done is that the rules regarding the item in question is changed/re-interpreted by the scrutineers and a new policy of enforcement brought in which cannot be back-dated.

Neither Michelin nor Ferrari were told they were illegal when they used the tyres and floor respectively, just that future use of the parts in question would be considered to be illegal within the new interpretation of the regulations.

Which is just the same as the Mass-Damper issue of last year.

Hopefully the next time you enter the earths atmosphere, that information will be of some assistance.