mclaren moveable aero parts

[jedii]

when lewis wheel hub feel out on the pit stop, they stuck it back in after which the thing was spinning with the wheel surely this makes it a moveable aero part, which is banned right? so surley he should be disquilifed i wonder if the stewards noticed this... unlikely

[SGWilko]

when lewis wheel hub feel out on the pit stop, they stuck it back in after which the thing was spinning with the wheel surely this makes it a moveable aero part, which is banned right? so surley he should be disquilifed i wonder if the stewards noticed this... unlikely

Would they [The stewards] need to prove that a part, when designed and working properly is not a moveable device, is intentionally broken by the pit crew, costing the car in question 13 seconds, in order to attempt to gain an on track advantage by making the said broken dvice moveable..........

[Easy Drifter]

And disqualify Webber for loss of light!

[Helicon_One]

By the logic of original poster, any car which suffers damage through a collision which loosens any aerodynamic part of the bodywork should be disqualified from the race.

[markabilly]

Would they [The stewards] need to prove that a part, when designed and working properly is not a moveable device, is intentionally broken by the pit crew, costing the car in question 13 seconds, in order to attempt to gain an on track advantage by making the said broken dvice moveable..........

Yeah, penalize those cheaters good......ferrari is probably thinking gee, why did we not think of that in Australia, maybe Kimi would not have run off the track....set a good example by DQ both LH and HK, that will stop such stuff in the future

[jjanicke]

when lewis wheel hub feel out on the pit stop, they stuck it back in after which the thing was spinning with the wheel surely this makes it a movable aero part, which is banned right? so surly he should be disqualified i wonder if the stewards noticed this... unlikely

The device is already a "movable aerodynamic device" in it's functioning form. How can it become a "movable aerodynamic device" after being installed incorrectly.

The only reason this thing is allowed in the first place is because Ferrari somehow convinced the FIA that it shouldn't be classified an "aerodynamic device" because it's part of the breaking systems. Last I understood it extracted air through the brakes for cooling, and it moves when the tires steer. Personally I'm baffled how a MOVING AIR extractor is not a "movable aerodynamic device" in the first place.

[JSH]

The device is already a "movable aerodynamic device" in it's functioning form. How can it become a "movable aerodynamic device" after being installed incorrectly.

But when installed correctly it doesn't move.

[DimitraF1]

FIA-RRARI RULES. GET OVER IT

[jjanicke]

But when installed correctly it doesn't move.

Yes it does. Wheel turns left, the faring turns left, etc.

The definition of a static aerodynamic device is one that is rigidly attached to the chassis. The brake faring is not attached to the chassis and moves with the movements of the wheels, theoretically being a movable areo device. But like I already said Ferrari were somehow able to convince the FIA is wasn't and now mostly everybody is doing it.

[DonJippo]

The definition of a static aerodynamic device is one that is rigidly attached to the chassis. The brake faring is not attached to the chassis and moves with the movements of the wheels, theoretically being a movable areo device. But like I already said Ferrari were somehow able to convince the FIA is wasn't and now mostly everybody is doing it.

Formula 1 car moves around the track, does that make it moveable aerodynamic device