petty bickering about a racing incident that happened 10 years ago thread

[ShiftingGears]

A lucky start, but look at how obviously they used LC here. Just look at the "magnificent" start Schumacher had there.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=G61AWO5mkYc

Ha.

I just noticed that Schumacher overtook Senna on the warmup lap :

[Knock-on]

Ha.

I just noticed that Schumacher overtook Senna on the warmup lap :

Ha!!

That's more like it.

Let's get back to the petty bickering. People are taking it all too seriously

[PolePosition_1]

Because unlike Benetton, who were never found to have TC on their system, Williams admitted that they had it. So what stopped them from using it in races? Why are you not hunting them with the same rigour?

These are not comparable at all and I`m pretty sure you know it.



You have to still to show that Benetton had TC, I am still waiting buddy.


Of course you can.
Can I ask if you were a Hill fan?


It is funny how you earlier complained about some of my comments and now you call me niave (sic).
Look, Benetton had LC. Never proved they used it, but it is not even in the topic really. Topic is TC. Now show me how they had TC. That`s all I am asking, you have not done that.

So why did they not delete the LC out of their system?



A lucky start, but look at how obviously they used LC here. Just look at the "magnificent" start Schumacher had there.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=G61AWO5mkYc

I remember when Häkkinen twice came from 3rd position in 2000 to lead in the first corner. LC maybe?

But at least you finally admitted that you cannot prove they used LC.


None was found despite extensive searching. You have nothing besides "you being sure." That counts for nothing unfortunately for you. Give me just some proof as to them having it, for example audio proof would be good.

Answer these questions I asked already earlier.
Why was TC not detected in Benetton Telemetry?
Was was is that no one heard TC, when we have seen in recent years that TC makes an obvious noise?
Why is it that in 14 years no one from the team has said anything, despite surley quite a few people having to know about it, if they really had had TC?

Because Williams didn't win the title. Did Williams actually have this system installed during the races? Post the link of the DC interview. Its different testing it in testing and having it fully functioning during course of the season.

The not the same situation, but your saying its ok for them to have a totally illegal system on the car because it was legal the previous season. Its not, if its made illegal, you remove it totally.

I've said Garry that I cannot prove Bennetton had TC. So I don't understand why your mocking me that I still can't prove it when I've said I can't prove it.

But they had LC, which works from the same system, so its highly likely. But as I said in my previous post, if you can't prove they had it, you shouldn't punish them. But we can prove they had LC.

Yes I am a Damon Hill fan, you say of course I can ask, but you didn't answer my question. Are you a Schumacher fan?

Erm, niave is a description, saying someone is talking out of their arse is an insult. Theres a difference. If I call a 12 year old child niave, I'm not insulting them, I'm just describing their nature.

And I think its particularly niave position to take, to assume Benetton didn't use LC when they had it fully functioning within the car. This added up with their splended starts they had, and fact it took them 4 months to hand over any evidence, and fact they denied having it, it was found, they admitted having it saying it can't be switched on, found it could be switched on by both a laptop and within the cockpit itself, and they claimed they didn't realise it. When the FIA asked them if they didn't know it existed, why was the turn on function so secretly hidden, they said so it wasn't turned on accidently. It was just lie after lie.

If you honestly believe they didn't use it thats fair enough, I can't prove they did use it, but to think they didn't use it, with all the facts I've mentioned above, I honestly believe its a naive position to take. Sorry if you disagree.

Well, fact that the system was so well hidden, maybe suggested they tried the best to hide it. But I don't think main question would be why didn't they rid it totally, main question I got is if they were innocent why take 4 month to show evidence?

I can prove they had LC, Benetton admitted to having it. Don't know what more proof you want?

Telementery, I don't know how sophisticated it was or if even used in 1994 to be honest.

And I don't know whether or not the FIA looked into it or not. There is no mention of it in the statement released by them.

The noise, well at San Marino when the FIA first asked to see demonstrations of their system, so presumably they must have suspected it from somewhere, presumably the noise would have been one area to raise the issue up.

But fact is the FIA wouldn't have been able to penalise a team for LC or TC on grounds of noise engine makes - so thats presumably why no mention of it.

Why is it 8 years ago a man was arrested for Jill Dando's murder and he has only now been released? Surely someone must know.

Why do crimes go unsolved for 20 years? Surely someone must know something.

Your asking me to answer the impossible questions! I don't know answer in same way presumably you don't.

If you think Benetton MUST be innocent if no one has come out in 14 years, its just another example of having a very naive view on life.

[Rollo]

Look, Benetton had LC. Never proved they used it, but it is not even in the topic really. Topic is TC. Now show me how they had TC. That`s all I am asking, you have not done that.

Answer these questions I asked already earlier.
Why was TC not detected in Benetton Telemetry?
Was was is that no one heard TC, when we have seen in recent years that TC makes an obvious noise?

Why is it that in 14 years no one from the team has said anything, despite surley quite a few people having to know about it, if they really had had TC?

http://grandprix.com/gpe/rr549.html

These included fully-automatic gearboxes, traction control and launch control - a system which allowed a driver to simply push the accelerator fully on when the start was given without needing to pay attention to wheel-spin or gear changes.

http://grandprix.com/gpe/rr550.html

There was increasing discontent that the rules were not being properly policed with allegations that some teams were using traction control and automatic starting systems.

http://www.grandprix.com/gpe/cref-czatad.html

the FIA announced that it had analyzed the software of Michael Schumacher's Benetton at the San Marino Grand Prix and discovered that the system included a "launch control" feature which could be activated with a laptop computer using a mysterious "option 13" on a list of 10 options. The FIA investigation concluded that there was "no direct evidence" of traction control having been used - although Benetton was fined $100,000 for failing to supply the governing body with access to its systems within the time limits dictated.

FIA Rulings Document - 94/216. Nov 7, 1994

A formal investigation has been concluded with regards the named "option 13" in the transmission software for the Benetton B194.

The FIA has not found sufficient evidence to determine the nature of the characteristics of this option, but due to the nature of the penalty already imposed on car no.5 at the Italian and Portugese Grands Prix, and the position that Williams F1 already holds a numerical advantage in the FIA Constructors Championship, a meeting of team principals has decided that in the interests of competition, no formal investigation will be entered into.

reprinted: A-Z of Grand Prix Cars, David Hodges, 2000.

Why has no-one said anything? Because they've all moved on. Williams won the Constructors Championship, and an agreement sealed the fate on the B194.
It still doesn't change the fact that Benetton may or may not have had it, it's just impossible to prove and with 14 years passing even more so.

As for "that" incident? Schumacher knew exactly what he was doing. I agree with James Allen's verdict in the biog.

Canadian Grand Prix was in June. Thats when they start their developments of next years cars by todays standards!

They wouldn't have been that far into development in June 1993 for the 1994 car.

To get the system fully implemented and functioning for 1994, they'd have had to have continued working on the system much past June 1993.

So your original answer doesn't stand.

Yes it does....

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2007/03/2...heel-steering/

"Of all the exotic technologies to be banned from Formula 1 through the years, four wheel steering could perhaps be the only innovation to have been developed after it was outlawed.

The FIA made clear early in 1993 that ‘driver aids’ would be banned for 1994. A range of technologies were included in that all-encompassing phrase including one not yet in use - four-wheel steering.

Although front-and-rear-wheel steering appeared on road cars such as the Honda Legend and Mitsubishi 3000 GTO, it would never be raced in Formula 1. But late in 1993, despite knowing it would be illegal in a matter of weeks, Benetton gave the system a go anyway - and came damn close to racing it.

Following his second Grand Prix win in Estoril, Portugal in 1993, Michael Schumacher stayed on at the circuit with the Benetton team to test a new ‘C’ version of the Cosworth-powered B193.

The major addition to this car was a hydraulically operated rear steering rack, which Moog electro-valves able to alter the steering angle of the rear wheels by two degree in either direction.

In an attempt to minimise any safety implications the hydraulics were designed to go into a preset ‘fail safe’ position in the event of failure, pointing the wheels straight.

The system was also designed to be turned off and on at will, allowing the driver to run the car with a conventional front wheel steer set up if he preferred.

And in the event that was exactly what drivers Schumacher and Riccardo Patrese did prefer, finding the four wheel steer set up added nothing to the car in terms of laptime. But it did, as far as Patrese was concerned, produce an unusual handling sensation.

The lap times testified that if the system added any to the car’s performance, it wasn’t very much. Schumacher said:

'It feels very good, but actually it doesn’t change things a lot. I am using the same lines and there isn’t a lot of movement at the rear. It makes it a little easier, but right now the system doesn’t work very well in the slow corners, so we might not use it in Adelaide'

They didn’t use it in Adelaide or Suzuka. Schumacher ran it in testing on Friday morning at Suzuka, and then turned the system off.

But Benetton’s failure to find any advantage with the system didn’t change the FIA’s decision to ban it"

So there you have it, in black & white, evidence that Benetton were working on systems late in 1993 that you claim they wouldn't have been.

I can't prove it, but they've admitted to Launch Control - and performance advantage to that was pretty good if you look at this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYca6E6c3IM

Hold on....Massa went from third to first at the start in Hungary this year....Hamilton went from 4th to 2nd at Silverstone this year...

...I remember Prost going from 4th to 1st into Copse in 1987, long before traction control first existed on an F1 car....

...I remember Senna going from 4th to 1st into Copse in 1985....

One great start doesn't prove anything other than it was a great start.

It certainly isn't the basis for a sound argument, nor does the video link you provided prove anything untoward whatsoever.

YWe can go into this if you want, but I work in IT, I'm not making this up.

And all due respect, but unless your in that field I highly doubt your 100% familiar with the system.

If you work in IT, then you would have some understanding that TC & LC are just computer programs, which don't add weight to a car, and have no physical form, so forgive my sceptism at your alleged knowledge but from what you have posted I have my doubts that you know the first thing about it.

[ArrowsFA1]

One great start doesn't prove anything other than it was a great start.

It certainly doesn't prove that Benetton did, or didn't have TC/LC. Just as Senna's suspicions about the Benetton didn't prove anything.

I think it's reasonable to raise a question mark as to whether the systems were used or not, but equally as it cannot be proved either way.

But I've done my research, move was introduced in 1993 June.

So our point still stands

The move was not introduced in June, Mosley initially announced that he wanted to see 'driver aids' banned for 1994 in June 1993, but the actually announcement was not made until the end of the following month.

Just out of interest, which F1 team were you part of the design team for in 1993?

The one I worked for started work on its 1994 car in May that year.

So your point does not stand.

Again.

[Rollo]

The FIA made clear early in 1993 that ‘driver aids’ would be banned for 1994. A range of technologies were included in that all-encompassing phrase including one not yet in use - four-wheel steering.

As far as four wheel steer goes, the Nissan GTR Group A car did not have it in race trim but the road going cars did. Honda had already done its testing on the system and found that there wasn't a significant difference in lap times.

In these cases, the added weight seems to negate any advantage you may have derived from it. It's also largely the reason why four wheel drive was used and then subsequently abandoned on the BRM P67, the Lotus 63 and why the only GP point ever scored by a 4WD car was the Matra MS84 at the '69 US GP.

Sometimes whilst a technology is good and prudent, it just doesn't justify itself.