Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singapore

Forum rules
Please read the forum rules
mnrvermaak
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2016 9:58 pm

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by mnrvermaak »

Isn't it possible that one clutch can give super fast changes but is a bit to grippy for a good start. And then another clutch made from a slightly different compound gives better starts but slower shift. RBR could have run the one clutch for qualifying where starts don't matter and then tried to change it to a clutch that would give a better start.

I am not saying it happened, but it is a component that could influences the car performance. I think RBR took a chance.

Zoue
Posts: 25158
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Zoue »

mnrvermaak wrote:Isn't it possible that one clutch can give super fast changes but is a bit to grippy for a good start. And then another clutch made from a slightly different compound gives better starts but slower shift. RBR could have run the one clutch for qualifying where starts don't matter and then tried to change it to a clutch that would give a better start.

I am not saying it happened, but it is a component that could influences the car performance. I think RBR took a chance.
why would that only be the case for Verstappen's car and not for Ricciardo's? And why only at this particular race and not previous ones?

I don't think that hypothesis stands up to scrutiny, tbh

Siao7
Posts: 8889
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Siao7 »

Zoue wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Zoue wrote: I would disagree. I think they lose by showing they are more interested in the letter of the law than the spirit or indeed F1 as a whole.
Likewise if they don't show interested in the letter of the law they'd be condemned too. I see what you mean, but I feel that in this instance RB had the chance to rectify it but didn't want the penalty so they put the blame on the FIA... Which sounds unfair
Weighing up their options they clearly felt that starting 4th with a dodgy clutch was preferable to starting last with a perfect one. But for me the point to be made is what is the reasoning behind denying the request? Even if Red Bull made an error in judgement earlier (and I'm not saying that's definitely the case), so what? What harm could there possibly be if they could demonstrate that they felt the clutch was compromised? What condemnation could the FIA expect to receive by allowing it? I couldn't find anything, but were the FIA condemned for allowing Merc to change their brake supplier for the front brakes back in 2014? I think it shows them in a poor light tbh. They had no real grounds to deny the request, especially since the part was not a restricted one.
I agree, however what stops every team finding issues and asking for free of penalty change of parts? If you allow one then you'll have to allow them all afterwards. I can't remember the Merc brake issue to be honest Zoue, what happened there? Was it a similar case? Changing it in Parc Ferme overnight?
I posted it earlier:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/115087

Essentially, Merc changed the front brakes in Parc Fermé because of a failure in practice. What was unusual about this was that they also changed supplier, which meant putting an entirely different spec unit on. If this was done on safety grounds, then logically one would assume the FIA would force every team using that supplier to change, but they didn't. Merc even kept the same supplier on the rears, which showed it wasn't simply a case of them losing faith in that supplier. To me that seems an inconsistent approach. The brakes weren't even ruled as faulty.
Ah, thanks, missed that.

Siao7
Posts: 8889
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Siao7 »

Zoue wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
mds wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Zoue wrote: I would disagree. I think they lose by showing they are more interested in the letter of the law than the spirit or indeed F1 as a whole.
Likewise if they don't show interested in the letter of the law they'd be condemned too. I see what you mean, but I feel that in this instance RB had the chance to rectify it but didn't want the penalty so they put the blame on the FIA... Which sounds unfair
But look at the above PDF indicating what has been changed by other teams, and then ask yourself the question why RBR were denied to swap an unrestricted part if the other teams were allowed to do what they did. That is what seems unfair here to me.
Did the other teams change parts without penalties though? RB had the chance to change it, with the associated penalty with it. It seems that they chose not to.

It is also important to remember that we don't know exactly what happened, the article is not really clear; just that the FIA delegate found no structural problem with the part.
penalties are applied for changing limited lifetime parts, not for changing any old thing. If you change e.g. a gearbox, then you get a 5 place grid drop. If you change PU components then you get an escalating scale of penalties, depending on how many you change. However, if you work on a car in Parc Fermé without permission then you get hauled off the grid and have to start in the pit lane. In this instance, Red Bull weren't allowed to fix the clutch. Period. Reading into that further it's frankly quite bizarre that the penalty for fixing something which they may normally change quite freely would carry a harsher penalty than changing a limited-lifetime part, but that's the FIA for you
I know all these, but we don't know much about this at the moment. So the fact that they weren't allowed to change it without any explanation needs to be investigated a bit more rather than accusing the FIA straight away. We know only one side of the story, that of Horner's.

Zoue
Posts: 25158
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Zoue »

Siao7 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
mds wrote:
Siao7 wrote:Likewise if they don't show interested in the letter of the law they'd be condemned too. I see what you mean, but I feel that in this instance RB had the chance to rectify it but didn't want the penalty so they put the blame on the FIA... Which sounds unfair
But look at the above PDF indicating what has been changed by other teams, and then ask yourself the question why RBR were denied to swap an unrestricted part if the other teams were allowed to do what they did. That is what seems unfair here to me.
Did the other teams change parts without penalties though? RB had the chance to change it, with the associated penalty with it. It seems that they chose not to.

It is also important to remember that we don't know exactly what happened, the article is not really clear; just that the FIA delegate found no structural problem with the part.
penalties are applied for changing limited lifetime parts, not for changing any old thing. If you change e.g. a gearbox, then you get a 5 place grid drop. If you change PU components then you get an escalating scale of penalties, depending on how many you change. However, if you work on a car in Parc Fermé without permission then you get hauled off the grid and have to start in the pit lane. In this instance, Red Bull weren't allowed to fix the clutch. Period. Reading into that further it's frankly quite bizarre that the penalty for fixing something which they may normally change quite freely would carry a harsher penalty than changing a limited-lifetime part, but that's the FIA for you
I know all these, but we don't know much about this at the moment. So the fact that they weren't allowed to change it without any explanation needs to be investigated a bit more rather than accusing the FIA straight away. We know only one side of the story, that of Horner's.
It's a fair point, but given that Max did appear to have a problem and no-one from the FIA has as yet come out to dispute Horner's version of events, it seems only fair to comment on what we do know. It seems that because they could find no structural issue they rejected the request, but I keep coming back to the question why that would be an issue on a part that is not governed by time-limited rules. There was nothing structurally wrong with the brakes on the Mercs, either, but they were allowed to replace them as a precautionary measure. I just don't get what the FIA thinks they gain by rejecting Red Bull's request in this instance.

Siao7
Posts: 8889
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Siao7 »

Zoue wrote:I just don't get what the FIA thinks they gain by rejecting Red Bull's request in this instance.
No idea on that I'm afraid

User avatar
Blinky McSquinty
Posts: 1464
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 12:13 pm

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Blinky McSquinty »

Zoue wrote:It's a fair point, but given that Max did appear to have a problem and no-one from the FIA has as yet come out to dispute Horner's version of events, it seems only fair to comment on what we do know. It seems that because they could find no structural issue they rejected the request, but I keep coming back to the question why that would be an issue on a part that is not governed by time-limited rules. There was nothing structurally wrong with the brakes on the Mercs, either, but they were allowed to replace them as a precautionary measure. I just don't get what the FIA thinks they gain by rejecting Red Bull's request in this instance.
This has nothing to do with the unit restrictions on the power unit or gear box. It is solely the parc fermé rules. They are intended so that after qualifying zero work is done on the cars, with strict exemptions, basically replenishing fluids and replacing BROKEN parts. If something is obviously broken, as in the example of Vettel's rear roll bar, Ferrari can put a new one in. If something is not working to a team's satisfaction, as in the case of Verstappen's clutch, Red Bull do not get a free pass. They can still change it, but suffer having to start from the pits.

From the 2016 Formula One Sporting Regulations

34.6 A competitor may not modify any part on the car or make changes to the set-up of the suspension whilst the car is being held under parc fermé conditions. In the case of a breach of this Article the relevant driver must start the race from the pit lane

Getting to the safety aspect, just because some component is iffy, that is a risk the teams, not the FIA take. For many races we have watched a Mercedes get a completely crappy start, resulting in numerous cars having to change lanes as they went by. The Mercedes clutch is definitely an "iffy" part, but the FIA allow Mercedes to run the risk. What if next race the FIA made both Mercedes cars start the race from the pits? Isn't that in line with your logic?
Only dogs, mothers, and quality undergarments give unconditional support.

User avatar
F1 MERCENARY
Posts: 2397
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Location: Miami, Florida

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by F1 MERCENARY »

simonr23 wrote:I think the story red bull are giving is slightly coloured to suit their own agenda. We know teams can change a tyre just having a flat spot, so a clutch that shows actual signs of damage would be allowed(I believe). Surely rbr just found that something wasn't optimal for the Singapore launch and wanted to use it as a free pass. The car was fine for the race and all the pit getaways...
precisely, it was an adjustment issue because the clutch's functionality itself was perfect and it never once failed or came close to it throughout the entire race distance. Yet again another case of RBR trying to have Charlie Whiting and Co. look the other way. Glad they didn't. This happens and you have to deal with getting things wrong.

As for this being a safety issue and to pinpoint it as the cause for what happened to Hulkenberg, nonsense. Hulkenberg's incident happened because Sainz didn't look in his mirrors because if he'd even turned his head slightly, he'd have noticed an entire car alongside. Sad because Hulk had an extraordinary getaway and was still out accelerating almost everyone ahead.
HAMILTON :: VERSTAPPEN :: LECLERC :: BOTTAS :: VETTEL :: SAINZ :: NORRIS
KVYAT :: RAIKKONEN :: RUSSEL :: ALBON :: RICCIARDO :: HULKENBURG :: PEREZ
STROLL :: MAGNUSSEN :: GROSJEAN :: GASLY :: GIOVANAZZI :: KUBICA

Zoue
Posts: 25158
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Zoue »

Blinky McSquinty wrote:
Zoue wrote:It's a fair point, but given that Max did appear to have a problem and no-one from the FIA has as yet come out to dispute Horner's version of events, it seems only fair to comment on what we do know. It seems that because they could find no structural issue they rejected the request, but I keep coming back to the question why that would be an issue on a part that is not governed by time-limited rules. There was nothing structurally wrong with the brakes on the Mercs, either, but they were allowed to replace them as a precautionary measure. I just don't get what the FIA thinks they gain by rejecting Red Bull's request in this instance.
This has nothing to do with the unit restrictions on the power unit or gear box. It is solely the parc fermé rules. They are intended so that after qualifying zero work is done on the cars, with strict exemptions, basically replenishing fluids and replacing BROKEN parts. If something is obviously broken, as in the example of Vettel's rear roll bar, Ferrari can put a new one in. If something is not working to a team's satisfaction, as in the case of Verstappen's clutch, Red Bull do not get a free pass. They can still change it, but suffer having to start from the pits.

From the 2016 Formula One Sporting Regulations

34.6 A competitor may not modify any part on the car or make changes to the set-up of the suspension whilst the car is being held under parc fermé conditions. In the case of a breach of this Article the relevant driver must start the race from the pit lane

Getting to the safety aspect, just because some component is iffy, that is a risk the teams, not the FIA take. For many races we have watched a Mercedes get a completely crappy start, resulting in numerous cars having to change lanes as they went by. The Mercedes clutch is definitely an "iffy" part, but the FIA allow Mercedes to run the risk. What if next race the FIA made both Mercedes cars start the race from the pits? Isn't that in line with your logic?
No, it's not. As has been posted above, it increases the likelihood of a poor start if the clutch is known to slip. The Mercedes clutch isn't faulty, just very sensitive and it's at least partly the drivers' fault when they fluff it, as Wolff himself said after the previous race.

I'm aware of the Parc Fermé rules. As I posted above, it was originally introduced to prevent engineers working overnight changing car setups and ensure they didn't have special qualifying ones. But this is a case of a part not working properly. I've asked the question a number of times but no-one has yet been able to answer why this is something that should be penalised. To what end? What is to be gained?

Zoue
Posts: 25158
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Zoue »

F1 MERCENARY wrote:
simonr23 wrote:I think the story red bull are giving is slightly coloured to suit their own agenda. We know teams can change a tyre just having a flat spot, so a clutch that shows actual signs of damage would be allowed(I believe). Surely rbr just found that something wasn't optimal for the Singapore launch and wanted to use it as a free pass. The car was fine for the race and all the pit getaways...
precisely, it was an adjustment issue because the clutch's functionality itself was perfect and it never once failed or came close to it throughout the entire race distance. Yet again another case of RBR trying to have Charlie Whiting and Co. look the other way. Glad they didn't. This happens and you have to deal with getting things wrong.

As for this being a safety issue and to pinpoint it as the cause for what happened to Hulkenberg, nonsense. Hulkenberg's incident happened because Sainz didn't look in his mirrors because if he'd even turned his head slightly, he'd have noticed an entire car alongside. Sad because Hulk had an extraordinary getaway and was still out accelerating almost everyone ahead.
This doesn't make sense. Clearly there was an issue as demonstrated by Verstappen's start. There's no need to look for conspiracy theories for everything. It's a fairly straightforward case here.

As for the free pass. Free pass for what, exactly? Once again, this is a part they can change 50 times a year if they want to. So what on earth is to be gained by them leaving it until Parc Fermé to try to "fool" anyone?

mnrvermaak
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2016 9:58 pm

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by mnrvermaak »

Zoue wrote:
mnrvermaak wrote:Isn't it possible that one clutch can give super fast changes but is a bit to grippy for a good start. And then another clutch made from a slightly different compound gives better starts but slower shift. RBR could have run the one clutch for qualifying where starts don't matter and then tried to change it to a clutch that would give a better start.

I am not saying it happened, but it is a component that could influences the car performance. I think RBR took a chance.
why would that only be the case for Verstappen's car and not for Ricciardo's? And why only at this particular race and not previous ones?

I don't think that hypothesis stands up to scrutiny, tbh
I get that the chance of it is miniscule, but your reasons for refuting my claim does not make sense.

It is often the case that the cars are not exactly the same. Or an upgrade only gets tested on one car. And maybe they only now had reason to do it and thats why they did not do it sooner. The cars are ever evolving and they are always searching for improvements or loopholes.

chetan_rao
Posts: 1246
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 7:39 am

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by chetan_rao »

Have we heard FIA's side of the story? I haven't seen anything beyond the initial report that it was denied on the basis of the scrutineer not finding any structural issues with the part in question.

User avatar
Exediron
Posts: 8428
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Location: Michigan, USA
Contact:

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Exediron »

Zoue wrote:This doesn't make sense. Clearly there was an issue as demonstrated by Verstappen's start. There's no need to look for conspiracy theories for everything. It's a fairly straightforward case here.
I don't see how that's clear. Was there clearly an issue with his clutch at Spa and at Monza? He made poor starts in both races, so if him making a bad start is proof of an issue with his clutch, why didn't they replace it at either of those races? The body of evidence at present suggests that Verstappen is simply poor at starts in the current car. In fact last year he had a negative average gain at start as well, whereas Sainz had a positive number. I don't think Max flubbing the start is any sort of proof that his clutch needed replacing.

If his clutch couldn't be proven to be damaged or in danger of failing, I don't see why they should be allowed to change it. Nothing that happened during the race proves either was the case - and it's questionable to me if anything even indicates it - so I don't see anything wrong with the FIA's decision here. Parc Ferme means nothing changes about the car between qualifying and the race. That's the rule, and everybody has to deal with it. One can question the need for the rule, but I do believe it was correctly enforced here.
PICK 10 COMPETITION (6 wins, 18 podiums): 3rd in 2016
TOP THREE CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): Champions in 2015 & 2018 | 2nd in 2017 & 2019
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 USA & P-F1 Champion

Zoue
Posts: 25158
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Zoue »

Exediron wrote:
Zoue wrote:This doesn't make sense. Clearly there was an issue as demonstrated by Verstappen's start. There's no need to look for conspiracy theories for everything. It's a fairly straightforward case here.
I don't see how that's clear. Was there clearly an issue with his clutch at Spa and at Monza? He made poor starts in both races, so if him making a bad start is proof of an issue with his clutch, why didn't they replace it at either of those races? The body of evidence at present suggests that Verstappen is simply poor at starts in the current car. In fact last year he had a negative average gain at start as well, whereas Sainz had a positive number. I don't think Max flubbing the start is any sort of proof that his clutch needed replacing.

If his clutch couldn't be proven to be damaged or in danger of failing, I don't see why they should be allowed to change it. Nothing that happened during the race proves either was the case - and it's questionable to me if anything even indicates it - so I don't see anything wrong with the FIA's decision here. Parc Ferme means nothing changes about the car between qualifying and the race. That's the rule, and everybody has to deal with it. One can question the need for the rule, but I do believe it was correctly enforced here.
They identified that the clutch wasn't operating properly before the race and he then made a poor start. You may call it coincidence if you like but I don't see any reason to look for any other motive when the facts fit the narrative.

I don't see why they shouldn't have been allowed to change it. As shown in a previous post others were allowed to change other things. They weren't trying a new configuration or upgrading a part (at least, that hasn't been reported), so why not? As mentioned previously, Mercedes were allowed to change to a completely different spec (and the part that was on the car wasn't even identified as faulty itself), which should be regarded as an upgrade, so why were Red Bull not allowed to exchange like for like? There's precedence for a dispensation so there's a lack of consistency plus a car was made to start with a handicap. Who benefits?

Zoue
Posts: 25158
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Zoue »

mnrvermaak wrote:
Zoue wrote:
mnrvermaak wrote:Isn't it possible that one clutch can give super fast changes but is a bit to grippy for a good start. And then another clutch made from a slightly different compound gives better starts but slower shift. RBR could have run the one clutch for qualifying where starts don't matter and then tried to change it to a clutch that would give a better start.

I am not saying it happened, but it is a component that could influences the car performance. I think RBR took a chance.
why would that only be the case for Verstappen's car and not for Ricciardo's? And why only at this particular race and not previous ones?

I don't think that hypothesis stands up to scrutiny, tbh
I get that the chance of it is miniscule, but your reasons for refuting my claim does not make sense.

It is often the case that the cars are not exactly the same. Or an upgrade only gets tested on one car. And maybe they only now had reason to do it and thats why they did not do it sooner. The cars are ever evolving and they are always searching for improvements or loopholes.
Why do they not make sense? I'm applying logic and accepting the facts at face value, while you are assuming an underlying motive which is pure speculation, with no real reason to entertain that idea in the first place beyond unfounded suspicion. There's no evidence an upgrade was involved, while there is evidence which supports the idea the clutch was not operating as intended. You may choose to believe what you will but if we are asking which makes sense then I don't think you're on solid ground here.

Siao7
Posts: 8889
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Siao7 »

Zoue wrote:
mnrvermaak wrote:
Zoue wrote:
mnrvermaak wrote:Isn't it possible that one clutch can give super fast changes but is a bit to grippy for a good start. And then another clutch made from a slightly different compound gives better starts but slower shift. RBR could have run the one clutch for qualifying where starts don't matter and then tried to change it to a clutch that would give a better start.

I am not saying it happened, but it is a component that could influences the car performance. I think RBR took a chance.
why would that only be the case for Verstappen's car and not for Ricciardo's? And why only at this particular race and not previous ones?

I don't think that hypothesis stands up to scrutiny, tbh
I get that the chance of it is miniscule, but your reasons for refuting my claim does not make sense.

It is often the case that the cars are not exactly the same. Or an upgrade only gets tested on one car. And maybe they only now had reason to do it and thats why they did not do it sooner. The cars are ever evolving and they are always searching for improvements or loopholes.
Why do they not make sense? I'm applying logic and accepting the facts at face value, while you are assuming an underlying motive which is pure speculation, with no real reason to entertain that idea in the first place beyond unfounded suspicion. There's no evidence an upgrade was involved, while there is evidence which supports the idea the clutch was not operating as intended. You may choose to believe what you will but if we are asking which makes sense then I don't think you're on solid ground here.
Indeed, if the clutch issue was over the last three races then it seems far fetched to be an upgrade issue

chetan_rao
Posts: 1246
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 7:39 am

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by chetan_rao »

Putting aside for a moment the merits of RB's argument and FIA's refusal to buy it, what I find surprising is a team willing to leave something till the point-in-time when a fix/change is at the discretion of the FIA.

If it was an unrestricted part that carried no penalties, shouldn't they have just done the safer thing and changed it before qualifying? Given the absence of standing starts in qualifying, they probably won't have had any concerns of the purported damage/issue that could hinder a standing start on race-day. It was pretty obvious that no other clutch-related function was affected (at least none have been reported on Max's car for the race).

FIA's fickle-mindedness and inconsistency isn't exactly a new phenomenon, so why risk it?

Zoue
Posts: 25158
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Zoue »

chetan_rao wrote:Putting aside for a moment the merits of RB's argument and FIA's refusal to buy it, what I find surprising is a team willing to leave something till the point-in-time when a fix/change is at the discretion of the FIA.

If it was an unrestricted part that carried no penalties, shouldn't they have just done the safer thing and changed it before qualifying? Given the absence of standing starts in qualifying, they probably won't have had any concerns of the purported damage/issue that could hinder a standing start on race-day.

FIA's fickle-mindedness and inconsistency isn't exactly a new phenomenon, so why risk it?
Because according to the reports they identified the issue on Saturday?

"Last night they discovered that the clutch wouldn’t bite well, but they weren’t allowed to change anything by the FIA because it wasn’t a structural problem and I was able to race with it."

and

"We had a clutch issue yesterday and we got permission to take it out to inspect it," Horner said.

"We couldn’t find anything specifically wrong so it went back onto the car today."


http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/verst ... lt-828087/

They got permission from the FIA to work on the car and inspect the clutch, so I don't see why they couldn't go that one extra step and replace the suspect part. It wouldn't have cost any more time and the car was already open anyway.

chetan_rao
Posts: 1246
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 7:39 am

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by chetan_rao »

Zoue wrote:
chetan_rao wrote:Putting aside for a moment the merits of RB's argument and FIA's refusal to buy it, what I find surprising is a team willing to leave something till the point-in-time when a fix/change is at the discretion of the FIA.

If it was an unrestricted part that carried no penalties, shouldn't they have just done the safer thing and changed it before qualifying? Given the absence of standing starts in qualifying, they probably won't have had any concerns of the purported damage/issue that could hinder a standing start on race-day.

FIA's fickle-mindedness and inconsistency isn't exactly a new phenomenon, so why risk it?
Because according to the reports they identified the issue on Saturday?

"Last night they discovered that the clutch wouldn’t bite well, but they weren’t allowed to change anything by the FIA because it wasn’t a structural problem and I was able to race with it."

and

"We had a clutch issue yesterday and we got permission to take it out to inspect it," Horner said.

"We couldn’t find anything specifically wrong so it went back onto the car today."


http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/verst ... lt-828087/

They got permission from the FIA to work on the car and inspect the clutch, so I don't see why they couldn't go that one extra step and replace the suspect part. It wouldn't have cost any more time and the car was already open anyway.
To be fair, if the team themselves say 'we couldn't find anything specifically wrong', one can hardly blame the FIA for arriving at the same conclusion on inspection. I won't debate the FIA is fickle as hell, but allowing teams to change parts when the purported issue isn't even demonstrable could be a very slippery slope. It may seem a small inconsequential part today, but will open a huge grey area procedure-wise for the future which is hardly black & white even today. I'd guess such shenanigans over several years is what led to the 'no work on the cars in Parc Ferme' rule in the first place.

What I find interesting there is if RB had no idea what was wrong with the clutch, how could they know its specific after-effect(s) beforehand? That bit doesn't seem to add up.

P.S. Even if they somehow knew the start won't be optimal and losing some places off the grid was a given (in addition to having a faulty clutch that may act up later in the race), wouldn't it have made sense to change the whole gearbox/clutch set and start 5 places behind but with good equipment? Similar end result but without the concern or the clutch going kaput. Max is just lucky he didn't stall during a pit-stop later on.
Last edited by chetan_rao on Wed Sep 21, 2016 9:01 am, edited 1 time in total.

Zoue
Posts: 25158
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Zoue »

chetan_rao wrote:
Zoue wrote:
chetan_rao wrote:Putting aside for a moment the merits of RB's argument and FIA's refusal to buy it, what I find surprising is a team willing to leave something till the point-in-time when a fix/change is at the discretion of the FIA.

If it was an unrestricted part that carried no penalties, shouldn't they have just done the safer thing and changed it before qualifying? Given the absence of standing starts in qualifying, they probably won't have had any concerns of the purported damage/issue that could hinder a standing start on race-day.

FIA's fickle-mindedness and inconsistency isn't exactly a new phenomenon, so why risk it?
Because according to the reports they identified the issue on Saturday?

"Last night they discovered that the clutch wouldn’t bite well, but they weren’t allowed to change anything by the FIA because it wasn’t a structural problem and I was able to race with it."

and

"We had a clutch issue yesterday and we got permission to take it out to inspect it," Horner said.

"We couldn’t find anything specifically wrong so it went back onto the car today."


http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/verst ... lt-828087/

They got permission from the FIA to work on the car and inspect the clutch, so I don't see why they couldn't go that one extra step and replace the suspect part. It wouldn't have cost any more time and the car was already open anyway.
To be fair, if the team themselves say 'we couldn't find anything specifically wrong', one can hardly blame the FIA for arriving at the same conclusion on inspection. I won't debate the FIA is fickle as hell, but allowing teams to change parts when the purported issue isn't even demonstrable could be a very slippery slope. It may seem a small inconsequential part today, but will open a huge grey area procedure-wise for the future which is hardly black & white even today. I'd guess such shenanigans over several years is what led to the 'no work on the cars in Parc Ferme' rule in the first place.

What I find interesting there is if RB had no idea what was wrong with the clutch, how could they know its specific after-effect(s) beforehand? That bit doesn't seem to add up.
A quote on another site stated they couldn't find anything "structurally wrong," which is somewhat different. I'm assuming they had data which showed issues. I don't really agree with the slippery slope. If a team is forced to replace like for like (unlike, say, Mercedes with their brakes), then I don't see how an advantage could be gained. It's different for a time-regulated part like a gearbox or PU, of course, but otherwise I'm struggling to see what the problem is with letting them fix something that obviously isn't working. Sorry to labour the point but Mercedes were allowed to change their brake supplier as a precaution: they also had no structural issue and if you think about it the fact that the FIA didn't simultaneously demand a product recall if they felt changing supplier was warranted is a little suspect. Changing a clutch for an identical one as a precaution seems rather minor in comparison.

chetan_rao
Posts: 1246
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 7:39 am

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by chetan_rao »

Zoue wrote:
chetan_rao wrote:
Zoue wrote:
chetan_rao wrote:Putting aside for a moment the merits of RB's argument and FIA's refusal to buy it, what I find surprising is a team willing to leave something till the point-in-time when a fix/change is at the discretion of the FIA.

If it was an unrestricted part that carried no penalties, shouldn't they have just done the safer thing and changed it before qualifying? Given the absence of standing starts in qualifying, they probably won't have had any concerns of the purported damage/issue that could hinder a standing start on race-day.

FIA's fickle-mindedness and inconsistency isn't exactly a new phenomenon, so why risk it?
Because according to the reports they identified the issue on Saturday?

"Last night they discovered that the clutch wouldn’t bite well, but they weren’t allowed to change anything by the FIA because it wasn’t a structural problem and I was able to race with it."

and

"We had a clutch issue yesterday and we got permission to take it out to inspect it," Horner said.

"We couldn’t find anything specifically wrong so it went back onto the car today."


http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/verst ... lt-828087/

They got permission from the FIA to work on the car and inspect the clutch, so I don't see why they couldn't go that one extra step and replace the suspect part. It wouldn't have cost any more time and the car was already open anyway.
To be fair, if the team themselves say 'we couldn't find anything specifically wrong', one can hardly blame the FIA for arriving at the same conclusion on inspection. I won't debate the FIA is fickle as hell, but allowing teams to change parts when the purported issue isn't even demonstrable could be a very slippery slope. It may seem a small inconsequential part today, but will open a huge grey area procedure-wise for the future which is hardly black & white even today. I'd guess such shenanigans over several years is what led to the 'no work on the cars in Parc Ferme' rule in the first place.

What I find interesting there is if RB had no idea what was wrong with the clutch, how could they know its specific after-effect(s) beforehand? That bit doesn't seem to add up.
A quote on another site stated they couldn't find anything "structurally wrong," which is somewhat different. I'm assuming they had data which showed issues. I don't really agree with the slippery slope. If a team is forced to replace like for like (unlike, say, Mercedes with their brakes), then I don't see how an advantage could be gained. It's different for a time-regulated part like a gearbox or PU, of course, but otherwise I'm struggling to see what the problem is with letting them fix something that obviously isn't working. Sorry to labour the point but Mercedes were allowed to change their brake supplier as a precaution: they also had no structural issue and if you think about it the fact that the FIA didn't simultaneously demand a product recall if they felt changing supplier was warranted is a little suspect. Changing a clutch for an identical one as a precaution seems rather minor in comparison.
Again, I won't debate the FIA's (in)consistency, but if RB's only concern was the clutch bite acting up (as claimed in the interview), it's difficult to attribute it solely to a faulty piece of equipment. I have never seen a race-car clutch specifically up-close but a regular clutch that keeps slipping shows obvious signs of irregular wear, esp. under heavy duty use in equipment like an F1 car.

Other teams (esp. Mercedes) also have clutch systems that are OK structurally but suffer performance issues during standing starts.

As to the Mercedes argument, I'd agree it's a valid line of thought, and one that can only be solved by the FIA being transparent with their reasoning while dealing with the teams. We have no idea what the FIA thought of this except the 'no structural issues found' claim by RB.

User avatar
mcdo
Posts: 10289
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Location: Ireland

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by mcdo »

Zoue wrote:
Exediron wrote:
Zoue wrote:This doesn't make sense. Clearly there was an issue as demonstrated by Verstappen's start. There's no need to look for conspiracy theories for everything. It's a fairly straightforward case here.
I don't see how that's clear. Was there clearly an issue with his clutch at Spa and at Monza? He made poor starts in both races, so if him making a bad start is proof of an issue with his clutch, why didn't they replace it at either of those races? The body of evidence at present suggests that Verstappen is simply poor at starts in the current car. In fact last year he had a negative average gain at start as well, whereas Sainz had a positive number. I don't think Max flubbing the start is any sort of proof that his clutch needed replacing.

If his clutch couldn't be proven to be damaged or in danger of failing, I don't see why they should be allowed to change it. Nothing that happened during the race proves either was the case - and it's questionable to me if anything even indicates it - so I don't see anything wrong with the FIA's decision here. Parc Ferme means nothing changes about the car between qualifying and the race. That's the rule, and everybody has to deal with it. One can question the need for the rule, but I do believe it was correctly enforced here.
They identified that the clutch wasn't operating properly before the race and he then made a poor start. You may call it coincidence if you like but I don't see any reason to look for any other motive when the facts fit the narrative.
Correlation does not imply causation! :D
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost

Zoue
Posts: 25158
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Zoue »

chetan_rao wrote:
Zoue wrote:
chetan_rao wrote:
Zoue wrote:
chetan_rao wrote:Putting aside for a moment the merits of RB's argument and FIA's refusal to buy it, what I find surprising is a team willing to leave something till the point-in-time when a fix/change is at the discretion of the FIA.

If it was an unrestricted part that carried no penalties, shouldn't they have just done the safer thing and changed it before qualifying? Given the absence of standing starts in qualifying, they probably won't have had any concerns of the purported damage/issue that could hinder a standing start on race-day.

FIA's fickle-mindedness and inconsistency isn't exactly a new phenomenon, so why risk it?
Because according to the reports they identified the issue on Saturday?

"Last night they discovered that the clutch wouldn’t bite well, but they weren’t allowed to change anything by the FIA because it wasn’t a structural problem and I was able to race with it."

and

"We had a clutch issue yesterday and we got permission to take it out to inspect it," Horner said.

"We couldn’t find anything specifically wrong so it went back onto the car today."


http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/verst ... lt-828087/

They got permission from the FIA to work on the car and inspect the clutch, so I don't see why they couldn't go that one extra step and replace the suspect part. It wouldn't have cost any more time and the car was already open anyway.
To be fair, if the team themselves say 'we couldn't find anything specifically wrong', one can hardly blame the FIA for arriving at the same conclusion on inspection. I won't debate the FIA is fickle as hell, but allowing teams to change parts when the purported issue isn't even demonstrable could be a very slippery slope. It may seem a small inconsequential part today, but will open a huge grey area procedure-wise for the future which is hardly black & white even today. I'd guess such shenanigans over several years is what led to the 'no work on the cars in Parc Ferme' rule in the first place.

What I find interesting there is if RB had no idea what was wrong with the clutch, how could they know its specific after-effect(s) beforehand? That bit doesn't seem to add up.
A quote on another site stated they couldn't find anything "structurally wrong," which is somewhat different. I'm assuming they had data which showed issues. I don't really agree with the slippery slope. If a team is forced to replace like for like (unlike, say, Mercedes with their brakes), then I don't see how an advantage could be gained. It's different for a time-regulated part like a gearbox or PU, of course, but otherwise I'm struggling to see what the problem is with letting them fix something that obviously isn't working. Sorry to labour the point but Mercedes were allowed to change their brake supplier as a precaution: they also had no structural issue and if you think about it the fact that the FIA didn't simultaneously demand a product recall if they felt changing supplier was warranted is a little suspect. Changing a clutch for an identical one as a precaution seems rather minor in comparison.
Again, I won't debate the FIA's (in)consistency, but if RB's only concern was the clutch bite acting up (as claimed in the interview), it's difficult to attribute it solely to a faulty piece of equipment. I have never seen a race-car clutch specifically up-close but a regular clutch that keeps slipping shows obvious signs of irregular wear, esp. under heavy duty use in equipment like an F1 car.

Other teams (esp. Mercedes) also have clutch systems that are OK structurally but suffer performance issues during standing starts.

As to the Mercedes argument, I'd agree it's a valid line of thought, and one that can only be solved by the FIA being transparent with their reasoning while dealing with the teams. We have no idea what the FIA thought of this except the 'no structural issues found' claim by RB.
That's different. This specific clutch was identified as having an issue, which is different to a design flaw.

Zoue
Posts: 25158
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Zoue »

mcdo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Exediron wrote:
Zoue wrote:This doesn't make sense. Clearly there was an issue as demonstrated by Verstappen's start. There's no need to look for conspiracy theories for everything. It's a fairly straightforward case here.
I don't see how that's clear. Was there clearly an issue with his clutch at Spa and at Monza? He made poor starts in both races, so if him making a bad start is proof of an issue with his clutch, why didn't they replace it at either of those races? The body of evidence at present suggests that Verstappen is simply poor at starts in the current car. In fact last year he had a negative average gain at start as well, whereas Sainz had a positive number. I don't think Max flubbing the start is any sort of proof that his clutch needed replacing.

If his clutch couldn't be proven to be damaged or in danger of failing, I don't see why they should be allowed to change it. Nothing that happened during the race proves either was the case - and it's questionable to me if anything even indicates it - so I don't see anything wrong with the FIA's decision here. Parc Ferme means nothing changes about the car between qualifying and the race. That's the rule, and everybody has to deal with it. One can question the need for the rule, but I do believe it was correctly enforced here.
They identified that the clutch wasn't operating properly before the race and he then made a poor start. You may call it coincidence if you like but I don't see any reason to look for any other motive when the facts fit the narrative.
Correlation does not imply causation! :D
Ha! Take your point. But in the absence of any other likely explanation it's also hard to dismiss the link ;)

chetan_rao
Posts: 1246
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 7:39 am

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by chetan_rao »

Zoue wrote: That's different. This specific clutch was identified as having an issue, which is different to a design flaw.
I'd like to see the FIA's side of the story before being sure. Drawing conclusions with incomplete facts based on an interview with a team principal who has an obvious interest in painting his side the victim isn't exactly fair.

RB claim there was an issue, but also that they couldn't find anything wrong (structurally) when allowed to inspect. If they have sufficient proof (data or material), then it would be a different story. I'm willing to change my opinion on this if more information comes out.

User avatar
James14
Posts: 1098
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:53 pm
Location: Ireland

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by James14 »

I starting to change my opinion a bit.
Look at it from the FIA's point of view. RB claim the clutch was faulty but could not show them any part was physically broke. Say the FIA take their word on good faith and let them work on the car. Other teams question this but the FIA cannot say for sure that the clutch was broken. What will the other teams do in future? They would have to take their word on good faith and all teams get to work on their cars in Parc Ferme.

Looking back RB were correct but if they were let change the clutch there would be no proof that they were correct and other teams would suspect that they pulled a fast one.

User avatar
Covalent
Posts: 10192
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Covalent »

Zoue wrote:
mds wrote:
Covalent wrote:
simonr23 wrote:I think the story red bull are giving is slightly coloured to suit their own agenda. We know teams can change a tyre just having a flat spot, so a clutch that shows actual signs of damage would be allowed(I believe). Surely rbr just found that something wasn't optimal for the Singapore launch and wanted to use it as a free pass. The car was fine for the race and all the pit getaways...
Yes I'm inclined to agree, I wouldn't trust Horner's word as the absolute truth. The parc ferme rules are quite clear and I don't think anything out of the ordinary happened here.
Still, they knew the start was not going to be good. I think it's a bit ridiculous that a driver that flatspots a tyre through his own fault can just replace the tyre ahead of the race out of safety reasons, but a clutch that is not really working as it should can't be worked on.
Exactly this. From a sporting and spectator viewpoint, we surely want all the competitors to have cars that are functioning as they should?
If it was his third straight bad start then the fourth clutch would probably not have been any better. Sounds to me there was nothing wrong with it, it was just poorly designed. The FIA saw there was nothing to be gained from allowing the team to replace it. A flatspotted tyre is a completely different situation.

Zoue
Posts: 25158
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Zoue »

Covalent wrote:
Zoue wrote:
mds wrote:
Covalent wrote:
simonr23 wrote:I think the story red bull are giving is slightly coloured to suit their own agenda. We know teams can change a tyre just having a flat spot, so a clutch that shows actual signs of damage would be allowed(I believe). Surely rbr just found that something wasn't optimal for the Singapore launch and wanted to use it as a free pass. The car was fine for the race and all the pit getaways...
Yes I'm inclined to agree, I wouldn't trust Horner's word as the absolute truth. The parc ferme rules are quite clear and I don't think anything out of the ordinary happened here.
Still, they knew the start was not going to be good. I think it's a bit ridiculous that a driver that flatspots a tyre through his own fault can just replace the tyre ahead of the race out of safety reasons, but a clutch that is not really working as it should can't be worked on.
Exactly this. From a sporting and spectator viewpoint, we surely want all the competitors to have cars that are functioning as they should?
If it was his third straight bad start then the fourth clutch would probably not have been any better. Sounds to me there was nothing wrong with it, it was just poorly designed. The FIA saw there was nothing to be gained from allowing the team to replace it. A flatspotted tyre is a completely different situation.
whether or not he fluffs it after that is a different issue. The point is that Red Bull saw it wasn't working correctly. So what was to be gained from not allowing them to change it? They'd already taken it out and opened it up at that point anyway

User avatar
Covalent
Posts: 10192
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Covalent »

Zoue wrote:
Covalent wrote:
Zoue wrote:
mds wrote:
Covalent wrote: Yes I'm inclined to agree, I wouldn't trust Horner's word as the absolute truth. The parc ferme rules are quite clear and I don't think anything out of the ordinary happened here.
Still, they knew the start was not going to be good. I think it's a bit ridiculous that a driver that flatspots a tyre through his own fault can just replace the tyre ahead of the race out of safety reasons, but a clutch that is not really working as it should can't be worked on.
Exactly this. From a sporting and spectator viewpoint, we surely want all the competitors to have cars that are functioning as they should?
If it was his third straight bad start then the fourth clutch would probably not have been any better. Sounds to me there was nothing wrong with it, it was just poorly designed. The FIA saw there was nothing to be gained from allowing the team to replace it. A flatspotted tyre is a completely different situation.
whether or not he fluffs it after that is a different issue. The point is that Red Bull saw it wasn't working correctly. So what was to be gained from not allowing them to change it? They'd already taken it out and opened it up at that point anyway
Because changing a part for the sake of it is not allowed under the current rules.

Zoue
Posts: 25158
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Zoue »

Covalent wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Covalent wrote:
Zoue wrote:
mds wrote: Still, they knew the start was not going to be good. I think it's a bit ridiculous that a driver that flatspots a tyre through his own fault can just replace the tyre ahead of the race out of safety reasons, but a clutch that is not really working as it should can't be worked on.
Exactly this. From a sporting and spectator viewpoint, we surely want all the competitors to have cars that are functioning as they should?
If it was his third straight bad start then the fourth clutch would probably not have been any better. Sounds to me there was nothing wrong with it, it was just poorly designed. The FIA saw there was nothing to be gained from allowing the team to replace it. A flatspotted tyre is a completely different situation.
whether or not he fluffs it after that is a different issue. The point is that Red Bull saw it wasn't working correctly. So what was to be gained from not allowing them to change it? They'd already taken it out and opened it up at that point anyway
Because changing a part for the sake of it is not allowed under the current rules.
But it's not changing it for the sake of it. Red Bull identified a problem with the part. It's not like they decided to change it on a whim. Just because they couldn't see any superficial issue doesn't mean the problem didn't exist

ALESI
Posts: 2418
Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2003 1:36 pm

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by ALESI »

This has only come about because F1 teams will try ANYTHING to get an advantage, so the rules have to be written a certain way, and unfortunately that means sometimes it works against a certain team. As others have said, no doubt they could have changed the clutch if they felt it was necessary, but started from the pitlane, so then it's not that they couldn't, but that they didn't want to.
Shoot999: "And anyone who puts a Y on the end of his name as a nickname should be punched in the face repeatedly."

Zoue
Posts: 25158
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Zoue »

ALESI wrote:This has only come about because F1 teams will try ANYTHING to get an advantage, so the rules have to be written a certain way, and unfortunately that means sometimes it works against a certain team. As others have said, no doubt they could have changed the clutch if they felt it was necessary, but started from the pitlane, so then it's not that they couldn't, but that they didn't want to.
It's not quite that black and white, though. They clearly weighed up the pros and cons of starting 4th with a dodgy clutch and starting from the back with a good one. Just because they chose the former doesn't invalidate the problem itself. And, as already mentioned, the Mercedes example shows that dispensation may be granted if the teams feel there is a problem (as opposed to there actually being one), so not allowing Red Bull to change things seems unduly harsh.

User avatar
Covalent
Posts: 10192
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Covalent »

Zoue wrote:
Covalent wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Covalent wrote:
Zoue wrote: Exactly this. From a sporting and spectator viewpoint, we surely want all the competitors to have cars that are functioning as they should?
If it was his third straight bad start then the fourth clutch would probably not have been any better. Sounds to me there was nothing wrong with it, it was just poorly designed. The FIA saw there was nothing to be gained from allowing the team to replace it. A flatspotted tyre is a completely different situation.
whether or not he fluffs it after that is a different issue. The point is that Red Bull saw it wasn't working correctly. So what was to be gained from not allowing them to change it? They'd already taken it out and opened it up at that point anyway
Because changing a part for the sake of it is not allowed under the current rules.
But it's not changing it for the sake of it. Red Bull identified a problem with the part. It's not like they decided to change it on a whim. Just because they couldn't see any superficial issue doesn't mean the problem didn't exist
I could copy-paste my reply from a few posts ago about it not changing anything whether the change it or not... and round and round we go :)

Zoue
Posts: 25158
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Zoue »

Covalent wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Covalent wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Covalent wrote: If it was his third straight bad start then the fourth clutch would probably not have been any better. Sounds to me there was nothing wrong with it, it was just poorly designed. The FIA saw there was nothing to be gained from allowing the team to replace it. A flatspotted tyre is a completely different situation.
whether or not he fluffs it after that is a different issue. The point is that Red Bull saw it wasn't working correctly. So what was to be gained from not allowing them to change it? They'd already taken it out and opened it up at that point anyway
Because changing a part for the sake of it is not allowed under the current rules.
But it's not changing it for the sake of it. Red Bull identified a problem with the part. It's not like they decided to change it on a whim. Just because they couldn't see any superficial issue doesn't mean the problem didn't exist
I could copy-paste my reply from a few posts ago about it not changing anything whether the change it or not... and round and round we go :)
you could, but you'd have nothing to base that on. If changing it would have done nothing, then you'd have to ask why Red Bull would have requested it in the first place. Once again, they identified the issue as that particular clutch not working as intended, which is somewhat different to a design flaw present in every clutch

User avatar
Covalent
Posts: 10192
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Covalent »

Zoue wrote:you could, but you'd have nothing to base that on. If changing it would have done nothing, then you'd have to ask why Red Bull would have requested it in the first place. Once again, they identified the issue as that particular clutch not working as intended, which is somewhat different to a design flaw present in every clutch
Sure I have. In Horner's words the problem has reappeared, and apparently they've now had three bad starts because of the clutch. Replacing it would have been a shot in the dark with no guarantees of any improvements. The teams could just as well be replacing tyres, engines, gearboxes etc. in hopes of performance gains.

Zoue
Posts: 25158
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Zoue »

Covalent wrote:
Zoue wrote:you could, but you'd have nothing to base that on. If changing it would have done nothing, then you'd have to ask why Red Bull would have requested it in the first place. Once again, they identified the issue as that particular clutch not working as intended, which is somewhat different to a design flaw present in every clutch
Sure I have. In Horner's words the problem has reappeared, and apparently they've now had three bad starts because of the clutch. Replacing it would have been a shot in the dark with no guarantees of any improvements. The teams could just as well be replacing tyres, engines, gearboxes etc. in hopes of performance gains.
No, you don't. Reappeared from when? There's nothing in any report I can find that says the problem kept occurring with various clutches. You're still making an assumption here

User avatar
purchville
Posts: 3011
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:33 am

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by purchville »

The clearest correlation that I can see in recent times is between a car having a poor start and Max Verstappen being the driver.

IMO the onus is on RBR to demonstrate a serious issue with the clutch to the FIA. They were given permission to take apart the clutch to achieve this, but still couldn't satisfactorily demonstrate a serious problem.
PF1 Pick 10 Competition:
- 6 victories (Germany '20, Italy '19, Mexico '18, Singapore '18, USA '17, USA '16, Mexico '16),
- 7 podiums
- 2013 Rookie of the Year
- 2014 Championship 6th position
- 2016 Championship 9th position

User avatar
Covalent
Posts: 10192
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Covalent »

Zoue wrote:
Covalent wrote:
Zoue wrote:you could, but you'd have nothing to base that on. If changing it would have done nothing, then you'd have to ask why Red Bull would have requested it in the first place. Once again, they identified the issue as that particular clutch not working as intended, which is somewhat different to a design flaw present in every clutch
Sure I have. In Horner's words the problem has reappeared, and apparently they've now had three bad starts because of the clutch. Replacing it would have been a shot in the dark with no guarantees of any improvements. The teams could just as well be replacing tyres, engines, gearboxes etc. in hopes of performance gains.
No, you don't. Reappeared from when? There's nothing in any report I can find that says the problem kept occurring with various clutches. You're still making an assumption here
The clutches are replaced every race and in the very article you linked it sounds like Max thinks all the bad starts have been caused by the clutch. Anyway, the tone of this conversation is progressing towards something I don't need to have a part in.

Zoue
Posts: 25158
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Zoue »

Covalent wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Covalent wrote:
Zoue wrote:you could, but you'd have nothing to base that on. If changing it would have done nothing, then you'd have to ask why Red Bull would have requested it in the first place. Once again, they identified the issue as that particular clutch not working as intended, which is somewhat different to a design flaw present in every clutch
Sure I have. In Horner's words the problem has reappeared, and apparently they've now had three bad starts because of the clutch. Replacing it would have been a shot in the dark with no guarantees of any improvements. The teams could just as well be replacing tyres, engines, gearboxes etc. in hopes of performance gains.
No, you don't. Reappeared from when? There's nothing in any report I can find that says the problem kept occurring with various clutches. You're still making an assumption here
The clutches are replaced every race and in the very article you linked it sounds like Max thinks all the bad starts have been caused by the clutch. Anyway, the tone of this conversation is progressing towards something I don't need to have a part in.
Apologies if you think the tone is off. I have no beef with you and it's not intentional. I'm just saying that there's no logic to Red Bull wanting to change the clutch if it's an inherent problem with the design. They clearly thought replacing it would cure the problem. Max just refers to starting problems but he doesn't specifically link it to clutch failures every time and even then he says this particular one was much worse

User avatar
Blinky McSquinty
Posts: 1464
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 12:13 pm

Re: Red Bull not allowed to fix Verstappen's clutch at Singa

Post by Blinky McSquinty »

The intent of the rules is to eliminate swapping parts after qualifying. The goal is to have a car in basically the same condition as it qualified in. Because in the past, teams changed engines, transmissions, a heck of a lot of parts so much that they were basically different cars. That is the intent of the rules, and to allow any team to swap parts just because they didn't like how it was or wasn't working is not appropriate.

Just because a team asks for permission from the FIA, and even go to the trouble of opening up the car to remove the clutch still does not grant them permission.

A clutch is not a safety related item, and if it doesn't work properly or fails, tough. This is racing, not a charity benefit.

The teams could design and install a system much easier for drivers to launch with, but they chose to use what they presently employ, with it's benefits (quick gear changes) and drawbacks. With the elimination of driver aids for starting and the "press one button and we're on our way", the onus is on the teams to design better clutches and launch procedures, and for drivers to step up and be near-perfect while juggling blindfolded.

Is it perfect? Obviously not. Is it easy? Many drivers have struggled and lost positions at the start. And it can be improved, but these are the present rules, and every team must live with them.
Only dogs, mothers, and quality undergarments give unconditional support.

Post Reply