planetf1.com

Mort Canard wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

pokerman wrote: Yeah that's worded wrong, that's averaged out over the 5 tracks, but you know when we say a driver is 2 tenths quicker than another driver it doesn't mean he's always 2 tenths quicker.

Mexico has always been an outlier for performance because of the high altitude whilst Austin was after the TD so I'm not sure were you are going with that?

I'm sorry, you called me out above that 0.2 is not 0.215, but now it is ok, 2 tenths are not really 2 tenths? Can you make up your mind?

USA I used to show that they fell back by 0.012, it's not that they lost a couple of seconds.

Well you pulled me up on semantics earlier, I wouldn't be calling 0.215s as being hardly 0.2s but I would say that about 0.195s.

Regarding Austin, no they didn't fall back by merely 0.012s when they were round about 3 tenths in front before, they fell back close to 3 tenths.

You realise that Leclerc was using an older spec 2 engine for Austin (while missing FP3), right? He could have been on pole otherwise, most likely actually since he has been besting Vettel in qualis lately. So I don't think how much time they lost in Austin is so clear cut.

Anyway, this is getting tiring, let's just wait and see what the FIA finds.

I'm a bit concerned as this is only reported by AMUS, I haven't been able to find any other info regarding the fuel parts investigation

24 hours later it's all over the 'net.

https://www.planetf1.com/news/fia-seize ... el-system/

https://www.grandprix247.com/2019/11/21 ... ularities/

https://f1i.com/news/362441-fia-reporte ... ystem.html

They are all citing the AMUS article. Anyway, let's see what happens

Siao7 wrote:

Mort Canard wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote: I'm sorry, you called me out above that 0.2 is not 0.215, but now it is ok, 2 tenths are not really 2 tenths? Can you make up your mind?

USA I used to show that they fell back by 0.012, it's not that they lost a couple of seconds.

Well you pulled me up on semantics earlier, I wouldn't be calling 0.215s as being hardly 0.2s but I would say that about 0.195s.

Regarding Austin, no they didn't fall back by merely 0.012s when they were round about 3 tenths in front before, they fell back close to 3 tenths.

You realise that Leclerc was using an older spec 2 engine for Austin (while missing FP3), right? He could have been on pole otherwise, most likely actually since he has been besting Vettel in qualis lately. So I don't think how much time they lost in Austin is so clear cut.

Anyway, this is getting tiring, let's just wait and see what the FIA finds.

I'm a bit concerned as this is only reported by AMUS, I haven't been able to find any other info regarding the fuel parts investigation

24 hours later it's all over the 'net.

https://www.planetf1.com/news/fia-seize ... el-system/

https://www.grandprix247.com/2019/11/21 ... ularities/

https://f1i.com/news/362441-fia-reporte ... ystem.html

They are all citing the AMUS article. Anyway, let's see what happens

Motorsport are now reporting it, so I guess it's real.

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/fuel ... 0/4601058/

Alienturnedhuman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

Mort Canard wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

pokerman wrote: Well you pulled me up on semantics earlier, I wouldn't be calling 0.215s as being hardly 0.2s but I would say that about 0.195s.

Regarding Austin, no they didn't fall back by merely 0.012s when they were round about 3 tenths in front before, they fell back close to 3 tenths.

You realise that Leclerc was using an older spec 2 engine for Austin (while missing FP3), right? He could have been on pole otherwise, most likely actually since he has been besting Vettel in qualis lately. So I don't think how much time they lost in Austin is so clear cut.

Anyway, this is getting tiring, let's just wait and see what the FIA finds.

I'm a bit concerned as this is only reported by AMUS, I haven't been able to find any other info regarding the fuel parts investigation

24 hours later it's all over the 'net.

https://www.planetf1.com/news/fia-seize ... el-system/

https://www.grandprix247.com/2019/11/21 ... ularities/

https://f1i.com/news/362441-fia-reporte ... ystem.html

They are all citing the AMUS article. Anyway, let's see what happens

Motorsport are now reporting it, so I guess it's real.

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/fuel ... 0/4601058/

So it seems that the FIA has issued a third directive that they'll be using a second sensor from next year (all teams, not just Ferrari). I can't find the directives in the FIA site, but anyway.

It seems that they have finished their investigation, so does this mean that they didn't really find anything regarding the Ferrari fuel system? Is anyone going to tell Max to shut up or is it too early? (Just joking on the last one!)

Probably done as a way to save face for Ferrari, no details but the result is a more level playing field. Till the next time. Interesting that Red Bull had such a handle on it though, I wonder if they had considered it?

Option or Prime wrote:Probably done as a way to save face for Ferrari, no details but the result is a more level playing field. Till the next time. Interesting that Red Bull had such a handle on it though, I wonder if they had considered it?

So they can't even win even when they are cleared? I don't exclude the possibility of course that it may well be the case, but it seems like Ferrari really can't win, like never. It feels like they are on everyone's naughty book the whole time; for example they ran more downforce than they normally do in Austin and straight away the other teams started talking about Ferrari not being fast on the straight (well, d'uh) so they must be up to something. It is getting tiring.

Siao7 wrote:

Option or Prime wrote:Probably done as a way to save face for Ferrari, no details but the result is a more level playing field. Till the next time. Interesting that Red Bull had such a handle on it though, I wonder if they had considered it?

So they can't even win even when they are cleared? I don't exclude the possibility of course that it may well be the case, but it seems like Ferrari really can't win, like never. It feels like they are on everyone's naughty book the whole time; for example they ran more downforce than they normally do in Austin and straight away the other teams started talking about Ferrari not being fast on the straight (well, d'uh) so they must be up to something. It is getting tiring.

Yeah, I agree it's getting really annoying actually.

Slower on the straight in Austin - it's evidence they're cheating
Faster in the straight in Brazil - it's evidence they're cheating
Have a number 1 driver - "let them race'
Let them race - lol stupid tactics bad management

Siao7 wrote: So they can't even win even when they are cleared? ......

.

Sorry, I missed the point when they were "cleared" !

.

Greenman wrote:

Siao7 wrote: So they can't even win even when they are cleared? ......

.

Sorry, I missed the point when they were "cleared" !

.

Well, they issued a third directive regarding next season and it is mentioned on the article that the investigation is finished. I haven't seen any reports that the FIA found something and is taking action against Ferrari. On that basis then yes, I'd say that they seem to be cleared. Obviously this is my assumption and I should have made it clearer maybe (that will come back to bite me if it turns out otherwise!), but I can't see how they are still being on the naughty corner at the moment. Do you think that this spells "guilty"?

FormulaFun wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

Option or Prime wrote:Probably done as a way to save face for Ferrari, no details but the result is a more level playing field. Till the next time. Interesting that Red Bull had such a handle on it though, I wonder if they had considered it?

So they can't even win even when they are cleared? I don't exclude the possibility of course that it may well be the case, but it seems like Ferrari really can't win, like never. It feels like they are on everyone's naughty book the whole time; for example they ran more downforce than they normally do in Austin and straight away the other teams started talking about Ferrari not being fast on the straight (well, d'uh) so they must be up to something. It is getting tiring.

Yeah, I agree it's getting really annoying actually.

Slower on the straight in Austin - it's evidence they're cheating
Faster in the straight in Brazil - it's evidence they're cheating
Have a number 1 driver - "let them race'
Let them race - lol stupid tactics bad management

Well, it is much more than that. Thinking about it, the last few years Ferrari were:

- using the twin batteries to cheat (a second sensor from the FIA solved that)
- burning oil (nothing came out of it but the FIA tightened how much oil can be used and forbid this practise anyway)
- cooling liquids from the intercooler (not sure where this is, but nothing came out of it to my knowledge)
- Fuel flow (current affair, still no verdict that Ferrari is cheating)

It just feels that they are being accused left right and centre all the time. The FIA hasn't found anything on any of these accusations so far to my knowledge. So either the whole of FIA is working to save Ferrari's face, or maybe, just maybe, there's nothing wrong; I think that they are possibly/probably exploiting a loophole which is not illegal, not yet anyway.

I do find it peculiar that Ferrari seem to get away with some on track infractions (like not giving them well deserved penalties the last couple of seasons), but I find it a leap that they are not conforming with the regs on a technical level and it is being covered for them.

And before I get any fire that I'm a Ferrari fanboy, I agree that they should throw the book at them if they are found that they are guilty of the fuel flow

Siao7 wrote:

Alienturnedhuman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

Mort Canard wrote:

Siao7 wrote: You realise that Leclerc was using an older spec 2 engine for Austin (while missing FP3), right? He could have been on pole otherwise, most likely actually since he has been besting Vettel in qualis lately. So I don't think how much time they lost in Austin is so clear cut.

Anyway, this is getting tiring, let's just wait and see what the FIA finds.

I'm a bit concerned as this is only reported by AMUS, I haven't been able to find any other info regarding the fuel parts investigation

24 hours later it's all over the 'net.

https://www.planetf1.com/news/fia-seize ... el-system/

https://www.grandprix247.com/2019/11/21 ... ularities/

https://f1i.com/news/362441-fia-reporte ... ystem.html

They are all citing the AMUS article. Anyway, let's see what happens

Motorsport are now reporting it, so I guess it's real.

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/fuel ... 0/4601058/

So it seems that the FIA has issued a third directive that they'll be using a second sensor from next year (all teams, not just Ferrari). I can't find the directives in the FIA site, but anyway.

It seems that they have finished their investigation, so does this mean that they didn't really find anything regarding the Ferrari fuel system? Is anyone going to tell Max to shut up or is it too early? (Just joking on the last one!)

There not going to out Ferrari giving their importance to the sport.

Option or Prime wrote:Probably done as a way to save face for Ferrari, no details but the result is a more level playing field. Till the next time. Interesting that Red Bull had such a handle on it though, I wonder if they had considered it?

Apparently this came from Mercedes.

Siao7 wrote:

Option or Prime wrote:Probably done as a way to save face for Ferrari, no details but the result is a more level playing field. Till the next time. Interesting that Red Bull had such a handle on it though, I wonder if they had considered it?

So they can't even win even when they are cleared? I don't exclude the possibility of course that it may well be the case, but it seems like Ferrari really can't win, like never. It feels like they are on everyone's naughty book the whole time; for example they ran more downforce than they normally do in Austin and straight away the other teams started talking about Ferrari not being fast on the straight (well, d'uh) so they must be up to something. It is getting tiring.

I've been through this smoke screen before by showing the speed of the Ferrari as measured in actual lap time.

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

Option or Prime wrote:Probably done as a way to save face for Ferrari, no details but the result is a more level playing field. Till the next time. Interesting that Red Bull had such a handle on it though, I wonder if they had considered it?

So they can't even win even when they are cleared? I don't exclude the possibility of course that it may well be the case, but it seems like Ferrari really can't win, like never. It feels like they are on everyone's naughty book the whole time; for example they ran more downforce than they normally do in Austin and straight away the other teams started talking about Ferrari not being fast on the straight (well, d'uh) so they must be up to something. It is getting tiring.

I've been through this smoke screen before by showing the speed of the Ferrari as measured in actual lap time.

Ah, I was wondering when you would show up to the party...

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

Alienturnedhuman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

Mort Canard wrote:
24 hours later it's all over the 'net.

https://www.planetf1.com/news/fia-seize ... el-system/

https://www.grandprix247.com/2019/11/21 ... ularities/

https://f1i.com/news/362441-fia-reporte ... ystem.html

They are all citing the AMUS article. Anyway, let's see what happens

Motorsport are now reporting it, so I guess it's real.

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/fuel ... 0/4601058/

So it seems that the FIA has issued a third directive that they'll be using a second sensor from next year (all teams, not just Ferrari). I can't find the directives in the FIA site, but anyway.

It seems that they have finished their investigation, so does this mean that they didn't really find anything regarding the Ferrari fuel system? Is anyone going to tell Max to shut up or is it too early? (Just joking on the last one!)

There not going to out Ferrari giving their importance to the sport.

Or they may just want to nip it in the bud, since one team came out and showed that a cheat is possible (I wonder if RB has a "cheat department, how did they come up with the solution?).

Why does it have to be that another team cheated automatically? And why would the FIA not out Ferrari for cheating? No team is bigger than the sport and if we are to believe the last few years Ferrari have been cheating on everything related to PU; how do these cheaters add value to the sport?

Siao7 wrote:

FormulaFun wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

Option or Prime wrote:Probably done as a way to save face for Ferrari, no details but the result is a more level playing field. Till the next time. Interesting that Red Bull had such a handle on it though, I wonder if they had considered it?

So they can't even win even when they are cleared? I don't exclude the possibility of course that it may well be the case, but it seems like Ferrari really can't win, like never. It feels like they are on everyone's naughty book the whole time; for example they ran more downforce than they normally do in Austin and straight away the other teams started talking about Ferrari not being fast on the straight (well, d'uh) so they must be up to something. It is getting tiring.

Yeah, I agree it's getting really annoying actually.

Slower on the straight in Austin - it's evidence they're cheating
Faster in the straight in Brazil - it's evidence they're cheating
Have a number 1 driver - "let them race'
Let them race - lol stupid tactics bad management

Well, it is much more than that. Thinking about it, the last few years Ferrari were:

- using the twin batteries to cheat (a second sensor from the FIA solved that)
- burning oil (nothing came out of it but the FIA tightened how much oil can be used and forbid this practise anyway)
- cooling liquids from the intercooler (not sure where this is, but nothing came out of it to my knowledge)
- Fuel flow (current affair, still no verdict that Ferrari is cheating)

It just feels that they are being accused left right and centre all the time. The FIA hasn't found anything on any of these accusations so far to my knowledge. So either the whole of FIA is working to save Ferrari's face, or maybe, just maybe, there's nothing wrong; I think that they are possibly/probably exploiting a loophole which is not illegal, not yet anyway.

I do find it peculiar that Ferrari seem to get away with some on track infractions (like not giving them well deserved penalties the last couple of seasons), but I find it a leap that they are not conforming with the regs on a technical level and it is being covered for them.

And before I get any fire that I'm a Ferrari fanboy, I agree that they should throw the book at them if they are found that they are guilty of the fuel flow

What about the extra oil tank Ferrari used that was actually an extra fuel tank seeing as the purpose of the oil was to be burnt in the combustion chamber of the engine.

When they clamped down on the amount of oil that could be burnt the worse affected was Ferrari, but no Ferrari don't have history for trying to get extra fuel into the engine by any conceivable means.

As like been said I didn't expect it to come out that Ferrari had been found guilty but very much that an extra procedure would be put in place for policing the flow of fuel into the engine.

Siao7 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

Option or Prime wrote:Probably done as a way to save face for Ferrari, no details but the result is a more level playing field. Till the next time. Interesting that Red Bull had such a handle on it though, I wonder if they had considered it?

So they can't even win even when they are cleared? I don't exclude the possibility of course that it may well be the case, but it seems like Ferrari really can't win, like never. It feels like they are on everyone's naughty book the whole time; for example they ran more downforce than they normally do in Austin and straight away the other teams started talking about Ferrari not being fast on the straight (well, d'uh) so they must be up to something. It is getting tiring.

I've been through this smoke screen before by showing the speed of the Ferrari as measured in actual lap time.

Ah, I was wondering when you would show up to the party...

As opposed to you having a free for all your opinion?

I think my explanation is valid.

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

FormulaFun wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

Option or Prime wrote:Probably done as a way to save face for Ferrari, no details but the result is a more level playing field. Till the next time. Interesting that Red Bull had such a handle on it though, I wonder if they had considered it?

So they can't even win even when they are cleared? I don't exclude the possibility of course that it may well be the case, but it seems like Ferrari really can't win, like never. It feels like they are on everyone's naughty book the whole time; for example they ran more downforce than they normally do in Austin and straight away the other teams started talking about Ferrari not being fast on the straight (well, d'uh) so they must be up to something. It is getting tiring.

Yeah, I agree it's getting really annoying actually.

Slower on the straight in Austin - it's evidence they're cheating
Faster in the straight in Brazil - it's evidence they're cheating
Have a number 1 driver - "let them race'
Let them race - lol stupid tactics bad management

Well, it is much more than that. Thinking about it, the last few years Ferrari were:

- using the twin batteries to cheat (a second sensor from the FIA solved that)
- burning oil (nothing came out of it but the FIA tightened how much oil can be used and forbid this practise anyway)
- cooling liquids from the intercooler (not sure where this is, but nothing came out of it to my knowledge)
- Fuel flow (current affair, still no verdict that Ferrari is cheating)

It just feels that they are being accused left right and centre all the time. The FIA hasn't found anything on any of these accusations so far to my knowledge. So either the whole of FIA is working to save Ferrari's face, or maybe, just maybe, there's nothing wrong; I think that they are possibly/probably exploiting a loophole which is not illegal, not yet anyway.

I do find it peculiar that Ferrari seem to get away with some on track infractions (like not giving them well deserved penalties the last couple of seasons), but I find it a leap that they are not conforming with the regs on a technical level and it is being covered for them.

And before I get any fire that I'm a Ferrari fanboy, I agree that they should throw the book at them if they are found that they are guilty of the fuel flow

What about the extra oil tank Ferrari used that was actually an extra fuel tank seeing as the purpose of the oil was to be burnt in the combustion chamber of the engine.

When they clamped down on the amount of oil that could be burnt the worse affected was Ferrari, but no Ferrari don't have history for trying to get extra fuel into the engine by any conceivable means.

As like been said when was it released that Ferrari had been cleared, I didn't expect it to come out that Ferrari had been found guilty but very much that an extra procedure would be put in place for policing the flow of fuel into the engine.

Yep, keep adding them accusations, you only re-enforce the points above

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

Option or Prime wrote:Probably done as a way to save face for Ferrari, no details but the result is a more level playing field. Till the next time. Interesting that Red Bull had such a handle on it though, I wonder if they had considered it?

So they can't even win even when they are cleared? I don't exclude the possibility of course that it may well be the case, but it seems like Ferrari really can't win, like never. It feels like they are on everyone's naughty book the whole time; for example they ran more downforce than they normally do in Austin and straight away the other teams started talking about Ferrari not being fast on the straight (well, d'uh) so they must be up to something. It is getting tiring.

I've been through this smoke screen before by showing the speed of the Ferrari as measured in actual lap time.

Ah, I was wondering when you would show up to the party...

As opposed to you having a free for all your opinion?

I think my explanation is valid.

Free for all opinion? Did I stop you from voicing your opinion or something? Good grief.

What explanation? Or do you want me to go through all your posts?

Siao7 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

Alienturnedhuman wrote:

Siao7 wrote: They are all citing the AMUS article. Anyway, let's see what happens

Motorsport are now reporting it, so I guess it's real.

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/fuel ... 0/4601058/

So it seems that the FIA has issued a third directive that they'll be using a second sensor from next year (all teams, not just Ferrari). I can't find the directives in the FIA site, but anyway.

It seems that they have finished their investigation, so does this mean that they didn't really find anything regarding the Ferrari fuel system? Is anyone going to tell Max to shut up or is it too early? (Just joking on the last one!)

There not going to out Ferrari giving their importance to the sport.

Or they may just want to nip it in the bud, since one team came out and showed that a cheat is possible (I wonder if RB has a "cheat department, how did they come up with the solution?).

Why does it have to be that another team cheated automatically? And why would the FIA not out Ferrari for cheating? No team is bigger than the sport and if we are to believe the last few years Ferrari have been cheating on everything related to PU; how do these cheaters add value to the sport?

How it's being dealt with is how I and a few others guessed it would go down, and yes Ferrari are that important.

Apparently it was Mercedes who sussed out what Ferrari might be doing, the performance jump and how it was being gained didn't seem normal.

Siao7 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

FormulaFun wrote:

Siao7 wrote: So they can't even win even when they are cleared? I don't exclude the possibility of course that it may well be the case, but it seems like Ferrari really can't win, like never. It feels like they are on everyone's naughty book the whole time; for example they ran more downforce than they normally do in Austin and straight away the other teams started talking about Ferrari not being fast on the straight (well, d'uh) so they must be up to something. It is getting tiring.

Yeah, I agree it's getting really annoying actually.

Slower on the straight in Austin - it's evidence they're cheating
Faster in the straight in Brazil - it's evidence they're cheating
Have a number 1 driver - "let them race'
Let them race - lol stupid tactics bad management

Well, it is much more than that. Thinking about it, the last few years Ferrari were:

- using the twin batteries to cheat (a second sensor from the FIA solved that)
- burning oil (nothing came out of it but the FIA tightened how much oil can be used and forbid this practise anyway)
- cooling liquids from the intercooler (not sure where this is, but nothing came out of it to my knowledge)
- Fuel flow (current affair, still no verdict that Ferrari is cheating)

It just feels that they are being accused left right and centre all the time. The FIA hasn't found anything on any of these accusations so far to my knowledge. So either the whole of FIA is working to save Ferrari's face, or maybe, just maybe, there's nothing wrong; I think that they are possibly/probably exploiting a loophole which is not illegal, not yet anyway.

I do find it peculiar that Ferrari seem to get away with some on track infractions (like not giving them well deserved penalties the last couple of seasons), but I find it a leap that they are not conforming with the regs on a technical level and it is being covered for them.

And before I get any fire that I'm a Ferrari fanboy, I agree that they should throw the book at them if they are found that they are guilty of the fuel flow

What about the extra oil tank Ferrari used that was actually an extra fuel tank seeing as the purpose of the oil was to be burnt in the combustion chamber of the engine.

When they clamped down on the amount of oil that could be burnt the worse affected was Ferrari, but no Ferrari don't have history for trying to get extra fuel into the engine by any conceivable means.

As like been said when was it released that Ferrari had been cleared, I didn't expect it to come out that Ferrari had been found guilty but very much that an extra procedure would be put in place for policing the flow of fuel into the engine.

Yep, keep adding them accusations, you only re-enforce the points above

Did Ferrari not have to remove an extra oil tank?

Siao7 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

pokerman wrote: I've been through this smoke screen before by showing the speed of the Ferrari as measured in actual lap time.

Ah, I was wondering when you would show up to the party...

As opposed to you having a free for all your opinion?

I think my explanation is valid.

Free for all opinion? Did I stop you from voicing your opinion or something? Good grief.

What explanation? Or do you want me to go through all your posts?

Then why the comment on me taking part in the discussion?

I have to assume then you simply ignored my previous posts and keep asking the same question but only want answers that agree with your own thinking?

Even P-F1 have run an article pointing out the drop in performance of Ferrari since the TD was announced in Austin.

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

pokerman wrote: I've been through this smoke screen before by showing the speed of the Ferrari as measured in actual lap time.

Ah, I was wondering when you would show up to the party...

As opposed to you having a free for all your opinion?

I think my explanation is valid.

Free for all opinion? Did I stop you from voicing your opinion or something? Good grief.

What explanation? Or do you want me to go through all your posts?

Then why the comment on me taking part in the discussion?

I have to assume then you simply ignored my previous posts and keep asking the same question but only want answers that agree with your own thinking?

Even P-F1 have run an article pointing out the drop in performance of Ferrari since the TD was announced in Austin.

Because you can't stop partaking to any discussion against Ferrari, it is predictable now. I'm never going to stop you voicing your opinion obviously (how could I?), but don't be surprised if I point it out. Let's leave this here as it doesn't add to the conversation, I apologise if you found my comment inappropriate.

As for the bold part, you know what they say about assumptions, right? Yeah I only read what agrees with me, everything else is filtered out in my browser. Or I just don't remember which post you mean out of the many comments you post in a day. You can chose to believe what you wish.

Oh PF1, the mother of all newsfeeds... The drop in performance can and has been explained, Ferrari has explained the drop in performance, they have been on record that they have not touched anything in the engine, but you want to believe whatever you want to believe. You had Mercedes not being able to outdrag the Torro Rosso in a straight last weekend, but the Honda engine is not being questioned now, is it?

I had added the responses to your other posts here to make it easier, but you know what, I deleted it as it made no sense to answer; I feel like I'm wasting my time here, I'm not really interested in changing your mind as you have already guessed how it is going to go down. I won't have internet access for a while anyway to answer, so please don't bother.

It's simple. The FIA are never going to out ferrari.

To do so would blow up F1.

Liberty can't even stop ferrari from getting the extra 100 million.

They will keep coming out with a directives to stop whatever they are doing.

This is all controlled as a business decision to keep the money flowing.

Anybody here thinking that Ferrari would get outed for anything major is deluding themselves.

pokerman wrote: Then why the comment on me taking part in the discussion?

I have to assume then you simply ignored my previous posts and keep asking the same question but only want answers that agree with your own thinking?

Even P-F1 have run an article pointing out the drop in performance of Ferrari since the TD was announced in Austin.

Poker, seriously... using a PF1 front page as an authority?

Poker, you have to understand that there are topics where your getting involved (Hamilton, Ferrari, Vettel) is very predictable. Just as me showing up in a Ferrari related discussion. I am not saying it is bad, just that our history shows that those topics are of greater interest to us. I believe that is what Siao is saying.

spiritone wrote:It's simple. The FIA are never going to out ferrari.

To do so would blow up F1.

Liberty can't even stop ferrari from getting the extra 100 million.

They will keep coming out with a directives to stop whatever they are doing.

This is all controlled as a business decision to keep the money flowing.

Anybody here thinking that Ferrari would get outed for anything major is deluding themselves.

If the FIA had come out and said there was definitely no Ferrari infraction, it would not believed by many in here. In that sense cannot "win". They were convicted from the first time they showed significant improvement.

Interestingly, it has been said in here that Ferrari is not an innovator, yet they are accused of cheating with innovations. Did they cheat the system? Perhaps, or maybe not. Anyone in here that thinks their team, any team, Is fully capable of exploiting grey areas of pushing (exceding) the limits, Is a bit foolish.

Siao, Poker, break it up. If you can't talk to each other civilly, please refrain from engaging one another at all.

Blake wrote:

pokerman wrote: Then why the comment on me taking part in the discussion?

I have to assume then you simply ignored my previous posts and keep asking the same question but only want answers that agree with your own thinking?

Even P-F1 have run an article pointing out the drop in performance of Ferrari since the TD was announced in Austin.

Poker, seriously... using a PF1 front page as an authority?

Poker, you have to understand that there are topics where your getting involved (Hamilton, Ferrari, Vettel) is very predictable. Just as me showing up in a Ferrari related discussion. I am not saying it is bad, just that our history shows that those topics are of greater interest to us. I believe that is what Siao is saying.

I'm merely showing it's not only my view in the wake of perhaps my view being seen as isolated opinion.

In the past 2 days I've posted in 7 different topics, the Sainz thread, DoTD thread, Silly Season Thread, The Renault Thread, the MotoGP thread and then of course the Ferrari TD thread, and the collision between Vettel and Leclerc thread.

The most topical threads presently I would think relates to the Ferrari TD and the Vettel/Leclerc collision so why would I not be posting in these threads?

Like you say you only actually see my posts that relate to subjects that are of interest to you and therefore think that I post mainly about Hamilton, Vettel and Ferrari, I've made one post that relates to Hamilton these past 2 days.

I don't understand the hate for Ferrari here. If they figured out a loophole, more power to them - that's what F1 has always been about. Anyone who thinks every team on the grid is not trying to figure out any loophole which will give them the slightest possible advantage is living in a dream land.

A.J. wrote:I don't understand the hate for Ferrari here. If they figured out a loophole, more power to them - that's what F1 has always been about. Anyone who thinks every team on the grid is not trying to figure out any loophole which will give them the slightest possible advantage is living in a dream land.

Should it be the case that they have done what has been alleged (and that so far has not been proven) - then it is not the case of 'finding a loophole'

A loophole is finding a gap in the technicalities of the regulations to do something that was not intended - such as the F-duct, the double diffuser or the exhaust blown diffusers. These were all legal within the rules, but were not design avenues intended by the FIA. Therefore, there was nothing illegal about them, and the loopholes were closed in later seasons.

What has been alleged here is to interfere with the FIA mandated fuel flow monitoring device so it records a legal reading when in fact the car was exceeding the limit.

It's essentially the same as if, when the cars are being weighed at the end of the race, if the mechanic was to secretly put his foot on the scales and push down hard without the stewards seeing so their underweight car appeared to be the legal weight.

In the same way, if a team was to install an F-duct on their car now, but hide it from the stewards, it too would be illegal, against the rules and would be cheating.

This debate has nothing to do with hating Ferrari, although no doubt anyone who dislikes Ferrari will be feeling empowered by the circumstances and more likely to assume guilt (or want guilt)

But it needs to be stressed, so far no hard evidence has been found to prove any wrongdoing - only suspicion and circumstantial evidence that does have other explanations.

Alienturnedhuman wrote:

A.J. wrote:I don't understand the hate for Ferrari here. If they figured out a loophole, more power to them - that's what F1 has always been about. Anyone who thinks every team on the grid is not trying to figure out any loophole which will give them the slightest possible advantage is living in a dream land.

Should it be the case that they have done what has been alleged (and that so far has not been proven) - then it is not the case of 'finding a loophole'

A loophole is finding a gap in the technicalities of the regulations to do something that was not intended - such as the F-duct, the double diffuser or the exhaust blown diffusers. These were all legal within the rules, but were not design avenues intended by the FIA. Therefore, there was nothing illegal about them, and the loopholes were closed in later seasons.

What has been alleged here is to interfere with the FIA mandated fuel flow monitoring device so it records a legal reading when in fact the car was exceeding the limit.

It's essentially the same as if, when the cars are being weighed at the end of the race, if the mechanic was to secretly put his foot on the scales and push down hard without the stewards seeing so their underweight car appeared to be the legal weight.

In the same way, if a team was to install an F-duct on their car now, but hide it from the stewards, it too would be illegal, against the rules and would be cheating.

This debate has nothing to do with hating Ferrari, although no doubt anyone who dislikes Ferrari will be feeling empowered by the circumstances and more likely to assume guilt (or want guilt)

But it needs to be stressed, so far no hard evidence has been found to prove any wrongdoing - only suspicion and circumstantial evidence that does have other explanations.

I get where you're coming from, but I don't necessarily agree - in both cases the teams are doing something against the spirit of the law (while following the letter of it). I get that your weight example is intended to be exaggerated by design, but if the FIA were actually doing a test which could be doctored so easily, I can guarantee every team would be sending their heaviest mechanic to put his/her foot on the scales every damn time (count on Merc/Ferrari/RBR to even hire the heaviest guy they can find - or at least the one who can force the most weight on one leg )

This isn't any different (in my mind) from the flexi-wing thing for which RedBull and Newey were (largely) admired, or even the blown diffusers - the FIA sets the rules, figures out the tests, and the teams have to comply with them. If a team can figure out a way to get an advantage and still be compliant, they can and will do it. It is up to the FIA to police them - there is no gentleman's code that any team is following. How does one know where to draw the line?

There's a difference between finding flaws in the tests, and actively sabotaging them.

A.J. wrote:This isn't any different (in my mind) from the flexi-wing thing for which RedBull and Newey were (largely) admired, or even the blown diffusers - the FIA sets the rules, figures out the tests, and the teams have to comply with them. If a team can figure out a way to get an advantage and still be compliant, they can and will do it. It is up to the FIA to police them - there is no gentleman's code that any team is following. How does one know where to draw the line?

It's different from those examples for the key reason that the rules are black and white on the subject of fuel flow. If Ferrari is doing anything at all to get more fuel into the engine than allowed, they are cheating. The rules even state outright that any system designed to circumvent the sensor is illegal. There really isn't any room for interpretation.

This is more similar to allegations that Red Bull was using traction control on their cars circa 2013. If Red Bull had been proven to be doing so (and they never were), that would not have been finding a clever loophole. It would have been cheating.

Exediron wrote:

A.J. wrote:This isn't any different (in my mind) from the flexi-wing thing for which RedBull and Newey were (largely) admired, or even the blown diffusers - the FIA sets the rules, figures out the tests, and the teams have to comply with them. If a team can figure out a way to get an advantage and still be compliant, they can and will do it. It is up to the FIA to police them - there is no gentleman's code that any team is following. How does one know where to draw the line?

It's different from those examples for the key reason that the rules are black and white on the subject of fuel flow. If Ferrari is doing anything at all to get more fuel into the engine than allowed, they are cheating. The rules even state outright that any system designed to circumvent the sensor is illegal. There really isn't any room for interpretation.

This is more similar to allegations that Red Bull was using traction control on their cars circa 2013. If Red Bull had been proven to be doing so (and they never were), that would not have been finding a clever loophole. It would have been cheating.

Yes, fully agreed. The alleged infraction is clear cheating, there is not way on Earth they can mask it as a loophole. Although technically they would not be burning oil nor would they have added anything in the fuel after the measuring equipment, which is forbidden by the regs. Just tampering with the measuring equipment, without even touching it! Almost ingenious if it wasn't totally illegal and immoral to say the least.

I have a question for the third directive issued by the FIA.

If their answer to everything is to install another fuel sensor, what would stop a team to do the same "interference" trick? I read somewhere that it may be installed inside the fuel tank, which I guess would make it impossible to interfere (no cables in the fuel tank). But then why would you need a second one? They could just have the one in the fuel tank if the other can be tampered with.

Siao7 wrote:I have a question for the third directive issued by the FIA.

If their answer to everything is to install another fuel sensor, what would stop a team to do the same "interference" trick? I read somewhere that it may be installed inside the fuel tank, which I guess would make it impossible to interfere (no cables in the fuel tank). But then why would you need a second one? They could just have the one in the fuel tank if the other can be tampered with.

Matthew Sommerfield, F1 technical expert, said it's just another sensor to cheat.

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:I have a question for the third directive issued by the FIA.

If their answer to everything is to install another fuel sensor, what would stop a team to do the same "interference" trick? I read somewhere that it may be installed inside the fuel tank, which I guess would make it impossible to interfere (no cables in the fuel tank). But then why would you need a second one? They could just have the one in the fuel tank if the other can be tampered with.

Matthew Sommerfield, F1 technical expert, said it's just another sensor to cheat.

Do you have a link to that? I googled it and couldn't find anything.

I can't believe that the FIA would be so daft to just add another sensor that is vulnerable in exactly the same way as RB "described" in their documents, it is idiotic to say the least.

Siao7 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:I have a question for the third directive issued by the FIA.

If their answer to everything is to install another fuel sensor, what would stop a team to do the same "interference" trick? I read somewhere that it may be installed inside the fuel tank, which I guess would make it impossible to interfere (no cables in the fuel tank). But then why would you need a second one? They could just have the one in the fuel tank if the other can be tampered with.

Matthew Sommerfield, F1 technical expert, said it's just another sensor to cheat.

Do you have a link to that? I googled it and couldn't find anything.

I can't believe that the FIA would be so daft to just add another sensor that is vulnerable in exactly the same way as RB "described" in their documents, it is idiotic to say the least.

It's something I heard second hand on one of the latest Misses Apex podcasts, probably from 'Trumpets' who does some work for 'Sommers', I will endeavour to find it although it might take some time.

Me personally I'm not a technical person at all but from what I read it's a quick way to find performance whether from the batteries were a second sensor had to be fitted or more recently with the fuel flow.

As for the FIA stewards it's fair to say they are not as clever as the engineers working within the teams.

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:I have a question for the third directive issued by the FIA.

If their answer to everything is to install another fuel sensor, what would stop a team to do the same "interference" trick? I read somewhere that it may be installed inside the fuel tank, which I guess would make it impossible to interfere (no cables in the fuel tank). But then why would you need a second one? They could just have the one in the fuel tank if the other can be tampered with.

Matthew Sommerfield, F1 technical expert, said it's just another sensor to cheat.

Do you have a link to that? I googled it and couldn't find anything.

I can't believe that the FIA would be so daft to just add another sensor that is vulnerable in exactly the same way as RB "described" in their documents, it is idiotic to say the least.

It's something I heard second hand on one of the latest Misses Apex podcasts, probably from 'Trumpets' who does some work for 'Sommers', I will endeavour to find it although it might take some time.

Me personally I'm not a technical person at all but from what I read it's a quick way to find performance whether from the batteries were a second sensor had to be fitted or more recently with the fuel flow.

As for the FIA stewards it's fair to say they are not as clever as the engineers working within the teams.

Ok, don't worry about finding it, I was just wondering, not asking you to go to lengths over this. If they indeed use the same sensors, the sensors that RB told them can be tampered with and even told them exactly how this can be achieved, then it's not about not being as clever, it is down right idiotic and I'd be happy if the teams cheated. Then again nothing should surprise us

There is no way on this earth ferrari have been acting within the spirit of the rules. I would call it cheating. This is year 6 of the hybrid engines. Performance generally converges over time, especially when there is such limited room for improvement. mercedes have done an incredible job on their engine, to which ferrari have lagged behind for years, but suddenly ferrari have found a legitimate improvement to make the other engines look like lawnmowers. give over. for the other manufacturers to be scratching their heads thinking we dont know how they are doing it says it all. ferrari international assistance are not going to come out and say ferrari were cheating. it wouldnt suprise me if they knew all along but its in their interest to have ferrari at the front giving the mercs a race.

Caserole of Nonsense wrote:There is no way on this earth ferrari have been acting within the spirit of the rules. I would call it cheating. This is year 6 of the hybrid engines. Performance generally converges over time, especially when there is such limited room for improvement. mercedes have done an incredible job on their engine, to which ferrari have lagged behind for years, but suddenly ferrari have found a legitimate improvement to make the other engines look like lawnmowers. give over. for the other manufacturers to be scratching their heads thinking we dont know how they are doing it says it all. ferrari international assistance are not going to come out and say ferrari were cheating. it wouldnt suprise me if they knew all along but its in their interest to have ferrari at the front giving the mercs a race.

"No way on this earth" unfortunately is not proof. Would you be happy if the FIA punished them based on that and it turned out that they may have just done too good a job?