FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[CookinFlat6]

It's been a long day and I'm battling a migraine, so I'm not sure I understand what that means.
Please humour me: Does a team rack up grid penalties after they've had five failures?

Edit: Don't worry, found the article detailing what a failure is: http://www.formula1.com/inside_f1/rules ... 9/fia.html

Perhaps you should not have boldly claimed that a smart TP might make a certain trade off before attempting to understand the pros and cons. I was debating this payoff with you on the assumption you were aware of the basics

a) Each driver may use no more than one gearbox for six consecutive Events in which his team competes. Should a driver use a replacement gearbox he will drop five places on the starting grid at that Event and an additional five places each time a further gearbox is used.
Any replacement gearbox will only be required to complete the remainder of the Event in question.
Unless the driver fails to finish the race (or is unable to start the race for reasons other than a penalty imposed by the stewards) the gearbox fitted to the car at the end of the Event must remain in it for the remainder of the six race sequence. Any driver who failed to finish the race at the first, second, third, fourth or fifth of the six Events for reasons which the technical delegate accepts as being beyond the control of the team or driver, may start the following Event with a different gearbox without a penalty being incurred.
A gearbox will be deemed to have been used once the car's timing transponder has shown that it has left the pit lane.

The bolded part of the regulations explains the pay off for a smart TP who finds he could do with a free gearbox replacement by forfeiting the last few laps assuming his car is fragilee early in the season.

Therefore going back to the theme of the thread, its likely that RBR could fail to finish races out of 'choice' at the start of the season if to finish at the back of the grid would mean having to use a fragile gearbox later or receive a penalty for changing it

[Jabberwocky]

Has there been any gearbox issues this year?

Sent using NCC-1701

[sagi58]

It's been a long day and I'm battling a migraine, so I'm not sure I understand what that means.
Please humour me: Does a team rack up grid penalties after they've had five failures?

Edit: Don't worry, found the article detailing what a failure is: http://www.formula1.com/inside_f1/rules ... 9/fia.html

Perhaps you should not have boldly claimed that a smart TP might make a certain trade off before attempting to understand the pros and cons. I was debating this payoff with you on the assumption you were aware of the basics...

The particular article that I read referred specifically to the various components that make up the power unit.
Since the car is made up of more than "just" the engine, motor generator unit-kinetic (MGU-K), the motor generator unit-heat (MGU-H), the energy store, turbocharger and control electronics, there still ""might"" be other components that a smart TP would want to have tested. After all, even I know that a car is not made up of "just" a power unit!

((p.s. yes, that italicized portion was copied and pasted!! ))

[sagi58]

Has there been any gearbox issues this year?

, Steven De Groote wrote:">Rosberg ends first Bahrain test on top

...Lotus meanwhile were not seen in the first 90 minutes of the test as the team was hard at work replacing gearbox parts with new elements flown over from the team's headquarters in Enstone. Yesterday, Lotus struggled with that gearbox, repeatedly bringing Maldonado out only to see him stop a few corners down the road...

[Jabberwocky]

Oh dear, bad engine, bad box, bad team boss. Lotus are living the dream

Sent using NCC-1701

[sagi58]

Oh dear, bad engine, bad box, bad team boss. Lotus are living the dream

But, they seem to think they'll be the best of the Renault-powered teams:

, Edd Straw wrote:">Lotus reckons it could be top Renault F1 team amid Red Bull plight

Lotus could depose Red Bull as Renault's lead Formula 1 team in 2014, according to technical director Nick Chester.

The Enstone squad set the fastest time of the four Renault-powered squads in testing in Bahrain, albeit almost five-and-a-half seconds slower than pacesetter Nico Rosberg's Mercedes.

But despite completing five fewer laps than Red Bull overall, Lotus had a good final day while the reigning world champion team struggled.

"I think we could be the lead Renault team," said Chester when asked about the possibility of being best of the Renaults.

"We certainly haven't gone badly this week in comparison to the other Renault teams and I know they are having a few problems...

[Jabberwocky]

I am sure that is political posturing after the rumours of RBR popping down the shops to buy some milk, bread, and Cosworth F1.

Sent using NCC-1701

[CookinFlat6]

Since the car is made up of more than "just" the engine, motor generator unit-kinetic (MGU-K), the motor generator unit-heat (MGU-H), the energy store, turbocharger and control electronics, there still ""might"" be other components that a smart TP would want to have tested. After all, even I know that a car is not made up of "just" a power unit!

((p.s. yes, that italicized portion was copied and pasted!! ))

Yes Sagi, there are other components the TP might want to test. But say you were the smart TP. You were testing a part called PART X, and you were testing it while running out of the points during a race. Would you want to finish the race (no points) or would you opt to finish 2 laps earlier enabling you to change your fragile gearbox or other PU component WITHOUT PENALTY, or would you do the extra 2 laps (you already did 50 laps) testing PART X? would an extra 2 laps of testing added to the race distance of 50 laps be worth giving up to receive a brand new gearbox/other important fragile part without penalty?

[sagi58]

Gotcha!

Hey, you should write to the FIA so that the "smart" people there
can write a rule that over-rules the bending of the rule.