FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[spankyham]

I don't think they'll be successful in the appeal, I feel it might be more a case of RBR wanting to show up the inaccuracies of the sensors and wanting something done about that.

My original thought was they had no chance with their appeal. But one recent claim I read was that they will show that the flow rates reported by the FiA supplied sensor indicate the used more fuel than they could possibly have on car. If true, and the sensor was genuinely faulty then they may have a good and reasonable case.


Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

[What's Burning?]

I don't think they'll be successful in the appeal, I feel it might be more a case of RBR wanting to show up the inaccuracies of the sensors and wanting something done about that.

My original thought was they had no chance with their appeal. But one recent claim I read was that they will show that the flow rates reported by the FiA supplied sensor indicate the used more fuel than they could possibly have on car. If true, and the sensor was genuinely faulty then they may have a good and reasonable case.


Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

Then that's very good news for Mercedes since they voluntarily turned their flow down.

[sagi58]

... But one recent claim I read was that they will show that the flow rates reported by the FiA supplied sensor indicate the used more fuel than they could possibly have on car. If true, and the sensor was genuinely faulty then they may have a good and reasonable case.

So, basically, they will be trying to prove that It's possible the sensor on Ricciardo's car is the one "bad" sensor in the lot?
Possible, n'est pas?

[Ichabod]

What would happen in the event of the sensors total failure ( no reading at all ) is there a second backup sensor, or would the FIA look to the teams telemetry to prove that they didn't breach the fuel flow rate or would the car have to retire

[sagi58]

Good question!!

I wonder if it will end up being like at the gas pump:
In the event of a discrepancy, this meter will be taken as being correct!

[stonemonkey]

Other methods of calculating fuel flow can be used if the fia determine there's a problem with the sensor but they have to give permission to do that, which they didn't for RB.

[sagi58]

Will their "defence" be that they didn't have time, since this occurred in the middle of a race?

[stonemonkey]

Nope, the issue had been ongoing since the Friday. They changed the sensor then the fia told them to go back to the original on the saturday.

[sagi58]

No excuses, then!! Off with their heads!!

[CookinFlat6]

But they do have an excuse - that the FIA-supplied device does not comply with the internationally-accepted standards, so decided to use a device which did.
However they and the others were told that despite the FIA devices shortcomings it would be the one used with offsets to compensate for its failings.
RBR will say the FIA illegally tried to force them to use a device know to be 'faulty' and that they were therefore compelled to use their own 'better' device to be able to comply with the regs

Most worrying for them is that they are not claiming Charlie told them it was ok

[What's Burning?]

The accuracy or inaccuracy of the device is not the primary issue here, it's the fact that the FiA made sure EVERYONE used the same one and that EVERY TEAM AGREED to use it as of the last Bahrain test and gave their assurances to the FiA that they would use it.

Red Bull's point if true may lead to a revision of the flow or even a newer or different standardized flow control metering device, but their DSQ has to be and will be upheld. The reason it must be upheld is that there is no go forward plan if then teams are allowed to use whatever they will instead of the FiA provided device. It would become the wild west and completely unmanageable/pointless to have the FiA provided flow meter.

I feel for Ricciardo though.

[CookinFlat6]

Yes, even if RBR successfully prove that they were justified in using their own because the FIA provided a faulty one that its not allwoed to do in the rules, even then the DQ cannot be overturned, it will just be like the tyre test, with the FIA saying 'we have made a procedural mistake in the measurements' and most likely will have no choice but to remove the regulation restricting fuel flow and allow only the total 100kg per race reg to remain.

But RBR will still be DQed as they failed to comply with a directive agreed by everyone from a sporting pov. The agreement, will be argued by the FIA supercedes the accuracy and therefore legality of the device

Its like a football match where the referees whistle blows the wrong signals, and the teams agree to listen to it anyway and just reverse the different signals, i.e a 'stop play' whistle becomes a free kick whistle etc. And then during the match one team decides that the 'stop play' they heard was really 'play on' (which it could be with a functioning whistle) and then go and score while the other team have stopped. Then they are turning around and saying a whistle that doesnt work is not reliable despite what was agreed at the start of the match

Typical RBR arrogance. Why did they not use their own device on both cars? Cant see RBR winning however its possible that the directive agreed by the teams to use the 'faulty' FIA device was another typical FIA directive - non binding, maybe the FIA should have changed a rule at the same time but didnt. We know how stupid the FIA are with their 'Charlie said so but dont rely on him' or 'this directive is non binding but you must comply'

Anything could happen with an independent tribunal which is where this will end up

[spankyham]

The accuracy or inaccuracy of the device is not the primary issue here, it's the fact that the FiA made sure EVERYONE used the same one and that EVERY TEAM AGREED to use it as of the last Bahrain test and gave their assurances to the FiA that they would use it.

Red Bull's point if true may lead to a revision of the flow or even a newer or different standardized flow control metering device, but their DSQ has to be and will be upheld. The reason it must be upheld is that there is no go forward plan if then teams are allowed to use whatever they will instead of the FiA provided device. It would become the wild west and completely unmanageable/pointless to have the FiA provided flow meter.

I feel for Ricciardo though.

What you say seems reasonable. My take is that Red Bull are trying to prove that the FiA failed to ensure that everyone used the "same". If they can succeed it that endeavor then you'd have to think they would have a very good chance of overturning the disqualification. It really should be simple to test/prove. Line up a series of these FiA sensors, subject them to a white-box flow rate and total measurement test and the readings must all be exactly the same.

[sagi58]

The accuracy or inaccuracy of the device is not the primary issue here, it's the fact that the FiA made sure EVERYONE used the same one and that EVERY TEAM AGREED to use it as of the last Bahrain test and gave their assurances to the FiA that they would use it...

All teams agreed, therefore the DSQ should stand!
((mind you, all teams agreed with last year's tires, before the season started, too!!))

...Red Bull's point if true may lead to a revision of the flow or even a newer or different standardized flow control metering device...

Hopefully, this won't be made into an issue of "well, they are right"
because Red Bull was "not" right in ignoring the FIA.

...I feel for Ricciardo though.

Absolutely!! Poor guy does better than the reigning WDC and gets DSQ?

[sagi58]

... My take is that Red Bull are trying to prove that the FiA failed to ensure that everyone used the "same". If they can succeed it that endeavor then you'd have to think they would have a very good chance of overturning the disqualification. It really should be simple to test/prove. Line up a series of these FiA sensors, subject them to a white-box flow rate and total measurement test and the readings must all be exactly the same.

It does seem relatively simple; but, the question is:
Would the FIA "risk" conducting such a test, with the possibility of Red Bull being right?