FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[LRW]

Seems Lotus and Redbull are not happy with CWs descision that the mercedes rearwing is legal....

LinkHere

Season has just only started and the legal protest / counter protests have already started.....

[myownalias]

There is always some sort of protest about one part or another on one car or another, that's just par for the course, the other teams can't work out why one team is fast so they clutch at straws and complain about a part or parts without knowing exactly what they are complaining about... if Mercedes were 2 seconds off the pace, no-one would be complaining about the legality!

[LRW]

What makes me chuckle, is last year Redbull were always the focus of the protests, and their response was always "yeah, yeah, we'll we just focus on ourselves, let them do what they want"...... but now all of a sudden someone even threatens to look like they might be quick or might have an advantage, and RedBull are just as keen as the rest to try and stunt progression through official channels.

Just think its a little two faced....

[calvins48]

It's a competitive sport. If Red Bull weren't interested, I'd be surprised!

[LRW]

Ted Kravitz has just confirmed on Sky that Lotus have confirmed they WILL contest the results of qualifying, because of the Mercedes rear-wing.

[yamashek]

lotus will have no case for this.

the wing is perfectly legal, and redbull will proof me right in incorporating this idea in the next few updates..

[FerrariFan63]

Is the duct permanently open, but only becomes effective when DRS is employed? Or does the button that engages DRS also open the duct?

If the former, then the duct is purely passive, and I'd think it legal. If the latter options, then that's definitely dodgy.

[LRW]

Is the duct permanently open, but only becomes effective when DRS is employed? Or does the button that engages DRS also open the duct?

If the former, then the duct is purely passive, and I'd think it legal. If the latter options, then that's definitely dodgy.

This is how I understand it to be. totally passive.

[FerrariFan63]

This is how I understand it to be. totally passive.

This page suggests otherwise. http://scarbsf1.wordpress.com/2012/03/1 ... -wing-drs/

There is a duct, but the moving of the wing element when DRS is opened physically opens the duct. Hence it isn't completely passive, but the opening of the front wing stalling duct is a secondary purpose of the moving of the rear wing element.

This is much more of a grey area. I was wondering if the air flow change when DRS was opening was creating pressure changes which would effectively enable or disable the front wing duct. But this is a actual, driver operated, opening and closing of the duct. If the above article is correct, that is.

[andrew]

It's been declared legal. The other teams just have to dry up and get on with it.

[FerrariFan63]

It's been declared legal. The other teams just have to dry up and get on with it.

That it's been declared legal doesn't mean that it actually should be legal given the rules. We have many example of things that have been declared legal, then declared not legal. E.g. mass dampers and brake steering. There is a lot of interesting discussion on this in the comments for the article I link to, but I haven't read enough of them to come up with a firm opinion. And the article is still making guesses about how the system actually works.

Edit: If the benefit of the system is that the front wing is stalled when DRS is open, maintaining the balance of the car, then there is little benefit when the car is moving in a straight line. If that's the case, then the system should be of very little advantage in the race, as the DRS overtaking zones tend to be straights, aren't they?

[bud]

I think Scarbs is correct in how he thinks it works. But ultimately I think it's legal as its a secondary effect to DRS activation.

[FerrariFan63]

I think Scarbs is correct in how he thinks it works. But ultimately I think it's legal as its a secondary effect to DRS activation.

We need to know more about the rules to make such a statement. The comments in the previous argument suggest that the rules might state that the mechanism for DRS activation is not allowed to perform other functions affecting aerodynamics, or that secondary effects are specifically banned. Without an in-depth analysis of the actual regulations, any firm statements of legality are on shaky ground.

[zurich_allan]

We just have to wait and see what is ultimately decided, anything else at this stage is purely speculation.

One thing though, if it IS eventually declared illegal, it should only affect them from the next race and shouldn't affect them for Australia. The device has been declared legal as things stand and would, in my opinion, be entirely unfair to then DQ or punish Mercedes in any way whatsoever as they are racing on the basis that they have been given official advice to the effect that it is legal. The precedent for this is the McLaren double braking system from 1998 where this is exactly what happened.

If it's declared illegal today that puts Mercedes in a very difficult and somewhat unfair position as they obviously physically cannot alter the design of the car between today and tomorrow.

Totally different if it had been declared illegal but then the team been allowed to race under protest, which isn't the case.

Will wait and see with interest.

[LRW]

We just have to wait and see what is ultimately decided, anything else at this stage is purely speculation.

One thing though, if it IS eventually declared illegal, it should only affect them from the next race and shouldn't affect them for Australia. The device has been declared legal as things stand and would, in my opinion, be entirely unfair to then DQ or punish Mercedes in any way whatsoever as they are racing on the basis that they have been given official advice to the effect that it is legal. The precedent for this is the McLaren double braking system from 1998 where this is exactly what happened.

If it's declared illegal today that puts Mercedes in a very difficult and somewhat unfair position as they obviously physically cannot alter the design of the car between today and tomorrow.

Totally different if it had been declared illegal but then the team been allowed to race under protest, which isn't the case.

Will wait and see with interest.

I can't see how they will declare it illegal as Charlie Whiting has already looked at the wing, has said it is a passive system and is fully legal.

Obviously he could change his mind. But I don't think he will. Not this season.