Rob Navin Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 Only stupid to get caught There was a detailed discription of the tank with drawings in Motering news this week. When you look at it its realy quite a clever idea. Quote
James Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 For gods sake when is the FIA going to grow some comon sence? you cant be aware of a design and the complain about it when that design does well! If the FIA was aware of the nature of the BAR then they should have made complaint about it before the race not after, or is Bernie upset that his old mate Shuey didnt win! Quote
Nick M Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 I agree with James. Most of these things are submitted for technical approval or comment before they are implemented so I think the FIA are being downright stupid claiming something is illegal if they've given prior consent to it. If they didn't like it at the time they should have said something then. Quote
toybox Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 just adds to publicity if you ask me,and the fia have to be seen to be doing somthing. f1 pr stunt. Quote
Carl Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 Bernie will be behind it. It'll somehow be connected to his master plan of breaking up the GPWC. All will become clearer in a year or two Quote
timd Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 I agree with James. Most of these things are submitted for technical approval or comment before they are implemented so I think the FIA are being downright stupid claiming something is illegal if they've given prior consent to it. If they didn't like it at the time they should have said something then. Isn't it more a case of the design is fine - but running a car which when drained of all fuel is less than 600kg isn't? ie. the system isn't the problem, it's BAR's interpretation of the rules that is. The tank arrangement is a bit of a red herring AFAICS, and BAR are clutching at straws trying to justify running a car in breach of the rules, despite it demonstrably not going underweight during the race. To the best of my knowledge, the rule they broke says "the car, less driver and ALL fuel, must not be less than 600kg". Therefore if BAR then design a car that requires 6kg of fuel at all times they've just handed themselves a 6kg weight penalty if they choose to run the car legally. Quote
Nick M Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 Isn't it more a case of the design is fine - but running a car which when drained of all fuel is less than 600kg isn't? ie. the system isn't the problem, it's BAR's interpretation of the rules that is. The tank arrangement is a bit of a red herring AFAICS, and BAR are clutching at straws trying to justify running a car in breach of the rules, despite it demonstrably not going underweight during the race. To the best of my knowledge, the rule they broke says "the car, less driver and ALL fuel, must not be less than 600kg". Therefore if BAR then design a car that requires 6kg of fuel at all times they've just handed themselves a 6kg weight penalty if they choose to run the car legally. Probably, but I still the think the FIA is being stupid. Slap them for being underweight for that race, but don't try and sling them out of the championship for trying to be cleverer than the FIA. I actually thought it was quite a clever interpretation, but agree it's one which could backfire. Not seen the precise wording of the rules but I would be a little surprised if there wasn't an area of greyness in there which allowed BAR to form their interpretation. If the rule is black and white "though shalt have no fuel in in the car when it's weighed" then yeah, I agree they've been dim. But if it says "though shalt have no fuel in the car other than residual amounts of fuel in the system" then *maybe* they could make a case. Jam really - just speculating. But I still think th FIA are muppets. Quote
mattf Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 The rules say nothing about weighing 600kg after being drained of all fuel. The rules state "The weight of the car must not be less than 605 kg during the qualifying practice session and no less than 600 kg at all other times during the Event." Quote
timd Posted May 5, 2005 Posted May 5, 2005 True, read the rules this morning. Seems it isn't being reported on very well (surprise surprise). Quote
Matt Seabrook Posted May 5, 2005 Posted May 5, 2005 Also if the second tank hold 6lts of fuel that is aprox 4.5kg they are still under 600kg as the car was more like 5.75kg under wieght Quote
ChrisG Posted May 5, 2005 Posted May 5, 2005 There's a good write-up of what was said in the court here, I think the main thing it comes down to is that there's nowhere in the actual rules that states 600kgs with no fuel at all on board, but it was discussed back in 1994 at some working group and seemingly agreed about the no fuel weight (but was not put in the rules). I guess BAR could claim that as they only started in the sport in 1999(?) then how were they meant to be aware of this, although in reality Im sure there were team members around in 1994 which would have known about it. My feelings on it are that they deserve a fine and maybe to lose constructor points for Imola, after the embarrasment Toyota had after being found cheating in WRC I personally think that this isnt a blatant cheating situation as the FIA are suggesting, its just another bending of the rules just like flexible wings etc which again although can conform to the letter of the law, don't really conform with the spirit of the law. Quote
Joff Posted May 5, 2005 Posted May 5, 2005 It could well be the FIA's revenge after the first race scenario where BAR "retired" Jenson and Sato so they could put a new engine in for round 2. They got away with it the first time! The rules have now been changed to prevent this. Having got through a loophole once, the FIA are making sure they dont do it again. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.