Formula 1 - 2014 Season

[Phil]

With today's engines and gearboxes having to last multiple races + limited boost on the turbo there is no way some extra fuel is going to give these cars insane power. And with the limited downforce they have now I wonder how much use they could actually make of this extra power. The only thing where more speed is really going to be more "dangerous" is in the high speed corners.

Also with regards to safety, does it really matter if they take a corner at 200 or 230kmph?

You might not be aware of this, but the cars are already quite a bit faster in a straight line than they were last year, reaching higher topspeeds. At this point, it's any ones guess how much power these engines are producing, even under the fuel flow limit. You are also mistaken in your assumption that there is a boost limit - there isn't - which means that if you didn't have a fuel flow limit, these engines would be capable of producing a lot more power. You don't need to take my word for it - take the FIAs:

“Giving the same amount of fuel to each car is an easy way of promoting efficiency – but the requirement is not as simple as that.” said Lom. “With no other limitations we might see some extreme and dangerous powerful engines, coupled with exotic strategies.”

“The fuel-flow limitation is there to stop this, enforcing a certain level of control. I say ‘a certain level’ because the engineers working on this project have an infinite amount of ingenuity, and over time the will certainly develop more efficient engines with greater power output.”

Source

Safety isn't only about the race either. It's also includes qualifying and/or practice where the cars aren't limited by the 100kg per race rule.

 

[Dave Baumann]

Evidently the original intention of the fuel flow limited was to ensure that the engine manufacturers pay enough attention to developing the performance of the non-internal combustion engine elements and to ensure they were recovering energy and giving performance back at the maximum rates. I've not actually seen a comment that the 100kg is a fixed amount, just up to; presumably if a manufacturer develops the recovery systems effectively enough team could start with less?

But, with regards to keeping it in the rules, one thing that you wouldn't want happening is a team exceeding the flow rate and getting to the front knowing that they may not complete the race only to have the race cut short due to some unforeseen issues.

 

[Wynix]

But, with regards to keeping it in the rules, one thing that you wouldn't want happening is a team exceeding the flow rate and getting to the front knowing that they may not complete the race only to have the race cut short due to some unforeseen issues.

Or what if after doing a fuel dump/burn to get ahead a safety car comes out and wrecks that?
Teams will have to take a balanced approach, no one is going to risk not finishing the race just to hope the race gets cut short.

These teams aren't stupid.

 

[Dave Baumann]

Just like teams wouldn't ask a driver to intentionally crash their car so they can conveniently have their other driver come into the pits at exactly the right time relative to the safety car coming out?

Rarely are F1 teams stupid. Devious is a completely different thing.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

You might not be aware of this, but the cars are already quite a bit faster in a straight line than they were last year, reaching higher topspeeds. At this point, it's any ones guess how much power these engines are producing, even under the fuel flow limit. You are also mistaken in your assumption that there is a boost limit - there isn't - which means that if you didn't have a fuel flow limit, these engines would be capable of producing a lot more power. You don't need to take my word for it - take the FIAs:



Source

Safety isn't only about the race either. It's also includes qualifying and/or practice where the cars aren't limited by the 100kg per race rule.

You are right. I didn't know that, I thought there was a boost limit.

 

[Bludd]

It's official, Red Bull have appealed Dan's disqualification.

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/formula1/26664721

 

[Wynix]

It's official, Red Bull have appealed Dan's disqualification.

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/formula1/26664721

I can't imagine this changing the outcome, the FIA want to make an example, if they are found to have been within the fuel burn limits the FIA will just find another excuse such as "disregarded instructions by FIA officials".

 

[Bludd]

I can't imagine this changing the outcome, the FIA want to make an example, if they are found to have been within the fuel burn limits the FIA will just find another excuse such as "disregarded instructions by FIA officials".

I tend to agree. I am just sorry for Dan.

 

[DJ12]

I have no sympathy. They were given the option to comply and choose to ignore it and hoped the stewards would let them off like previous years.

All team's were warned before the race they would be disqualified if there were any irregularities, but such is the arrogance they have developed they thought it wouldn't apply to them.

 

[Davros]

seeing as the flow should be an average of 50kg/hour going over 100kg/hour is a hell of a lot

 

[cjo]

seeing as the flow should be an average of 50kg/hour going over 100kg/hour is a hell of a lot

Wouldn't fuel usage drop to (almost) 0 under braking? They are probably only talking about short blips over 100kg/hr while hard on the accelerator.

 

[Wynix]

Wouldn't fuel usage drop to (almost) 0 under braking? They are probably only talking about short blips over 100kg/hr while hard on the accelerator.

Yes this is exactly what happened.
It's not about them using more fuel for the race(because they didn't), it's about them going above the ridiculous fuel burn rate.

 

[DJ12]

It's not ridiculous though it's it? The world's going green and f1 was fast becoming irrelevant.

Let's say Bernie got his way and these engines never came into being, we'd only have 2 engine suppliers, could Mercedes and Ferrari provide engines for 10 team each? I doubt it.

The rules are there, all the team's need to adhere to them plain and simple.

 

[Dave Baumann]

I can't imagine this changing the outcome, the FIA want to make an example, if they are found to have been within the fuel burn limits the FIA will just find another excuse such as "disregarded instructions by FIA officials".

I don't think the discussion will even be about what their actual burn rates were, that's secondary. The discussion is about ignoring FIA mandated equipment to monitor such things - Red Bull may produce a ream of data that shows they did not exceed the spec, but the FIA's point will be "but this is based on your measurement methods which can be biased in any way, you're in the dock for removing the sensor that we can calibrate for all teams".

I'll be shocked if they get away with this. If they do, the other teams may as well just start ripping out the FIA spec ECU's and put their own in, that, oh, happens to have traction control software, etc.

 

[cjo]

I don't think the discussion will even be about what their actual burn rates were, that's secondary. The discussion is about ignoring FIA mandated equipment to monitor such things - Red Bull may produce a ream of data that shows they did not exceed the spec, but the FIA's point will be "but this is based on your measurement methods which can be biased in any way, you're in the dock for removing the sensor that we can calibrate for all teams".

I'll be shocked if they get away with this. If they do, the other teams may as well just start ripping out the FIA spec ECU's and put their own in, that, oh, happens to have traction control software, etc.

They didn't remove the sensor, they just ignored it...

 

[Bludd]

I think RBR should have the Constructor's points taken away for Dan's 2nd place and he should get the place and Driver's points back.

 

[Tahir2]

I think RBR should have the Constructor's points taken away for Dan's 2nd place and he should get the place and Driver's points back.

Nice idea in theory but in theory a driver could win the championship not having conformed to the rules and regulations of the sport.

It also has come to light that Red Bull were informed 5 laps after the race had started that they needed to restrict their fuel flow but again chose to ignore the FIA's warnings.

"We advised them twice after qualifying and five laps into the race to take the necessary steps to comply with the regulations," Whiting told The Times. "They chose to use their own calculations to show they complied. If they had followed the advice we gave them at the time, we would not have had a problem and they would not have been penalised.

At this point FIA should have black flagged the Daniel Ricciardo's car IMHO. It is such a shame that the new Red Bull driver makes such an amazing start to the season for his team boss to just throw it all away at his races expense. Horrible behaviour by Red Bull and I hope they do not jeopardise the new drivers championship hopes again in the future (yeah right.)

What is also interesting is Ricciardo's lack of issues and Vettel's reliability problems - perhaps the new engine can only work at higher fuel flow rates?

 

[Bludd]

Nice idea in theory but in theory a driver could win the championship not having conformed to the rules and regulations of the sport.

It also has come to light that Red Bull were informed 5 laps after the race had started that they needed to restrict their fuel flow but again chose to ignore the FIA's warnings.

Yeah, you're probably right, but there's precedence for what I said

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_Brazilian_Grand_Prix#Post-race

 

[Tahir2]

Thanks for the link, learnt something new about the sport and I have to agree with Niki Lauda's comments

 

[Davros]

Wouldn't fuel usage drop to (almost) 0 under braking? They are probably only talking about short blips over 100kg/hr while hard on the accelerator.

I just used simple maths you get 100kg its a 2hour race aka 50kg/hour