2023 United States Grand Prix - COTA, Oct 20 - 22

[the EDGE]

If you fly internally in UK you don’t get asked for passports or ID, is that the same for countries within the Schengen area?

I see why FIA can’t check all cars all the time, or even all parts on just some cars, it would be exhaustive, timely, & frankly not worth the cost. I mean, when was the last time (before this) they found something?

But… I would have thought before this that the plank would have been checked on all cars, along with weight/fuel etc. Not much point it being there otherwise. I would have thought it was quite a basic check that would take minutes

[AR3-GP]

Even the weight checks are random.

The only thing that gets checked systematically for all is the driver weight. To be honest I'm unsure of the purpose of checking driver weights.

[dans79]

Even the weight checks are random.

The only thing that gets checked systematically for all is the driver weight. To be honest I'm unsure of the purpose of checking driver weights.

That is incorrect.

all cars that finish are weighed post race.

All the cars go through a lot of checks, you can seem them listed in the post race scrutineering document.
https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files ... eering.pdf


31 tests were done to every car that finished the race. You can see the list in the document.

keep in mind most of them where done all at once by hooking the mcu up to a computer, and thus could be done by a child!


the "random" tests where.

The following aerodynamic component or bodywork areas were checked on car numbers 11, 04 and 22:

you can see the list of individual aero components in the document.

A physical floor and a plank wear inspection was carried out on car numbers 01, 16, 44 and 04.

A fuel sample was taken from car number 55.

The fuel samples have been checked for density and analysed by gas chromatography.

The results of all the fuel analyses show that the fuels were the same as ones, which had been
approved for use by the relevant competitors prior to the Competition.
Further the density change of the fuel samples taken today was within the permitted limits.

An engine oil sample was taken from car number 55.

The engine oil samples have been analysed by FTIR spectroscopy and viscometry.
The results of the FTIR analyses show that the sampled oils were consistent with reference engine
oil samples which had been approved for use by the relevant competitors prior to the Competition.

[ThijsMuis]

[ThijsMuis]

[TFSA]

The FIA can check every plank if there was a desire for consistency. They are willing to pay the winners of a Sprint race 1 million dollars, but can't check the legality of each cars plank after every race.
Step back...think about that for just a second I implore you.

From the press release:

In conducting these tests, a huge amount of work goes on in the limited time available after a Grand Prix finishes and before the cars need to be returned to their teams for disassembly and transportation to the next race. However, even though a wide array of checks are made, it is impossible to cover every parameter of every car in the short time available – and this is especially true of back-to-back race weekends when freight deadlines must also be considered.

The race finished on sunday, and they have to pack the entire circus up and have it ready by no later than thursday night thousands of miles away.

Money can't invent you a time machine.

As for the Sprint race 1 million dollars:

1. That's still just an idea.
2. It says it could potentially stretch to 1 million dollars - not that it will.
3. It says specifically in the articles mentioned that the idea is to get a sponsor on board - so someone else will be footing the bill.

[chrisc90]

Charles takes it like a man! No excuses from him

[CHT]

You can't safely conclude that. If the FIA is basing their decisions on cars to check partly on data, then 8 other teams pushing the rules is gonna get figured out - maybe not immediately, but at some point.

I know the FIA sometimes presents themselves as somewhat incompetent, but they're not that stupid.

If there is bias raised from previous races being projected into a future race, that would alleviate others from the same scrutiny. That much is clear from the numbers of inspections we've seen some teams get over others.

I mean we literally just had a driver go off track 28 times without sanction, this was picked up by a random on twitter.
I'd say the FIA at this both point are both incompetent and stupid.

Strange time to criticise the FIA for ineptitude when they just used their post-race inspection process to bust two illegal cars at the same race. The time to criticise them for "bias" would've been before, when they had checked certain cars more than others but never found anything. The USGP only serves to validate the FIA knew what they were doing and clearly have a process in place for monitoring suspected offenders. I'm more at ease knowing that rather than believing the selection is 100% random. Then it would truly be a lottery of "are we going to get away with it this time".

F1 is so competitive in nature, so it is also possible that teams are always actively spying on one another. For ride hide that is certainly something that is noticeable from the trackside. And since ground effect now contributes to more than 50% of the car downforce, teams will be paying more attention in that area, especially for Merc since they have brought a new floor to the race. In some way, this sport on its own is self-governing. FIA may just be acting like it's random.

[AR3-GP]

If there is bias raised from previous races being projected into a future race, that would alleviate others from the same scrutiny. That much is clear from the numbers of inspections we've seen some teams get over others.

I mean we literally just had a driver go off track 28 times without sanction, this was picked up by a random on twitter.
I'd say the FIA at this both point are both incompetent and stupid.

Strange time to criticise the FIA for ineptitude when they just used their post-race inspection process to bust two illegal cars at the same race. The time to criticise them for "bias" would've been before, when they had checked certain cars more than others but never found anything. The USGP only serves to validate the FIA knew what they were doing and clearly have a process in place for monitoring suspected offenders. I'm more at ease knowing that rather than believing the selection is 100% random. Then it would truly be a lottery of "are we going to get away with it this time".

F1 is so competitive in nature, so it is also possible that teams are always actively spying on one another. For ride hide that is certainly something that is noticeable from the trackside. And since ground effect now contributes to more than 50% of the car downforce, teams will be paying more attention in that area, especially for Merc since they have brought a new floor to the race. In some way, this sport on its own is self-governing. FIA may just be acting like it's random.

A second fact worth mentioning is that the teams knew about and agreed to these inspection procedures. Hamilton, Leclerc, Mercedes, and Ferrari had plank checks at previous GPs and were aware that not everyone gets checked. To now throw the toys out and make baseless accusations of others of being out of tolerance solely because your own car was thrown out is just sour grapes.

[organic]

[AR3-GP]

Talk about throwing gasoline on a fire...

[dans79]

Talk about throwing gasoline on a fire...

The fia should have burned to ground numerous times over the decades. Somehow it always manages to had wave away issues.

[organic]

Amus says 0.2mm for Leclerc, more for Hamilton

[ValeVida46]

The FIA can check every plank if there was a desire for consistency. They are willing to pay the winners of a Sprint race 1 million dollars, but can't check the legality of each cars plank after every race.
Step back...think about that for just a second I implore you.

From the press release:

In conducting these tests, a huge amount of work goes on in the limited time available after a Grand Prix finishes and before the cars need to be returned to their teams for disassembly and transportation to the next race. However, even though a wide array of checks are made, it is impossible to cover every parameter of every car in the short time available – and this is especially true of back-to-back race weekends when freight deadlines must also be considered.

The race finished on sunday, and they have to pack the entire circus up and have it ready by no later than thursday night thousands of miles away.

Money can't invent you a time machine.

As for the Sprint race 1 million dollars:

1. That's still just an idea.
2. It says it could potentially stretch to 1 million dollars - not that it will.
3. It says specifically in the articles mentioned that the idea is to get a sponsor on board - so someone else will be footing the bill.

Logistically, you can check 20 planks very easily with 5 scrutineers doing 10 teams. @Dans79 post mirrors that.
It's a plank measurement. Not a time consuming exhaustive and comprehensive check.
Conflating every parameter and all parts with just checking planks is once again, wrong.

The million dollar sprint might be an idea, but it contextualises the problem. 5 scrutineers wont cost 1 million over a season let alone a race event, regardless who pays for it.

I don't see why you'd defend a tiny minority of the grid having planks checked instead of all of them. But perhaps a two tiered system based on suspicions is why you prefer?

[ValeVida46]

https://twitter.com/SkySportsF1/status/ ... PORLg&s=19

2 valid points I have made.

More of the grid should have their planks checked - Norris

The margins were tiny and could easily have just been taking one kerb too hard - LeClerc