Technical Directive: FIA bans with immediate effect special protective plates installed over skid blocks

[Vanja #66]

It's written in the article: https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/fia- ... /10674832/

A previous technical directive gave teams further scope to add supportive skids, also known as satellite skids, on the plank further away from the four measuring points.

Those support skids were understood to be legal as long as they had the same vertical stiffness as the main skids, but they didn't reference thickness.

In recent weeks some teams, including Ferrari but not Red Bull's other rival McLaren, were deemed to have taken advantage of the provision to go beyond what is intended and come up with thicker protections that help protect the main skids.

If you have supporting evidence that suggest this is not true, then share it.

Thickness is thickness and you are talking about external offset. Do you have any evidence of non-flush skid blocks on any car?

[organic]

Yes I think the thickness is not about whether it's flush with the surface or not. It's a given that it is flush.

It says the stiffness of the extra block is specified, but a thicker extra skid block will be stiffer. So I think that's where the benefit lies, not in it being not flush or whatever.

[AR3-GP]

I thought for a bit and have a slightly different view on the matter.

I think teams were using the supportive skid plates, but the reason for using them wasn't necessarily "to prevent wear at the primary inspection holes". We can't say what the motives of the teams were and no one will confess to this. However, from Red Bull's point of view, this "supportive skid" allocation via this backroom TD actually contravenes the FIA's own regulations (Article 3.15.18) saying any design intended to protect the inspection holes is not legal. Since there is a possibility for the additional skid supports to work in this capacity, then they cannot be legal.

We haven't seen the skids of the 2024 cars so it's not possible to estimate how much the additional metallic supportive skids could have contributed to reducing plank wear at the inspection holes. IF a team was doing it for the reason that Red Bull outlined, then they may lose some performance. However, a team who was using the supportive skids coincidentally (and not deliberately) may also be impacted as they may not have realized what effect the supportive skid blocks were having on protection of the inspection holes.

I think it's more a case of Red Bull wanting the FIA to shut down this backdoor TD in case another team was using them deliberately and with great effect. It explains why Red Bull would report it despite having to modify their own floor. If they were using supportive skids for innocuous reasons, then it cost them nothing but might hurt a team that was using it deliberately. It's more of a "just in case" protest.


In any case, if I was a betting man, I would guess that Mercedes may have been more deliberate about this than others. Their cars spark a lot. Their drivers complained a lot about warm seat bottoms. There was clearly something funny going on there.

[dialtone]

As shared in the Red Bull team thread:

https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/313660/r ... ctive.html

The FIA confirmed to GPblog that as of the Las Vegas Grand Prix, a new technical directive [TD] has been introduced to counter a new trick used by several teams. This technical directive ensures that teams can no longer play tricks to reduce the wear of the so-called skid blocks.

The FIA also denied reports that Red Bull Racing was the team that raised this with the FIA. In fact, Red Bull Racing is said to have used a similar system, something that the Austrian team also doesn't deny. So Red Bull is also "affected" by the new TD, although the effect is less compared to its competitors.

Ferrari is said to be the team that will suffer the most from this new directive, although the technical directive isn't expected to make a major difference in terms of performance. McLaren is said to be one of the few teams that did not use the trick.

[AR3-GP]

As shared in the Red Bull team thread:

https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/313660/r ... ctive.html

The FIA confirmed to GPblog that as of the Las Vegas Grand Prix, a new technical directive [TD] has been introduced to counter a new trick used by several teams. This technical directive ensures that teams can no longer play tricks to reduce the wear of the so-called skid blocks.

The FIA also denied reports that Red Bull Racing was the team that raised this with the FIA. In fact, Red Bull Racing is said to have used a similar system, something that the Austrian team also doesn't deny. So Red Bull is also "affected" by the new TD, although the effect is less compared to its competitors.

Ferrari is said to be the team that will suffer the most from this new directive, although the technical directive isn't expected to make a major difference in terms of performance. McLaren is said to be one of the few teams that did not use the trick.

What I'm interested in is why everyone is reporting that Ferrari will be the most affected. Are there any photos of the SF24 floor? What is the basis of this argument?

[scuderiabrandon]

As shared in the Red Bull team thread:

https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/313660/r ... ctive.html

The FIA confirmed to GPblog that as of the Las Vegas Grand Prix, a new technical directive [TD] has been introduced to counter a new trick used by several teams. This technical directive ensures that teams can no longer play tricks to reduce the wear of the so-called skid blocks.

The FIA also denied reports that Red Bull Racing was the team that raised this with the FIA. In fact, Red Bull Racing is said to have used a similar system, something that the Austrian team also doesn't deny. So Red Bull is also "affected" by the new TD, although the effect is less compared to its competitors.

Ferrari is said to be the team that will suffer the most from this new directive, although the technical directive isn't expected to make a major difference in terms of performance. McLaren is said to be one of the few teams that did not use the trick.

What I'm interested in is why everyone is reporting that Ferrari will be the most affected. Are there any photos of the SF24 floor? What is the basis of this argument?

An assumption made from a AMuS article which was by far the most dubious one of the lot. You can't discount the politics that go into all of this. Ferrari are a direct rival, I'm sure adding pressure to a Haas or a Mercedes doesn't really do much for Red Bull.

Ferrari aren't the only one who need to produce new planks for this race. 1-week notice is incredibly tight. I'm sure the others involved were not pleased with the decision either, but no one cares if Haas or another midfield team ask to move the date to have adequate time to produce new parts.

[AR3-GP]

As shared in the Red Bull team thread:

https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/313660/r ... ctive.html

What I'm interested in is why everyone is reporting that Ferrari will be the most affected. Are there any photos of the SF24 floor? What is the basis of this argument?

An assumption made from a AMuS article which was by far the most dubious one of the lot. You can't discount the politics that go into all of this. Ferrari are a direct rival, I'm sure adding pressure to a Haas or a Mercedes doesn't really do much for Red Bull.

Ferrari aren't the only one who need to produce new planks for this race. 1-week notice is incredibly tight. I'm sure the others involved were not pleased with the decision either, but no one cares if Haas or another midfield team ask to move the date to have adequate time to produce new parts.

I agree there's no shortage of outlets who have an axe to grind with individual teams, but I can assure you that Michael Schmidt would not work for the benefit of Red Bull. As a long time reader of his, he hates Red Bull and Horner with a passion. He is not doing charity work for them in sharing this story.

Regarding the claim that Ferrari has to change the skid the most, it could be a simple observation due to looking at the how the skid is designed. It doesn't mean that Ferrari was deliberately doing anything to avoid plank wear. I agree that 1 weeks notice is enough to make anyone upset. It doesn't mean the reason for their supplemental skid plates was to prevent plank wear. It can also mean that the logistics of making new parts is difficult.

[dialtone]

Regarding the claim that Ferrari has to change the skid the most, it could be a simple observation due to looking at the how the skid is designed. It doesn't mean that Ferrari was deliberately doing anything to avoid plank wear. I agree that 1 weeks notice is enough to make anyone upset. It doesn't mean the reason for their supplemental skid plates was to prevent plank wear. It can also mean that the logistics of making new parts is difficult.

If you believe the claim that Ferrari asked for post-ponement, you should have to believe the claim that it's not a big performance enhancer. Ferrari probably doesn't want to waste time designing stuff for this car when they are busy with the new year already.

Impact comes in various forms, including the annoyance/operational headache of having to fix this thing quickly. Vegas isn't a low ride sensitive track being a city track with no fast corners, not much will happen here is my expectation.

[AR3-GP]

Another take from Italian Motorsport.com

The skate must be 10 millimeters thick, and a maximum consumption of one millimeter is allowed. The headache that the engineers are grappling with the single-seaters of this generation is linked precisely to the height from the ground, the closer the surface is to the asphalt and the greater the aerodynamic load developed, but there is the limit imposed by the wear of the skate in contact with the track. The fixing screws, sliding against the road surface, can be reduced by a maximum of one millimeter, and on this front the teams have used different solutions to limit consumption.

For some time there had been rumors in the paddock of 'protective' treatments, rumors that have never been confirmed. However, the suspicions were enough for Red Bull to put pressure on the FIA asking for clarification on what is allowed to do and what is to be considered prohibited in terms of skate protections and the International Federation responded with a directive sent to all teams in which it is emphasized that no treatment, or protective material of the skate, It is allowed by the regulations.

Two teams (one should be Ferrari) would have asked to postpone the directive to the Qatar Grand Prix weekend, but the FIA did not give in. There are quite a few question marks with which several teams will start the Las Vegas weekend, as a directive in such a sensitive area of the car can have a major impact.

The time available to prepare was practically nil, with all the risks involved. "There will be those who will have to raise the car – revealed a team principal – and this could lead to significant aerodynamic imbalances, especially on a track like Las Vegas".

https://it.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1-la ... /10674800/

[ScuderiaLeo]

I think the fact so many outlets are saying varying things shows none of them actually know what's going on, as usual... some reporters are saying Red Bull reported it and didn't use it, others say that Red Bull reported it but did use it, and now we have some saying Red Bull didn't report it and used it. All we're missing to complete the square is: Red Bull didn't report it and didn't use it.

[AR3-GP]

Not great but gpblog is probably the least credible source. It's a clickbait website. Go to their homepage and skim the headlines there. It's good for churning out as much content as possible about driver chit chat, but in the more interesting technical cases, they don't carry much weight. AMUS carries a lot more weight historically.

[Polite]

I think the fact so many outlets are saying varying things shows none of them actually know what's going on, as usual... some reporters are saying Red Bull reported it and didn't use it, others say that Red Bull reported it but did use it, and now we have some saying Red Bull didn't report it and used it. All we're missing to complete the square is: Red Bull didn't report it and didn't use it.

and Ferrari will be the most affected..

[Seanspeed]

An assumption made from a AMuS article which was by far the most dubious one of the lot. You can't discount the politics that go into all of this. Ferrari are a direct rival, I'm sure adding pressure to a Haas or a Mercedes doesn't really do much for Red Bull.

Ferrari aren't the only one who need to produce new planks for this race. 1-week notice is incredibly tight. I'm sure the others involved were not pleased with the decision either, but no one cares if Haas or another midfield team ask to move the date to have adequate time to produce new parts.

How is Ferrari a direct rival?

Verstappen has the WDC in the bag and the WCC is clearly out of reach for Red Bull. Do they really think some long shot of 2nd in the WCC is that critical?

And why is the FIA making strong technical directives literally THREE races from the finish of a twenty four race calendar? Seems quite ridiculous to me.

[scuderiabrandon]

An assumption made from a AMuS article which was by far the most dubious one of the lot. You can't discount the politics that go into all of this. Ferrari are a direct rival, I'm sure adding pressure to a Haas or a Mercedes doesn't really do much for Red Bull.

Ferrari aren't the only one who need to produce new planks for this race. 1-week notice is incredibly tight. I'm sure the others involved were not pleased with the decision either, but no one cares if Haas or another midfield team ask to move the date to have adequate time to produce new parts.

How is Ferrari a direct rival?

Verstappen has the WDC in the bag and the WCC is clearly out of reach for Red Bull. Do they really think some long shot of 2nd in the WCC is that critical?

And why is the FIA making strong technical directives literally THREE races from the finish of a twenty four race calendar? Seems quite ridiculous to me.

they are 13 points away from Ferrari.

[Andi76]

Craig Scarborough published something about that recently in relation to the AmuS article:



I've known Michael Schmidt for almost 30 years and when he publishes something like this, it's true. The exact technical explanation and how it works may be a different matter, but if he says that 5 teams surround the skid blocks with protection and the FIA has issued a new technical directive, then that is so. As far as I know, it is a new version of the TD39, namely version "J". It would also not be the first time since 2022 (as the many versions of TD39 also clearly show) that the teams take any measures and tricks to protect the skid blocks. Springy material, lowering screws and other things have been used. Ultimately, this is the area where you find the most downforce. So it's only logical that you try everything here. It's the quickest, easiest and above all most effective way to find performance. In the end, of course, there is a lot of exaggeration, because it's all about nuances. But there are many possibilities. From synthetic diamond or DLC, materials that are already often used in F1, there would be enough possibilities to reduce the wear of the skid blocks in a clever way.
Because, as I said, this is ultimately the quickest and most effective way to find performance. Therefore, it is only natural that many teams start here, which can be easily recognized by the many versions of the TD039.