Red Bull Racing 2012

[raymondu999]

Agreed. It's F1 after all - I don't think they would sacrifice a tenth for charity

[raymondu999]

Personally I don't think Mark has what it takes to beat Seb on points over a season, unless some major catastrophe occurs (knock on wood). Monaco is just about the only track so far where Mark has comprehensively outdone Seb. He outraced and outqualified Seb in Malaysia and China, but almost didn't outrace Seb in China, and we never know how things would have played out in Malaysia had Seb's left rear and Karthikeyan's front wing had a coming together

[Hail22]

The question is, if just like in the article(s) have stated the FIA are forcing Red-Bull to re-design the brake ducts...does that mean the car cannot drive in FP3/Quali unless they make appropriate adjustments/changes or will they be given a a grid penalty in order to off set the gain from the duct? (adding a half a second penalty or less in order to replicate the benefit it may theoretically give).

To me...if the FIA have forced a re-design surely that means a team must find a suitable replacement/edit of the item deemed "illegal" correct?

[myurr]

Yes, the car would fail scrutineering otherwise. Do we know when this judgement was passed? If it was before the start of the weekend then presumably Red Bull would have been able to bring an update to fix the issue.

[Cuky]

so RB is using illegal car for all 6 races so far and yet no penalty is given...

[beelsebob]

so RB is using illegal car for all 6 races so far and yet no penalty is given...

A friend of mine had a bit of a giggle at the concept that RBR may be the first team to win the championship with a car that's been shown to be illegal in every race

[Huntresa]

so RB is using illegal car for all 6 races so far and yet no penalty is given...

Its hard to give a penalty when they are not actually breaking a written rule but breaking the way FIA sees the rule. They dont want you to use stuff like this for aero effecct but it can ofc be done and is being done by many teams just RB took it one step to far.

Edit: FIA sees it as breaking the spirit of a rule even if you dont break the rule as its written, its just silly rly

[beelsebob]

so RB is using illegal car for all 6 races so far and yet no penalty is given...

Its hard to give a penalty when they are not actually breaking a written rule but breaking the way FIA sees the rule. They dont want you to use stuff like this for aero effecct but it can ofc be done and is being done by many teams just RB took it one step to far.

They've broken a written rule in at least 5 races so far. The reason no penalty has been given is because the infraction was confirmed too late after the races to be able to penalise them.

[MuseF1]

The way I see it this should have been picked up at the first race, not the seventh round. then there would be no problems with them running illegally for the first 6 races

[Huntresa]

so RB is using illegal car for all 6 races so far and yet no penalty is given...

Its hard to give a penalty when they are not actually breaking a written rule but breaking the way FIA sees the rule. They dont want you to use stuff like this for aero effecct but it can ofc be done and is being done by many teams just RB took it one step to far.

They've broken a written rule in at least 5 races so far. The reason no penalty has been given is because the infraction was confirmed too late after the races to be able to penalise them.

This isnt a written rule, only if you mean the one for brake air intake only for cooling, everyone brakes that one not just RB, as i said they just took it one step to far. FIA Could make every car illegal if they wanted going by the spirits of the rules on exhaust and on stuff they dont want to have an aero effect, like the brakeducts etc.

[beelsebob]

They've broken a written rule in at least 5 races so far. The reason no penalty has been given is because the infraction was confirmed too late after the races to be able to penalise them.

This isnt a written rule, only if you mean the one for brake air intake only for cooling, everyone brakes that one not just RB, as i said they just took it one step to far. FIA Could make every car illegal if they wanted going by the spirits of the rules on exhaust and on stuff they dont want to have an aero effect, like the brakeducts etc.

No, I mean the one about not having holes in your floor

[skgoa]

That wasn't a written rule either. Nowhere in the regulations it clearly stated that enclosed holes aren't allowed in the outer 50mm of the floor. Thus the cars were not illegal until the FIA clarified that they indeed see the ban on enclosed holes being implied by the explicit exception for enclosed holes at the front of the sidepods. That's why the cars always passed scrutineering: they simply were legal.
And BTW the cars don't have to be legal for free practice, they have to be legal from the moment Q1 starts. So there actually were no punishable acts of rule-breakage so far.

Though TBH I peronally believe they should get punished for their flexing wings and monocoque. The stewards should be allowed to punish them, even when the illegal deflection is not reproducable at a stand-still. It's f*cking obvious on camera...

[hardingfv32]

Face it, RB just does a better job of interpreting, manipulating, and administrating the rules than any other team. They go to the edge without getting burned. The goal is to when races without being DQ'd at the end of the day. Clearly they are the champions.

Brian

[Richard]

The age old expression is that the winning team is the one that doesn't get caught by the scrutineers.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=7180

[beelsebob]

That wasn't a written rule either.

Yes it was:

3.12.5 All parts lying on the reference and step planes, in addition to the transition between the two planes, must produce uniform, solid, hard, continuous, rigid (no degree of freedom in relation to the body/chassis unit), impervious surfaces under all circumstances.
Forward of a line 450mm forward of the rear face of the cockpit entry template, fully enclosed holes are permitted in the surfaces lying on the reference and step planes provided no part of the car is visible through them when viewed from directly below. This does not apply to any parts of rear view mirrors which are visible, provided each of these areas does not exceed 12000mm2 when projected to a horizontal plane above the car, or to any parts of the panels referred to in Article 15.4.7