Engine Unfreeze

[SectorOne]

edit: factually incorrect.

[adrianjordan]

Can Honda not homologate their engine by 28th February, but then be allowed the same number of upgrade tokens throughout the year as the other manufacturers? That would seem the fair way to go about it to me...

[Blackout]

I thought as soon as you use one token or modify 1% of the 2014PU it beacomes a 2015 PU and you can start the season with it. then you can use the reamining 31 tokens during the season : P

[turbof1]

That was my understanding too at first, but I asked around and the general concensus is that they are allowed to introduce tokens at several points during 2015 rather then only at one specific time. Appendix 4 speaks of once homologated, you can't change it anymore. But the token system acts as a complete exception on that.

To add pain to injury, the fia didn't define homologation, so manufacturers (all of them, including Honda. More on that below) can just homologate the power unit over and over again within the 32 tokens during 2015. If the fia specified a specific date, homologation would only be possible on one possible date, but 2015 is a period. You are only allowed to homologate in 2015, but when or how many times is left undefined.

Matt Somers wrote a very good piece on that:

somersf1.blogspot.be/2015/01/the-powerunit-un-freeze-debacle.html

Note that in the comment section below the article I asked more on this. Tokens aren't items, they are points them can spend on updating items. Except for items excluded in 2015, they can spend the 32 points how they want, when they want, including parts they already updated in the same season. Say you have made a mistake with the turbo, which let's say costed 6 points, you can spend another 6 points fixing it, provided you have at least 6 points left.

All of this has to operate within the 4 power units, devided into 6 parts, though. And aiming to increase performance later on in the season comes at price of sacrificing extra performance early on.

There's also nothing withholding Honda from doing the exact same thing. Whiting speaks of appendix 4 - C "fair and equitable" as if it's a catch all rule, but like Somers said if Honda gets a lawyer on the case they'll easily prove it isn't fair at all. It would not be difficult for them to argumentate that they fall under appendix 4 - b instead, which refers to the the table in appendix 4 - technical regulations, in other words the same system as the other manufacturers.

[bill shoe]

I have mild criticism for many of the posts here and the perspective they come from. Most of us here at F1T are logical types working in fields (often technical) where logic either prevails, or there is an imperfect but genuine attempt to make logic prevail. So when the new FIA engine unfreeze comes out we wring our hands and thrash on about how it's a fiasco for good rule writing, good consistency, transparency, etc. I think these logical considerations have nothing whatsoever to do with how and why the rules were changed. Nobody at the top of FOM, the FIA, Renault, Ferrari, etc. is deficient in logic. They did what they did because they have the power to do it. No legal or technical logic applies beyond the thin window dressing of press releases and Autosport articles.

The F1 power players do not fail to understand logic, rather we fail to understand power.

[F1NAC]

@Turbof1

what a mess in FIA . So they introduced rule that says that you can homologate only once, but then introduce token system which with loophole for this year offers you to "homologate" PU more times this year? (sorry but its really confusing)

[skt36]

It's not really that much of a mess. The rules were written with the intention that teams would homologate the 2015 power unit before the first race of 2015 on the assumption that the teams would want the best engine possible as soon as possible.

Because Mercedes are so far ahead the other manufacturers are willing to compromise early on in the season to get closer to Mercedes later on.

Because there is no 2015 homologation date specified the teams can incrementally make the changes that the FIA expected would be made for the start of 2015. This is massively limited by the restriction on engines used in the season so there will probably be only a single in-season upgrade.

Honda have no homologated engine. They can only race in Australia with a homologated engine and therefore must homologate the engine before the first race. Because this engine is being introduced after the initial deadline for homologation they can only homologate the engine subject to 1.c

"...which the FIA is satisfied, in its absolute discretion and after full consultation with all other suppliers of power units for the Championship, could fairly and equitably be allowed to compete with other homologated power units"

The FIA therefore has complete discretion to say that the conditions of Honda's entry are that it has essentially used all 32 tokens already as every single engine component is new. The 32 tokens are supposed to be used to convert a 2014 engine to a 2015 one. As Honda's engine will already be 2015 spec there is no reason for them to use the tokens.

The other teams are running with an engine that is worse than it would be without the loophole until the engine is upgraded.

[turbof1]

You can argue against that. For instance you can't build an engine with 32 tokens, a power unit consist of 66. This simply proves the reasoning of the FIA is flawed, and the rules they try reinforce aren't applicable.

Second is that appendix 4 - C acts as an exception on appendix 4 - B. 4 - B takes precedence over 4 - C, the latter is written for updates by exception throughout the year. The FIA tries to use 4 - C as a catch all rule, while 4 - B states:

Code: Select all

[u]and except as permitted by (c) below[/u], no changes may be made to the design or construction of the homologated parts for the duration of the homologati on period laid out in Article 28.5 of the F1 Sporting Regulations.

that 4-C is an exception.
The only issue we have is that Honda does not have a homologated power unit. 28.5 states:

Code: Select all

Only power units which have been homologated by the FIA in accordance with Appendix 4 may be used at an Event during the 2014-2020 Championship seasons.

But Appendix 4 says nothing about when such a power unit has to be homologated. 4 - A & B only refers to a power unit before february 28 2014 and a MODIFIED power unit after february 28 2014. Honda falls out of both categories. In short: there is no regulatory base for any power unit introduced, but not modified, after february 28 2014. The closest thing that comes to Honda's case is appendix 4 - B, which means they are in the same group of the others.

And again, as specified, manufacturers can homologate as much as they want, so Honda as well.

[sumiciu]

To add pain to injury, the fia didn't define homologation, so manufacturers (all of them, including Honda. More on that below) can just homologate the power unit over and over again within the 32 tokens during 2015. If the fia specified a specific date, homologation would only be possible on one possible date, but 2015 is a period. You are only allowed to homologate in 2015, but when or how many times is left undefined.

I always had understood that there were an unique homologation of the power unit along the season. With this is mind what's actually game changing is this fact you are pointing out, since several homologations would be as a partial and short-term unfreeze. An in-season evolution that it seems that it hasn't been considerer by some of us.

It's getting messy, I think they should be clearer on that the sooner the better.

[turbof1]

To add pain to injury, the fia didn't define homologation, so manufacturers (all of them, including Honda. More on that below) can just homologate the power unit over and over again within the 32 tokens during 2015. If the fia specified a specific date, homologation would only be possible on one possible date, but 2015 is a period. You are only allowed to homologate in 2015, but when or how many times is left undefined.

I always had understood that there were an unique homologation of the power unit along the season. With this is mind what's actually game changing is this fact you are pointing out, since several homologations would be as a partial and short-term unfreeze. An in-season evolution that it seems that it hasn't been considerer by some of us.

It's getting messy, I think they should be clearer on that the sooner the better.

Well I was thinking along those lines myself, but after reading comments from others and going through the rulebook I only found a bit of procedurial stuff with nowhere any mentioning of "only one homologation per season is allowed" or anything similar.
The reason why this never has been stumbled on before is that in the past the rules specified only one date, a particular day, to homologate. That leaves only one specific moment to homologate, hence why you can only homologate once. But that's with an undefined moment, which translates itself into a period.

I think a lot of lawyers are going to have fun with that since Honda will want to have the same development rights.

[skt36]

1.c isn't an exception though. The appendix starts with.
"An homologated power unit ... any such power unit is one which is identical in every respect to either"

It then lists 3 cases.

1.a, a power unit delivered in 2014
1.b, a power unit delivered after 2014 modified in accordance with the token system
1.c, a power unit delivered after 2014 that is not modified in accordance with the token system

The Honda engine is first delivered after Feb 2014 (excludes 1.a), and has not been modified in accordance with the token system and therefore must be 1.c

1.c is written to cover both the introduction of a completely new engine (delivered to the FIA) and the modification of an existing engine (modified and re-delivered)

The question is can the PU homologated under 1.c then be modified using development tokens for 2015 and delivered to the FIA under 1.b? I think that once the PU is accepted under 1.c you have a case for the further development to take place as the 2015 tokens have not yet been used according to the regulations.

The issue arises because in order to be accepted under 1.c the FIA can include whatever conditions they feel like. The alternative is that they refuse to homologate the initial 2015 engine, which backs Honda into a corner.

[CjC]

Can Honda not homologate their engine by 28th February, but then be allowed the same number of upgrade tokens throughout the year as the other manufacturers? That would seem the fair way to go about it to me...

That does seem fair, it's the logical thing to do.

However, the FIA have never done anything logical or in the interest of fairness- so why would they start now?

[turbof1]

1.c isn't an exception though. The appendix starts with.
"An homologated power unit ... any such power unit is one which is identical in every respect to either"

It then lists 3 cases.

1.a, a power unit delivered in 2014
1.b, a power unit delivered after 2014 modified in accordance with the token system
1.c, a power unit delivered after 2014 that is not modified in accordance with the token system

The Honda engine is first delivered after Feb 2014 (excludes 1.a), and has not been modified in accordance with the token system and therefore must be 1.c

1.c is written to cover both the introduction of a completely new engine (delivered to the FIA) and the modification of an existing engine (modified and re-delivered)

The question is can the PU homologated under 1.c then be modified using development tokens for 2015 and delivered to the FIA under 1.b? I think that once the PU is accepted under 1.c you have a case for the further development to take place as the 2015 tokens have not yet been used according to the regulations.

The issue arises because in order to be accepted under 1.c the FIA can include whatever conditions they feel like. The alternative is that they refuse to homologate the initial 2015 engine, which backs Honda into a corner.

I disagree here that 1.c is a case mentioned by the first paragraph. I can fully understand why you feel 1.c is that, but pay very much attention to this:

Other than any parts solely associated with power unit installation in different types of car (which have no per formance benefit and which may be changed from time to time during the homologation period with the consent of the FIA), any such power unit is one which is identical in every respect to either :

That very last word is important. Either. Look up it's exact definition, the word either means "the one or the other". It is a choice between TWO things, not three!

This is further reinforced by seperating b) and c) with a paragraph:

Once homologated in accordance with a) or b) above, and except as permitted by (c) below, no changes may be made to the design or construction of the homologated parts for the duration of the homologation period laid out in Article 28.5 of the F1 Sporting Regulations.

The rules clearly indicate a) and c) as the two choices, with c) stating modified and redelivered. The word modified is not defined. It could be interpreted as anything. HOWEVER, a seperate paragraph (assumingly a continuation of c) right below explains that "such changes" (modifications on which c) applies solely on) are normally only for safety, cost-saving and reliablity.

My interpretation, and I'm sure Honda will bring forward a very similar one, is that c) only applies in case of changes that are for reliability, cost-saving and reliability. Nothing to do with a completely new and for the manufacturer first power unit.

Admittingly I too made a small error. I stated c) was an exception to b), while it is an exception to a) as well.

As you'll probably understand, this is a 'game' of interpreting the rules into your advantage. Every team and manufacturer will try to choose the interpretation that gives the biggest advantage yet still remain true to the letter, but not the spirit, of the regulations.

[skt36]

As for the discussion around the definition of "homologation", the significance of homologating a PU is that all customers must use the homologated PU. The homologated PU can be changed many times, but each change forces every customer to make an engine change. I don't know if this was enforced last year though with any reliability upgrades, which 1.c states are a rehomologation of the PU.

As said above, it can be argued that Honda should according to the letter of 1.b be allowed to to make in season upgrades, but according to 1.c the FIA can refuse to let them homologate the PU.

To illustrate

Date ------------- Others --------------------------------- Honda
Feb-14 ---------- 2014-A (1.a) --------------------------- None
Feb-15 ---------- 2015-A (1.b using 27 tokens) ------- 2015-A (1.c)
Later in 2015 -- 2015-B (1.b using 5 tokens) --------- 2015-A

At the start of 2015 it is unfair (as relevant to 1.c) to allow Honda 32 tokens as their PU should be more developed than a PU introduced under 1.a given the extra year of unrestricted development. The other teams do get the advantage of development after the start of 2015, but given that they are limited to modifications of a PU that was locked in 2014 they start from a worse position, so on balance it should be fairly equal.


I'm struggling to keep up with your replies but in answer to the post at 20:18, either does imply one of two choices, but the structuring of each paragraph 1, 1.a, 1.b, 1.c, as opposed to 1.c having another level of indentation implies that 1.a,b,c are all cases of homologated power units.

The alternative explanation would leave 1.c hanging as the sentence fragment in 1.c makes no sense without something before it. It also implies that changes can be made to a homologated PU for reliability, but that PU won't be homologated. Given that the updated PU will not be identical to the homologated PU it cannot be used in an event.

Most importantly it means that there is no legal way to introduce a new PU after the 2014 deadline. I doubt that Honda's lawyers would want to argue this.

The second paragraph of 1.b in my opinion seems to be to emphasise that once a part is modified using development tokens, that part can not be modified any further without another homologation under 1.b. I.e you can't use 3 tokens to change a part, and then use the same tokens to make further changes to that same part.

[turbof1]

I think we are edging towards a common understanding, so I'm just going to reply on a few things:

The other teams do get the advantage of development after the start of 2015, but given that they are limited to modifications of a PU that was locked in 2014 they start from a worse position, so on balance it should be fairly equal.

Honda will argue that 2014 had nothing to do with them since they didn't entered that year. From Honda's point of view, what's fair or not fair will be judged the moment they can run the engine, not before that. They'll definitely argumentate that a) because this is not a matter of cost-saving, reliability or safety 1.c isn't applicable and thus the fia cannot have the final word in the sense of "fairly and equitably" and b) even if 1.c is considered, it isn't fairly and equitably. They'll very likely argumentate a lack of running a full season which the others have, and that their return was judged on the assumption that everybody would have to homologate the power unit before the start of the season.

Most importantly it means that there is no legal way to introduce a new PU after the 2014 deadline. I doubt that Honda's lawyers would want to argue this.

Maybe they will use it to undermine the position of the fia. Clearly a solution needs to be found for Honda, and by argueing that the rules are simply insufficient they may force out a solution of their suggestion.

As of having to homologate a new engine on the same date, that'll be interesting. What happens for instance if Mercedes brings all updates before the season starts, or if they don't agree with the proposed date from Ferrari and Renault? A very interesting dynamic of politics which unfortunaly have little to do with racing and developing a car... .