[ 2020 ] Racing Point F1 Team - Mercedes

[PowerandtheGlory]

Photography + legal transfer of CAD files for listed components, that was always the understanding. Take all the known reference points from listed components and F1 technical regulations, then fill in the blanks from photography.

Racing Point freely informed the FIA about having used Mercedes CAD files when designing the brake drums, as to their understanding the transfer in 2019 was completely legal. IMO fault lies with the FIA for not being sufficiently clear over how the change from listed to non-listed components was to be handled, especially when it turns out Racing Point was correct about being allowed to use the front brake drums but not allowed to use the rear drums over a technicality.

But the rules for 2020 specifed that brake ducts myst be designed by the team, anf by definition racing poiht didnt do this.
So they leapfrogged in development by using 3D scans and photos or whatever.
It lacks a certain integrity...

[Ringleheim]

I love that Racing Point has been adjudicated to have illegal brake vents, but will be "allowed" to use them nonetheless this weekend at Silverstone, because they don't have time to make new ones.

And that, folks, is why F1 is more than a little bit "Mickey Mouse".

It's a piece of sporting entertainment, and not a lot else.

I wish they would embrace that fact and give us screaming V-12s!

[bill shoe]

The FIA have lost the political backbone to enforce their own rules.

They don't investigate rather obvious problems with Ferrari fuel flow until other teams protest it, and they come out with a secret and lenient agreement that was only possible because a Ferrari whistleblower came forward.

The conclude on a technical level that RP are using illegally designed brake ducts, but the ducts and most of the points scored with them can stay.

As the rules go forward, more team activity is being constrained by behavior rules rather than physical (weight/dimensional) rules. The FIA either can't or doesn't choose to enforce behavior rules. It only reliably enforces technical rules that are verifiable on the weight/dimensional measurement rig in pit lane.

I hear people blithely say the upcoming financial rules will be easily enforced because very smart financial auditors will be used. However, enforcement is not a smartness issue, it's a political willpower issue. The FIA has none.

[FittingMechanics]

I'm conflicted with the FIA report. On one hand RP are punished because of intent (they knew what they were doing in 2019 would be illegal in 2020) so what they did in 2019 was not illegal. But then in their summary also state that the team cannot unlearn what they have already learned. Either way, they learned the information last year. Either way, how do they unlearn that. But to me the punishment is borderline fair and the issue should be closed. The reason I say borderline is I'm not a fan of punishments based on Outcome, Intent, DNA, Gentleman's Agreements, Super Secret Handshakes (I'm looking at you Ferrari), and the like. If its a rule write it into the regulations. If its a poorly written rule, pick yourself up and revise.

They should have iterated on the part and shown that they were iterating and improving on the design. They to my understanding did not do that. This would make it much closer to the front brake situation.

[subcritical71]

I'm conflicted with the FIA report. On one hand RP are punished because of intent (they knew what they were doing in 2019 would be illegal in 2020) so what they did in 2019 was not illegal. But then in their summary also state that the team cannot unlearn what they have already learned. Either way, they learned the information last year. Either way, how do they unlearn that. But to me the punishment is borderline fair and the issue should be closed. The reason I say borderline is I'm not a fan of punishments based on Outcome, Intent, DNA, Gentleman's Agreements, Super Secret Handshakes (I'm looking at you Ferrari), and the like. If its a rule write it into the regulations. If its a poorly written rule, pick yourself up and revise.

They should have iterated on the part and shown that they were iterating and improving on the design. They to my understanding did not do that. This would make it much closer to the front brake situation.

Yeah, from the report it looks like if they would have ran the RBD at all in 2019 they would have been good. Hindsight is a bitch.

[Raleigh]

Photography + legal transfer of CAD files for listed components, that was always the understanding. Take all the known reference points from listed components and F1 technical regulations, then fill in the blanks from photography.

Racing Point freely informed the FIA about having used Mercedes CAD files when designing the brake drums, as to their understanding the transfer in 2019 was completely legal. IMO fault lies with the FIA for not being sufficiently clear over how the change from listed to non-listed components was to be handled, especially when it turns out Racing Point was correct about being allowed to use the front brake drums but not allowed to use the rear drums over a technicality.

But the rules for 2020 specifed that brake ducts myst be designed by the team, anf by definition racing poiht didnt do this.
So they leapfrogged in development by using 3D scans and photos or whatever.
It lacks a certain integrity...

FIA ruled that transfering the brake designs in 2019 was legal, and using those brake designs this year is also legal because Racing Point couldn't be expected to unlearn the designs, but only if Racing Point had specifically used those brake designs on track in 2019.

Which means the front brake design process was completely legal, and the brake brake designs process would also have been completely legal except that Racing Point ran their own rear brakes last year and never used the Mercedes rear brake design on track.

Huge mess because the FIA failed to clearly specify how the change from legally supplied listed designs was to be handled, IMO Racing Point acted in good faith and could still appeal the penalties given.

[Racer X]

Sergio Perez posted a screenshot of a video call with Nico and it's nice to see the level of friendship he has with him.

I wonder if Sergio requested Hulk.
As apposed to the driver's who are in the Academy list with Mercedes-Benz.
Since Mercedes clearly would have preferred their Academy drivers but all of them were unavailable.

[Mansell89]

Farcical FIA announcements today, making a complete mockery of the technical directives and the wider rules.

Anyone think that the financial muscle of Lawrence Stroll and the political strength of Toto Wolff has saved Racing Point here?

I can imagine if Williams or an independent had done this, they’d be completely made an example of.

[dans79]

Farcical FIA announcements today, making a complete mockery of the technical directives and the wider rules.

Anyone think that the financial muscle of Lawrence Stroll and the political strength of Toto Wolff has saved Racing Point here?

I can imagine if Williams or an independent had done this, they’d be completely made an example of.

No, RP was saved because the FIA continually writes crappy ambiguous rules, that are full of loopholes

[dans79]

A strait forward explanation!

[Morteza]

[dans79]

https://twitter.com/wbuxtonofficial/sta ... 93376?s=19

https://twitter.com/lawrobarretto/statu ... 69315?s=19

https://twitter.com/lawrobarretto/statu ... 88196?s=19

Imagine that, all the teams that are likely to get beaten by RP are going to appeal.

Talk about a bunch of spoiled children!

there's something incredibly slimy in my opinion about being able to appeal a protest that you had no part in!

[SmallSoldier]

https://twitter.com/wbuxtonofficial/sta ... 93376?s=19

https://twitter.com/lawrobarretto/statu ... 69315?s=19

https://twitter.com/lawrobarretto/statu ... 88196?s=19

Imagine that, all the teams that are likely to get beaten by RP are going to appeal.

Talk about a bunch of spoiled children!

there's something incredibly slimy in my opinion about being able to appeal a protest that you had no part in!

What is slimy about protesting? BTW, RP still hasn’t “beaten” everyone else yet... If not, they would already be P2-P3 in the championship.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Mamba]

A strait forward explanation!

This confuses me: "that had not been legitimately provided to RP in 2019 under old rules."

If they already had everything and legitimately acquired it in 2019 then why buy it again in 2020? Brake ducts were removed as listed parts (or intention to do so) was announced in April of 2019 already and they buy a complete set in Jan 2020? This just doesn't add up... The front brake ducts make sense to me as they already used them in 2019, but some claim they already had a set of rear ducts in 2019 but just didn't use them. Fine, as they didn't fit the high rake concept but if you already had them and their CAD files then why did they need another set?

Other question is why would Merc provide a complete set of now listed parts to RP in 2020? Under the 2020 regs they(RP) would have to make them themselves.

Confusing matter this with small details differing from account to account.

[siskue2005]

A strait forward explanation!

This confuses me: "that had not been legitimately provided to RP in 2019 under old rules."

If they already had everything and legitimately acquired it in 2019 then why buy it again in 2020? Brake ducts were removed as listed parts (or intention to do so) was announced in April of 2019 already and they buy a complete set in Jan 2020? This just doesn't add up... The front brake ducts make sense to me as they already used them in 2019, but some claim they already had a set of rear ducts in 2019 but just didn't use them. Fine, as they didn't fit the high rake concept but if you already had them and their CAD files then why did they need another set?

Other question is why would Merc provide a complete set of non-listed parts to RP in 2020? Under the 2020 regs they(RP) would have to make them themselves.

Confusing matter this with small details differing from account to account.

maybe this tweet guy had a typo? maybe it was Jan 6 2019?