Staggering hypocrisy or fair point?

[2fast748]

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/ferrari-sees-dou...

I'm not sure whether to laugh at the bare faced cheek of the man or quietly nod and say maybe he has a fair point?

Is there a difference between blatantly cheating (rigging sensors) or clever engineering?

[mw88]

2fast748 said:

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/ferrari-sees-dou...

I'm not sure whether to laugh at the bare faced cheek of the man or quietly nod and say maybe he has a fair point?

Is there a difference between blatantly cheating (rigging sensors) or clever engineering?

It's a fine line.

Some people claimed Red Bull's flexi wing was cheating, some said it was clever engineering.

No one really knows what Ferrari were doing with their engines. They either cleverly engineered a solution which exploited a "blind spot" in the sensors, or they were cheating.

You need to be pushing the rules as much as possible, else you're leaving lap time on the table.

[TheDeuce]

Totally different imo - unless Mercedes are breaking a clearly defined rule in the same black and white fashion Ferrari were.

The Ferrari cheat was pretty appalling... In a fuel flow limited race, sneaking extra fuel flow to cover the same distance as everyone else, is the equivalent of using the correct amount of fuel but taking a physical shortcut across the circuit on order to win! That's not just a technical innovation, that is outright cheating.

Granted it was never formerly declared cheating, but I think it's fairly obvious that was an agreement that formed part of a wider FIA/Ferrari deal.

[Carlososos]

I would say there is a difference but it’s close depending on the situation.

I think the main reason Ferrari got so much attention was the sheer size of the “cheat”. They came from no where to blitzing everyone. Bound to catch everyone’s gaze.

[Adrian W]

I think this is a non story, even if they had some kind of intercooler or charge cooler in their airbox it cant cool the air very much without a refrigerant of some kind, even if it was 100% efficient it couldn't cool below ambient. Surely the shape of their airbox could create a cooler charge if allowed.

[TheDeuce]

Adrian W said:

I think this is a non story, even if they had some kind of intercooler or charge cooler in their airbox it cant cool the air very much without a refrigerant of some kind, even if it was 100% efficient it couldn't cool below ambient. Surely the shape of their airbox could create a cooler charge if allowed.

I actually think it's most likely a case of Mercedes doing something a bit clever, RB and Ferrari have more or less figured out how to do the same, so need to now clarify that it's ok with the FIA. If it's ok, they do the same. If it's not ok, Mercedes have to stop. It's a win win so there is zero reason RB and Ferrari wouldn't ask the question - it doesn't mean it's anything significant though, this is just routine due diligence.

[Leithen]

The staggering hypocrisy was Wolff getting pissy with Binotto whilst Mercedes continues to be mired in it's own diesel-gate cheat nightmare.

But that's got nothing to do with F1 - bks - Mercedes is Mercedes. They, alongside many other manufacturers have been caught red handed in one of the most blatant cheats in manufacturing history. To then try and take some moral high ground over a sporting competitor doing something infinitesimal in comparison just goes to show how divorced from reality certain members of the F1 paddock are.

Apologies, rant over.

[Oilchange]

Adrian W said:

I think this is a non story, even if they had some kind of intercooler or charge cooler in their airbox it cant cool the air very much without a refrigerant of some kind, even if it was 100% efficient it couldn't cool below ambient. Surely the shape of their airbox could create a cooler charge if allowed.

I'm no scientist but light aircraft don't have refrigerant in their carbs yet ice build-up at up to 30 degrees celcius ambient air temp is a real problem.
How does that happen? Apart from the super low pressures in the venturi of course.

[MarkwG]

Leithen said:

The staggering hypocrisy was Wolff getting pissy with Binotto whilst Mercedes continues to be mired in it's own diesel-gate cheat nightmare.

But that's got nothing to do with F1 - bks - Mercedes is Mercedes. They, alongside many other manufacturers have been caught red handed in one of the most blatant cheats in manufacturing history. To then try and take some moral high ground over a sporting competitor doing something infinitesimal in comparison just goes to show how divorced from reality certain members of the F1 paddock are.

Apologies, rant over.

You realise that Mercedes, the F1 team, has no control over the manufacturing processes of Daimler, the car & van manufacturer, & that the emissions rigging started well before Mercedes F1, in this iteration, existed? You appreciate that Fiat, the former owner of Ferrari, is also mired in the diesel scandal, & that began when they owned Ferrari?

Ferrari F1 were caught deliberately engineering their engine to gain an illegal advantage; with it, they could well have won both championships, hardly a small matter - but they were investigated & found guilty. If Mercedes have developed a technique the others feel is illegal, then they're welcome to raise an objection & have it investigated - either they put up or shut up.

[Leithen]

MarkwG said:

You realise that Mercedes, the F1 team, has no control over the manufacturing processes of Daimler, the car & van manufacturer, & that the emissions rigging started well before Mercedes F1, in this iteration, existed? You appreciate that Fiat, the former owner of Ferrari, is also mired in the diesel scandal, & that began when they owned Ferrari?

Ferrari F1 were caught deliberately engineering their engine to gain an illegal advantage; with it, they could well have won both championships, hardly a small matter - but they were investigated & found guilty. If Mercedes have developed a technique the others feel is illegal, then they're welcome to raise an objection & have it investigated - either they put up or shut up.

The moment they renamed Brawn F1 Mercedes, they linked the reputation of both groups irrevocably.

If they got caught cheating at F1 it would be bad for the group as a whole. It works exactly the same the other way round.

They should have been far more circumspect about being sanctimonious about engine cheats.

[MarkwG]

Leithen said:

MarkwG said:

You realise that Mercedes, the F1 team, has no control over the manufacturing processes of Daimler, the car & van manufacturer, & that the emissions rigging started well before Mercedes F1, in this iteration, existed? You appreciate that Fiat, the former owner of Ferrari, is also mired in the diesel scandal, & that began when they owned Ferrari?

Ferrari F1 were caught deliberately engineering their engine to gain an illegal advantage; with it, they could well have won both championships, hardly a small matter - but they were investigated & found guilty. If Mercedes have developed a technique the others feel is illegal, then they're welcome to raise an objection & have it investigated - either they put up or shut up.

The moment they renamed Brawn F1 Mercedes, they linked the reputation of both groups irrevocably.

If they got caught cheating at F1 it would be bad for the group as a whole. It works exactly the same the other way round.

They should have been far more circumspect about being sanctimonious about engine cheats.

So you're saying Mercedes F1 shouldn't raise objections to Ferrari F1 cheating, because Daimler the car/van manufacturer were subsequently found to have cheated their emissions obligations, even though Ferraris owner, Fiat, did too? How bizarre.

[coetzeeh]

MarkwG said:

You realise that Mercedes, the F1 team, has no control over the manufacturing processes of Daimler, the car & van manufacturer, & that the emissions rigging started well before Mercedes F1, in this iteration, existed? You appreciate that Fiat, the former owner of Ferrari, is also mired in the diesel scandal, & that began when they owned Ferrari?

Ferrari F1 were caught deliberately engineering their engine to gain an illegal advantage; with it, they could well have won both championships, hardly a small matter - but they were investigated & found guilty. If Mercedes have developed a technique the others feel is illegal, then they're welcome to raise an objection & have it investigated - either they put up or shut up.

Do you have a link or reference to the technical details of the Ferrari cheating? The article in Motorsport suggests the FIA were unable to find proof but instead relied on Ferrari to help close any loopholes. Thanks

[Leithen]

MarkwG said:

So you're saying Mercedes F1 shouldn't raise objections to Ferrari F1 cheating, because Daimler the car/van manufacturer were subsequently found to have cheated their emissions obligations, even though Ferraris owner, Fiat, did too? How bizarre.

Not at all. If you recall it became a bizarre personal spat between Wolff and Binotto at the time. You could cut through the sanctimony with a knife.

There have been, and always will be rules that are stretched, broken, trampled on etc. Every team will privately and publicly protest. What may or may not have been done by Ferrari was not exceptional in the history of the sport. The shocked position taken by Merc and Red Bull was more than a little risible. Merc however seemed blind to the obvious hypocrisy given their very recent settlement in the US and ongoing issues in Europe.

[Piginapoke]

Ferrari didn't use more fuel than allowed, it just found a way to store it up between the fuel flow sensor and the ICE, giving a short term power boost after braking, until the fuel was all used up. I thought it was really clever and didn't break the letter of any rule.

Mercedes seem to have found a way of cooling the intake air for a short period of time, much below the 10% average ambient difference that's within the regulations, for a short term power boost. It's also really clever, doesn't break any rules and is much the same as Ferrari.

Those who get all hung up over this need to understand pushing the rules to the limit is fundamental to the F1 mentality, it's not a spec series.

[TheDeuce]

Piginapoke said:

Ferrari didn't use more fuel than allowed, it just found a way to store it up between the fuel flow sensor and the ICE, giving a short term power boost after braking, until the fuel was all used up. I thought it was really clever and didn't break the letter of any rule.

Mercedes seem to have found a way of cooling the intake air for a short period of time, much below the 10% average ambient difference that's within the regulations, for a short term power boost. It's also really clever, doesn't break any rules and is much the same as Ferrari.

Those who get all hung up over this need to understand pushing the rules to the limit is fundamental to the F1 mentality, it's not a spec series.

Nonsense. The way they were flowing extra fuel was speculated by myself and others that have an understanding of how flow metres cycle their feedback even before the regs were updated. The trick was to flow the extra fuel between read cycles. The answer was to have a second flow sensor that only the FIA could monitor - which is what they did.

The remedy proved the cheat.

For the record, Ferrari were very clever and imaginative in their cheat, it was epic in that regard. But it was also, a honking great cheat! And imo massively unfair - any of the other PU manufacturers could easily have acquired the same extra power with the extra fuel flow.

[MarkwG]

coetzeeh said:

Do you have a link or reference to the technical details of the Ferrari cheating? The article in Motorsport suggests the FIA were unable to find proof but instead relied on Ferrari to help close any loopholes. Thanks

https://www.racefans.net/2020/03/02/why-the-fia-struck-a-confidential-deal-over-ferraris-power-unit/ - one of a number of articles that cover the situation. Due to the confidentiality agreement, you'll need to join the dots, but the performance loss clearly demonstrated there was something going on.

[Piginapoke]

TheDeuce said:

Piginapoke said:

Ferrari didn't use more fuel than allowed, it just found a way to store it up between the fuel flow sensor and the ICE, giving a short term power boost after braking, until the fuel was all used up. I thought it was really clever and didn't break the letter of any rule.

Mercedes seem to have found a way of cooling the intake air for a short period of time, much below the 10% average ambient difference that's within the regulations, for a short term power boost. It's also really clever, doesn't break any rules and is much the same as Ferrari.

Those who get all hung up over this need to understand pushing the rules to the limit is fundamental to the F1 mentality, it's not a spec series.

Nonsense. The way they were flowing extra fuel was speculated by myself and others that have an understanding of how flow metres cycle their feedback even before the regs were updated. The trick was to flow the extra fuel between read cycles. The answer was to have a second flow sensor that only the FIA could monitor - which is what they did.

The remedy proved the cheat.

For the record, Ferrari were very clever and imaginative in their cheat, it was epic in that regard. But it was also, a honking great cheat! And imo massively unfair - any of the other PU manufacturers could easily have acquired the same extra power with the extra fuel flow.

That isn’t what Ferrari did, at all.

[Flooble]

Oilchange said:

Adrian W said:

I think this is a non story, even if they had some kind of intercooler or charge cooler in their airbox it cant cool the air very much without a refrigerant of some kind, even if it was 100% efficient it couldn't cool below ambient. Surely the shape of their airbox could create a cooler charge if allowed.

I'm no scientist but light aircraft don't have refrigerant in their carbs yet ice build-up at up to 30 degrees celcius ambient air temp is a real problem.
How does that happen? Apart from the super low pressures in the venturi of course.

I think you just answered your own question?

[MarkwG]

Leithen said:

MarkwG said:

So you're saying Mercedes F1 shouldn't raise objections to Ferrari F1 cheating, because Daimler the car/van manufacturer were subsequently found to have cheated their emissions obligations, even though Ferraris owner, Fiat, did too? How bizarre.

Not at all. If you recall it became a bizarre personal spat between Wolff and Binotto at the time. You could cut through the sanctimony with a knife.

There have been, and always will be rules that are stretched, broken, trampled on etc. Every team will privately and publicly protest. What may or may not have been done by Ferrari was not exceptional in the history of the sport. The shocked position taken by Merc and Red Bull was more than a little risible. Merc however seemed blind to the obvious hypocrisy given their very recent settlement in the US and ongoing issues in Europe.

But you're happy to accept Binottos protestations of sweet innocence, when that was clearly not the case? Wolf will likely have had no influence, or even any knowledge of, the diesel scandal affecting the parent company before it became public, & it has no relevance to the F1 team, beyond affecting their joint corporate reputation. Of course they're all "shocked" when another team is on the hook for cheating, what else would you expect? They're hardly going to laugh it off as all part of the fun & games, are they? That's also part & parcel of the process.

[QuattroDave]

MarkwG said:

coetzeeh said:

Do you have a link or reference to the technical details of the Ferrari cheating? The article in Motorsport suggests the FIA were unable to find proof but instead relied on Ferrari to help close any loopholes. Thanks

https://www.racefans.net/2020/03/02/why-the-fia-struck-a-confidential-deal-over-ferraris-power-unit/ - one of a number of articles that cover the situation. Due to the confidentiality agreement, you'll need to join the dots, but the performance loss clearly demonstrated there was something going on.

Plus if Ferrari weren't cheating why did they strike a deal with the FIA to keep the details behind locked doors? I'd expect any company or individual accused of cheating but hadn't to challenge to clear their name.