this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2023
194 points (97.1% liked)

Formula 1

8926 readers
144 users here now

Welcome to Formula1 @ Lemmy.world Lemmy's largest community for Formula 1 and related racing series


Rules


  1. Be respectful to everyone; drivers, lemmings, redditors etc
  2. No gambling, crypto or NFTs
  3. Spoilers are allowed
  4. Non English articles should include a translation in the comments by deepl.com or similar
  5. Paywalled articles should include at least a brief summary in the comments, the wording of the article should not be altered
  6. Social media posts should be posted as screenshots with a link for those who want to view it
  7. Memes are allowed on Monday only as we all do like a laugh or 2, but don’t want to become formuladank.

Up next


F1 Calendar

2024 Calendar

Location Date
🇳🇱 Netherlands 23-25 Aug
🇮🇹 Italy 30 Aug-01 Sep
🇦🇿 Azerbaijan 13-15 Sep
🇸🇬 Singapore 20-22 Sep
🇺🇸 United States 18-20 Oct
🇲🇽 Mexico 25-27 Oct
🇧🇷 Brazil 01-03 Nov
🇺🇸 United States 21-23 Nov
🇶🇦 Qatar 29 Nov-01 Dec
🇦🇪 Abu Dhabi 06-08 Dec

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 25 points 10 months ago (11 children)

Maybe I'm not reading that right or didn't catch it, but it doesn't sound like all cars' planks were checked during scrutineering. From the same document:

A physical floor and a plank wear inspection was carried out on car numbers 01, 16, 44 and 04.

So all the cars were subject to various inspections, but not all had the same things inspected. In particular, only cars 01 (VER), 16 (LEC), 44 (HAM), and 04 (NOR) were selected for plank wear inspections. And as such, only cars 16 and 44 were found to be out of compliance.

Am I understanding that correctly?

[–] [email protected] 40 points 10 months ago (1 children)

This is standard for how they do technical inspections. They can't check every rule on every car, so they check just a few important ones for every car (fuel, weight, etc) and then do random checks on a handful of cars each for others. The idea is to prevent it from being worthwhile to break the rule, while also requiring substantially fewer resources. That's probably also why the penalty is so steep: if it was a slap on the wrist that you had a small chance of being caught for, you might as well just always run out-of-spec.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 10 months ago (2 children)

It’s fair, but if they’re finding cars fail the checks, then all cars on the grid should be checked for the same failure.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Is the time a limiting factor here? I read the results of 4 cars checks came 2 hours after the GP finished. Given we have night races that are followed up with FP1 less that 5 days later (following Friday morning), there possibly a logistics issue if doing those checks across 20 cars can’t be completed the evening of the race for any reason. Possibly isn’t just a headcount issue too if particular equipments needed? There’s time needed to ship the cars to other countries.

Watching Ted’s notebook teams are often well into teardown not long after the race ends, so perhaps losing a night becomes an issue for the back to back races.

I’m not sure to be honest, but just a thought.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

No that’s a good point on the timescales that I hadn’t considered. Although I assume the planks detach - could they all be handed over the the FIA for testing at a later date?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I am guessing FIA mandates that no work be done on the car if it had been selected for random tests. How will you ensure it is the same plank if it is delievered well after the car has been disassembled

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Most parts appear to have the irremovable/tamper proof stickers on with a serial number. Put one on the plank which is registered with the FIA. When it’s sent to the FIA after they’ll know if it’s the correct plank or not.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

I seem to be in the minority here but isn't that a terrible waste of time? What would it achieve maybe 2 or 3 more disquals, fans are even more outraged. Doesn't seem like a productive use of time. The rules are the way they are to make it not worth it for teams to run out of compliance cars, if a team flies too close to the sun and gets caught then good, its working. The system did its job.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

But then that’s like saying ‘we should only check track limits for 20% of the cars running’.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

If the rules said that then yeah, but they don't. The rules do however say we will randomly check x number of cars for rule x on any given weekend and that's what they did. Are you suggesting the fia change the rules in the middles of a weekend in order to disqualify more cars? That would be an outrage.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

No, I’m suggesting the rules are wrong to start with.

load more comments (9 replies)