FIA wants to exclude BAR from F1 championship

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by iGav, May 4, 2005.

  1. iGav macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    #1
    Holy s**t!!! :eek:

    I've been reading a lot about this case on the various F1 sites and in the F1 mags, I know that exclusion was one of the options that has been suggested by the press, but now it's confirmed that the FIA want BAR-Honda to be excluded from the 2005 Championship, with a hefty €1 million fine as well!! :eek:

    Rinky dinky link
     
  2. anonymous161 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2003
    Location:
    Where the wind comes sweeping down the plains
    #2
    Did anyone actually find said hidden fuel tank? because if they did, then BAR cheated. But I think suspending them for the season may be a little harsh.
    Since the grid has to have 20 cars, who would get to run 3 cars if BAR were dropped?
     
  3. iGav thread starter macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    #3
    As far as I'm aware, having a second tank isn't an issue and isn't in itself illegal.

    The problem is how they've interpreted the rules, it would seem that BAR-Honda believe that fuel can be used as a ballast, whereas the FIA disagree.

    Harsh certainly, but the FIA have already set a precedent when the Toyota WRC team were banned because they used an ingeniously illegal turbo.

    I have no idea, maybe a system where two different teams provide 2 extra cars at each race in the order of last years WCC maybe?
     
  4. Don't panic macrumors 603

    Don't panic

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Location:
    having a drink at Milliways
    #4
    for what I understand, part of the issue is that when requested to drain the car at imola, they said they did, but left the fuel in the secondary "secret" tank, thus showing, according to FIA, bad faith.
    I think the fine, redisigning the car and being out of 4 GPs (as many as they raced so far) should be enough.
     
  5. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #5
    Wow, this is rough!

    BAR obviously acted in bad faith, but tossing the team this year is a pretty stiff penalty. And for once, Button is not entirely to blame. :rolleyes:

    I didn't expect such a reaction from the FIA.

    EDIT: OT, but I hear now that Stoddart wants to keep his V10 after everyone switches to V8s. Seems like a typical move.
     
  6. anonymous161 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2003
    Location:
    Where the wind comes sweeping down the plains
    #6
    I believe the rules specify a single rubber bladder- but having a second tank doesn't necessarily break the rules. However, using fuel as ballast is clearly an attempt to circumvent the rules, that much is obvious. This is what the FIA is claiming, I was just curious as to whether the second tank was actually found or just hinted at.

    If BAR were suspended for 4 races they might as well be suspended for the whole season since they would be so far behind in the championship it would hardly be worth the effort to run at all.
     
  7. iGav thread starter macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    #7
    Yep, a second 'collector' tank was found inside the main tank.

    Rinky dink link

    Especially interesting...

     
  8. anonymous161 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2003
    Location:
    Where the wind comes sweeping down the plains
    #8
    After how many grand prixs and BAR suddenly misunderstand what "drain the fuel from the car" means.
    Sometimes I think people go race purely to play semantics.
     
  9. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #9
    It looks like BAR may scoot with just a fine though. If they manage to convince the court that the FIA's "established practices" for weighing a car do not equate to binding "rules", they could preserve their points, suffering only a slap on the wrist.

    I also found it interesting that the FIA implied that other (all?) teams used the "collectors" as well, but drained them before the cars were weighed. BAR chose to keep theirs full because their car was underweight, and figured that the rules were sufficiently vague that they could be challenged. They claim that the extra fuel is not subject to be drained, since it constitutes an integral part of the car's engine.

    In essence they are claiming that the extra fuel is not, in fact, to be treated as fuel? Hmmm....
     
  10. MOFS macrumors 65816

    MOFS

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    Durham, UK
    #10
    The BBC website says that the engine is illegal, as long as it is tuned down so it isn't as fast as the other engines. Seems fair to me - Cosworth are struggling for funds, they get an extra year to develop a V8.

    Seems a bit harsh on BAR anyway. I'm sure many teams have done this (Benetton spring to mind) and got away with this. My feeling about this is just that BAR will lose the points but Button will keep them, just as what happenned when Williams and Benetton used dodgy petrol a few years ago.
     
  11. iGav thread starter macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    #11
    Yep... their car is underweight, and so they always have that advantage over other teams.

    BAR claim that the car requires 6kg of fuel at all times, and only with that 6kg in the car is it over the minimum weight, yet other teams cars when completely drained of fuel including the collector tanks (which one would presume would also need a similar amount of fuel as the BAR to be effective) still comply with the minimum weight regulations.

    BAR always have an advantage.
     
  12. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #12
    You mean legal, right? ;)

    from what I gather it is up to the FIA's dicretion whether to allow it. Cosworth should be fine if BMW buys Sauber as rumored, and Williams switches to Cosworth. But nothing's for certain.

    My question: How is this BAR incident worse than Ferrari's testing transgressions? Sure, the teams are supposed to work out testing limits but shouldn't the FIA step in when somebody chooses to ignore the limits?
     
  13. anonymous161 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2003
    Location:
    Where the wind comes sweeping down the plains
    #13
    Fuel is fuel is fuel. The tech regs, at least from what I can remember specify a pretty clear "dry weight" of car and driver at 600 kg. No car would run without fuel in it, obviously, but fuel is not part of the racing weight requirements. The car must weigh at least this much during the entire grand prix. Obviously if you use fuel as weight ballast, your intention is to burn it off because gasoline doesn't make good ballast, being a liquid and all. BAR got caught with their pants down and are going to try and weasel their way out of it. I would hate to see them excluded, but I hate cheaters even more. "Tolerances" and grey areas are one thing, but lying to an FIA official by arguing that you didn't understand what " drain the fuel from the car" means and then arguing that it is an integral part of your engine is just dumb. Air is a vital component to combustion too but I don't see anybody trying to argue the "integral" nature of a turbo charger.

    No matter how much they test, the F2005 weighs 600 kg when it lines up on the grid, that's the difference.
    Ferrari's testing is not something that is regulated by the FIA, that was simply a good faith gentleman's agreement that to my understanding Ferrari was not initially invited to sign. Good faith and a dollar will get you a cup of coffee. Ferrari should have probably played ball on the testing agreement, but it is certainly not a rule of law.
     
  14. virividox macrumors 601

    virividox

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2003
    Location:
    Manila - Nottingham - Philadelphia - Santa Barbar
    #14
    It's rather stiff penalty lets hope it doesnt push through
     
  15. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #15
    What you say makes sense, but BAR are in essence arguing that what they are doing is no worse than Ferrari - bad faith, maybe, but no rules broken. They are trying to convince the court that the rules allow the collector with fuel to be considered part of the empty weight of the car.

    My opinion (which is remarkably similar to Alonso's ;) ) is that BAR is cheating - and so is Scuderia. But I still can't see tossing them for the season...
     
  16. anonymous161 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2003
    Location:
    Where the wind comes sweeping down the plains
    #16
    It will be interesting to see how this turns out. Bernie has weighed in and he feels that BAR are guilty and they should be excluded for the rest of the season. He also says that 18 cars would run so that no team would have to run 3, so much for what I knew about the Concorde Agreement. Link
     
  17. iGav thread starter macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    #17
    Just a thought... how can Ferrari be cheating when they were never part of the testing agreement? an agreement that so it would seem has already been broken by several teams in the last couple of weeks?

    The so called Testing Agreement was implemented for one reason and one reason only, to disadvantage Ferrari. Nothing more.

    They're not cheating, because they're not breaking the rules. :)

    Anyway... I eagerly await the Courts decision sometime today. :)
     
  18. MOFS macrumors 65816

    MOFS

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    Durham, UK
    #18
    Ummm...yeah...legal. :eek:

    The Ferrari testing transgressions are technically not testing transgressions at all. The limit is self-imposed, but because the FIA and Bernie need a 100% agreeance on the issue (ie all the teams have to vote for this issue), Ferrari have basically used their veto to prevent this going through, claiming that they need this testing because of the lack of tyre testing data Bridgestone left. This makes you realise how important that one tyre supplier for the entire field is...
     
  19. iGav thread starter macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    #19
    BAR and Button get two-race ban

    It's out... BAR Honda have had their results from the Imola GP stripped, and have been banned for the next 2 races.

    Rinky dink link

    Dirty cheats. :mad:
     
  20. barneygumble macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2005
    #20
    I think this is a sufficient penalty, t hope they don't transgress any further i really enjoyed the ride last year with them
     
  21. iGav thread starter macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    #21
    There's now suggestions on some of the F1 sites that BAR Honda possibly ran the same system last year, and have only just been picked up on it.

    According to the FIA Statement a further 11.38kg of fuel was found in the car after BAR stated that "That's it" after they initially emptied the car.

    IMHO, they should've been kicked out for the season, with a 12 month suspended ban for 2006.

    Can you imagine the uproar this would have caused if it had been Ferrari?
     
  22. anonymous161 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2003
    Location:
    Where the wind comes sweeping down the plains
    #22
    11 kilos is a lot more than a "collector" tank would need to hold to prime the fuel system, at least in my understanding, that is a fuel second's worth of fuel at a pit stop. Like you said iGav, dirty cheats. If Ferrari had done this, the other teams would have been asking to exclude them from last year's championship as well as this one.

    On another note, I read on grandprix.com that BAR Honda ran a record test distance and set fastest lap at Mugello last week with their 2006 spec V8!!! They should just put that sucker in when they come back.
     
  23. iGav thread starter macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    #23
    Heads will roll at BAR Honda after this one. ;)

    They should never have let Dave Richards go. :rolleyes:

    I read that the V8 was 4 seconds off the lap record, that said, this is BAR we're talking about so they might have found a way to conceal a couple of hidden cylinders in the engine. heheh

    BAR have stated they weren't trying to set the best time, so I suspect that on a full bore run, they'll probably be 2 to 2.5 seconds off the pace of the current V10's.

    To be honest I wouldn't be at all surprised if by the end of '06 start of '07 season the V8's aren't already matching the current V10 times.
     
  24. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #24
    But if they were doing this last year, the implication is that Richards may have been in on the plot. Of ,course, his quick departure may have been the result of an argument over whether to do this....



    The lighter weight of the engine is probably a factor for starters.

    I really can't imagine what would have happened if this went down with Ferrari instead of BAR. Pandemonium. :eek:

    Way to go, BAR. :mad:
     
  25. anonymous161 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2003
    Location:
    Where the wind comes sweeping down the plains
    #25
    Not a record time, but I believe the fastest time of the day.

    All these changes do is make everyone spend more money. At some point the FIA needs to realize that they can't slow the cars down by regulation.
    A control tire is a necessity, but only to even the playing field, not to actually slow the cars down. How about 1 tire compound for crying out loud? How is the fan supposed to know whether they are running a soft, soft-medium, medium, medium-hard, or hard tire?
    They could always switch the cars to methanol or some bio derivative with a lower energy to weight ratio- that would be fun and it would have an environmental angle. I think the IRL is doing that next year.
     

Share This Page