FIA wants to exclude BAR from F1 championship

iGav

macrumors G3
Original poster
Mar 9, 2002
9,025
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
 

iGav

macrumors G3
Original poster
Mar 9, 2002
9,025
1
anonymous161 said:
Did anyone actually find said hidden fuel tank? because if they did, then BAR cheated.
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.

anonymous161 said:
But I think suspending them for the season may be a little harsh.
Harsh certainly, but the FIA have already set a precedent when the Toyota WRC team were banned because they used an ingeniously illegal turbo.

anonymous161 said:
Since the grid has to have 20 cars, who would get to run 3 cars if BAR were dropped?
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?
 

Don't panic

macrumors 603
Jan 30, 2004
5,551
695
having a drink at Milliways
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.
 

Lord Blackadder

macrumors G5
May 7, 2004
13,520
2,557
Sod off
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.
 
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.
 

iGav

macrumors G3
Original poster
Mar 9, 2002
9,025
1
anonymous161 said:
I was just curious as to whether the second tank was actually found or just hinted at.
Yep, a second 'collector' tank was found inside the main tank.

Rinky dink link

Especially interesting...

It was clear from this that De Groot's interpretation of events was different to that of BAR and that the contention was over what the team was asked to do. Asked whether there was an allegation that the team had defied the request, he replied: "I asked for a full drain out and afterwards I found more fuel." He added that "most teams take it as a matter of course that the collector will be drained." BAR clearly interpreted his instruction as being to do what is called a "lifted pump", a procedure by which the front of the car is raised and the fuel in the tank is pumped out and the car weighed.
 

Lord Blackadder

macrumors G5
May 7, 2004
13,520
2,557
Sod off
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.

"One must at the very least include in the minimum weight the amount of fuel which is needed to ensure that the cars engine can operate without a technical malfunction," he said. "And you have heard evidence from Mr Willis that this car simply cannot operate without a minimum of six kgs of fuel."
In essence they are claiming that the extra fuel is not, in fact, to be treated as fuel? Hmmm....
 

MOFS

macrumors 65816
Feb 27, 2003
1,204
144
Durham, UK
Lord Blackadder said:
EDIT: OT, but I hear now that Stoddart wants to keep his V10 after everyone switches to V8s. Seems like a typical move.
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.
 

iGav

macrumors G3
Original poster
Mar 9, 2002
9,025
1
Lord Blackadder said:
In essence they are claiming that the extra fuel is not, in fact, to be treated as fuel? Hmmm....
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.
 

Lord Blackadder

macrumors G5
May 7, 2004
13,520
2,557
Sod off
MOFS said:
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.
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?
 

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.
 

Lord Blackadder

macrumors G5
May 7, 2004
13,520
2,557
Sod off
anonymous161 said:
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.
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...
 

iGav

macrumors G3
Original poster
Mar 9, 2002
9,025
1
Lord Blackadder said:
My opinion (which is remarkably similar to Alonso's ;) ) is that BAR is cheating - and so is Scuderia.
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. :)
 

MOFS

macrumors 65816
Feb 27, 2003
1,204
144
Durham, UK
Lord Blackadder said:
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?
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...
 

iGav

macrumors G3
Original poster
Mar 9, 2002
9,025
1
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:
 

barneygumble

macrumors 6502a
Apr 18, 2005
726
0
iGav said:
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:
I think this is a sufficient penalty, t hope they don't transgress any further i really enjoyed the ride last year with them
 

iGav

macrumors G3
Original poster
Mar 9, 2002
9,025
1
barneygumble said:
I think this is a sufficient penalty, t hope they don't transgress any further i really enjoyed the ride last year with them
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?
 
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.
 

iGav

macrumors G3
Original poster
Mar 9, 2002
9,025
1
anonymous161 said:
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.
Heads will roll at BAR Honda after this one. ;)

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

anonymous161 said:
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.
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.
 

Lord Blackadder

macrumors G5
May 7, 2004
13,520
2,557
Sod off
iGav said:
Heads will roll at BAR Honda after this one. ;)

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



iGav said:
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.
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:
 
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.