FIA wants to exclude BAR from F1 championship

[iGav]

But if they were doing this last year, the implication is that Richards may have been in on the plot.

indeed... but he at least got away with it though whilst he was in charge. heheheh

Of ,course, his quick departure may have been the result of an argument over whether to do this....

possibly... BAR-Honda have a habit of trying stuff, such as the electro, then mechanical torque transfer device last season, which is always on the edge of the written regulation, but purposely having a car 6kg short of the minimal weight...

Richards is massively successful with Prodrive though, I can't imagine that he'd purposely have done the same.

But BAR-Honda were suspiciously fast last season... considering that before they'd never even scored a podium.

That said, they've sucked big time this year... hmmmmmmm.

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

Exactly... that said, just incase anyone has any doubts... I'd have wanted to see Ferrari's arse kicked out of the championship as well in the same circumstances.

I'm wondering if we'll see Honda buy BAT out completely sooner rather than later because of this... BAR's name has certainly been heavily tarnished.

I bet Jense is pi$$ed!!!

 

[devman]

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?

Exactly! And I'm not sure it's possible to imagine how big an uproar it would have been... (meaning - it would have been HUGE)

 

[R.Youden]

OK I am a big F1 fan (going to Silverstone this year). As far as I can make out BAR have not broken the rules, they gave themself the oportunity to break them but they didn't. Under the new regs engines have to last two races. Say that is 10-12 times when they where on low fuel. If they did not have a constant supply of fuel going into the engine it would cause excessive wear to the enigne. BAR claim that they need 9kg of fuel to make the engine run effectively. That can not be disputed, only Honda and BAR know the characteristics of the car. At Imola BAR where asked to do a "lift and drain" of the main fuel tank. They lift the front of the car to drain the main tanks. The steward drained the tank and asked if the main tank was empty which is what it was. At no point did they ask if there was any more fuel in the car, all they asked is was the main tank empty.

The regulations state that you cannot use fuel as balast and they clearly were not doing that.

Go back to 1999, Malaysian Grand Prix. Eddie Irvine in with a chance of the championship. His barge boards where too big. The rules stated they where allowed XXmm with 5% tolerance. This 5% was designed to be for manufacturing tolerance but Ferrari went above that 5% limit. They claimed that this was due to manufacturing and that it should be allowed to have a manufactring tolerance on top of the stated 5% tolerance that was designed for manufacture but not explicitly stated. The FIA really do need to look at how the rules are written as there are so many gray areas.

As for the 2 race ban, what is that. OK the FIA said they cheated and should be thrown out and the court said they probably didnt cheat. So if they didn't cheat what did they do? You can not ban people because they had the ability to cheat, do you ban an athlete if he has drugs in his house but urine samples are clear? Go back to 1994 and the Benetton traction control! That was the worst bit of blatent cheating, but the FIA could not prove they used the system so they could not impose a fine.

This system has undermined the race stewards who now are just yes men for the FIA. It needs to be sorted.

Anyway Button off to Williams now next year.

That was good to get off my chest!

 

[iGav]

As far as I can make out BAR have not broken the rules, they gave themself the oportunity to break them but they didn't.

This event has certainly been an issue of semantics that's for sure.

Now from my understanding, BAR-Honda did break the minimum weight rule. The regulations clearly state the minimum weight.

4.1 Minimum weight :
The weight of the car must not be less than 605 kg during the
qualifying practice session and no less than 600 kg at all other
times during the Event.

And weight is defined as...

1.9 Weight :
Is the weight of the car with the driver, wearing his complete racing
apparel, at all times during the event.

My understanding is that it was clarified back in 1994 that the minimum weight does not include any fuel onboard the car and comments by members of other teams, and the FIA's Charlie Whiting supports this.

Now when the BAR-Honda was drained of fuel the car (remember weight is defined as car + driver) was under the 600kg minimum weight at 594.6kg. It required a minimum of 5.4kg of fuel onboard to bring the car up to the minimum weight. In which case BAR-Honda were using fuel as ballast.

If they did not have a constant supply of fuel going into the engine it would cause excessive wear to the enigne. BAR claim that they need 9kg of fuel to make the engine run effectively. That can not be disputed, only Honda and BAR know the characteristics of the car.

If the Honda engine needs 9kg of fuel then it needs 9kg of fuel, indeed no one can dispute that. According to Jo Bauer other teams use a similar 'collector' system, so the Honda engine is not unique in this respect.

However, fuel cannot be used as a ballast and when the onboard fuel was drained the car was found to be underweight. If fuel cannot be used as ballast when the car was drained of fuel it should have met or exceeded the minimum weight of 600kg, but it didn't.

At Imola BAR where asked to do a "lift and drain" of the main fuel tank. They lift the front of the car to drain the main tanks. The steward drained the tank and asked if the main tank was empty which is what it was. At no point did they ask if there was any more fuel in the car, all they asked is was the main tank empty.

From comments I have read from transcripts of the FIA Court. BAR-Honda were requested to do a "full drain" by Kris de Groot. But BAR-Honda interpreted this as a "Lifted Pump" procedure. This appears to be the main area of contentions.

The regulations state that you cannot use fuel as balast and they clearly were not doing that.

Indeed the regulations do... "In order to ensure that fluids are not being used as ballast... "

In which case the BAR-Honda should have met or exceeded the 600kg minimum weight limit when it was submitted to a "full drain", it did not, because it required at least 5.4kg of fuel to conform to the minimum weight regulations.

BAR-Honda ALWAYS had at least a 5.4kg advantage over the other teams, which is obviously unfair.

The FIA really do need to look at how the rules are written as there are so many gray areas.

Absolutely agree with you there...

As for the 2 race ban, what is that. OK the FIA said they cheated and should be thrown out and the court said they probably didnt cheat. So if they didn't cheat what did they do?

It couldn't be proved that they deliberately cheated, however that doesn't excuse the fact that the car didn't conform to the regulations. It is up to the team to prove that their car conforms (Article 2.6). But BAR-Honda couldn't and thus they have been penalised.

Also, the way in which BAR-Honda handled the "full drain" procedure, and that they didn't seek clarification on the matter before hand certainly had an impact on the penalty they received.

 

[iGav]

Wowser the FIA really want to hand BAR-Honda a slap down don't they!

FIA Statement

Statements attributed to the management of BAR Honda are currently under investigation in the light of the team’s obligation to do nothing “prejudicial to the image and dignity of Formula One racing” or “prejudicial to the interests of any competition or to the interests of motor sport generally”.

Article about Honda statement

 

[iGav]

The BAR-Honda Formula 1 team has accepted full responsibility for its two-race ban and subsequent disqualification.

Rinky dink link

Rinky dinky link too