andylancaster3000
|
| posted on 5/5/05 at 05:37 PM |
|
|
Button Banned for 2 Races
It seems that Mr. Button and Sato have been given a two race ban for running a car 5kg under the limit at Imola. BAR have also had 10 points deducted
from their championship. I personally think they have been lucky with this punishment. Could have been a lot worse...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/4517629.stm
Andy
|
|
|
|
|
MkIndy7
|
| posted on 5/5/05 at 06:33 PM |
|
|
Lucky!
From what I remember Benneton never got such severe punishments for fuel Irregularitys.
Unsuprisingly when a certain German driver was driving for them!.......
|
|
|
drmike54
|
| posted on 5/5/05 at 06:42 PM |
|
|
FIA & F1 sure isn't NASCAR.
Started Welding the chassis!!!!
|
|
|
Surrey Dave
|
| posted on 5/5/05 at 06:46 PM |
|
|
Pants Pants Pants!!!!!!
If as BAR state the data shows that the car did not at anytime race under weight, its PANTS!!!!!
|
|
|
gazza285
|
| posted on 5/5/05 at 06:47 PM |
|
|
Coudn't really care.
|
|
|
bigandy
|
| posted on 5/5/05 at 06:51 PM |
|
|
Why the minimum weight anyway? Why not let the teams race as light as they want? A bit of competition never hurt anyone....
Andy
Dammit! Too many decisions....
|
|
|
turbolag
|
| posted on 5/5/05 at 06:52 PM |
|
|
The word is that BAR had a concealed 2nd tank that held 15 litres. They drain the dregs out of the main tank at the end for the weigh in, but the
extra fuel still keeps the weight up and also potentially allowed Button to go further before pitting. Heard that yesterday from a mate who's a
chassis engineer at Red Bull.
If it's true, it's more than just an irregularity - it's a nasty piece of downright cheating and they were lucky to get off so
light. Ecclestone wanted them chucked out of this years championships.
If it ain't broke, you ain't fiddlin' hard enough!
|
|
|
turbolag
|
| posted on 5/5/05 at 06:53 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by bigandy
Why the minimum weight anyway? Why not let the teams race as light as they want? A bit of competition never hurt anyone....
Andy
To keep it affordable for the poorer teams. A 10mm titanium nut costs a tenner...
If it ain't broke, you ain't fiddlin' hard enough!
|
|
|
andyps
|
| posted on 5/5/05 at 09:45 PM |
|
|
Punishment given out by the Ferrari Internal Advisers again. The red cars can be illegal and proved OK, the others are OK and
then proved illegal, strange isn't it
Andy
An expert is someone who knows more and more about less and less
|
|
|
Northy
|
| posted on 5/5/05 at 09:58 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by turbolag
The word is that BAR had a concealed 2nd tank that held 15 litres. They drain the dregs out of the main tank at the end for the weigh in, but the
extra fuel still keeps the weight up and also potentially allowed Button to go further before pitting. Heard that yesterday from a mate who's a
chassis engineer at Red Bull.
I heard that the extra tank was inside the main tank and was only to stop weight transfer (fuel sloshing about) upsetting the car on low fuel
and also to help fuel pick up.
I also heard that the FIA knew of the setup and were ok with it.
What the FIA didn't like was when they asked BAR if the car was "fully drained" and they replied "Yes". They then found
~5.4kg of fuel still in the inner tank 
They have said they are going to fight it and try and qualify to race this weekend anyway. The poo could really hit the fan then!
Should be worth watching this weekend.......
Graham
Website under construction. Help greatfully received as I don't really know what I'm doing! 
"If a man says something in the woods and there are no women there, is he still wrong?"
Built 2L 8 Valve Vx Powered Avon
|
|
|
Triton
|
| posted on 5/5/05 at 10:31 PM |
|
|
That's Farty 1 racing for you.......pillocks
|
|
|
Triton
|
| posted on 5/5/05 at 10:33 PM |
|
|
Make them all race 2 cv's then at least it would be worth watching
|
|
|
bigandy
|
| posted on 6/5/05 at 11:06 AM |
|
|
Formula 2CV....
Has a certain "appeal" to it doesn't it? I'd watch it!
Andy
Dammit! Too many decisions....
|
|
|
David Jenkins
|
| posted on 6/5/05 at 11:23 AM |
|
|
Well, you did mention it!
2CV racing
David
|
|
|
bigandy
|
| posted on 6/5/05 at 11:45 AM |
|
|
Why are no ideas original these days?!!!
Pretty cool site though!
Andy
Dammit! Too many decisions....
|
|
|
andyps
|
| posted on 6/5/05 at 12:36 PM |
|
|
Apparently, the fuel tank used by BAR is identical to that used by some of the other teams. What is the likelihood that with BAR having decided not to
challenge the ban that someone might challenge the result of the race and lead to other manufacturers getting similar bans?
Andy
An expert is someone who knows more and more about less and less
|
|
|
Northy
|
| posted on 6/5/05 at 01:11 PM |
|
|
BAR have decided not to challenge the ban. They were already set up in the paddock, so they are packing up and going home 
Shitter. 
Graham
Website under construction. Help greatfully received as I don't really know what I'm doing!
"If a man says something in the woods and there are no women there, is he still wrong?"
Built 2L 8 Valve Vx Powered Avon
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 6/5/05 at 03:48 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by andyps
Apparently, the fuel tank used by BAR is identical to that used by some of the other teams. What is the likelihood that with BAR having decided not to
challenge the ban that someone might challenge the result of the race and lead to other manufacturers getting similar bans?
Re other teams I was just about to say the same.
|
|
|
turbolag
|
| posted on 6/5/05 at 08:38 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by andyps
Apparently, the fuel tank used by BAR is identical to that used by some of the other teams. What is the likelihood that with BAR having decided not to
challenge the ban that someone might challenge the result of the race and lead to other manufacturers getting similar bans?
Because other
teams using the same tank arrangement have cars that still weigh the 600 kilo minimum without fuel, where's BARs car needed the
'supplemenatry' tank to be full to meet the limit. If they'd stuck a bit more weight on the car itself then the actual tanks
themselves, or otherwise, aren't an issue.
If it ain't broke, you ain't fiddlin' hard enough!
|
|
|
andyps
|
| posted on 6/5/05 at 10:55 PM |
|
|
BAR are sufficiently pissed off with the FIA to have published the whole of their defence submission on their website, even though it gives info to
competing teams. The car needed the extra fuel to run properly, so would be above the weight limit at all times (according to what they say). All 103
pages are available here
Andy
An expert is someone who knows more and more about less and less
|
|
|
Peteff
|
| posted on 7/5/05 at 10:09 AM |
|
|
I've read that and it sounds like the FIA moved the goalposts with the "except for fuel" clause. If the fuel was there at the end of
the race and couldn't have been added after it should count towards the all up weight.
yours, Pete
I went into the RSPCA office the other day. It was so small you could hardly swing a cat in there.
|
|
|
escary
|
| posted on 11/5/05 at 08:18 AM |
|
|
f1 is dead
they have destroyed 'the pinacle of motor car racing'
clipping the wings of what is supossed to be the fastest men in the fastest cars driving at insane speeds in equally insine tracks makes a mockery of
it all.
It's all for tv!
Motorsport existed before tv now who rules supreme?
reset F1 back about 10 years with slick tyres and no traction control, limitless engines, and twelve lap qualifying.
And just for tv make everyone do a three lap run each 15 mins.
Problem sorted.
Or do what everyone else seems to be doing , like me, support Motogp.
It's much better (you know its true)
Ignore whats' left of F1, maybe they will get the message.
|
|
|
