2021 Monaco GP

Current Formula One related news, information and discussion.
Post Reply
White six
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts: 1957
Joined: 3 years ago

#241

Post by White six »

Bottom post of the previous page:

Everso Biggyballies wrote: 2 years ago
Aty wrote: 2 years ago https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/arti ... g1HrC.html
Ferrari investigation finds that Leclerc qualifying crash WAS to blame for issue that forced Monaco DNS
Some of you may recall our conversation in here where it was said that Binotto has taken risk with that post-crash examination. There simply wasn't time and conditions for proper investigation. I think he knew as an engineer, what he was facing. There is no point to swell on it. Leclerc however...
The stupid thing is that Ferrari were totally slack in their post crash pre race investigation. The gearbox was fine. We get that. But other ancilliary parts such as a driveshaft hub should have been checked and crack tested as a matter of course, if not replaced automatically as part of the. repair job.

There is no penalty attached to replacing a hub, and no such restriction of safety related parts replacement under par ferme regs. The hub did not crack on the outlap, the crack was there from the crash. The crack just cause the driveshaft hub to fail as soon as it was put under load.

That one is purely down to bad management and poor processes for such investigation work. It would be checked on a road car after a heavy crash. It is inexcusable that it was not checked on an F1 car after a crash. Changes in processes and policy need to be made.

Is Binotto still team principal, and who is the trackside head of engineering. They should both be worried for their future.
Binotto is overseeing an impressive return to form. Absolutely no chance he's in trouble. Hth
The board equivalent of the Jody scheckter chicane. Fast but pointless
User avatar
Everso Biggyballies
Legendary Member
Legendary Member
Posts: 49206
Joined: 18 years ago
Real Name: Chris
Favourite Motorsport: Anything that goes left and right.
Favourite Racing Car: Too Many to mention
Favourite Driver: Kimi,Niki,Jim(none called Michael)
Favourite Circuit: Nordschleife, Spa, Mt Panorama.
Car(s) Currently Owned: Audi SQ5 3.0L V6 TwinTurbo
Location: Just moved 3 klms further away so now 11 klms from Albert Park, Melbourne.

#242

Post by Everso Biggyballies »

Ferrari's explanation is pitiful in its revelations.

They say damage to the driveshaft hub escaped their notice as it did not expect the left-hand side of the car to be damaged, but replacing the gearbox may have brought the issue to light - even if it planned to install the same driveshaft - as a technician would have had a chance to inspect the component.

What they are saying is the thy never even bothered to look at the hub, which is basically the part the driveshaft goes through to drive the wheels.... and is also the part all the wishbones and suspension components are attached to and thus what all the loads are inflicted on. And they did not bother to even check it. Sorry but thats gross negligence.

As I suggested in my post needs to happen, Ferrari has since admitted that it will change its internal processes in the event of a crash and extend its due diligence to any other parts that could be directly affected.

* I started life with nothing, and still have most of it left


“Good drivers have dead flies on the side windows!” (Walter Röhrl)

* I married Miss Right. Just didn't know her first name was Always
Aty
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts: 2240
Joined: 3 years ago
Favourite Driver: Prost, Schumacher, Vettel
Favourite Circuit: Nordschleife

#243

Post by Aty »

Ferrari had only 7 [min] to inspect Leclerc's car for damages. That should put to bed speculations about team being negligent on that account. Leclerc committed error, pay for it dearly, and that should perhaps close the case. Things happen.
User avatar
Everso Biggyballies
Legendary Member
Legendary Member
Posts: 49206
Joined: 18 years ago
Real Name: Chris
Favourite Motorsport: Anything that goes left and right.
Favourite Racing Car: Too Many to mention
Favourite Driver: Kimi,Niki,Jim(none called Michael)
Favourite Circuit: Nordschleife, Spa, Mt Panorama.
Car(s) Currently Owned: Audi SQ5 3.0L V6 TwinTurbo
Location: Just moved 3 klms further away so now 11 klms from Albert Park, Melbourne.

#244

Post by Everso Biggyballies »

Aty wrote: 2 years ago Ferrari had only 7 [min] to inspect Leclerc's car for damages. That should put to bed speculations about team being negligent on that account. Leclerc committed error, pay for it dearly, and that should perhaps close the case. Things happen.
I dont understand this 7 minute claim. Obviously they were not restricted to 7 minutes to evaluate and repair the crash damage, gearbox status etc..... That initial evaluation and repair period is the period when they should have picked the fault in the hub, or made the decision to replace or not such a stressed and major component that is undoubtedly peripheral to the damage zone.

I believe the 7 minutes you refer to would be the time pre-race from when he went out to the grid until the pitlane closed. The part should have been evaluated and replaced long before it got to that stage. Knowing they would only have c 7 minutes to rectify any unforeseen damage after his initial outlap to the grid only makes their lack of diligence in the initial evaluation / repairs more apparent.

Anyway I can see we are at a stage on this where we must agree to disagree. I made it clear initially that their management of the processes of investigation in such cases was lacking and showed poor management. Ferrari have subsequently agreed their processes to be lacking in this area and the need for a revision of their current manner of working. I rest my case. :wink:

Of course another zone of questioning opens..... were Ferrari trying to minimise their costs on the repair given the current budget caps? Not replacing all potentially damaged items purely to try and not make the repair costs excessive. We have already heard of Toto at Imola suggesting the cost of crash repairs impacting on their development plans due to financial considerations. Are the FIA happy that to meet budget restraints, the teams are cutting corners on what comes down to driver safety, leaving potentially dangerous parts in place to save a few thousand euros? That is another question.

* I started life with nothing, and still have most of it left


“Good drivers have dead flies on the side windows!” (Walter Röhrl)

* I married Miss Right. Just didn't know her first name was Always
Aty
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts: 2240
Joined: 3 years ago
Favourite Driver: Prost, Schumacher, Vettel
Favourite Circuit: Nordschleife

#245

Post by Aty »

Everso Biggyballies wrote: 2 years ago
Aty wrote: 2 years ago Ferrari had only 7 [min] to inspect Leclerc's car for damages. That should put to bed speculations about team being negligent on that account. Leclerc committed error, pay for it dearly, and that should perhaps close the case. Things happen.
I dont understand this 7 minute claim. Obviously they were not restricted to 7 minutes to evaluate and repair the crash damage, gearbox status etc..... That initial evaluation and repair period is the period when they should have picked the fault in the hub, or made the decision to replace or not such a stressed and major component that is undoubtedly peripheral to the damage zone.

I believe the 7 minutes you refer to would be the time pre-race from when he went out to the grid until the pitlane closed. The part should have been evaluated and replaced long before it got to that stage. Knowing they would only have c 7 minutes to rectify any unforeseen damage after his initial outlap to the grid only makes their lack of diligence in the initial evaluation / repairs more apparent.

Anyway I can see we are at a stage on this where we must agree to disagree. I made it clear initially that their management of the processes of investigation in such cases was lacking and showed poor management. Ferrari have subsequently agreed their processes to be lacking in this area and the need for a revision of their current manner of working. I rest my case. :wink:

Of course another zone of questioning opens..... were Ferrari trying to minimise their costs on the repair given the current budget caps? Not replacing all potentially damaged items purely to try and not make the repair costs excessive. We have already heard of Toto at Imola suggesting the cost of crash repairs impacting on their development plans due to financial considerations. Are the FIA happy that to meet budget restraints, the teams are cutting corners on what comes down to driver safety, leaving potentially dangerous parts in place to save a few thousand euros? That is another question.
My understanding is, (7 min) it was time how much FiA allowed Ferrari to make decision on scope of repairs on Leclerc's car.
User avatar
Everso Biggyballies
Legendary Member
Legendary Member
Posts: 49206
Joined: 18 years ago
Real Name: Chris
Favourite Motorsport: Anything that goes left and right.
Favourite Racing Car: Too Many to mention
Favourite Driver: Kimi,Niki,Jim(none called Michael)
Favourite Circuit: Nordschleife, Spa, Mt Panorama.
Car(s) Currently Owned: Audi SQ5 3.0L V6 TwinTurbo
Location: Just moved 3 klms further away so now 11 klms from Albert Park, Melbourne.

#246

Post by Everso Biggyballies »

@Aty well if that is the case it is a ruling I have never heard of and one that to me flies in the face of safety. To put such a minimal time limit on such a critical evaluation of damaged components is not realistic and from a safety point of view, with drivers Marshalls and even spectators lives put at risk in such a way for a hurriedly evaluated and overlooked damaged part of steering or suspension is a gross miscarriage of safety. It also seems strange that if such a time limit was put in place, how is it that the team had overnight to decide and undertake further more detailed inspection of the gearbox prior to making their final decision on whether to replace the gearbox with a penalty or to leave it unchanged as they did. Ferrari certainly said at the time that the intial investigation of the gearbox showed no damage but they would be making further more detailed inspection overnight prior to making their decision. That alone flies in the face of any apparent 7 minutes time limit you suggest.

This is why I felt the 7 minutes was purely the time from when Leclerc did his outlap to the time left for repairs to be made prior to the pitlane closing.

I would be very interested to read anything you have seen regarding this mystery 7 minute ruling. If you have links it would be great.
I have read a detailed report by Binotto (link below) in which he states that the failed hub was not even inspected. He also details how the gearbox was inspected and carefully overhauled / rebuilt after the crash. Nowhere does he offer or mention that there was any time limit on their crash evaluation, certainly not mentioning any ruling of 7 minutes. I would have thought he would have offered that 7 minutes as a reason things. might have been overlooked.
https://www.racefans.net/2021/05/23/dri ... h-binotto/

* I started life with nothing, and still have most of it left


“Good drivers have dead flies on the side windows!” (Walter Röhrl)

* I married Miss Right. Just didn't know her first name was Always
Aty
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts: 2240
Joined: 3 years ago
Favourite Driver: Prost, Schumacher, Vettel
Favourite Circuit: Nordschleife

#247

Post by Aty »

https://www.gpblog.com/en/videos/85129/ ... e-car.html

This article explains timing. I was apparently wrong (misinformed). 7 min was related to logistical procedure. (It's all I have).
User avatar
Everso Biggyballies
Legendary Member
Legendary Member
Posts: 49206
Joined: 18 years ago
Real Name: Chris
Favourite Motorsport: Anything that goes left and right.
Favourite Racing Car: Too Many to mention
Favourite Driver: Kimi,Niki,Jim(none called Michael)
Favourite Circuit: Nordschleife, Spa, Mt Panorama.
Car(s) Currently Owned: Audi SQ5 3.0L V6 TwinTurbo
Location: Just moved 3 klms further away so now 11 klms from Albert Park, Melbourne.

#248

Post by Everso Biggyballies »

Aty wrote: 2 years ago https://www.gpblog.com/en/videos/85129/ ... e-car.html

This article explains timing. I was apparently wrong (misinformed). 7 min was related to logistical procedure. (It's all I have).
Thanks for the link and the discussion. I think we now all perhaps understand the systems in place in such instances better than before. I know I do. It does seem that the 7 minutes mentioned refers to the pitlane pre grid closure time.
IIRC Max Verstappen last year in Hungary where he crashed on the outlap, that Red Bull faced the same options as Ferrari faced with Leclerc's car last weekend. Instead of returning to pitlane Max lined up on the grid position and they used the extra time that option gave them, to replace the front suspension and nose and clear the grid in time for Max to start normally. Had they returned to pitlane they would not have had the time to repair the car prior to pitlane closing, whereas by lining up on the grid they had until the 5 minutes before the start deadline by when all pit crew and equipment must be away from the grid.
Intereting in the article you linked that Ferrari chose to not take a pitlane start due to the fact he was mandated to start on soft rubber, so the option of running a long first stint on harder rubber was not available. Also I guess starting from the pitlane at Monaco on the less attractive tyre would not have resulted in the likleyhood of points, so why wear the engine etc for nothing. Some of the rules relating to all these penalties for replacing this and that or having engines that must last for 7 races annoy me greatly. Anyway that is another subject.
Thinking with the benefit of hindsight, I wonder if Leclerc had after his outlap continued to the grid that Ferrari might have had the time needed to change the hub and driveshaft. Just a thought.
Of course if they still had a half hour warm-up session race morning as the old days this whole issue would never have arisen.:wink:

* I started life with nothing, and still have most of it left


“Good drivers have dead flies on the side windows!” (Walter Röhrl)

* I married Miss Right. Just didn't know her first name was Always
Aty
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts: 2240
Joined: 3 years ago
Favourite Driver: Prost, Schumacher, Vettel
Favourite Circuit: Nordschleife

#249

Post by Aty »

https://twitter.com/AstonMartinF1/statu ... 0530733063

How many people you need there? Was it 18 or 20 with one policeman (in red) watching? With budgetary restrictions I guess this will change.
2 jacks
2 side pods
8 right wheels
6 or 8 left wheels
User avatar
Michael Ferner
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 3531
Joined: 7 years ago
Real Name: Michael Ferner
Favourite Racing Car: Miller '122', McLaren M23
Favourite Driver: Billy Winn, Bruce McLaren
Car(s) Currently Owned: None
Location: Bitburg, Germany

#250

Post by Michael Ferner »

I still don't understand: if it is a parc fermé situation, how are they allowed to repair the car, and if it isn't, why on earth is there no "warm-up" practice session??? :huh:
2023 'Guess The Pole' Points & Accuracy Champion

If you don't vote now against fascism, you may never have that chance again...


Ceterum censeo interruptiones essent delendam.
User avatar
Everso Biggyballies
Legendary Member
Legendary Member
Posts: 49206
Joined: 18 years ago
Real Name: Chris
Favourite Motorsport: Anything that goes left and right.
Favourite Racing Car: Too Many to mention
Favourite Driver: Kimi,Niki,Jim(none called Michael)
Favourite Circuit: Nordschleife, Spa, Mt Panorama.
Car(s) Currently Owned: Audi SQ5 3.0L V6 TwinTurbo
Location: Just moved 3 klms further away so now 11 klms from Albert Park, Melbourne.

#251

Post by Everso Biggyballies »

Michael Ferner wrote: 2 years ago I still don't understand: if it is a parc fermé situation, how are they allowed to repair the car, and if it isn't, why on earth is there no "warm-up" practice session??? :huh:
In parc ferme my understanding is that Teams are permitted to complete repairs on the car under parc ferme conditions, but must replace all parts with those of the same specification. They get 31/2 hours to place the car in parc ferme after qualifying, but from what I believe parc ferme conditions start at the end of Q1. There is a list of allowed work.

In terms of crash repairs only parts of the same specification can be used and it must be authorised by the FIA. How that affects say for instance if Leclerc's car last weekend was fitted with a one off updated wing that needed replacing and therefore a direct equivalent was not available I am not sure.

Here is the section regarding Parc Ferme from the FIA Sporting Regs.
34) PRE-RACE PARC FERMÉ
34.1 Every team must provide the FIA technical delegate with a suspension set-up sheet for both of
their cars before each of them leaves the pit lane for the first time during qualifying practice
session.
34.2 Each car will be deemed to be in parc fermé from the time at which it leaves the pit lane for the
first time during qualifying practice until the start of the race. Any car which fails to leave the pit
lane during qualifying practice will be deemed to be in parc fermé at the end of Q1.
Between these times, other than when cars are sealed overnight in accordance with 34.4 below,
the following work may be carried out:
a) Engines may be started.
b) Fuel may be added or removed and a fuel breather fitted.
c) Wheels, wheel fasteners and tyres may be removed, changed or rebalanced and tyre
pressures checked.
d) Spark plugs may be removed in order to carry out an internal engine inspection and
cylinder compression checks.
e) Permitted heating or cooling devices may be fitted.
f) A jump battery may be connected and on board electrical units may be freely accessed
via a physical connection to the car.
g) Charging and / or discharging of the ERS energy storage devices.
h) The brake system may be bled.
i) Engine oil may be drained.
j) Compressed gases may be drained or added.
2020 F1 Sporting Regulations 28/71 7 April 2020
©2020 Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile Issue 6
k) Fluids may be drained and/or replenished, however, fluids used for replenishment must
conform to the same specification as the original fluid.
l) The aerodynamic set up of the front wing may be adjusted using the existing parts. No
parts may be added, removed or replaced.
m) If the FIA technical delegate is satisfied that changes in climatic conditions necessitate
alterations to the specification of a car, changes may be made to the air ducts around the
front and rear brakes and radiator ducts. These changes may be made at any time after
all teams have been sent the message “CHANGE IN CLIMATIC CONDITIONS” via the official
messaging system. From this point onwards the choice of air ducts around the front and
rear brakes and radiator ducts is free and pitot tubes may be covered or uncovered,
subject always to compliance with the relevant Technical Regulations.
n) Bodywork (excluding radiators) may be removed and/or cleaned.
o) Cosmetic changes may be made to the bodywork and tape may be added.
p) Any part of the car may be cleaned.
q) On board cameras, marshalling system components, timing transponders and any
associated equipment may be removed, refitted or checked.
r) Any work required by the FIA technical delegate.
s) Changes to improve the driver's comfort. In this context anything other than the
adjustment of mirrors, seat belts and pedals may only be carried out with the specific
permission of the FIA technical delegate.
Should ambient temperature change significantly, teams will be requested to change the
head padding required by Article 14.6.1-6 of the Technical Regulations via the official
messaging system.
The addition or removal of padding (or similar material) is also permitted but may only be
carried out under supervision and, if required by the FIA technical delegate, must be
removed before the post-race weighing procedure.
t) Drinking fluid for the driver may be added at any time, however, the capacity of the
container for any such fluid must not exceed 1.5 litres.
u) Repair of genuine accident damage.
v) Any parts which are removed from the car in order to carry out any work specifically
permitted above, or any parts removed to carry out essential safety checks, must remain
close to it and, at all times, be visible to the scrutineer assigned to the relevant car.
Furthermore, any parts removed from the car in order to carry out any such work must
be refitted before the car leaves the pit lane.
Any work not listed above may only be undertaken with the approval of the FIA technical
delegate following a written request from the team concerned. It must be clear that any
replacement part a team wishes to fit is the same in design and similar in mass, inertia and
function to the original. Any parts removed will be retained by the FIA.
However, if a team wishes to change a part during the qualifying session, between
reconnaissance laps and/or on the grid before the start of the race, this may be done without
first seeking the permission of the technical delegate, provided it is reasonable for the relevant
team to believe permission would be given if there was time to ask and the broken or damaged
part remains in full view of the scrutineer assigned to the car at all times.
34.3 At the end of the qualifying practice at least six cars will be chosen at random to undergo further
checks, once informed their car has been selected the team concerned must take the car to the
parc fermé immediately.
34.4 Within three and a half hours of the end of the qualifying practice session all cars used during
the session (or which were intended for use but failed to leave the pit lane) must be covered
and ready for FIA seals to be applied in order to ensure that they remain secure until the
2020 F1 Sporting Regulations 29/71 7 April 2020
©2020 Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile Issue 6
following day. For marketing purposes this deadline may be extended for one car from each
competitor for a maximum of two hours by prior arrangement with the FIA technical delegate.
However, no work of any kind may be carried out on the car any later than three and a half hours
after the end of the qualifying practice session.
Whilst cars are covered overnight they may be fitted with devices to keep them warm.
34.5 Five hours and 10 minutes before the start of the formation lap the seals and covers may be
removed but the cars will remain under parc fermé conditions until the start of the race.
34.6 A competitor may not modify any part on the car or make changes to the set-up of the
suspension whilst the car is being held under parc fermé conditions. In the case of a breach of
this Article the relevant driver must start the race from the pit lane and follow the procedures
laid out in Article 36.2.
In order that the scrutineers may be completely satisfied that no alterations have been made to
the suspension systems or aerodynamic configuration of the car (with the exception of the front
wing) whilst in pre-race parc fermé, it must be clear from physical inspection that changes
cannot be made without the use of tools.
34.7 One scrutineer will be allocated to each car for the purpose of ensuring that no unauthorised
work is carried out whilst cars are being held under parc fermé conditions.
34.8 A list of parts replaced with the specific agreement of the FIA technical delegate whilst cars are
being held under parc fermé conditions will be published and distributed to all teams prior to
the race.
34.9 The mass of oil contained in each oil tank, with the exception of the main oil tank, must be
declared to the FIA one hour before the start of the race.
https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files ... -04-07.pdf

* I started life with nothing, and still have most of it left


“Good drivers have dead flies on the side windows!” (Walter Röhrl)

* I married Miss Right. Just didn't know her first name was Always
User avatar
Michael Ferner
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 3531
Joined: 7 years ago
Real Name: Michael Ferner
Favourite Racing Car: Miller '122', McLaren M23
Favourite Driver: Billy Winn, Bruce McLaren
Car(s) Currently Owned: None
Location: Bitburg, Germany

#252

Post by Michael Ferner »

I'm not going to read through all of that, but thanks anyway. It means, not everything that#s called parc fermé is, in fact, parc fermé. In a real parc fermé, you are not allowed to touch the car, period.
2023 'Guess The Pole' Points & Accuracy Champion

If you don't vote now against fascism, you may never have that chance again...


Ceterum censeo interruptiones essent delendam.
User avatar
Everso Biggyballies
Legendary Member
Legendary Member
Posts: 49206
Joined: 18 years ago
Real Name: Chris
Favourite Motorsport: Anything that goes left and right.
Favourite Racing Car: Too Many to mention
Favourite Driver: Kimi,Niki,Jim(none called Michael)
Favourite Circuit: Nordschleife, Spa, Mt Panorama.
Car(s) Currently Owned: Audi SQ5 3.0L V6 TwinTurbo
Location: Just moved 3 klms further away so now 11 klms from Albert Park, Melbourne.

#253

Post by Everso Biggyballies »

Michael Ferner wrote: 2 years ago It means, not everything that#s called parc fermé is, in fact, parc fermé. In a real parc fermé, you are not allowed to touch the car, period.
Exactly. In fact I was going to add that very comment myself. I thought it was enough already.

* I started life with nothing, and still have most of it left


“Good drivers have dead flies on the side windows!” (Walter Röhrl)

* I married Miss Right. Just didn't know her first name was Always
User avatar
Ruslan
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts: 1783
Joined: 3 years ago
Favourite Motorsport: Formula 1
Favourite Circuit: Monaco actually
Location: Washington, DC

#254

Post by Ruslan »

@Everso Biggyballies

Thanks. Appreciate the effort.
Post Reply