Those emails stated that the information was used in the simulator. That prove that they use, not just have.

Again, lets not forget the first hearing. McLaren was found guilty of having Ferrari's data, but they are not penalize because FIA as no proof that they used the data. Same goes for Renault, they have to prove that not only Renault have the data, but they actually use it, in their simulations or whatever ways there is. This is the stage where Renault is right now.

If you say Renault should be punish at this stage, that means McLaren should be penalize at the first hearing as well. Don't this meant something to you? That the same decision was made here?

That Alonso and Pedro's email was the decisive factor in the second hearing. That's why FIA agrees to give both of them immunity in exchange for the emails. If that email was useless, FIA will not give them any immunity. Nobody will be interested in it. But the email was important. So important that Alonso could use it to threaten Ron, that Ron had to go to Max informing him that Alonso has some new evidence first before Alonso can do so himself. This goes to show how important they were.

About the floor, McLaren lodge a complain about Ferrari floor design stating that it's exploiting some loop holes in the rules, thus urging FIA to change the rules to cover the loophole.

How did McLaren knew about ferrari's floor design? It's not the wing we're talking about, its a floorboard which no one can see it at all.

Without the stolen technical data, there's absolutely no way McLaren would know about the details of Ferrari's floorboard design. The complain was targeted at Ferrari, and obviously they have to go forward with some proof. Otherwise, Ferrari car has always passed the FIA test and you can't argue against that without any information about the design. How would they know Ferrari's floorboard behavior when they are not the one who's testing other car's floorboard.

FIA gave immunity for information regarding the scandal. Not for exchanging with the emails. and yes, the emails are useless, because, they (WMSC) could not ascertain that simulators info has been translated to the race car. If that have been proven, McLarens car should have been DQ long time ago.



This i have to ask the source of this. So Ferrari exploiting rules is okay with you?




Your claims are so far fetched lar bro, imho. First of all, you cannot tell if the boards are flexing just looking at the drawings or diagram. Two, simulators are not used to simulate aero properties of the cars. They use wind tunnel for that, iinm. simulators are more for training. Three, to simulate a Ferrari aero properties, they have to built a mock up of a scaled Ferrari car then ran it in the wind tunnel.

I wonder how on earth did Ferrari complained against McLaren 2nd brake pedal to the FIA in 1998?

without the stolen given technical data, they will still know cause stepney was singing.

the emails exchange, basically gives FIA the chance to penalize mclaren, no matter the content was from the given technical data or verbal tips from stepney/anywhere else or whether it's useful or not.

who the hell knows what kind of simulation, it might just be a computer simulation, like enter different values and see what's the result, which is useless most of the time, coz it's a simulation. but still those data were used, even though it's just a mere test. Every team does that, it's like when u receive a tip, do you sit there and scratch your head or you test it out first ?

bah... FIA is full of crap, both mclaren and renault should have been penalized after their 1st hearing.

This post has been edited by blah1134: Dec 9 2007, 04:00 AM

Then that would still raise the question of how did McLaren knew Ferrari was exploiting a gray area?

It was a gray area, just like in a wing test, there's no way of 100% simulating a condition during real situation when the car is running, so all the FIA can do is to place weight at certain point, so long as it passed that test, it is legal. There's no other way for McLaren to know about Ferrari's floorboard without any information. Furthermore, those information is 700 pages, I doubt its just diagrams and specifications. Lots of other data may be gain from that.

Of course exploiting a loop hole isn't right (although every team does that in F1 due to its highly technical nature), but that's what the FIA are for, they are there to ensure the cars are legit. It's not for other team to conduct espionage on their rival team to see if they are breaking any rules.

Aero can be simulated in computer too. Programs such as AutoCAD if I'm not mistaken, was once used by someone to simulate the effect of split rear wing. Of course not as good as the real thing like wind tunnle.

That's right, the FIA needed concrete evidence (otherwise McLaren would have appeal), and those emails was the concrete evidence

As you mentioned, it is still being use. Of course every team would want to do that, but the difference here is that the data is something that's not suppose to be known to other team. Teams can test other team's visible design such as new wing and stuff like that. But for other details that they cannot obtained visually, obviously its wrong to even have them.

And yeah, I do agree that since having those information is itself illegal, anyone who have them is wrong and should be prosecuted.

woooo now we have brundle vs FIA !

more drama ! since there's no racing now.

information regarding the scandel... tat's the email in this context la...
bro dun u get it? it's not just about implementing it into the car... u have USED the data to test something... it is still a way to use the data... who knows maybe because of this data mclaren was able to find out more from testing it, which they might not have been able to and tat gives them advantage?

According to max mosley, mclaren was punished because they din't tell out the truth during the 1st hearing...

Source from f1 live

this is getting boring
too many people complain abt Renault so Max had to come out and explain their reason for punishing McLaren. Let the old man rest guys

imho, i think you should read the emails itself, the exchange of emails of Alonso and Pedro were about car setups.

Like, hornet post, he speculate that Mclaren used Ferrari data in the simulator program..



So you dont need test driver to run this kinda test, just racing engineer will do. That's why the emails exchanges, between alonso and pedro, imho, its not a big deal; its still considered in the hearing, but the judgement is not 100% based on the emails, imho.

and McLaren is penalised for in possesion of Ferrari data, but WMSC dont have conclusive proof that McLaren used it on their cars. So why you ask? because imho, there's no patent in F1 car design. This year Ferrari have zero keel design just like McLaren, so does this mean that Ferrari have stolen McLaren's info?

So the question here do McLaren benefit from the data they get??

They clearly know the weight distribution of Ferarri, they even know Ferarri Racing strategy in few races..

Do they gain advantage??

If they don't gain, they want all this info for what??

i did read the mail and correct me if i'm wrong, i remember one of the drivers did mention they wanna test it out in simulation in the email...

WTF is going on. I stop watching F1 for a while and now i heard they banning engine developement for 10 year !!! Are they f***ing insane or what~~ ! What the hell a motorsport is for if not as a testing ground for further racing technology Its like giving a death blow to an already sick F1 motorsport.

That's why McLaren is fined for in posession of Ferrari data and not disqualified from the championship.

Do they gain advantage? Thats why WSMC is uncertain and McLaren will be called upon again to face them.

McLaren doesnt ask for the info, but the info was smuggled out by Stepney, who i believe is unhappy at Ferrari.

---

Added on December 10, 2007, 12:26 pmyes, weight distribution - its all about car setup.

---

Added on December 10, 2007, 12:29 pmerr cool down bro.... FIA is not banning lar, freezing is the correct term. Engine is one portion of an F1 car performance.

Teams can still develop aero, electronic and tyres technology.

This post has been edited by evoHahn: Dec 10 2007, 12:29 PM

It's fair to say the FIA is saying that if you aren't a top team, we won't make an example out of you.

And as for engine development, it's about time. Time for more fuel efficiency and testing out 'greener resources.'

about the freeze of Engine.. I agree about what FIA do.. team can spend the money/time to develop more re-use energy and more green energy than keep increase the RPM oft he Engine..

as u can see.. Japanese Car in 2litre engine are more powerful than some US car @ 5-6litre engine...

Thts just semantics. Aero, electronics and tyre technology goes only so far. Engine development is the one that makes the difference in my opinion. And stopping 10 years of development in engine technology is just plain dumb. A lot of thing can be done in 10 years.

How can u develop more fuel efficient engine for racing application if they weren't tested in races for reliability?? And what do you mean greener resources?? Stuck some algae base fuel in the tank and hope it runs on an engine design for petrol??

What u mean green engine and "reusing" energy?? And fyi, there already IS an engine limit set by FIA which is at 19000 rpm. No engine manufacturer may go above this.

A japanese 2 liter car is more powerful because its using force induction to boost the power. Either by means of turbo charge which is popular in japan or supercharge which is preferred by western. And u cant compare US build 5-6 liter engine with japanese engine. First reason to be is that the US car manufacturer cant build fuel efficient engine for shiat. All they wanted is to sell this cars to american consumer which looks down anything that is not v8 and above 5liter and mare a grrrrr~~ sounds when it goes. If you really wan to compare you need to compare German build cars with thier japanese counterpart. Alto they still need abt above 3 liter to achive the same power as the japnese 2 liter, they do it without force induction. And they corner just as well too.

Which brings me to my point again. Why the 10 year ban/freeze??? Its not like hybrid and fuel cell cars going to take motorsport anytime soon. At best they going to start of in consumer cars first and then as the technology matures it will slowly sip into more faster sports cars. They the FIA got more chance to go fuel efficent spree with diesel fueled engine than hybrid and fuel cell looking at the development pace of green technology now.

And I'm not alone against this issue...
http://digg.com/motorsport/F1_Bans_Engine_Developement_WTF

This post has been edited by WhitE LighteR: Dec 10 2007, 01:37 PM

of course you are not alone againt the engine freeze.. but we are not alone support the Engine Freeze...

Formula One is a Technology leading Sport.. what developed in the sport in the past .. some of it use in the consumer car now.. why have to do it the other way round?

Car manufacturer makes more faster car to win races and get that technology into supercars. From disk brakes, ceramic brakes, launch control etc. All this makes the car goes faster or stop faster and were develop, yes on track first then to consumer cars. But you cant expect to take a green engine concept and stick it into a formula one car. Coz a green engine is meant to be green. Not go fast. Yes u probably get better millage etc.. But can u imagine looking at 22 prius racing each other on and eco friendly tyres Its like living a nitemare. Im not againts development of greener technology. Just do it outside first please. Than once its capable of at least a decent horse power figure u can start talking abt integrating it into motorsport. Not forcing motorsport development into justifying green technology research. That is not what they are suppose to do. Coz thats similar like taking a rule in a religion and trying to find a scientific reason to justify it, where is its suppose to be the other way round.

Instead technology advancement such as the KERS which is much touted by FIA can be develop and implement alongside current engine technology. Then as years past, regulation concerning engine efficiency can be further enforce as a rule to further improve engine capability to develop similar power at a lower engine capacity like what has been done when they swicth from v10 to v8 and lowered the engine capacity. Not killing it off all the sudden.

Well, with all the engine reliability and power it mean nothing if the tyres grained after only two laps of used and poor aero setups. Then why teams put a lot wings on their cars, built wind tunnels if only engine matters?

In fact V8s are faster than V10 in certain track, is it down to engine alone?


I think the main issue of freezing engine development is cost cutting. Let see 2007 line up :

i. Renault - engine by Renault
ii. Ferrari - in house engine
iii. McLaren - engine by Mercedes
iv. hONDA - engine by Honda
v. Williams - customer deal with Toyota
vi. Redbull - customer deal with Renault
vii. Toyota - engine by toyota
viii. Torro Rosso - customer deal with Ferrari
ix. Sauber - engine by BMW
x. Super Arguri - customer deal with Honda
xi. Spyker - customer deal with Ferrari.

Half of the team is buying engine for their use. So when the manufacturer of the engine, develop a new engine, they will pass it down to the customer. I think the recent casuality of engine wars in F1 is Cosworth and its a shame.

You see, if FIA can pull this cost cutting off, they will entince new car manufacturer into the sport... a return of Audi to F1 maybe or maybe the return of Yamaha and ultimately keep the smaller teams in F1.

I agree that there's no concrete evidence that mclaren directly apply those data on their car (if they did, the punishment would have been worse, they are probably banned for 2007 and 2008 already). The point is regardless of how useful simulators are, its still being use. Doesn't matter what the outcome it, using it is wrong, in fact having those data is wrong by law, but obviously FIA didn't judge merely on copyright issues (otherwise, Renault too should and would have been punish)

Simulators are equally important in the entire R&D process, not just in F1 but many other industry as well. Simulator helps narrow down the results they are searching for, because its not practical to test everything in the wind tunnel and race track. Simulator helps narrow everything down to a point where its worth building it and test it in the wind tunnel, which is more expensive than simulator but cheaper than building the actual component. At that stage, changes can still made, but the range of changes is already narrowed down by simulator, so to reduce the cost of keep on rebuilding new aero components scale model

Trail and error is only practical in simulator, and that's where they do such thing to find the best design

This post has been edited by Hornet: Dec 10 2007, 04:55 PM