Red Bull told RB8 floor holes must be removed

F1 Fanatic round-up

Mark Webber, Red Bull, Monaco, 2012In the round-up: the FIA tells Red Bull to make changes to their RB8.

Links

Top F1 links from the past 24 hours:

FIA forces Red Bull to redesign car before Canadian Grand Prix (The Guardian)

“Red Bull will have to revise the design of their car before next weekend’s Canadian Grand Prix after the FIA said that the controversial holes in the rear floor of their RB8 could not be employed.”

Red Bull forced to remove floor holes for Canada (Adam Cooper)

“Locating a fully enclosed hole partly or wholly within the 50mm band which is exempt from the requirements of Article 3.12.10 along the outer edges of the surfaces lying on the step plane does not exempt it from the requirements of Article 3.12.5, those parts lying outboard of Y650 are still parts of the surfaces lying on the step plane.”

Formula 1 powertrains for Le Mans in 2014 (Racecar Engineering)

“It has been made clear that the new generation of Formula 1 V6 engines could be installed, which could give a Ferrari, Mercedes, PURE, Cosworth and Renault a short cut to Le Mans, as they would not have to develop a bespoke engine.”

There?s only one way to drive a F1 car and I haven?t forgotten it: Kimi (Firstpost)

“Nothing has changed, it?s the same as before ?ǣ some rules have evolved, I had KERS three years ago, but now there are DRS and the Pirelli tyres etc but nothing is different. Racing is still done in the same way. The quickest usually wins.”

F1.com Monaco race edit video

Video highlights from the Monaco Grand Prix.

Formula One seat might not be enough to tear Paffett away from beloved DTM (Kent News)

“Obviously I would like to race in F1, but it wouldn?t be a disaster if I didn’t.”

The Lost – Vocal – Chord (Toro Rosso)

Daniel Ricciardo: “The radar said rain was coming, so the team decided to keep me out on the supersofts past the point where I?d usually have come in. The plan was to wait it out until the rain started to fall, come in for the inters and then take places off those who needed to pit for a second time. The rain never came and in the end I had to pit for the soft tyre and as a result lost quite a bit of track time.”

Comment of the day

As always, choosing a favourite from the many excellent Caption Competition entries proved tricky. Among my favourites were those from Lopek, JamieFranklinF1 and Sunnymir:

But the winning entry from Jay_au is the one that adorns the caption below:

Jenson Button, Gary Paffett, Brands Hatch, 2012

This is where your mirrors are, you might want to check them in Canada this year.

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Tom Parfitt!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is by emailling me, using Twitter or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Alain Prost won the Monaco Grand Prix on this day in 1984.

The race is best remembered for the heavy rain storm in which Ayrton Senna, making his fifth F1 start, brilliantly drove to second.

It was also the race in which the similarly inexperienced Stefan Bellof dragged his Tyrrell up to third, keeping pace with and sometimes catching Senna.

This race also began a remarkable streak of success for McLaren, who won nine of the ten races in Monte-Carlo beginning with this one. Five of those were won by Senna from 1989 to 1993. The only one McLaren didn’t win fell to a Lotus – also driven by Senna.

Here is the race being red-flagged with Prost commenting at the end:

Image ?? Red Bull/Getty images, DTM/Hoch Zwei

Advert | Go Ad-free

106 comments on Red Bull told RB8 floor holes must be removed

  1. F1Yankee (@f1yankee) said on 3rd June 2012, 2:13

    f1 what are you doing??? how was this legit in the first place?

  2. GIan Fangio said on 3rd June 2012, 3:07

    I am afraid to ask… but… exactly… how do you remove a hole?… the way I see it… if you remove something… you get a hole.

  3. jim (@dart8) said on 3rd June 2012, 3:21

    “The issue of the design’s legality had been raised unofficially during the Monaco Grand Prix but the FIA technical delegate, Charlie Whiting, had declared it within the rules. An official protest was considered by teams including McLaren, Ferrari and Mercedes after the race but it is understood it was deferred to avoid negative publicity for the sport at one of its most high-profile events and a clarification of the rule was requested instead.”

    Deferred? negative publicity for the sport? “high profile event” it’s repulsive, if it wasn’t for my love of these beautiful cars I’d say f:”@ off, ? I’ll might as well watch newsnight…Or possibly football- another sport that seems to live outside the world of common sense

    • bosyber (@bosyber) said on 3rd June 2012, 7:07

      They are right @dart8, it wasn’t worth it (unless that hole would have been a big performance issue – but now they’ll probably just cut a tiny slit to make it “not-fully-enclosed” so it really isn’t technically a big thing) to change the quali/race result.

      I do think it is at least silly that this wasn’t already changed after Bahrain, or Spain at the latest; Merc at least protested then, plenty of time since to clarify and change car …

  4. Todd (@braketurnaccelerate) said on 3rd June 2012, 8:07

    I hate RBR for a number of reasons, but based on what I read, they really didn’t break the rules. They were within them as they (the rules) were interpreted at the time. Now FIA has clarified them, they are outside the rules and need to be changed to fit within the new interpretation. I don’t really see a need to vacate their Monaco win based on that. The rules weren’t specific or clear at the time, allowing RBR to squeak their holes in. Now it’s been clarified.

    Very cut and dry, IMHO.

    • Todd (@braketurnaccelerate) said on 3rd June 2012, 8:18

      *clear cut

      (not cut and dry)

    • Ben73 (@ben73) said on 3rd June 2012, 10:04

      Spa 2008 the rules weren’t specific or clear at the time as to what constitutes giving a place back. They were clarified, after the race but the alleged offender lost the race win. I suppose it just depends whether your team has the commercial rights holder or president of the FIA’s favourite driver in it.

  5. shaggymike (@shaggymike) said on 3rd June 2012, 9:35

    How strange that the footage of Monaco ’84 shows only Prost, no sign of anyone else!

  6. Atticus (@atticus-2) said on 3rd June 2012, 10:23

    Woohoo, Chase & Status – Blind Faith in the race edit, one of my favourite songs. Thanks again to an F1 Fanatic, who told me the track’s name after I heard it on the ROC event back in December.

    Also, I lol’d very very hard on the caption competition winner, it is spot on, fantastic line. :)

    As far as the Le Mans engine rule is concerned… If it would have been done in the 1950s, it would have simply meant copying much of the first formula to the Le Mans event… Strange, but probably wise move, given the economic troubles which obviously affect the world of racing as well.

  7. Tony M (@tango11) said on 3rd June 2012, 10:39

    So. Mclaren get put to back of grid for minor technical infringement in q3 in legal car, but Rbr allowed to keep results achieved in illegal car. Forget the minute of the “”rules “, there is a lack of common sense, fairness, or natural justice .

    Rbr looses credibility and respect too. What undiscovered cheats did they have last 2 years?

    • Mads (@mads) said on 3rd June 2012, 11:32

      @tony-m you have completely missed the point. the car was 100% legal when it was raced. now the interpretation of the rule changed, making the car illegal in future races. to disqualify them now would be a bit like disqualifying button button from the 2009 championship because his. car ran the DDD, which under current regs. is illegal.

      • Phil Carr (@atseridluap) said on 3rd June 2012, 12:11

        @mads no, you’ve missed the point. The FIA are there to ensure every team abides by the rules. All the teams will try & interprut those rules to their own advantage to eek out an advantage (good on ya). However, the FIA must ensure an even paying field so all teams have an even chance.
        Charlie Whiting & John Todt get paid vast amounts of money to ensure the rules they write are adherred to. So for them to take no action at all since Bahrain; until an opposition team complains (@ Monaco) & then further delay any ruling until after that race is blatant incompetency.
        They’ve ruled the floor illegal but not NOW it doesn’t come into effect until Canada. Which basically says that the FIA are completely useless at their job; any team can try anything they like & get away with it. But don’t let your competitors see it & we (the FIA) will keep quiet about it. But, once the cats out of the bag we’ll have to do something. As long as it doesn’t disturb our race weekends (especially the Monaco GP).

        • Mads (@mads) said on 3rd June 2012, 12:33

          @atseridluap what does that change? if the fia says something is legal, then it is legal. how would they look if they told them that it was legal and then later took those results away from them because they changed their mind? that they are slow and can’t make their mind up, is a completely different discussion.

          • Phil Carr (@atseridluap) said on 3rd June 2012, 13:24

            The race stewards said it was legal. The FIA have now tated it is in fact illegal. The precident was set in Australia 2011 when Sauber were booted out of the final results after racing to 7 & 8th position.

          • Mads (@mads) said on 3rd June 2012, 15:18

            @atseridluap
            No as far as I understand RB had a letter from the FIA stating that their interpretation was currently legal because the rule was not as clear as one would think, so the scrutineers couldn’t do anything about it even if they wanted to.
            What happened to Sauber was that they had accidentally made their rear wing so that it did not comply with the regulations, and because the regulations in that part was very clear they couldn’t argue that they had a different interpretation of the regs. nor could they show any sort of approval from the FIA so they were disqualified.

    • GT_Racer said on 3rd June 2012, 14:38

      Mclaren get put to back of grid for minor technical infringement in q3 in legal car

      McLaren broke the very clearly defined technical regulations, Its very clearly written in the rules that any technical infringement = disqualification.

      Stewards had no other otions avaliable & coudn’t have given any other penalty.

      Red Bull have kept the results because they broke no rules, There hole was legal & passed all legality checks. The FIA have clarified the regulations which only now makes the hole illegal.

  8. Phil Carr (@atseridluap) said on 3rd June 2012, 11:34

    Thankfully the FIA has been able to clear up the confusion over the RB8 floor. It’s now illegal & has to be changed before canada. It was illegal since Bahrain but coz no one complained & the FIA couldn’t make a decision on their own it was deemed legal. The FIA knew something was wrong every race since then but preferred to sit on the fence & say nothing. In Monaco Ferrari & Mclaren had had enough of the FIA fence sitting & decided to complain. This caught out the FIA who didn’t want their premier event distrubted or overshadowed by disfaulifications so they jumped back on the fence again. Finally RB wanted clarification before Canada. The FIA has had to speak to all teams & finally with a majority decision the RB8 floor is now illegal.

    Why bother having the FIA they are useless!

  9. Lothario said on 3rd June 2012, 12:20

    But of course, since they are Red Bull, not McLaren, they keep their points…

    Also, who is using PURE’s engines for 2014?

    • Mads (@mads) said on 3rd June 2012, 15:22

      No. Because the hole was legal when they raced it, they keep their points.
      Do you remember when Lewis kept his pole position in Canada last year? The rules weren’t entirely clear, they gave them the benefit of doubt and in the same instance cleared up the rules which meant that if anyone tries the same again they will be disqualified. If RB goes to Canada with their previous solution they will be disqualified as well.

  10. Funkyf1 (@funkyf1) said on 3rd June 2012, 14:20

    What short memories some have, Mercedes spent he first few races of this year defending their DDRS. Holes in floor, same situation, slightly different result/interuptation. F1 is about pushing boundaries, I don’t believe either team tried to cheat.

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.