Public Group active 20 hours, 33 minutes ago
Sounds like it:
well they certainly need it, so I would let this one slide
Well they do seem to have a lot of filming days, but I’m sure the FIA would be right on their case if so.
But then we’ve all heard the case that FIA are bias towards Ferrari.
And we’ve all heard the case that everyone hates Ferrari.
Who said they were testing? ;)
heh you know what I mean
apparently the rules now say that film days can not use any parts or components that haven’t been raced (not the actual component but the design)
I couldn’t find it in the rules at all, might have an old copy
I believe this rule was discussed, but it evidently wasn’t implemented as it isn’t in the Sporting Regulations. As long as Ferrari were using “demonstration” tyres provided specifically for the occasion, the demo run was legal.
The use of those tyres, incidentally, would probably have rendered any data gathered from the tests essentially worthless for competitive use.
Even so, I find it incredible that an F1 website would publish such an article without first bothering to check the relevant regulations. It’s not as if they’re hard to get hold of, being freely available on the FIA website.
@Red Andy – paddocktalk is usually pretty good, they do publish a lot of speculative stuff though that sometimes hits the mark
havnt checked any of this out, but my reaction to the quote when I first saw it was “probably”
Regarding the test, has Massa driven partly using Alonso’s helmet? It is seen in use at Fiorano with the same car (the on board camera is missing) and it is seen with the visor open near Massa.
I’m not in favour of the testing ban, so I’m not particularly concerned if they are purposely pushing the rules.
I think the test more served as an installation of new parts than a proper test. If you bring new parts to a GP that have already been run on the car in testing, you are at an advantage over teams that will have to use up time in FP1 getting everything working.
paddocktalk is usually pretty good, they do publish a lot of speculative stuff though that sometimes hits the mark
Maybe so, but this is not even in the “speculative” category. It’s just plain wrong, as a brief glance at the relevant regulations would have confirmed.
I’m not a subscriber to the Joe Saward “you’re not a journalist unless you go to all the races” worldview, but some of the F1 stuff you find on the Internet really is of dire quality.
Fair point from Webber in the article. Plus they have their own track!
I wouldn’t take anything on Paddocktalk seriously, precisely because of spurious drivel like this.
But there was a rule introduced in 2010 that said if a team wants to hold a filming day, the car must be of the same speciication as that used at the previous race. It was introduced when Ferrari had a filming day ahead of the European Grand Prix when they were introducing a major update (I think it was a blown diffuser) that was run on the filming day. A lot of people though Ferrari were trying to slip beneath the radar because of the complexity of the system and the potential to get it wrong.
So there is a precedent.
First – Any publication that consistently puts question marks after their
own headlines can never be taken seriously.
Second – What evidence other than speculation is there that shows the 150o
was not in the same specification as China? I would hope that if the FIA
puts a rule in place they at least have the means to police it better than we do.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Log in or create an F1 Fanatic account.
Advert | Go Ad-free
Adverts | Go Ad-free
© Keith Collantine 2015 • Disclaimer