Link suspension banned???

[MacFeegle]

Silly FIA. Stupid time in middle season.

F1 laugh at itself and fans head to other series.

[Jag_Warrior]

The FIA must be run by a bunch of complete morons. The time to rule on something's legality is BEFORE the frickin' season starts!!!!!!!!!!! No one was hiding these systems. And according to this story, they've been around in one form or another since 2008. Good grief. What a bunch of talking chimps!

Here's a linked story for those who haven't heard about this:

http://asia.eurosport.com/formula-1/f1-set-to-ban-fric-suspension-systems_sto4318510/story.shtml


Formula 1's FRIC suspension systems, believed to be one of the strengths of the dominant Mercedes car, could be banned for the German Grand Prix, AUTOSPORT can reveal. (http://asia.eurosport.com/formula-1/f1-set-to-ban-fric-suspension-systems_sto4318510/story.shtml) Less than a fortnight before the next race at Hockenheim, the FIA has informed F1 teams that it believes the Front-and-Rear Interconnected Suspension (FRIC) systems used by most of them are illegal.
CRAIG SCARBOROUGH: Secrets of suspension and FRIC
According to sources, the governing body wrote to teams on Tuesday to tell them that following detailed investigations into the design of the FRIC systems, it believes they are in contravention of the rules.
In the note, a copy of which has been seen by AUTOSPORT, Whiting said: "Having now seen and studied nearly every current design of front to rear linked suspension system we, the FIA, are formally of the view that the legality of all such systems could be called into question."
Whiting suggests that the way the suspension systems help control pitch and roll could be in breach of article 3.15 of F1's technical regulations.
Article 3.15 is the catch-all regulation that relates to moveable aerodynamic devices. It outlaws any part of the car that influences the aerodynamics that is not "rigidly secured to the entirely sprung part of the car (rigidly secured means not having any degree of freedom)."
The FRIC systems link the front and rear suspension to maintain a constant ride height for improved performance.
Lotus (then called Renault) was the first team to introduce the concept in 2008.
Mercedes more recently took the design to the next level and is now believed to run the most complicated system, however it is unclear which team would suffer the most from a ban.
FIA OPEN TO DELAYING BAN UNTIL 2015
With limited testing time before the next race at Hockenheim, and 2014 designs being based around FRIC, the FIA is open to delaying the ban if there is consensus among teams.
It has asked teams to vote on whether or not they will be in favour of delaying the ban until the start of 2015 rather than it coming into force for the German GP.
However, for that to happen it would require unanimous support from all the teams on the grid.
It is unclear how easy it will be to achieve unanimous support for a delay - especially if any team feels its FRIC design is not as good as a rival's, or indeed if a team is not running the system at all.
If unanimous support is not reached, then Whiting has made it clear that from the next race in Germany, any team running FRIC risks being reported to the stewards by the FIA for non-compliance with the regulations.
The fact that the FIA has indicated it believes FRIC to be illegal also opens the door for a team to protest one of its rivals from the next race.


(http://asia.eurosport.com/formula-1/f1-set-to-ban-fric-suspension-systems_sto4318510/story.shtml)

[Bagwan]

So , after looking at all the cars pre-season , and deciding they were good to go , they now have examined them closer and found they are not good to go .

The steering wheel can seriously affect the aerodynamics if one turns it , so it should be on the list for a ban soon .

[donKey jote]

How many here were happy about banning Renaults mass damper system mid season? :andrea:

[truefan72]

FIA is joke

[Hawkmoon]

There's no way they'll get unanimous agreement to delay the ban until 2015. F1 is rarely unanimous about anything. Mercedes run the system and Red Bull don't, at least according to this article: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/114890. Pretty good odds that Red Bull won't agree on a delay?

[airshifter]

It's the FIA being the FIA. They like to change their minds about things that have been used for years.

I thought the mass damper ban was stupid. As well as some of the other reactive ride height systems by Renault and others.

I personally think that the FIA just get involved in attempts to level the playing field at times, and they really don't care what the rules are. If the rules weren't so vague at times, they couldn't be exploited as much as they are. Nor could the FIA use those vague rules to make something illegal after allowing it.

I'm sure tires will be next, and Bagwan already mentioned steering wheels. After all, both move and have effect on the aero of he car. Driver head isolation restraints are soon to follow.

[Robinho]

from what i've seen, everyone runs it in some form or another, although Mercedes is believed to have the most extreme example. But these types of new and highly illegaland dangerous systems must be banned stra.......wait, Renault/Lotus first had it in 2008, and its outlawed on the basis of movable aero devices (same rule since pre-2008). well played FIA, well played

[MacFeegle]

FIA = FRICing joke :laugh:

[schmenke]

This is a senseless move by the FIA. The cars are evaluated for technical admittance before the start of the season. The FIA can’t change their minds mid-way through the season after further “detailed investigations”. If the system was deemed admissible at the start of the season then it should be good to go for the entire season.

[Mark]

Oh god were going to have another season decided by stupid rulings. Fair enough if they want to give notice these won't be permitted next year but it's too late to change the rules now.

[driveace]

Are they trying to give F1 the death deal ? People are getting fed up of rule changes just to level the playing field .When the Rzb was dominant for 4 years,they never went after them !

[steveaki13]

F1 becoming a joke???? Who would have thought it. :dozey:

Seriously banning blown diffusers or suspension mid season is as dumb as. Its bad enough changing rules every season, but mid season. Jeez

[Big Ben]

Oh well... They didn't really ban it mid season now, did they? They just pointed out they will find it illegal if any team might decide to file a protest wink wink nudge nudge :laugh:.. it's not the same thing at all :laugh:

[Bagwan]

So , first they look stupid because they didn't catch this before the season began .
Then , they look stupid because they declare it illegal mid-season .
Then , they look stupid because , amid constant yack about cost savings , they cause everyone to quickly redesign major elements of the suspension , likely effecting many other related systems , between races .
Then , if teams don't comply with the change , they risk first , a hugely important scrutineering situation , where they must hope they fit the rules and can argue such or be disqualified , and then , if in , the potential for others to still protest .
Stupid , and stupider .

And then , perhaps most importantly , they will need to restate the spurious logic that has them conclude that this is related the aerodynamics .
That's the stupidest part of all of this .

[donKey jote]

Well they already set a precedent way back when by concluding that the mass-damper was related to aerodynamics...
on the other hand, knowing how consistent they tend to be, a precedent doesn't mean anything :dozey:

[airshifter]

Well they already set a precedent way back when by concluding that the mass-damper was related to aerodynamics...
on the other hand, knowing how consistent they tend to be, a precedent doesn't mean anything :dozey:

Don't bray too loud Donkey. If they banned the mass damper, at some point they will figure out that on curbs and bumps the drivers organs might shift. If that is declared illegal, drivers might have to wear fitted girdles and HANS type racing cups to race!

[MacFeegle]

Restrict testing mean teams have tough job to decide.

Even if all team agree to 2015 ban (more chance snow in sahara) it still mean they change at end year with little test for 2015. Best job change now and bite bullet. Difference not too big so remove FRIC and test all season ready 2015.

Like Mass Damper for Renault and Ferrari, this legal to ban but stupid do it mid season. Team know reason for link suspension to maintain aero stability. Too obvious so why FIA let go for years? FRIC whole purpose is maintain stability so aero not fluctuate.

FIA being political or incompetent. Difficult to tell most times.

[MacFeegle]

Restrict testing mean teams have tough job to decide.

Even if all team agree to 2015 ban (more chance snow in sahara) it still mean they change at end year with little test for 2015. Best job change now and bite bullet. Difference not too big so remove FRIC and test all season ready 2015.

Like Mass Damper for Renault and Ferrari, this legal to ban but stupid do it mid season. Team know reason for link suspension to maintain aero stability. Too obvious so why FIA let go for years? FRIC whole purpose is maintain stability so aero not fluctuate.

FIA being political or incompetent. Difficult to tell most times.

[Bagwan]

Restrict testing mean teams have tough job to decide.

Even if all team agree to 2015 ban (more chance snow in sahara) it still mean they change at end year with little test for 2015. Best job change now and bite bullet. Difference not too big so remove FRIC and test all season ready 2015.

Like Mass Damper for Renault and Ferrari, this legal to ban but stupid do it mid season. Team know reason for link suspension to maintain aero stability. Too obvious so why FIA let go for years? FRIC whole purpose is maintain stability so aero not fluctuate.

FIA being political or incompetent. Difficult to tell most times.

Problem is , as I see it , if the linked suspension is to maintain aero stability , then so is the entire suspension system , as these things are always sprung very hard to begin with , to deal with the downforce they produce .
That keeps them within very close tolerances to begin with , and all the rest of the set-up is down to keeping the rubber on the road at the right ride height , which , for all is as close to the ground without scraping that plank off , because that's where the most ground effect is .

If I've got this right , isn't all suspension on these cars illegal if this really applies to the FRIC system ?
I get the reasoning , I suppose , but I'm quite puzzled as to how it doesn't apply , for the same reasoning , to the rest of the suspension .

[MacFeegle]

Problem is , as I see it , if the linked suspension is to maintain aero stability , then so is the entire suspension system , as these things are always sprung very hard to begin with , to deal with the downforce they produce .
That keeps them within very close tolerances to begin with , and all the rest of the set-up is down to keeping the rubber on the road at the right ride height , which , for all is as close to the ground without scraping that plank off , because that's where the most ground effect is .

If I've got this right , isn't all suspension on these cars illegal if this really applies to the FRIC system ?
I get the reasoning , I suppose , but I'm quite puzzled as to how it doesn't apply , for the same reasoning , to the rest of the suspension .

I understand confusion Mr Bagwan.

Suspension is design to maintain ride in all cases. Plank is ground zero whicvh you must wear in race but not exceed max wear or show over with Stewards.

Main goal to ensure even wear plank but tricky cause car dive under brake and sit under gas so see saw.

Goal to make dive become sit and sit become dive = even and stable. Problem. How do this with convention = impossible so link like anti roll bar (which is also aero device in current rules).

See basic plan?

Car turn left so physics load right and roll bar move load left. FRIC same back and front.

Me think should be allowed as help car perform but technology go USA because FIA lady boy about spend. Disgrace. Make F1 Cartoon mouse.

So, you 100% right. If FRIC illegal then roll bar illegal. Also argue centrufugal wheel channeling and aero over suspension arm etc. All moveable and design to influense aero.

just FIA bang drum and be cock.

[Nem14]

The FIA's job seems to be making sure F1 teams spend as much money as possible. Lol!

[Bagwan]

I understand confusion Mr Bagwan.

Suspension is design to maintain ride in all cases. Plank is ground zero whicvh you must wear in race but not exceed max wear or show over with Stewards.

Main goal to ensure even wear plank but tricky cause car dive under brake and sit under gas so see saw.

Goal to make dive become sit and sit become dive = even and stable. Problem. How do this with convention = impossible so link like anti roll bar (which is also aero device in current rules).

See basic plan?

Car turn left so physics load right and roll bar move load left. FRIC same back and front.

Me think should be allowed as help car perform but technology go USA because FIA lady boy about spend. Disgrace. Make F1 Cartoon mouse.

So, you 100% right. If FRIC illegal then roll bar illegal. Also argue centrufugal wheel channeling and aero over suspension arm etc. All moveable and design to influense aero.

just FIA bang drum and be cock.

I get it Mr. Mac .

But , consider this .
If the goal of this system is to add pressure frontward when braking to counter that dive , isn't that the exact goal of making that suspension stiff in the first place ?

Certainly , it is an improvement on just stiffening , but clearly , I think , they have the same effect .
In fact , it's really an improvement on the same concept in that way .

I think , sadly , that banning it is not such a good thing to begin with , as it might be something that could be better developed , and then sent to the road car sector , where it might be really useful , coupled with ABS .

Instead of the current potentially disastrous situation we have the FIA setting up for the German GP , back footing the home team , the leading team , mid-season , whilst forcing buckets of spending , risking mid-season mutiny , amid protests and bans and appeals , they could easily have said nothing but that they would not be allowed next year , as an effort to slow the cars down for the reason of safety .
Perhaps even to have said that they would ban it three races from now , instead of next race , to allow a little time , and maybe a little less cash to be spent in such an urgent situation .

Given that the idea that this improvement could be argued to be safer , as it helps to stabilize the attitude of the car , makes the banning on safety grounds a bit spurious , but easily argued that it would slow the cars down to at least some degree .

That seems to me to make more sense than banning , mid-season or not , on the grounds of movable aerodynamic device .