5to1 Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 The most recent and probably well known application was on the Millenium Bridge to stop it swaying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon magnifique Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 I'm guessing that one's a bit bigger and heavier than the one in the nose of the Renault... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterb Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 [ QUOTE ] I'm guessing that one's a bit bigger and heavier than the one in the nose of the Renault... [/ QUOTE ] ... but, interestingly, it was stated that 7(?) other cars had been using mass dampers, and I couldn't see any other teams being disadvantaged to the same extent as Renault. Either Renault have been using the damper to overcome other deficiencies of their car, or they had based so much of the design on the presence of the damper that they couldn't design it out quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorburn Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 Apparently Renault were the first to start using it and have it far more refined than the other teams. It does seem really stupid to take something like this away mid-season when the FIA had already given it the OK. Tell them they can't use it next season certainly but not during the middle of a championship fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neimad Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 Yet another case of the FIA jumping in to "help" even the score for the less well off teams that can't afford such devices. Unfortunately, in their efforts to make F1 a more even and cheaper playing field, all they really seem to achieve is annoying the current teams and restricting technological progress -- something which F1 has prided its self on for many years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedRobin Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 My thoughts too, Neimad - Automotive technology should be encouraged, not stamped out by rule obsessed bureaucrats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarMad Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 I'd have to agree. Is this an attempt to give Ferrari an unfair advantage by changing this now ? I can understand the new wings on the BMW being removed they looked hideous anyway. But as already stated they OK'ed this at the start of the season so why have they asked to have it removed now ? Its this sort of things that really leaves a bad taste in the mouth, Renault are rightly annoyed IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon magnifique Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 Oh please don't roll out the old "FIA biased towards Ferrari" nonsense again. Of course, that isn't to suggest the FIA aren't incompetent... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterb Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 Never mind - it's added spice to the final six races! If Schumi wins all six, Alonso loses the championship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon magnifique Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 And where are all those who were saying Schumcher's past it now, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarMad Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 [ QUOTE ] Oh please don't roll out the old "FIA biased towards Ferrari" nonsense again. Of course, that isn't to suggest the FIA aren't incompetent... [/ QUOTE ] What is it then ... and why change it all now. If it was fine at the start of the season why suddenly make it illegal ? The fact that the local stewards don't agree with the ban speaks volumes to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon magnifique Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 As I suggested though, I think there's a question mark over the FIA's technical competence rather than fairness. The FIA have appealed against their own technical committee's decision. i.e. it would seem the powers that be at the FIA would tend to agree with the Hockenheim stewards that it should be legal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarMad Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 Your right, they do a very bad job of keeping this sort of thing away from the attraction of the racing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon magnifique Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5to1 Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 [ QUOTE ] I'm guessing that one's a bit bigger and heavier than the one in the nose of the Renault... [/ QUOTE ] LOL. Yes theres a few on the bridge, two different sizes and types I believe. The story behind it is quite interesting if you have an interest in design/engineering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RacingRed Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 [ QUOTE ] Is this an attempt to give Ferrari an unfair advantage by changing this now ? [/ QUOTE ] Like the tyre changes getting dropped to trip up Ferrari a few years back? Face it, the FIA are bodgers, they're naturally inclined to bodgery and Max Mosely is the arch bodger in chief. This is shaping up to be a great end to the season, hope it's as close as Schumacher/Raikkonen in 2004. (I think that was a close one, he's won so many times I struggle to seperate them! ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5to1 Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Oh please don't roll out the old "FIA biased towards Ferrari" nonsense again. Of course, that isn't to suggest the FIA aren't incompetent... [/ QUOTE ] What is it then ... and why change it all now. If it was fine at the start of the season why suddenly make it illegal ? The fact that the local stewards don't agree with the ban speaks volumes to me. [/ QUOTE ] Well it isn't as clear cut as that. The Stewards could only consider the evidence relating to the effect of the system on aerodynamic performance. The FIA put forward other evidence, but since it was privelaged/confidential and couldn't be disclosed in any ruling the Stewards felt they couldn't base their decision on it. Renault then provided data/test car to prove the damper had no discernable effect on Aero performance, and so the Stewards ruled in their favour. With the caveat that the other evidence provided by the FIA could be used in future proceedings to rule the dampers illegal. WRT to why the FIA has jumped on this now. I'm guessing because the system improves mechanical grip by ensuring the contact patch of the tyres is kept to a maximum. Given other teams are now copying Renaults system and the FIA's long standing efforts to limit mechanical grip, they were bound to step in sooner or later. The ban is not telling at all. Since I don't believe there was a Ban in place for this race. Renault just opted to pull the system as a precaution. That is telling, because it implies the other evidence put forward by the FIA (which Renault would have been privy to) must have been strong enough to insert reasonable doubt in Renaults mind as to the legality of the system. The conspiracy theories which suggest the FIA are biased towards Ferrari make little sense given recent history. Monaco made F1 history rightly or wrongly to the detriment of Ferrari. And it was only a few years ago that the FIA implimented the biggest package of rule changes to kerb Ferrari/Schumi's dominance. Ruling out a damper system is hardly comparable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarMad Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 [ QUOTE ] The ban is not telling at all. Since I don't believe there was a Ban in place for this race. Renault just opted to pull the system as a precaution. That is telling, because it implies the other evidence put forward by the FIA (which Renault would have been privy to) must have been strong enough to insert reasonable doubt in Renaults mind as to the legality of the system. [/ QUOTE ] I thought they had made it illegal but the stewards overturned it. They could have raced with it but if they had gone back to the original position they would have been punished thus they didn't take the risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeilB Posted July 30, 2006 Author Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 [ QUOTE ] Unfortunately, in their efforts to make F1 a more even and cheaper playing field, all they really seem to achieve is annoying the current teams and restricting technological progress -- something which F1 has prided its self on for many years. [/ QUOTE ] In fact they are increasing costs, to goto a long distance back to a short distance and V8's the budgets have been made bigger to make up the bhp gap between the new and old engines. Just shows how much of a pain in the arse Max Mosely is at times, I wish he would just bugger off and have somebody else there. Autosport say that Renault argues that with the FIA appeal against the Hockenheim race stewards' decision to allow mass dampers not due to be heard until before the Turkish Grand Prix, it is unfair for them to be penalised for another race. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian_C Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 [ QUOTE ] My memory is awful. What were the changes from the original track? [/ QUOTE ] Agree with Mook, Neil and EssFour. The last of the remaining 'classic' tracks on the calendar alongside Monza and Spa - although that one isn't even happening this year I gather - it was a shame to see the stunning forest straights culled for the 2002 season by Tilke. Didn't realise they had literally dug the tarmac up though - shame. Richy, from the archive.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_G Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 So basically the first and last four corners are all that have been kept. Sacrilage. As for the race it was good, agree with Brundle of Webber and Raikkonen being Drivers of the day, Williams have got a mountain to climb. I hope McLaren give one of the English young guns a drive instead of DelaRosa before the end of the season. Pedro's Ok but underlines why he is test driver. But you've got to say Ferrari would have won it by a country mile or by lapping everyone if they had been on it every lap of the race. I think they were making so many mistakes towards the end beacuse they were driving so slowly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeilB Posted July 31, 2006 Author Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 The official reason for changing Hockenheim was to give spectators more of a view as they couldn't build grandstands in the forest. There was also the fact that sponsors were unhappy that there were hardly any camera's in the forest so thier logo's were not been seen as much as they wanted. Quite ironic really that since 2002 the Hockenheimring has lost money hand over fist, so much for changes for the better then eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5to1 Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] The ban is not telling at all. Since I don't believe there was a Ban in place for this race. Renault just opted to pull the system as a precaution. That is telling, because it implies the other evidence put forward by the FIA (which Renault would have been privy to) must have been strong enough to insert reasonable doubt in Renaults mind as to the legality of the system. [/ QUOTE ] I thought they had made it illegal but the stewards overturned it. They could have raced with it but if they had gone back to the original position they would have been punished thus they didn't take the risk. [/ QUOTE ] My understanding is that the FIA said it was illegal. Renault said it wasn't. Went to the Stewards who ruled in favour of Renault based on the Aero argument. So there was no ban in effect for this race. I think you may be right that they could have retrospectively penalised Renault if they used the system after being informed it was illegal. Since the stewards only addressed the Aero issue. But that only shows the other evidence put reasonable doubt in Renaults minds. Bit of a shambles really. But thats the FIA. And it affects all teams. I did miss the race though, so this is all based on stuff I read. Although ITV rarely provide accurate info about the politics of F1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now