I'm not happy about the fuel flow regulations for a variety of reasons. I'm (surprise surprise) in Red Bulls court on this one, if they have a faulty sensor which has a higher reading than what is actually occuring, the teams should be allowed to change them. RBR seem fairly certain they havn't exceeded the allowed flow rate, if they can conclusively prove they havn't, what then? Will they still be disqualified? Disqualified for what? not fitting an incorrectly calibrated FIA sensor that would have put them in a disadvantage to their rivals? And who is to say their rivals don't have a sensor incorrectly calibrated the other way to give them more? All controlled by people who have a vested financial interest in the spectacle. I'm not saying the FIA are guilty of trying to influence results, but it does seem as though they now have the ability to do it if they wished to. If it's proved they have used more fuel, fine, keep them DSQ, as they have broken the rules, which brings me to my other gripe, the actual need for them, they have a maximum fuel allowance of 100kg per race, let them use it as they see fit, isn't there enough contrivance in the rules already.
It's all about the homologation. If the FIA has mandated a specific part from a specific manufacturer, then that's what everyone must use. Otherwise, we open a Pandora's box - constructors ignoring the regs they don't like, and fitting alternative parts that are convenient for them. Having said that... Amen. How have the FIA justified this fuel flow rule? I must have missed that. Seems like a stupid rule.
This is totally not my area of expertise, but I've seen it explained elsewhere as a necessary regulation so that teams aren't running a qualifying and race spec engine map. In quali you could have a flow rate far above 100 kg/hr, greatly increasing power (I've seen it compared to 1500bhp), and then run at the current flow levels in the race. To do that your engine construction needs to be far tougher, and able to handle a much wider range of operating conditions, increasing cost. Someone more mechanically minded may be able to correct what I've said though!
ah, but this strengthening = much more weight, which is undesirable, and what is the advantage in qualifying if you crank it up and blow up 20% of your seasons supply of engines?
Maybe the fuel allowance should be say 125 kg for both qualifying and the race. They have a set amount of fuel and the can use it how they want!
I think Red Bull are correct and have probably had a fault with the sensor. My problem with all this is how Red Bull reacted. If the governing body tells you to stop doing something in a race, and you ignore them, then you are in the wrong and deserve to be thrown out of the race, and at this point it's not relevant if the fuel sensor was wrong or not. That's my point of view anyway, and I still feel sorry for Daniel who had a great race and didn't do anything wrong.
My understanding is that Red Bull demonstrated the sensor was incorrect by showing them that the FIA version shows a different rate to their own version. That's fine, but if all teams are using the FIA one and they all have the same dependency, i.e The FIA sensor is always off by +1%, then Red Bull using their own sensor which is more accurate gives them advantage. If the FIA sensor was shown to be off in relation to the other teams then that seems a little unfair, but I guess the FIA will simply tell them there are avenues for dealing with this, rather than simply chucking the FIA one and using their own one.
Regardless of whether its fair, unfair, correct or incorrect - you do not disregard a direct instruction from race control, be that a verbal or flag warning. Simple. What's next, we refuse to let someone past under instruction because we disagree, we refuse to follow a mechanical flag warning..... Where does it stop?
To add to this, I'm pretty sure that if teams wanted to fit their own fuel flow sensors (not sure if this is alongside, or instead of the FIA mandated one), then their sensor required FIA approval. I think I've read that Red Bull never had theirs approved. Whilst the FIA one may have an inherent error, it's at least been used previously and it's limitations are known. Red Bull's sensor may as well be an LED on a stick for what it's worth. Without FIA approval there's no guarantee it's any more accurate that the FIA's sensor.
It could end up being a deciding factor in the WDC and/or the WCC. If RBR can conclusively prove they did not exceed the regulated fuel flow rate, and are still excluded, and Ricciardo or RBR miss out on the championship by 17 points, then the championships will have been fixed, there would be no ifs or buts about it. Their only crime would have been not fitting a sensor the FIA knew to be faulty that gave them a disadvantage. It will stink like a smoked haddock left in the midday sun. It will be dodgier than Hamiltons 2007 brazilian gearbox
No because as mrw indicates above,what is to say all FIA sensors don't have the same fault, in which case all other teams would have been at a disadvantage to rbr. Since rbr could not possibly have known whether or not this was the case, there is no moral argument here - rbr were wrong to continue use of their own sensor, period.
Summing things up in one word is usually too much of a simplification. However, it's difficult to see past Red Bull's actions as either naive or arrogant. That said, one does not necessarily preclude the other: it could be both! The technical regulations (whether or not one agrees with them) are clear; and how anyone can conclude Red Bull's actions were not in breach of them is beyond me. One thing I am utterly convinced about is that had it been one of his competitors behaving this way, Horner would be throwing a fit with a rule book raised high in his hand, but that's really beside the point…
Red Bull have finally lodged an appeal (after some loophole finding no doubt) But isn't it all too late now? Isnt the result now set in stone?
It will be interesting to see what their case is? However, if their excuse is pitiful and non relevant they should be further punished for bringing the sport into disrepute by making an inappropriate appeal/protest?